INSAS Excalibur & MCIWS Ghatak Assault Rifles to Replace Indian Army's Standard Issue INSAS Rifles

[HariPrasad]

There was an instance where a rifle failed arde qc in a cold environment. went back to the drawing board and found everything was ok, except for manufacturing process or something. And some jokers here blame the designer for a production fault.

INSAS was an excellent gun. We won Kargil with it. In an interview, general V K Singh praised it very much. He told that it fired very flat. (I do not know what is that). He further told that at that time somebody should have visualized the requirement of 15 years years subsequently and start development of INSAS replacement.

 

[Omega007]

INSAS was an excellent gun. We won Kargil with it. In an interview, general V K Singh praised it very much. He told that it fired very flat. (I do not know what is that). He further told that at that time somebody should have visualized the requirement of 15 years years subsequently and start development .

Let me clarify this in a layman's terms,since I've got some experience with rifles.
Ok,now a rifle bullet is essentially a projectile and as any projectile,a bullet starts to drop due to gravity.Now a the 5.56 cartridge make use of a small projectile which is fired at an initial muzzle velocity of around 920 meter/sec (measured at 20 meter from the barrel's end) which ensures a relatively flatter trajectory out to a much longer distance and the shooter doesn't need to compensate too much (compensate meaning is to aim for a little higher than where your target is,the longer the range higher you have to aim and there by partially or totally loose sight of your target).

In contrast,the AK fires a heavier but much slower round - the M43.While it's good for close range,it drops at way too faster a rate due to its very poor ballistic coefficient.And lesser the range,faster it will loose its velocity and more it will drop.The M43 has got more of a parabolic trajectory and that's why it is less suitable suitable for medium range combat,which most conventional battles are expected to be fought at.
That is one of the reasons why Taliban always gets their asses handed to them whenever they encountered the US forces in the open grounds apart from their poor training.The US forces could simply pick them off from outside of the effective range of their AKs and even score regular head shots.In fact there were so many dead Taliban with holes in their heads,that UN security Observers at first though that the US forces had been executing captured terrorists.But from the autopsies, it was cleared beyond any doubts that they had indeed been shot from over 300-400 yards.And that was only possible due to the flat trajectory achieved their high velocity light weight 5.56 rounds (the green tipped M855s to be precise).

By the way,I forgot to mention that usual muzzle velocity of the M43 rounds is about 710 meter/sec or so.

 

[HariPrasad]

Let me clarify this in a layman's terms,since I've got some experience with rifles.
Ok,now a rifle bullet is essentially a projectile and as any projectile,a bullet starts to drop due to gravity.Now a the 5.56 cartridge make use of a small projectile which is fired at an initial muzzle velocity of around 920 meter/sec (measured at 20 meter from the barrel's end) which ensures a relatively flatter trajectory out to a much longer distance and the shooter doesn't need to compensate too much (compensate meaning is to aim for a little higher than where your target is,the longer the range higher you have to aim and there by partially or totally loose sight of your target).

In contrast,the AK fires a heavier but much slower round - the M43.While it's good for close range,it drops at way too faster a rate due to its very poor ballistic coefficient.And lesser the range,faster it will loose its velocity and more it will drop.The M43 has got more of a parabolic trajectory and that's why it is less suitable suitable for medium range combat,which most conventional battles are expected to be fought at.
That is one of the reasons why Taliban always gets their asses handed to them whenever they encountered the US forces in the open grounds apart from their poor training.The US forces could simply pick them off from outside of the effective range of their AKs and even score regular head shots.In fact there were so many dead Taliban with holes in their heads,that UN security Observers at first though that the US forces had been executing captured terrorists.But from the autopsies, it was cleared beyond any doubts that they had indeed been shot from over 300-400 yards.And that was only possible due to the flat trajectory achieved their high velocity light weight 5.56 rounds (the green tipped M855s to be precise).

By the way,I forgot to mention that usual muzzle velocity of the M43 rounds is about 710 meter/sec or so.

Excellent explanation. It is previllage to have a poster like you. In this troll thread, member like you is rare. Thank you very much. Your post deserve positive rating. .

 

[Chanakya's_Chant]

It is utterly shameful that the WW2-era Bren and Sten are STILL in widespread use in the IA today with no replacements on the horizon.

Lack of proper coordination between the IA and its suppliers like OFB seems to be one of the causes of the same - The ordnance factory at Khamaria is left with two batches of multimodal hand-grenades that the army is refusing to accept. They were to replace the World War II design grenades in service with the IA and other paramilitary forces - The Army wants changes in the time lag for the blast to trigger once the grenade's pin is pulled out. The factory, on the other hand, has maintained the delay is based on a chemical process and the timing cannot be changed beyond the current bandwidth.

The bottom line is - whether with a shorter fuse or not - those multimodal hand-grenades are much better and lethal than the ones in service which in many cases simply did not go off as the detonator failed. Ex-army officers have often said militants have better grenades than those with their troops. IA should rather accept it and work with OFB to get things sorted - reluctance to accept the same isn't the solution.

Ordnance factory stuck with grenades as Army wants shorter fuse - The Times of India

 

[Sneaker]

Lack of proper coordination between the IA and its suppliers like OFB seems to be one of the causes of the same - The ordnance factory at Khamaria is left with two batches of multimodal hand-grenades that the army is refusing to accept. They were to replace the World War II design grenades in service with the IA and other paramilitary forces - The Army wants changes in the time lag for the blast to trigger once the grenade's pin is pulled out. The factory, on the other hand, has maintained the delay is based on a chemical process and the timing cannot be changed beyond the current bandwidth.

The bottom line is - whether with a shorter fuse or not - those multimodal hand-grenades are much better and lethal than the ones in service which in many cases simply did not go off as the detonator failed. Ex-army officers have often said militants have better grenades than those with their troops. IA should rather accept it and work with OFB to get things sorted - reluctance to accept the same isn't the solution.

Ordnance factory stuck with grenades as Army wants shorter fuse - The Times of India

Once accepted by army, you can forget about any improvement. Didn't OFB know the delay requirement before hand? Delayed detonation v/s failed detonation isn't same thing IMO. If grenade fails to detonate, it is basically a rock, but if it has longer delay, it can be used against you!

 

[Abingdonboy]

Well,what else do you expect buddy??What else can anyone expect from a bunch of Gernails,who do not know what they want??Just take a look at the recent RFI issued by the DGMF for their FRCV and you will know what I'm saying.

By the way,welcome back bro.

You're right about that- time and again it is clear the IA's procurement department is lacking the requisite technical expertise when laying out specific requirements and this leads to massive issues later in the tender stage (often the scrapping of tenders).

The IA is already effectively standing still on modernisation (across the board) as the IAF and IN run off into the distance thanks largely to the IA's ENORMOUS operational expenditure bill and thus ineffective capital expenditure budget but the horrifying truth is that they aren't making the most of the limited CAP EX they have because their procurement dept is utterly useless. This situation isn't just embarrassing, it is dangerous.



As for the FRCV, I think what they want is somewhat clear and given this is a RFI the specifics are intentionally unclear. Once the bidders have presented their products to the IA, the RFP will be released with more stringent criteria based on the info obtained from the RFI.

 

[Sneaker]

Let me clarify this in a layman's terms,since I've got some experience with rifles.
Ok,now a rifle bullet is essentially a projectile and as any projectile,a bullet starts to drop due to gravity.Now a the 5.56 cartridge make use of a small projectile which is fired at an initial muzzle velocity of around 920 meter/sec (measured at 20 meter from the barrel's end) which ensures a relatively flatter trajectory out to a much longer distance and the shooter doesn't need to compensate too much (compensate meaning is to aim for a little higher than where your target is,the longer the range higher you have to aim and there by partially or totally loose sight of your target).

In contrast,the AK fires a heavier but much slower round - the M43.While it's good for close range,it drops at way too faster a rate due to its very poor ballistic coefficient.And lesser the range,faster it will loose its velocity and more it will drop.The M43 has got more of a parabolic trajectory and that's why it is less suitable suitable for medium range combat,which most conventional battles are expected to be fought at.
That is one of the reasons why Taliban always gets their asses handed to them whenever they encountered the US forces in the open grounds apart from their poor training.The US forces could simply pick them off from outside of the effective range of their AKs and even score regular head shots.In fact there were so many dead Taliban with holes in their heads,that UN security Observers at first though that the US forces had been executing captured terrorists.But from the autopsies, it was cleared beyond any doubts that they had indeed been shot from over 300-400 yards.And that was only possible due to the flat trajectory achieved their high velocity light weight 5.56 rounds (the green tipped M855s to be precise).

By the way,I forgot to mention that usual muzzle velocity of the M43 rounds is about 710 meter/sec or so.

If compared to 7.62, ballistics of 5.56 is better due to improved muzzle velocity (can't imagine 7.62 with that much muzzle velocity!!) but always wondered how insas compares to other 5.56s out there? I just compared wiki and empty insas is heavier than loaded m16 and with less muzzle velocity. It is medicore in that way...

 

[Omega007]

If compared to 7.62, ballistics of 5.56 is better due to improved muzzle velocity (can't imagine 7.62 with that much muzzle velocity!!) but always wondered how insas compares to other 5.56s out there? I just compared wiki and empty insas is heavier than loaded m16 and with less muzzle velocity. It is medicore in that way...

Wiki is not considered to be a source when we are talking about a specific model of something.You would do better not to quote wiki from now on.Thank you.
And as for INSAS being heavier than M16,is due to its wooden stock and stamped steel construction compared to the lightweight but more expensive Al-Mg alloy used in M16.As for the muzzle velocity,the M16s have got 20" barrel,where as the INSAS has 18.5",so obviously the M 16s have got 10-15 meter/sec more muzzle velocity but it's not really that significant.The initial muzzle velocity of INSAS 1B1 is rated at 920 meter/sec,which is adequate and in compliance with GSQR issued by the IA.
And lastly,you get what you pay for,bro.If you are ready to pay 1200 USD per piece,then you can get something like a decent M16 but if you only have 400 or so to offer,then INSAS would be the best bang for the buck!!It's as simple as that.Pure economics.

 

[The_Sidewinder]

If compared to 7.62, ballistics of 5.56 is better due to improved muzzle velocity (can't imagine 7.62 with that much muzzle velocity!!) but always wondered how insas compares to other 5.56s out there? I just compared wiki and empty insas is heavier than loaded m16 and with less muzzle velocity. It is medicore in that way...

M4 is a headshot specialist. @Omega007 already stated about Afganistan. But the story of suspected execution actually happened during US armies sieze on fortified Falujjah in Iraq. M4 is a briliant lightwright gun with which soldiers can manuver quickly while still firing accurately. With Insas due to its weight you have to crouch & prone all the time to shoot accurately. Suits in war environment, but in close quater CI ops, its pain in the a$$.

 

[Omega007]

M4 is a headshot specialist. @Omega007 already stated about Afganistan. But the story of suspected execusion actually happened during US armies sieze on fortified Fazzulah in Iraq. M4 is a briliant lightwright gun with which soldiers can manuver quickly while still firing accurately. With Insas due to its weight you have to crouch & prone all the time to shoot accurately. Suits in war environment, but close quater CI ops, its pain in the a$$.

It would be Fallujah I guess.
By the way,an experienced shooter can definitely engage targets from crouch position just as well,the heavier weight actually gives better stability by lessening the muzzle rise to an extent.But yeah,it can be (and it does) tiring,carrying it around for prolonged period of time.

Excellent explanation. It is previllage to have a poster like you. In this troll thread, member like you is rare. Thank you very much. Your post deserve positive rating. .

Oh come on man,you being too generous here.I'm glad that I could come of any help.

 

[The_Sidewinder]

It would be Fallujah I guess.
By the way,an experienced shooter can definitely engage targets from crouch position just as well,the heavier weight actually gives better stability by lessening the muzzle rise to an extent.But yeah,it can be (and it does) tiring,carrying it around for prolonged period of time.

US army always believes in shoot & move strategy. In Afganistan & Iraq it help save countless american lives. I watched a documentry where the major explains why it is so importent to be able to shoot down your enemy while you are constantly manuvering. It gives the enemy a far tougher target to shoot down, as insurgents were mainly equipped with Ak series & type 56, which are not known for their accuracy, soldiers had more chance to shoot down their enemy with lighter, more accurate m4 than vice versa. I hope MICWS will be as good as M4 if not better. That will boost our CI operative significantly & will bring down casuality rate.

oops MCIWS.

 

[Omega007]

US army always believes in shoot & move strategy. In Afganistan & Iraq it help save countless american lives. I watched a documentry where the major explains why it is so importent to be able to shoot down your enemy while you are constantly manuvering. It gives the enemy a far tougher target to shoot down, as insurgents were mainly equipped with Ak series & type 56, which are not known for their accuracy, soldiers had more chance to shoot down their enemy with lighter, more accurate m4 than vice versa.

Couldn't agree more.This is the essence of maneuvering warfare - "not just shoot and scoot but shoot while scoot"!!

I hope MICWS will be as good as M4 if not better. That will boost our CI operative significantly & will bring down casuality rate.

oops MCIWS.

By better,if you mean lighter,then that's not possible because the MCIWS is a rifle and not a carbine,it comes equipped with the same 18.5" heavy barrel of INSAS (heavier than that on TAR 21);compared to that,M4 has got a 14" barrel which comes at the cost of less power and range.But it will definitely be much lighter than the 1B1 due to extensive use of Mg-Al alloy compared to the stamped steel in INSAS.

Oh,and lest I forget,M4 does not have a gas piston,where as according to all available reports,MCIWS has a short stroke piston,which is more reliable and less maintenance intensive but a little heavier.A fare trade if you ask me.

 

[The_Sidewinder]

Couldn't agree more.This is the essence of maneuvering warfare - "not just shoot and scoot but shoot while scoot"!!



By better,if you mean lighter,then that's not possible because the MCIWS is a rifle and not a carbine,it comes equipped with the same 18.5" heavy barrel of INSAS (heavier than that on TAR 21);compared to that,M4 has got a 14" barrel which comes at the cost of less power and range.But it will definitely be much lighter than the 1B1 due to extensive use of Mg-Al alloy compared to the stamped steel in INSAS.

Oh,and lest I forget,M4 does not have a gas piston,where as according to all available reports,MCIWS has a short stroke piston,which is more reliable and less maintenance intensive but a little heavier.A fare trade if you ask me.

Well MCIWS will be an assault rifle just like M16. So heavier weight is justified. I hope our scientists will work on a carbine derivative of MCIWS just like M4..I dont have any issues with MCIWS as it will be far lighter than INSAS 1B1 , so serves the purpose I guess.

 

[Sneaker]

Wiki is not considered to be a source when we are talking about a specific model of something.You would do better not to quote wiki from now on.Thank you.
And as for INSAS being heavier than M16,is due to its wooden stock and stamped steel construction compared to the lightweight but more expensive Al-Mg alloy used in M16.As for the muzzle velocity,the M16s have got 20" barrel,where as the INSAS has 18.5",so obviously the M 16s have got 10-15 meter/sec more muzzle velocity but it's not really that significant.The initial muzzle velocity of INSAS 1B1 is rated at 920 meter/sec,which is adequate and in compliance with GSQR issued by the IA.
And lastly,you get what you pay for,bro.If you are ready to pay 1200 USD per piece,then you can get something like a decent M16 but if you only have 400 or so to offer,then INSAS would be the best bang for the buck!!It's as simple as that.Pure economics.

Wiki is quite accurate if sources are mentioned. M16 not only has Al-Mg alloy, it is chrome plated to avoid corrosion (costly lesson from nam). Now, we have been hearing jamming in insas, did we do any such things to alleviate the issue? economy is one thing (aks can cost 10$ a piece anyways) but I am more worried about giving substandard weapons even when we can afford better ones. Didn't OFB people plan to go on strike when insas production was being stopped because they lose overtime? Sh!t like this gets me riled...

M4 is a headshot specialist. @Omega007 already stated about Afganistan. But the story of suspected execution actually happened during US armies sieze on fortified Falujjah in Iraq. M4 is a briliant lightwright gun with which soldiers can manuver quickly while still firing accurately. With Insas due to its weight you have to crouch & prone all the time to shoot accurately. Suits in war environment, but in close quater CI ops, its pain in the a$$.

I have fired both insas (don't remember the exact feeling since it is long time ago) and AR15. AR 15 is a breeze compared to insas. You can't put different arms into a blender and come up with a good design. I want to shout at these "designers" when they boast of "transparent magazine"...

 

[Omega007]

Wiki is quite accurate if sources are mentioned. M16 not only has Al-Mg alloy, it is chrome plated to avoid corrosion (costly lesson from nam). Now, we have been hearing jamming in insas, did we do any such things to alleviate the issue? economy is one thing (aks can cost 10$ a piece anyways) but I am more worried about giving substandard weapons even when we can afford better ones. Didn't OFB people plan to go on strike when insas production was being stopped because they lose overtime? Sh!t like this gets me riled...

The specs mentioned are that of old 1B version,with orange polymer.The OFB website was never updated.The barrels had been chrome plated from day one,that's how the GSQR was written.The jamming happened due to poor maintenance and pouring too much oil into the bolt carrier assembly.Actually,all those reports of jammings and stoppages we keep hearing from time to time are old incidents and had been rectified long time ago.
And besides,I have used the 1B1 myself,never encountered any problem that could not have been rectified in the field.All you need to do is turn the gas regulator knob and clog the rifle a bit and you are all good to go!!That's how simple it was!!

I have fired both insas (don't remember the exact feeling since it is long time ago) and AR15. AR 15 is a breeze compared to insas. You can't put different arms into a blender and come up with a good design. I want to shout at these "designers" when they boast of "transparent magazine"...

And what is the cost of an AR 15 again??And you fired INSAS - where and when may I ask??