What INSAS has really achieved after 15 years & what its future

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

I am all out of guesses bro. That was the best I could.

We can confirm -
Non of IA regular infantry has H&K
Non of PARA/GARUD/NSG has H&K
Don't know about MARCOS but I think they preffer AKs

To buy a weapon for IA or SF you need a green flag from MOD and if YES we would have definatly saw that news.
I just checked on google if any police CRT has it but wouldn't find anything

There are two organisation that can buy weapons even from black market without NOD of MOD
And one of them is RAW and other is SOF

*Marcos have Tavor now.With SOF do you mean SFF?

Apart from that i agree with your post.

@COLDHEARTED AVIATOR

Bro, be careful of what you share here.I know you are mature enough but still. There are somethings which are not public for good, and i think this is not the right place to talk about it.

Ya buddy...to be honest i dont have any knowledge on this..just guessing.

 

[Sergi]

*Marcos have Tavor now.With SOF do you mean SFF?

Apart from that i agree with your post.




Ya buddy...to be honest i dont have any knowledge on this..just guessing.

He is right. Let's close our findings right here. We will know when we are supposed to Know

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

He is right. Let's close our findings right here. We will know when we are supposed to Know

Thing is...we dont know exactly WTF is this.I thought a lot about whether to share this or not but finally i did...

Anyways looks like the forces are a lot secretive than we thought.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Guys regarding this G36 issue I am soooo confused. Firstly an Indian SOF operator even ex-SOF wouldn't be posing on FB. Even regular indian military would be cautious of doing so- it is now against MoD policy if I'm not wrong. Also given the IA SF have heir trusty Tavors in huge numbers now and have a significant amount of M4s (that they are stocking up on) then I see no reason for them to go for be G36 same goes for Garud and MARCOs. It is possible NSG are getting such weapons. I'd have to throw my hat in at Special Group if I'm honest.


An interesting detour- does anyone else think that the recent news of M4 for IA SF will be for more than just he bog standard m4? m4 is a wide term and for he IA SF to be getting more or a weapon they have used for years is hardly news so something more?

 

[dekho]

I believe we should go for Tavor with full TOT.Its a very good weapon extremely accurate and we already have them in large numbers in the SF.So theres no point really in not going for it.Getting different weapons wil become a logistical nightmare in the end.

A bullpup rifle is not the solution for an army that operates in various terrains and conditions. Tavor suits IDF and Indian Special Forces because they mostly operate in Close Quarters (IDF has most engagements in urban areas and rarely in open fields); there's a reason why countries like USA, Russia and Germany never opted for bullpups. Bullpup rifles are expensive to aqcuire and train with, and can not be operated effectively without optics since the rifle being compact does not allow space for iron sights.

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

A bullpup rifle is not the solution for an army that operates in various terrains and conditions. Tavor suits IDF and Indian Special Forces because they mostly operate in Close Quarters (IDF has most engagements in urban areas and rarely in open fields); there's a reason why countries like USA, Russia and Germany never opted for bullpups. Bullpup rifles are expensive to aqcuire and train with, and can not be operated effectively without optics since the rifle being compact does not allow space for iron sights.

But SA80 of the British Army has been in service since long in all environments and is still present since its induction in 1985.

 

[MilSpec]

A bullpup rifle is not the solution for an army that operates in various terrains and conditions. Tavor suits IDF and Indian Special Forces because they mostly operate in Close Quarters (IDF has most engagements in urban areas and rarely in open fields); there's a reason why countries like USA, Russia and Germany never opted for bullpups. Bullpup rifles are expensive to aqcuire and train with, and can not be operated effectively without optics since the rifle being compact does not allow space for iron sights.

I dont think that is correct, distance between the sights on a ak is lesser than peep sights on a AUG. Most modern firearms come with optics and IA itself is looking to mount optics on Insas battle units.
Now a days red dots, halo sights and acog's are getting cheaper by the day

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

Guys regarding this G36 issue I am soooo confused. Firstly an Indian SOF operator even ex-SOF wouldn't be posing on FB. Even regular indian military would be cautious of doing so- it is now against MoD policy if I'm not wrong. Also given the IA SF have heir trusty Tavors in huge numbers now and have a significant amount of M4s (that they are stocking up on) then I see no reason for them to go for be G36 same goes for Garud and MARCOs. It is possible NSG are getting such weapons. I'd have to throw my hat in at Special Group if I'm honest.


An interesting detour- does anyone else think that the recent news of M4 for IA SF will be for more than just he bog standard m4? m4 is a wide term and for he IA SF to be getting more or a weapon they have used for years is hardly news so something more?

This pic is very recent and i would like to drag your attention to the news i posted a week ago in SF thread that the IA SOF will have its own budget and maybe a secret one...could be possible that there are lot of things to it.

Regarding unit i wont make a guess as RoYaL~GuJJar rightly pointed out.

 

[MilSpec]

Aug is used by the Australians and SA80 by british, even Chinese use a bullpup. US rifle deal has a lot of greys in it hence they are stickeng to stoner platform for now, but a switch is foreseen. Russians army has cultural affinity towards their firearms and with thier volunteer/conscript army they wouldn't want anything that needs additional training.

Bulpups have no issues in reliability, and makes more sense in design

 

[Abingdonboy]

A bullpup rifle is not the solution for an army that operates in various terrains and conditions. Tavor suits IDF and Indian Special Forces because they mostly operate in Close Quarters (IDF has most engagements in urban areas and rarely in open fields); there's a reason why countries like USA, Russia and Germany never opted for bullpups. Bullpup rifles are expensive to aqcuire and train with, and can not be operated effectively without optics since the rifle being compact does not allow space for iron sights.

Actually the barrel of the TAVOR-21 is longer than that of the M4/M-16 but due to the bull-pup design is shorter in overall length wich means it is more accurate but doesn't have a length/mobility penalty. Indian SOFs have been smart to get the Tavors.

This pic is very recent and i would like to drag your attention to the news i posted a week ago in SF thread that the IA SOF will have its own budget and maybe a secret one...could be possible that there are lot of things to it.

Regarding unit i wont make a guess as RoYaL~GuJJar rightly pointed out.

Yes as soon as I saw the pic and had a think my mind shot to the news about a seperate SOF budget.



Still pretty baffling.

 

[dekho]

But SA80 of the British Army has been in service since long in all environments and is still present since its induction in 1985.

There are no disadvantages in traditional configuration to begin with that bullpup provides solution to. Yes, the overall length of the weapon is reduced with same barrel length but at what cost-

1. very few bullpups are ambidextrous. most of them eject shells to their right which would hit the face of a left hand user.
2. magazine changes take a lot of time since magazine feed is in awkward position and would completely break the line of sight of soldier.
3. bullpups are heavy. SA80 weighs 3.8 kgs empty.
4. bullpups do not have stock so a soldier cannot sight along the top of the barrel with iron sights. this makes optics a necessity and optics do not fare well in harsh conditions.

Also SA80 had serious jamming issues when it was introduced. these issues could only be adressed after H&K was pulled in for some serious modifications.

 

[Abingdonboy]

There are no disadvantages in traditional configuration to begin with that bullpup provides solution to. Yes, the overall length of the weapon is reduced with same barrel length but at what cost-

1. very few bullpups are ambidextrous. most of them eject shells to their right which would hit the face of a left hand user.
2. magazine changes take a lot of time since magazine feed is in awkward position and would completely break the line of sight of soldier.
3. bullpups are heavy. SA80 weighs 3.8 kgs empty.
4. bullpups do not have stock so a soldier cannot sight along the top of the barrel with iron sights. this makes optics a necessity and optics do not fare well in harsh conditions.

Also SA80 had serious jamming issues when it was introduced. these issues could only be adressed after H&K was pulled in for some serious modifications.

Most of these complaints are outdated IMHO. Today with more rugged optics that can be exposed to every condtion imgainble and even submerged, when polymor is being used to reduce weight, when swapping over ejectors and charging handles is a 20min job for any armourer then bull-pups can be ideal for SOF if nessercary.

 

[dekho]

The main problem in adopting bullpup in Indian Army is ergonomics. imagine the cost and time that will go into training infantrymen in operating and maintaining rifles of a new design. Another disadvantage is that the muzzle of a bllpup bieng so near to the face the heat from muzzle flash and the gases would be hazardous. There is also risk of soldier accidentally touch the barrel and suffer burn injuries.

 

[dekho]

Most of these complaints are outdated IMHO. Today with more rugged optics that can be exposed to every condtion imgainble and even submerged, when polymor is being used to reduce weight, when swapping over ejectors and charging handles is a 20min job for any armourer then bull-pups can be ideal for SOF if nessercary.

Surely there are more advanced optics available in the market but they do not come cheap and the cost for equipping more than a million soldiers with bullpups which themselves are expensive wich super advanced optics would be astronomical.

 

[Abingdonboy]

The main problem in adopting bullpup in Indian Army is ergonomics. imagine the cost and time that will go into training infantrymen in operating and maintaining rifles of a new design. Another disadvantage is that the muzzle of a bllpup bieng so near to the face the heat from muzzle flash and the gases would be hazardous. There is also risk of soldier accidentally touch the barrel and suffer burn injuries.

This is the same for any rifle the IA were to adopt. The INSAS will be replaced within 5 years anyway so training the entire IA on a new weapon is going to need to happen sooner than later and is not actually a huge task for professional soldiers.

Surely there are more advanced optics available in the market but they do not come cheap and the cost for equipping more than a million soldiers with bullpups which themselves are expensive wich super advanced optics would be astronomical.

You gotta spend money to make money lol!! (I know not the write saying!)