What they really need is to build the EM-2 aka the Janson rifle.
Almost full power cartridge in a carbine length gun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM-2
Almost full power cartridge in a carbine length gun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM-2
Indian Army dumping the INSAS assault rifle
- Thread starter nathan
- Start date
- Status
HorseSoldier
Member
And 5.56mm until NATO followed the US lead.
They'll just be throwing more money down a hole if they go that route, since 7.62x51 is not noted for its effective one-shot-stops on the battlefield, either.
Israeli Tavors -- India and Israel have been comparing notes on mutual Muslim enemies for a while now, and Israel has sold a good bit of its kit to India as well, including some Tavors that have already been purchased for Indian SOF types, if the internet is to be believed.
Last edited:
Al LaVodka
member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,040
India is A) a Democracy (the largest u wiseguys) and B) not Muslim. Therefore, this Administration will NOT be giving them our tax money. At least not for AMERICAN made arms. Well, maybe there's an outside chance -- they're not one of our allies, Jewish, nor the only democracy in the middle-east...
Al
An (Indian) elephant is a mouse developed by committee.
Maverick223
Member
That is plausible, all I am trying to say is it is highly unlikely that the US Govt. will supply India, either indirectly or directly, due to our relationship with Pakistan.
Greenmachin3
Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 93
It's a shame, really. Culturally, India is much better suited to an alliance with the US than Pakistan. Especially considering the British influence. In fact, many of the UK and Indian laws are still so similar that case law is often studied between the two. I really dislike the fact that Pakistan is considered a US ally. It's my understanding from friends that have been over there that most Taliban, even back in the mid 90s during their rise to power, are/were Paki.
The 5.56 cartridge was designed as an urban sub 300m cartridge for use against soviet invasion in dense western Europe right? I can see where a more powerful cartridge, especially out past 500m, would start to look good nowadays.
Either way, I think if anything, the INSAS is the nicest looking AK derivative. I would consider a parts kit for purchase as an oddity/fun/impress my friends rifle.
The 5.56 cartridge was designed as an urban sub 300m cartridge for use against soviet invasion in dense western Europe right? I can see where a more powerful cartridge, especially out past 500m, would start to look good nowadays.
Either way, I think if anything, the INSAS is the nicest looking AK derivative. I would consider a parts kit for purchase as an oddity/fun/impress my friends rifle.
nalioth
Member
Fixed.Greenmachin3 said:
It is widely held that the INSAS took the best features¹ from lots of prior systems, and kludged them into a faulty whole.
[1] "Best" from what or whose standpoint, we'll never know.
telomerase
Member
Neither India nor Pakistan has a military that spends as much as all the other militaries on the planet put together. Nor do their militaries go around making more enemies for them on every continent.
On the other hand, neither of their militaries can distinguish between a small upper-atmosphere comet or asteroid impact and a nuclear weapon, so they could accidentally kill a quarter of the people on the subcontinent in an accidental nuclear war. I guess quaint ineptitude is only good for so much.
As far as the rifle goes, maybe they should just upgrade to Enfield No. 4 MkIIs... apparently it wouldn't be any heavier than their "assault rifle" and it would have better sights for anti-terrorist work among the disarmed throngs of Mumbai, long-range desert fighting in the Kashmir forever war, mountain warfare against the Nepalese zombie Maoists, etc.
Greenmachin3
Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 93
At ~10lbs, I bet the INSAS is at least very controllable, if not very point-able, with the 5.56x45 round.
It's my understanding that part of the reason the Israelis were so effective on the ground against the Arabs in the 6 Day War was because, aside from air power etc., they could simply out-range and out shoot the AK toting Arabs with their FALs in 7.62x51. In a desert environment, I could see that as an enormous plus.
The INSAS is a strange gun. Now I know that India's climate ranges from temperate, to jungle, to mountain, to desert, but it seems as though most of their fighting is along their border with Pakistan which is more plains-like. A harder-hitting longer-ranged round certainly being called for doesn't sound out of place.
It's my understanding that part of the reason the Israelis were so effective on the ground against the Arabs in the 6 Day War was because, aside from air power etc., they could simply out-range and out shoot the AK toting Arabs with their FALs in 7.62x51. In a desert environment, I could see that as an enormous plus.
The INSAS is a strange gun. Now I know that India's climate ranges from temperate, to jungle, to mountain, to desert, but it seems as though most of their fighting is along their border with Pakistan which is more plains-like. A harder-hitting longer-ranged round certainly being called for doesn't sound out of place.
HorseSoldier
Member
So much wrongness, so little time . . .
Wrong. The 5.56mm round was developed to make the soldier armed with it more effective on the battlefield. It gave up longer range performance because people who actually studied battlefields and combat had realized decades earlier that troops could rarely acquire targets past 300 meters, much less hit them.
European battlefields had nothing specific to do with it. When we first adopted the M16 and 5.56mm round, the emphasis was on equipping troops in the warzone in SE Asia with the new kit to allow them to better do their job (issues to technical failure aside). Guys stationed in Europe were lower priority and continued to use the M14. Seems illogical they did it that way if the rational was really to field a specialized weapon for European battlefields.
No. The Israelis found the FAL so superior that a lot of IDF troops supposedly stashed their weapons in their vehicles and picked up AKs off the battlefield.
Whether or not that anecdote is true (I've read it online various times, but am unaware of an actual primary source describing it), we do know that the lessons the IDF learned from the 6 Days War resulted in their developing their own AK clone -- and chambering it in 5.56mm.
Wrong. The 5.56mm round was developed to make the soldier armed with it more effective on the battlefield. It gave up longer range performance because people who actually studied battlefields and combat had realized decades earlier that troops could rarely acquire targets past 300 meters, much less hit them.
European battlefields had nothing specific to do with it. When we first adopted the M16 and 5.56mm round, the emphasis was on equipping troops in the warzone in SE Asia with the new kit to allow them to better do their job (issues to technical failure aside). Guys stationed in Europe were lower priority and continued to use the M14. Seems illogical they did it that way if the rational was really to field a specialized weapon for European battlefields.
No. The Israelis found the FAL so superior that a lot of IDF troops supposedly stashed their weapons in their vehicles and picked up AKs off the battlefield.
Whether or not that anecdote is true (I've read it online various times, but am unaware of an actual primary source describing it), we do know that the lessons the IDF learned from the 6 Days War resulted in their developing their own AK clone -- and chambering it in 5.56mm.
Greenmachin3
Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 93
Interesting. The more you know.
- Status
