Rare early (1971) Lithgow full auto L1A1!!

The INSAS, another tale for another day. They have spent as much on that as we did on the NIMROD and what did we do with that at the end of Billions spent?

Having been over recently, they are a kind people, who search for the equivalent of the Holy Grail when it comes to weaponry, and a nation I will never understand having lived there as an Army brat as well. They love the British and what the Commonwealth stood for, yes Independance was a natural progressive thing to do, but Military wise, we still have both India and Pakistan attend RMAS. Its Esprit de Corps I know, but two countries split from what was India doing the same drills/leadership etc.
Thats where the SA80-/LSW reasoning comes from. These are the future Generals of both countries, who are always looking for the best deal for their people and good luck to them.

So in short, the British rifle of today, will always be the Indian Armies rifle of tomorrow, following the days of gun boat deplomacy whether we or they like it or not, we have always supported them through thick and thin, as they have us for more than two world wars, losing millions to British Political causes. Our rifles have always stood the test of time, and as such they see that, clearly as a great benchmark of engineering. Operationally one can spend hours banging your gums about how useless it is against and 7.62 NATO round but hey ho, its been upgraded more times than the good old Durex!!lol
;)

India - SA80........... I find it incomprehensible to say the two words in one breath. Not that there's anything wrong with the A2. It's just the logistics of adopting an early 80's design that no one else adopted, (even with most generous terms offered) with a total production run up to the mid 90's, of only 330,000 units. Are they going to tool up afresh........

Or is it April 1st?

Goodness gracious me ha ha!

Peter, it is their thoughts not mine, and they respect what we use regardless.

To take on the SLR/SMG and others was probably well timed as both were coming to the end of their enforced service, and they dropped lucky and bought them at "rock" bottom prices, but they are always looking for a good deal.....thats them.

They desperately want a 5.56 gap stopper and press ahead with Excaliber, but who knows!!

Indian Army pushes ahead with Excalibur rifle programme | IHS Jane's 360

But where can I read about India taking on the SA80. Are they going to buy the tooling for the top half from H&K who are the design authority for MOST of it but, alas, not all of it - which could cause manufacturing and logistics problems, (as I know to my cost. But that's another story)

I can't say that I know anything about the INSAS/Excalibur rifle, but it appears to be just another variant of the AKM, I guess there must be a mechanical difference? Reading through the Janes blurb, can I take from this that the Indians have achieved the impossible and built an AK variant that doesn't work very well !!

It still makes me laugh, the Political positive spin put on the L85A2 launch, what a "major achievement" that was, rebuilding a rifle to be what it was supposed to be in the first place, at huge additional expense!

From a personal perspective, I think its a shame the British, Australians and Canadians didn't collaborate again on a new individual weapon system design after the inch pattern era, follow the same tried, very sensible (and extremely successful format) of picking a proven design and turning it into a world beater.

At least the Australians and Canadians picked known designs and didn't try to re-invent the wheel like we did!

Peter,
It was a verbal exchange between a few of their British trained officers nothing more thqn that, but made me think they weren't happy with what was coming.
Agreed it is a partial facelift of many weapons more so, the AK series, but you could have a competition in naming parts, and you probably wouldnt be far off in each case.
H&K parts etc

Phew............ If I had to describe the INSAS to a class, I'd be telling them to think 5.56mm GALIL. It's true that there were teething problems with the INSAS - just like our L85 - but like us, they eventually took the bull by the horns, gave it and the sloppy design team a good kicking and got it working properly. That's straight from the horses mouth....... or as close as you could get, from the previous Indian Army Liaison Offr (the ILO) at work.

We had Offrs from all armies at Warminster on the junior command courses, Platoon commanders, JOTAC courses etc etc and while they might have been to Sandhurst, it wasn't for the Officers Commissioning course. They have their own Sandhurst at Chetwynd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Phew............ If I had to describe the INSAS to a class, I'd be telling them to think 5.56mm GALIL. It's true that there were teething problems with the INSAS - just like our L85 - but like us, they eventually took the bull by the horns, gave it and the sloppy design team a good kicking and got it working properly. That's straight from the horses mouth....... or as close as you could get, from the previous Indian Army Liaison Offr (the ILO) at work.

We had Offrs from all armies at Warminster on the junior command courses, Platoon commanders, JOTAC courses etc etc and while they might have been to Sandhurst, it wasn't for the Officers Commissioning course. They have their own Sandhurst at Chetwynd

---

Ah right, so if we say Galil, we are talking basically expensive tarted up AKM, I will have to read up on the INSAS, astonished they managed to bugger up such a proven design!

At least with the starting point of "Hey, lets ram an AR18 up an EM2's arse on a Tesco Value range budget and see what happens" you can see why the L85A1 went so very wrong, but to get the legendary reliable AKM design wrong, well India goes to the bottom of class, just below us!

Why oh why do the people who hold the purse strings let these companies re-invent the wheel, usually very badly and usually at a crippling expense to the tax payer and the poor sod who gets issued with it!

Speaking as the devils advocate, you can do all the trials, extended trials, troop trials, pre production assessments, production evaluations, cost analysis, fault assessments, fault timings and whatever else you can think of over a few years.............. But guess what? There is absolutely nothing on this earth that will test a new rifle like full deployment to troops in the field.

But you have GOT to listen and act on the defect reports that filter back. Most of the faults that come back are generally trivial ones that can be easily put right with a bit of will and where withall. SA80 ejected cases tipping round. SIMPLE cure to remove .014" from the front/top edge of the ejection opening. Correct the shape to the cocking handle to make into a shaped deflector to boot and the whole problem is solved. The SA80 was but nothing compared with the Brens faults once it started seeing action in France. And look how that was revered - eventually.

That much is true, design theory, static ranges, and limited troop trials will only take the testing so far. It isn't until you give a fully loaded soldier a rifle that you can find out if the magazine housing is strong enough to work as a step ladder in urban operations, or if two rifles can serve as a stretcher, in the case of the C7A1, it is and can.


Take the original C7 magazines, they were some of the early polymer design and they did not get a positive reputation, we switched to a metal bodied magazine, but after the improvement of plastics the P-MAG is the "high-speed" kit the world over. Although they are well improved, I don't trust them and would never rely on them. However technology does evolve with fielding, testing, and breakage.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ds20mags-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../05/c7_2-1.jpg