Indian Army finds 5.56 ineffective and wants more AKs

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nathan

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
5,070
NAGPUR: The indigenous 5.56x45mm Insas (Indian National Small Arms System) rifle has been the standard assault weapon for the Indian Army since the late 1990s. However, the jawans using it in counter-insurgency operations find it ineffective.
As part of the new Army doctrine, the gun is meant to incapacitate the enemy, rather than kill. Insas has a smaller calibre, which means it has less power. This is because ¡X and it's the official view ¡X injuring an enemy can lead to enemy soldiers getting engaged in tending the wounded, thus yielding a tactical battlefield advantage....

Read more: Saddled with Insas, Army wants new AK-47s - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-AK-47s/articleshow/4979790.cms#ixzz1As1YDUaJ


Related link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...Army-wants-new-AK-47s/articleshow/4979790.cms
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Never handled one, but INSAS has been pretty widely known as a mediocre, at best, weapon, reflecting a very poor case of borrowing from various previous designs. India got the "prestige" of fielding a local design that sort of demonstrated that maybe they should have shopped abroad.

As for the Indian MoD fielding a 5.56mm weapon because of their desire to only wound the enemy . . . either the reporter writing this piece is a retard, or the Indian powers that be are idiots. Nobody outside the subcontinent has ever fielded 5.56x45 for a desire to only wound the enemy, urban myths aside, so it begs the question of where the stupid enters the equation in India. Given the fact that reporters the world over are still reporters, my money is on the media, but I could be wrong.
 
So far i like my Ishapore 2A1 rifle in .308. Maybe im just old school. hahahaha...
 
This article contains a ton of urban myth as well as a need for a new sling & maybe a tougher magazine.

As for the zero wandering every time you clean it? That's a serious design flaw.
 
5.56 penetrates barriers like a wasp penetrates a double-glazed window.:neener:
What loads do you shoot through that Ishy?
Want one but scared of kabooms.
 
Im just using South African surplus 7.62 NATO . It shoots good though. No signs of overpressure on the spent casings that i had noticed.
 
That particular news agency started having a beef with that rifle back in 1999.
Most of the problems they then reports have supposedly been fixed.
The troops from Napal said it works for them.

Basically it is an AK variant made with little thought to ergonomics.

A different sling attach point, different sling and better magazines would fix almost all of their complaints.
Sounds like a couple of under-trained and mouthy troops think that full auto AKs would be better for spraying bullets at close range.
 
"As part of the new Army doctrine, the gun is meant to incapacitate the enemy, rather than kill."

Killing the enemy in wartime is kind of, well, a 1940's type mentality.
 
Atblis,

You're not kidding. I've spent time in India and traveled around. It is a complete mess and their military, which is present everywhere, is at best poorly trained.

As for the media report about the Indian Army doctrine being to wound and not kill the enemy, that's complete non-sense. I trust the media outlet regurgitating this old wives tale can produce the official document from the Indian government that spells out this requirement/doctrine.

Not.

I've seen similar claims made by people about our own use of the 5.56mm round. Ironically, no one has ever produced a single shred of official evidence showing where any government requirement existed then (1960's) or today stating we wanted to wound and not kill the enemy.

It's utter non-sense.

So I would take this media report with a grain of salt as they're obviously biased and have an axe to grind, and they're willing to spread misinformation to grind that axe.

There might be elements within the Indian Army that want to transition to AK's. Heck, I'm sure there are elements within our own military that want to use AK's (and some Spec Ops do use them).
 
I think the commander of GSG-9, Germany's special forces, had it right. At the Infantry Symposium last year, sponsored by Rheinmetal, there was a discussion about the lethality of the 5.56. He commented that "The SS109 round was perfectly lethal up to 400 meters if the soldiers would hit what they were shooting at. I love the American soldier but they are not being taught marksmanship. The best rifle marksmanship training in America is from a private group called 'Johnny Appleseed' or some such thing."

He was referring to the RWVA's Appleseed Project.

What can be said about the woeful state of American military marksmanship training I'm sure can be said 10 times over for the Indian military.

In short, the main problem is not the cartridge... it is the ability of the shooter to put the bullet in the right place. The average soldier's effectiveness could be increased a lot more through proper and thorough training than it could be by any different equipment. That goes for our military as well as the Indians'.

Of course the soldier's job can be made easier with a more ballistically effective round, but it doesn't provide a lot of return if they can't hit what they are shooting at. You know, the slow 7.62x39 is not known as an especially lethal round, either. It penetrates barriers better and perhaps has a little more "knockdown" at closer ranges than the 5.56 just because of it's larger mass, but that's about it. The wound channel on a FMJ 7.62x39 is not too terribly impressive at any range, especially out to 300m and further.

If these guys really want a more lethal round, they should be pushing for hollow point or soft point ammo. Those are very effective against unarmored targets out of a .223. And if they are talking about fighting irregular forces, there are no Geneva Convention concerns.

BTW, at that Infantry Symposium, after the GSG-9 Commander's comments, a member of the American special forces community jumped up, corrected him on the name of Project Appleseed, and said he had taken the course and qualified because he came with some basic knowledge but the weekend was a real "ball buster." Come to one and find out for yourself! :D
 
The M-16 used in Nam used the M-193 round. It was very lethal.I will never know how this wounding myth got started. Byron
 
Never handled one, but INSAS has been pretty widely known as a mediocre, at best, weapon, reflecting a very poor case of borrowing from various previous designs. India got the "prestige" of fielding a local design that sort of demonstrated that maybe they should have shopped abroad.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the "blame the caliber" angle is an attempt to distract attention from the design's shortcomings.
 
5.56mm is lethal for it's intended purpose. It has too do to many jobs this days. Jobs it was not intended for. Add to that the short barrels and no wonder you have reports saying is not "doing the job." Maybe it was not designed for that job in the first place.
 
I am compelled to ask how many people on this forum at THR would view the 223
as a 400 yd plus deer gun ( and a deer with or without a flak jacket to be specific) ?
 
My Indian Army story:

Driving in a pouring rainstorm we see these 4 guys just standing by the side of the road, wearing rain gear and looking miserable. So, I pull over and roll down the window an ask if they need a ride or something.
One guy meanders over and says (in what sounds like a perfect British "posh" accent) that no, their ride will be along in a couple hours. Keep in mind that its raining like mad.
As I drive off I notice that they have stacked their rifles muzzle down in the mud. Actually jammed them up to the front sight.
 
I think the commander of GSG-9, Germany's special forces, had it right. At the Infantry Symposium last year, sponsored by Rheinmetal, there was a discussion about the lethality of the 5.56. He commented that "The SS109 round was perfectly lethal up to 400 meters if the soldiers would hit what they were shooting at. I love the American soldier but they are not being taught marksmanship. The best rifle marksmanship training in America is from a private group called 'Johnny Appleseed' or some such thing."
Click to expand...


The commander of GSG-9 is spot on.
When Kuwait was invaded i had been the senior firing range advisor to the Saudi Arabian national guard for several years. We had a special marksmanship training program for the Saudis because the vast majority of them were poor marksmen.

Then the 82nd Airborne Division started using our ranges. They made the Saudis look like resolute marksmen.
 
I'm sure the Indian military has their reasons.

But... I think I will fallow the lead of the U.S. Military and Special Forces given their long resume.

I don't recall the "Indian Influence" in WW1 nor WW2. At least they never said anything in any history class I took, Grandpa didn't say anything either. Also, I don't think Dad said anything about the Indians in Vietnam...

I know they were there in some capacity... I'm just guessing though.

Its kind of like having Steven Spielburg tell you one thing about movie making, and the video store clerk telling you he is full of **** and you should really do this.
 
Most modern combat takes place well short of 400 yards.

Regardless, many deer fall to .223 in the United States every year.
 
But... I think I will fallow the lead of the U.S. Military and Special Forces given their long resume.
Click to expand...

This is what some of those special forces troops had to say:
from here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/6fjrvj...e-issue-10.pdf

“We shot guys with a 5.56
millimeter center mass and had them walk in five hours later and say
‘you shot me.’ Then we would medically evacuate them. If you hit a
guy center mass – he needs to die. That is the whole point of shooting
at someone; not to do anything less than that.":)
 
Anecdotal stories of people being shot in the chest who survive aren't something we should base our military small arms usage on.

Example:

http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2009/11/farmington_hills_hunter_surviv.html

Are 12ga slugs under powered? Are they adequate for deer? The guy in the above story survived being "shot in the chest" by a slug.

This guy was also shot in the chest with a slug in this story in Iowa and survived.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/hunting/2010/12/iowa-man-shot-chest-hunting-partner

Given these two anecdotal stories, is there enough evidence to stop using shotguns with slugs for deer hunting because they're inadequate?

I think not.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Indian Army dumping the INSAS assault rifle
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Greenmachin3
G
S
  • Locked
Two New Russian Assault Rifles Vie To Unseat AK-47
Replies
23
Views
3K
atblis
A
C
  • Locked
Plan to Sell Iraqis M-16s
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
dscottw88
D
<*(((><
  • Locked
Ukraines New AR-47
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
RecoilRob
R
C
  • Locked
AK-47s are turning up more often in U.S.
Replies
1
Views
352
romma
R
Back
Top