Okay, so a thread on the devp of INSAS. The issues faced and the problems leading to its discard in a short time frame of 20 years. In this thread I will say as it is FUs were made by all agencies involved and ppl will take umbrage cest la vie 1/n

Before we go on to the INSAS proper, let's just take a look at the 5.56x45 NATO and a little background to the M16. If u roughly convert this into inches, it'll come to approx .223". Yes, the same .22 that is defined in the US as suitable for small game /vermin~40lb 2/n

So, keep this in mind when I discuss the effect on target ie a human. So, the INSAS was was conceptualized in the early 80s as a replacement for the 7.62x51 SLR becoz? Well, the SLR couldn't fire in burst mode, heavy, recoil and WTH the whole of NATO had converted anyway 3/n

So, we got down to importing a few weapons of all kinds incl the M16 and the AUG Styr to study the various mechanisms and build etc. So then the PSQRs (prelim services qualitative reqmts) were finalized sometime in 1984/5 and the job was given to the DRDO to produce a system 4/n

Which included a LMG, Rifle and Carbine having 80% commonality of parts. One reqmt was that the LMG should be effective upto 700m and be capable of penetrating a steel helmet at that rg. Why this pt? Becoz it'll have a bearing later on wrt compatibility with NATO amn & BPJs
5/n

Anyway devp commenced. OK so many of u would have heard of GSQR what is PSQR? Well, GSQRs are fixed that means to accept any discrepancy during trials etc one has to get back to the CFA ie the DAC whereas in the PSQRs, as the DAC devp takes place 6/n

The devp agency, in this case the DRDO can get back with problems being faced by it and the QRs can be amended after deliberations at the service HQ level. Again an imp pt. Anyway, the devp contd with a no of trials and iterations the most hilarious one being that the 7/n

Carbine should have two triggers. Yes 2. Two pistol grips and 2 triggers so that even when ur in firing posn, you could choose to fire with either hand hilarious right? This reqmt was later dropped Anyway, the list of funny things dont end here. Anyway, cut to 1996. 8/n

The IA finally accepted what was offered by the DRDO and in grand ceremony, the first INSAS ser No 000004 was presented to the QMG. It's still there at the Inf School Mhow. Large scale inductionin NC started in 1997 onwards. OK so now I'll just leave facts for a while 9/n

And get into the perception management issues here. So, we were told that the INSAS mag has been tested to withstand a 3 Ton veg going over it (the erstwhile Shaktiman). And ofcourse, we too parroted the narrative that to injure 1 en in battle will reduce 5 (4 for evac)
10/n

This narrative was first given out by the US when they dply their M16s in Vietnam and field reports came in increasing Nos that confirmed hits made no difference on an advancing en. Anyway, it saw action in Op Vijay in Kargil and guess what? The same issues were reported 11/n

In addition there were reports of the mag cracking, double feed, oil spray in the firers eye, overheating (incidentally, even the Nepal Army had apch us with the problem of jams in the wpns, but much like the US army we too put it down to improper cleaning
12/n

Anyway, post Kargil atleast we could have got our act together na pas? But no, it took us all of 5 more yrs to carry out an AUCRT(accelerated user cum reliability trials) wherein there were 23 defects iden in the rifle and 21 in the LMG. Incidentally the carbine 13/n

Sry, halfcock fire ho gaya just a lot like the INSAS when it does fire. The carbine was still nowhere on the horizon. Anyway, let's focus on the carbine devp so far. Remember the carbine with 2 triggers? Well it went back to one trigger and was in the trials when 14/n

Some senior officer if the IA fired it and said it makes too much sound. So, the QRs were amended (see my second tweet)again to include, sound should be lower than the in service CMG. So, the DRDO started devp a 5.56x 30 cal wpn
More on that later. 15/n

So, the oil spray in the firers eye was addressed, a few other issues too, however, in 2007, again, trials were conducted and still there were about 18odd defects in the rifle and 21 odd in the LMG. Anyway if u remember, we are already in the 10th yr of its induction. 16/n

Anyway, by now the feedback from the grand could not be ignored. The boys wanted to use only AKs in J&K. Another aside here, when we were going for IPKF, the Russkies offered us AKs at about 2000 Rs. But we wanted our own which started 19k. Anyway Atmanirbhar anyone? 17/n

Ok, so now we had a wpn which was our own. So, we should have got what we wanted. But, this is where I come inatleast as far as LMGs are concerned. So, SAFK made 15k LMGs to overcome all the issues sometime in 2015. These were in Janalpur and I was tasked to test them. 18/n

So, we sent ppl there and got a hold of 10 LMGs from the Ordinanance depot there and also 2 from the local unit and we had a trial. 4800 rds to be fired in cycles from each. The older LMGs (unit ones) performed better with approx 1800 MTBF(mean time betw failure19/n

And the LMGs from OD JBL had a MTBF of approx 800 rds
Basic issue was shearing of the firing pin which is basically a class 2 defect, and overheating of the cocking handle. So, after the initial trials, I was called for a mtg with the DCOAS and it just keeps getting better20/n

The cocking handle is that thing which a firer holds in his hand whenever he needs to change the mag once its enpty. So, after about 4/5 mags the firer had to use his handkerchief to cock the wpn. I brought it out in the trial report and hence the meeting with the DCOAS
21/n

Anyway there the DRDO rep, a scientist H then, I'm sure he must be heading the ARDE, made a statement that we've done whatever we had to do. Now we are no longer associated with the INSAS program. JTB 22/n

Now, the last tweet brings out the attitude. Anyway, I was told to go to SAF Kanpur and we sorted out the issue in 1 day 23/ n

But then the Infantry directorate wanted to produce a next generation assault rifle and frankly ppl put in a lot of effort. The so called next gen assault rifle came over ro us just before the ICC15. Unfortunately, the DC Inf( by the way he'd put in the max effort) in it 24/n

Good person, BTW, on Diwali morning, I was on the rg and the DG comes over there and asked me,So how it. N I said Sir, as a INSAS 1 C it's great. Let's have a comparative trials and I'm sure that we'll be able to get over the 12k deficiencies that we have(had) 25_n

But unfortunately, the INSAS 1c never saw the light of the day. And so the story ends 26/26

Ok, so, I'd identified couple of issues in the PSQRS. Sorry, missed out on those issues. My first thread. Wonder how does @CestMoiz do it
Anyway, 700m piercing a steel helmet. So, the DRDO made a bullet that was more stable in the air, leading to it being longer 27/n

and having a hard steel core. Hence, no compatibility with 5.56x 45 NATO, and later on resultant issues with BPJs. How do BPJs enter the picture? Ok, world over, you are supposed to be protected by ur own amn. Incidentally, only we use hard steel core amn. 28/n

So, to protect ourselves from our own ann, the et of the BPJs rose from approx 7.5 kgs to about 13.5 kgs in the full configuration. We only realised the FU when we were evaluating the Lt Bullet Proof Vehicle and our INSAS rds were going through like hot Knife thu butter

Hence, no LBPVs and we're still here

Missed nos in the last two. Anyway the AK 7.62x39 amn being made by the OFB has a hard steel core. So, when u see the CAPFs with their snazzy looking BPJs, just understand that they're not protected against their own amn. May not be an issue in J&K but definitely against reds

Our INSAS amn and AK AK doesn't fall in the cat of NIJ level III, it's actually level IV. Fact unknown to many. Had eval the AK OFB amn during comparative trials with ex import. The OFB amn with MV of 625m/a + - 15 m/s penetrated a MS sheet of 3.5mm at 400m 32/n