Indian Army Plans to Upgrade the INSAS Rifle. Part 1 - History

The history of the Indian INSAS rifle is quite unique and has always been marked by controversy. And even if you never heard of it before, you can figure out its reputation just by reading headlines of TFB articles published in the last 10 years:

• India Replaces All INSAS Rifles In "Red Zones" With AKs, Cites INSAS as "Defective"
• INSAS Malfunctions Caught on Video in Combat
• Indian Army wants to ditch the INSAS
• India To Adopt Indigenous Rifle Design To Replace Troubled INSAS

I have always been fascinated with the INSAS rifle. While working in India, I spent many hours interviewing Indian soldiers from different units and branches about their experience with different types of service rifles. I also had a chance to test INSAS myself and it was an unforgettable experience.

Recently a company called Star Aerospace presented a modernization kit, that includes a new magazine, folding adjustable stock, pistol grip, new handguard, and a receiver cover with integrated Picatinny rail.

This upgrade makes a lot of sense, but to truly understand why it is essential for the Indian army, let’s dive into the history of INSAS and the problems that this rifle previously experienced.

History of INSAS

INSAS is an abbreviation that means Indian Small Arms System. It was developed in the 80s by the Small Arms System Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to replace SLR, an FN FAL variant used by Indian forces, which was produced in-country.

INSAS is manufactured by the state-run Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), which recently was divided into several smaller companies. In 1993, the first batch of 1500 INSAS rifles was officially handed over to the army by the Ishapore factory.

INSAS is not a copy of any existing design and more of a compilation of many different rifles. The charging handle location is similar to HK G3, the overall design often reminds people of Galil (and let’s not forget RK 62, the Galil’s predecessor), but at the end of the day, it is an original design.

INSAS program also includes a Light Machine Gun (LMG). Several years ago TFB published a video of this type of LMG having stoppages in a firefight.

Since the first conflict where INSAS was used, the Kargil War of 1999, the rifle’s reputation started to decline.

Issues with INSAS according to Indian press

There were a lot of complaints published in the Indian press. Here is the quote from a recent article “ Replacing INSAS - In Search of A Good Rifle”:

As early as 1999, during the Kargil War, Indian soldiers complained about the cracking of the polymer plastic magazine in the cold weather. Gradually, more complaints streamed in — jamming during high-altitude operations in Siachen and the Kashmir Valley, as well as malfunctioning during anti-Naxal operations in the forests of central India.

Gradually, the army stopped using it during counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir, going instead for the trusted AK-47, known for its ability to withstand extremes of weather conditions.

There was one more article that caught my attention called “ Why India’s Homemade INSAS Rifle Failed to Fire :

(...) INSAS (Indian National Small Arms Systems) has been riddled with niggling problems from the start.

Failing to secure the confidence of the end-users during the Kargil conflict in 1999 due to issues like cracking of the magazines, jamming, spurting of oil during firing, and going into automatic mode when it was set for three rounds to name a few (...)

Between 2015-16 and 2019-20, 13-17 percent of the INSAS rifles were returned for rectification due to defects in components like the breech lock, piston extension, body housing, and unit burst control among others.

And now, a recent report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has thrown more light on the issues that plague the gun.

In a 2016-2019 audit scrutiny conducted in a sample of 26 cases of ‘defect investigation’ in small weapons, 14 were from the 5.56 mm INSAS rifle. The repetitive defects were the bursting of cartridge case in the chamber, bulging of housing body and cracks in the breech block/barrel extension.

“The rifles were declared ‘un-serviceable’ in all cases. Burst of cartridge case was due to excessive pressure produced in the chamber for lower/higher hardness of components, improper tempering of breech block, and faulty process control in hardening treatment,” the national auditor’s findings said.

The audit probe committee concluded that the problems were due to “pre-existing metallurgical deficiencies in the barrels/components and deviations in hardness of the components due to improper heat treatment process. All these problems indicate manufacturing problems of a metallurgical nature in the concerned weapons.”