| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| 'How can our .303 rifles fight against AK-47?' |
| 2008-12-02 |
| While leaving his Airoli home in suburban Mumbai on Wednesday night, Sudam Aaba Pandarkar, an assistant sub-inspector of the Thane Railway Police, could never have imagined the terrible night that awaited him. Pandarkar, who is usually on duty in the ladies' compartment in Central Railway trains, reached the Chhattrapati Shivaji Terminus at around 9.50 pm. Pandarkar initially mistook the sound of gunshots as firecrackers being lit by happy cricket enthusiasts, after India's victory against England [Images] in the fifth one day international that day. The gravity of the situation hit him when he saw the terrorists firing from their automatic rifles. As he tried to make his way to the place where the terrorists were spraying bullets, he came across a terrorist standing just 15 metres away from him, near platform number 6. Without wasting any time, Pandarkar unlocked his .303 rifle and fired three shots at the terrorist. Unfortunately, all three bullets missed the target. "When you shoot in such circumstances, it is to kill the target. The terrorist was fortunate that he was not hit by my bullets," he says when asked why he missed the target. The terrorist fired back and the bullet hit Pandarkar in the chest. When the terrorist ran away, Pandarkar tried to follow him, but couldn't move beyond a few feet. His colleagues rushed to his rescue as he fell down, writhing in pain. "The bullet narrowly missed his heart and ruptured his left lung. Had the bullet hit him just a few inches lower, it would have completely damaged his heart. He must thank his stars for that," says Dr Ashish Kumar Tiwari, staff physician and spokesperson of Bombay Hospital, who along with Dr D P Vyas, is in charge of all the injured patients. Pandarkar's wife Parvatibai, who's been with her husband ever since he was hospitalised, stands at his bedside, as her husband talks to television reporters. Though Pandarkar has no complaints against anybody for his condition, he wonders aloud, "It was.303 versus automatic rifles like AK-47s and AK-46s. Do we stand a chance?" He also feels that something must be done to upgrade the outdated firearms used by the police, so that the force is better-prepared the next time. |
| Posted by:john frum |
| #23 God bless your Dad, JAB, sounds like a great man ;-) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-12-02 23:31 |
| #22 FWIW, my Dad, God rest his soul, used to tell me fondly about when he was in the Army in the mid '50s in Germany. He grew up in the country and was a very good shot (though he'd always tell me he was nothing compared to Grandad). He'd often recount that shooting all kinds of guns all the time was something he loved about the Army. He expressed great admiration for the older NCOs (WW2 or Korea vets in the company he commanded) who could fire the bolt action rifles (1903 Springfields I guess) at such high rates of fire and with such accuracy that he felt they would be at no disadvantage to modern firearms (he used to complain a lot about the M-1 so there was some bias). I reckon most people do not try to fire bolt action rifles too quickly as they focus on hunting. But, when such rifles were issued to soldiers the situation must have been different and they probably would have held up fine vs. an AK-47. But I'm no expert. My son will probably think I'm a good shot by our citified standards and I'll have to tell him about Grandad. But at least he'll learn to shoot. Dad used to love reading Rantburg, btw. |
| Posted by: JAB 2008-12-02 23:12 |
| #21 Thinking back to "Men Against Fire" by SLA Marshall, the mere act of taking offensive action sets this constable apart from the vast majority of combatants that have ever faced incoming fire. I've read elsewhere that Marshall's assertions were tosh. The problem with US (and most other) forces has generally been that they were too trigger-happy, not that they were reluctant to shoot. The Korean, Vietnam and Iraq wars were characterized by native allies who expended too much ammunition haphazardly without really looking at where their adversary was. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2008-12-02 22:49 |
| #20 The Carcano M91/38 rifle wasn't the best rifle in the world either by 1963, but still could do a lot of damage on a target by a trained rifleman. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-12-02 20:10 |
| #19 Assuming that the story is accurate, I too will give the sub-inspector credit fir; 1. Marching to the sound of the guns 2. Opening fire, attempting to engage Thinking back to "Men Against Fire" by SLA Marshall, the mere act of taking offensive action sets this constable apart from the vast majority of combatants that have ever faced incoming fire. Quoting Teddy Roosevelt: It Is Not The Critic Who Counts "It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat." |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2008-12-02 20:02 |
| #18 Thank goodness US troops were well equipped and trained at the beginning of WWII when we were an up and coming power. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-12-02 19:58 |
| #17 I will concede that the Enfield was a fine rifle in it's time but at short range against a full or semi auto in trained hands it is not adequate. This cop had guts if not the skills to get those 3 rounds off. Of course training matters but most police do not have the best training to face an armed combatant. Swat officers here in the US perhaps but that is specialized (read elite) training with hand-picked people. Beat Cops? Not hardly. It still doesn't excuse the Political, management and supervisory mindset that allowed this lack of basic firearms training and practice. And the issuance of out of date equipment. Especially by a up and coming world power in such a dangerous part of the world. |
| Posted by: tipover 2008-12-02 19:20 |
| #16 Weren't there a lot of casualties in WWI? How did that happen? |
| Posted by: Jeremiah Thaise1218 2008-12-02 19:14 |
| #15 do they not teach them how too aim? Old weapon or not if the aim was true then he might have at least winged him Your comment reminds me of an old Hindu saying. "How can one expect a monkey to appreciate the taste of ginger?" |
| Posted by: Gruger Smith5247 2008-12-02 18:57 |
| #14 Lee Enfield .303's, of course. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2008-12-02 18:55 |
| #13 When I was growing up in the Australian bush in the 1950s the only rifles I ever saw were war surplus Lee Enfield's from the Lithgow Small Arms Factory, and every farmer had one to shoot kangaroos and for the rifle range. With open sights they are very accurate at 400 yards and more, and a roo has a smaller heart shot area than a Jihadi. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2008-12-02 18:54 |
| #12 'How can our .303 rifles fight against AK-47?' The gun is more than capable, it's the shooter who was not up to the task. Lack of training, lack of practice, or lack of temperment. Not at all unusual though. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-12-02 18:52 |
| #11 Also, the Afghanis put a lot of Soviets in the ground using SMLEs during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - but then the Afghanis would practice anywhere they chose, and did enough live firing to be reasonably accurate. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2008-12-02 18:02 |
| #10 Three items for which we can be thankful: 1. It happened there, and not here. Thank you "W". 2. The Indians were successful in capturing one of the terrs alive. 3. The Indians were successful in eventually bringing an end to it. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2008-12-02 17:59 |
| #9 The lack of training, especially live firing, is what doomed the Indian cops armed with the SMLE. The old British .303 round is a deadly one, and if any of the terrorists had actually been hit by one, they would have been badly wounded if not killed. I wonder if the Indian cops are issued hollow points or not? A hollow pointed .303 would be a nightmare wounding bullet. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2008-12-02 17:54 |
| #8 do they not teach them how too aim? Old weapon or not if the aim was true then he might have at least winged him |
| Posted by: rabid whitetail 2008-12-02 17:48 |
| #7 I would respectfully submit that success in these sorts of events has more to do with effective leadership, training, and the determination of the operator than the age or type of weapon used. As I recall, one of the first casualties was a senior (if not the senior) counter terrorism chief. That cound not have had a positive impact on leadership at the scene. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2008-12-02 17:29 |
| #6 With a spray and pray AK-47 he would have just filled the air with lead, and probably missed his target anyway. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2008-12-02 17:25 |
| #5 I know that India has made much more modern versions of the Enfield, chambered in 7.62mm NATO, which should be cheap-enough ammunition to practice with. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2008-12-02 17:23 |
| #4 Look, old bolt-action Mausers in the hands of civilians in Peru in the 90's were enough to put a serious dent in the Sendoro Luminoso. If they'd kept the guns in good condition and PRACTICED with them they'd probably be very adequate for the task. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2008-12-02 17:22 |
| #3 Read the previous article. Not only are they carrying a Enfield .303 (80 yr. plus old bolt gun) but many if not most have never fired them due to lack of ammo and NO ranges. He was lucky to get off 3 shots let alone hit anything. The rifles were good in 1915, adequate in 1940, antiques in 2008. |
| Posted by: tipover 2008-12-02 17:17 |
| #2 Response: Lee Enfield L96A1 |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2008-12-02 17:15 |
| #1 Here we go again. The cops want to be Storm Troopers. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2008-12-02 16:58 |
