Bayonets? Yes or No?

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by tangolima

This is a common explanation. Life in armed forces is boring. If soldiers are allowed to sharpen bayonets, very soon there will be no bayonets left to be sharpened. The steel will be ground away.

There is much truth to this statement. I once made the mistake of buying a mil-surp AK bayonet by mail order. What I received was about 75% of what had started out as an AK bayonet.

[44 AMP]

Still, I don't see any practical application but I don't want to be told you can't have that.

Military history is full of practical applications, and there are still practical applications today, though not as widespread or common as they once were.

Civilian history? not so much, although they could be counted as militia equipment.

NO ADULT likes to hear "you can't have that". The people saying that, making those decisions, and worse, sometimes making their will law, are NOT treating people as adults. They are treating us as if we were children who must be told what they can, and cannot do, or have, for their own "safety".

IF they are allowed the power to determine what we can, and cannot have, it is a very small step from there to determining what we can and cannot think, and ALL other aspects of our lives.

I respect their right to their own opinions, and they are free to tell me what I should, or should not do, or believe all day long. When thy go from should to must, and make that a law, they go too far.

[bamaranger]

I saw a photo a while back of bayonet use. The guy was in Alaska, his knock around bear rifle was a M44-7.62x54r carbine. The bayonet was extended, and the rifle stuck in the ground next to him while he fished.

[HiBC]

The bayonet was essential for accessing the ham and lima beans inside a case of C-Rations. That cardboard was tough and there was the wire wrap!
I've forgotten the names but there was a company or battalion commander during the Korean war who insisted his unit excelled in bayonet proficiency.

I don't recall the details, I think it was a "Must Hold" situation,but sure enough,
out of ammo they held against human wave attacks.
I read an account of the battle and IIRC a Unit Citation. I think the point was,
"Out of ammo? Those poor bastards are going to get stuck!!"

Edit: I looked it up! https://nationalinfantrymuseum.org/a...ayonet-attack/

"On February 7, 1951, Millett led his Soldiers from Easy Company, 2D Battalion, 27th Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division atop Hill 180 near Soam-Ni, Korea."

On longer versus shorter rifle/bayonets effectiveness.....Yes,it can be argued.
I'm not an authority but I did fence for a few years.
There is the principle of forte vs foible.

The shorter weapon is far more powerful in the parry. With a cool head and some agility its possible for the shorter weapon to deflect the longer weapon and get inside the pokey point. Beware the butt stroke!

[44 AMP]

The shorter weapon is far more powerful in the parry.

Yes, but the shorter weapon also means the other guy's pokey part is closer to you. Given roughly equal positions and skill, the longer reach is an advantage. It is not a guaranteed decisive advantage, but it is an advantage.

Given unequal positions (Or skill) things change.

"Give up Annakin, I have the high ground!" is not just some jedi bravado.

The advantages of the high ground and of reach over your opponent have been known since prehistory.

Despite what you see in movies, tv and theater, real sword fights involve both ends and rarely involve running and jumping all over the set. Actual masters rarely even cross swords and the same applies to a bayonetted rifle. Popular adventure fiction rarely shows real sword or bayonet fighting, its scripted dancing.

[davidsog]

For a combat infantryman, perhaps, for the rest of the world, not so much.

No.

We can do a little drill.

5 feet apart facing each other.

My rifle has one in the chamber ready to fire but my muzzle is pointed 45 degrees off from you. It does not matter if I have a rifle, a pistol, or a knife.

Your rifle is locked to the rear and your non-firing hand is on a fresh magazine in your pouch.

When the timer starts you can choose to reload or use your rifle as a weapon without a bayonet.
If you choose to reload, you will die every time.

If you know bayonet drills, even without a bayonet, you have learned the basic moves of using a rifle as a weapon in Hand to Hand combat. You have a very good chance of stopping me before I can turn my muzzle 45 degrees or close the distance with a knife and kill you.

[44 AMP]

How about we do a different little drill?

5 feet apart facing each other.

Your rifle has one in the chamber ready to fire but my muzzle is pointed 45 degrees off from you. It does not matter if you have a rifle, a pistol, or a knife.

My rifle is locked to the rear and my non-firing hand is on a fresh magazine in my pouch, because I have just emptied it into your chest at point blank range...

When the timer starts you fall down, dead.
Drill over.

[tangolima]

Don't forget the steel helmet. You can whack the bad guy with it if everything fails.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[HiBC]

Weapons,like golf clubs, have ideal contexts for their use and effectiveness.

The Romans had he phalanx and the short sword.

The cutlass was preferred in the raw melee of boarding ships.

Muskets and ranks and volley fire favored longer guns and bayonets.

For some reason in WW2 rifles got a bit shorter and bayonets were cut down and reground.

The Zulu Warrior of Rorkes Drift time could fight with his Iklwa stabbing spear pretty well. He would be a tough adversary in the above mentioned 5 ft scenario. The Iklwa spears tended to be under 40 inches in total length.
The Masai lion spears were a little longer ,between 5 and 6 feet.

For some it was a rite of passage to take on a lion with a spear.

That whole style of fighting is a heavy part of the culture and they probably leaned toward what works.

In use,lacking a round in the chamber, a rifle with a bayonet is not so far removed from the stabbing spear. The rifle may be a better bashing club.

Whether you have an 6 foot long spear/rifle bayonet or a 40 inch Iklwa, there will be an effective "length of thrust". Of course,there are variables.

But a weakness of the long weapon is it provides leverage to deflect (parry) it off target . If the parry is delivered with an aggressive closure toward the enemy, you will be inside the useful deployment of the bayonet. Its like tanks and battleships,you can get inside the depression of the guns.

Clinched up belly to belly throat biting range, I imagine a Kabar may be more effective than a 1917 Eddystone with a long bayonet. Back up 10 feet and things change.

Better yet,back up so the A-10 s or 155 s can handle it.

I'm speaking as a "Chairborne". Have a grain of salt on me!

It seems davidsog might know something about a dogfight with guns in a bathroom size space. Scary. No time for rules.

[davidsog]

How about we do a different little drill?

Your drill is unrealistic. Your rifle has been sitting in the closet for the last 14 months and fails to fire.

You lose.

I'm speaking as a "Chairborne". Have a grain of salt on me!

You get it, LOL.