Bayonet obsolete? Not yet, apparently -

[Jarnhamar]

We're just joking when we talk about sneaking up behind sentries in all our kit (Canadian Commanders love to see how much shit they can load troops down with) and taking them out with a bayonet/knife right?

 

[Old Sweat]

Further to my last and since this is the silly season, contrast this to how easily the pioneers and mortars were axed from the infantry battalion establishment. These capabilities, it can be argued, are much more of an asset to a battalion than is the bayonet. This reminds me of one of the Peter Principles, the one that says to the effect, that the amount of effort devoted to considering an issue is in inverse proportion to its cost or importance. This can be demonstrated at an officers' mess meeting, where a new redecorating scheme costing tens of thousands of the members' dollars will pass with nary a murmur, and the next 45 minutes are spent in heated debate over spending a few bucks per month on crested matches.*

*I am dating myself. This sort of thing went on when people were allowed to smoke indoors and messes were the social centre of regimental life. Edward would probably concur in this, as he no doubt also experienced it.

 

[PuckChaser]

We're just joking when we talk about sneaking up behind sentries in all our kit (Canadian Commanders love to see how much crap they can load troops down with) and taking them out with a bayonet/knife right?

There are 3 sentry takedowns covered on the CQC Basic course, one of which uses the bayonet. The remainder are neck breaks.

 

[Jarnhamar]

There are 3 sentry take downs covered on the CQC Basic course, one of which uses the bayonet. The remainder are neck breaks.

I'm not going to lie that's pretty awesome. I wish I could do a course like that instead of the radiation safety officer course I was on last  :

How practical is sneaking up on a sentry and doing a solid snake kinda take down though?
It looks good on WW2 movies, some commandos scaling up the ass end of a mountain cliff to sneak up on 2 German sentries staring off in the opposite direction smoking and joking- but I wonder the actual application of it today?

Overseas I stopped carrying my bayonet and just had a fighting knife. Some guys had them some didn't, no one seemed to care either way.

 

[PuckChaser]

The course was re-written in 2002, so the techniques are definately more modern. I don't think it's pretty practical for the current conflict, however I'm not combat arms and haven't been in that close contact with the enemy. Mostly its taught as a tool in the toolbox, just in case we do end up in another country on country warfighting like Korea, etc.

 

[Fusaki]

Why would you limit the bayonet to just being mounted on the rifle? In a CQC situation I'd be grabbing it straight from the scabbard and placing it somewhere soft on the enemy without worrying about the rifle. That's like saying if you're going to transition to pistol, you would only use it in the proper marksman firing stance. The only time I could see an ASP having a range advantage is when the bayonet is in your hands, not on the end of a rifle. I really don't think the surface area of the ASP is going to be able to block effectively against an enemy with an empty rifle (or any other field expedient weapon of the same size) who's swinging it at you.

You just proved my point.

The only half-decent argument so far for keeping the bayonet is for the 1 in a million situation when:

-You're in a lethal force encounter; and

-You're not able to have a buddy pass you a fresh mag/grab unspent mags off a friendly casualty; and

-You're not able to grab the rifle off a dead enemy; and

-You're not able to extract back to the LAV, or some place with more ammo; and

-You're close enough to the enemy that you MIGHT be able to charge him without getting yourself shot; and

-There are no friends around who would be trying to get a clear shot at the guy you're about to engage in CQC with; and

-given the above, you'd probably have no time to mount the bayonet on a rifle anyway; so

-in essence you're really just advocating the carriage of a fighting knife; which

-you said yourself is inferior to an ASP baton, given the ASP's longer range.

But even if, in this one in a million freak occurrence, we were to find the bayonet to be superior to the ASP baton, there are still at least 8 other good <a href=http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28762/post-899749#msg899749> reasons</a> why the bayonet is obsolete.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Rifle > Pistol > Fighting knife?

 

[Kirkhill]

I am willing to stipulate that it makes little sense to carry a 2lb, 18" long pig-sticker on the off chance that one may need to carry out a bayonet charge against a defended position after your last bullet has gone.

But I fail to understand the angst against installing a fitting on a functional fighting knife and/or swiss army knife that would allow them to be attached to the barrel or furniture of a service rifle / assault rifle / smg / pistol.

In what way is that more onerous than carrying a separate ASP/tomahawk/entrenching tool?

And by the way, with these 10 tonne CQ vehicles being driven around the countryside thesedays it would seem that the OC could have his CQMS carry a pretty large tool-kit into the theater, if not the AOO.

PS British Army crowd control baton Circa 1946  (aka entrenching tool handle)

http://onlinemilitaria.net/shopexd.asp?id=3898

 

[Michael OLeary]

I am willing to stipulate that it makes little sense to carry a 2lb, 18" long pig-sticker on the off chance that one may need to carry out a bayonet charge against a defended position after your last bullet has gone.

Everyone keeps saying they see the bayonet charge as a possibility after all their ammunition is gone.  Wouldn't it be more prudent, with a greater possibility of success, if the desired criteria is that most of the enemy's ammunition is gone?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If I recall correctly the Brits used bayonets in the defense of the Hook in korea?

 

[daftandbarmy]

To paraphrase another rmember here (who shall remain nameless until he/she chooses to reveal him/herself):

" 'Ain't Army.ca great? You can, without a pang of conscience or peer censure, freely discuss the process of skewering your fellow man - on Christmas."

And with that, I've attached my idea of the perfect Christmas present... next to a well executed ambush that is. 

Merry Christmas to the bayonet thread! :christmas happy:

 

[Fusaki]

But I fail to understand the angst against installing a fitting on a functional fighting knife and/or swiss army knife that would allow them to be attached to the barrel or furniture of a service rifle / assault rifle / smg / pistol.

Would you install tits on a bull?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Well that pretty well describes half of the high tech programs the US military has worked on in the last 20 years.

 

[a_majoor]

If the "real" objection is weight and/or the space taken on the tac vest, then consider the size and weight of a pistol and 2+ loaded magazines or a 12 gauge shotgun + however much ammunition you would consider "prudent" to carry just in case.

Over the years, I have actually used the bayonet for a multitude of secondary purposes (from cutting cord to windlassing wire onto piquets) and know and understand its purposes for my and against the enemy's morale (and body), while most of the time I have actually been issued a pistol in theater the true purpose of that was to identify me to the locals and allies as a person of authority rather than any utility as an actual weapon. (the pistol as a psychological weapon!)

 

[Kirkhill]

Everyone keeps saying they see the bayonet charge as a possibility after all their ammunition is gone.  Wouldn't it be more prudent, with a greater possibility of success, if the desired criteria is that most of the enemy's ammunition is gone?

Agreed

 

[Kirkhill]

Would you install tits on a bull?

Perhaps not, but bulls have tits - vestigial and useless - ornamental - just in case.  The have not been removed from the original pattern.

 

[Jungle]

Perhaps not, but bulls have tits - vestigial and useless - ornamental - just in case.

Ah-HAA !! Then let's talk about chickens; they don't have tits !! That's the reason roosters don't have hands...

As for the bayonet, I choose to carry it or not depending on where I'm going, and what I'm gonna do. Most of the time, I leave it behind.

Hope you all had a great Christmas, and that you enjoy the rest of this silly Season !!

Have a good one !!

 

[Jarnhamar]

Perhaps not, but bulls have tits - vestigial and useless - ornamental - just in case.  The have not been removed from the original pattern.

LOL
Checkmate
;D

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Here is a thread about the ASP baton. [Just ignore the bravado from Navy Grunt, he was a poser from way back who sometimes did post good info though]


It might help those who have questions about the baton.

 

[Fusaki]

If the "real" objection is weight and/or the space taken on the tac vest, then consider the size and weight of a pistol and 2+ loaded magazines or a 12 gauge shotgun + however much ammunition you would consider "prudent" to carry just in case.

My objection to the bayonet is not about the individual characteristics of weight and utility. I believe that the bayonet is obsolete because of it's lack of efficiency. 

Considering the alternatives, it's weight is not justified by it's utility.  Water, ammo, and body armour are all heavy - especially when compared to a 2lb knife.  But at least they serve a very real purpose in the lives of dismounted soldiers.  Water, ammo, and body armour havn't yet been rendered obsolete by other tools that do the job better.  The bayonet has.  It's inefficient.