Bayonet obsolete? Not yet, apparently -

[Britney Spears]

Well, take out the word "bayonet" and you could say the same thing about the C-7 vs the FN C1 too. Times have changed and the emphasis is different nowadays. Most infantrymen today don't even carry plain ol' C-7s anymore.

 

[Old Man]

Quick Question, NATO Boy, admittedly a bit of a left turn from the thread topic.
Which Stalwart Guardian had highland units fighting to the sound of bagpipes? I was on SG 04 but was away from the LIBs so might have missed this. When marching with pipes I often thought that the sound would lend some power to an attack, even modern day - how did it work out?

By the way, although I've been reading the forums on this site for a while, I'm new as a posting member, so hello to all. Hope I don't break etiquette before learning the ropes.

 

[Danjanou]

The operative word is psychological here, an important if overlooked aspect in combat.

Read the accounts of the Brit action again. The last thing these Iraqi insurgents expected was the Brits to come charging at them, and therefore it worked. From the sounds of things instead of doing what they should have dropped into good firing positions and shot these idiotic Brits running at them screaming with pointed sticks and their heads off, but they didn't.

Instead they probably stood there jaws dropped until the squaddies close the distance and then, well game over.

Monday morning quarter backing this, it probably didn't look too smart a move for the commander on the ground, but it worked end of story.

Psychological weapon for the side using it too. Anybody remember that old â Å“spirt of the bayonet mentalityâ ? or is that taboo in these SHARP warm fuzzy days. Gets the aggression up, the adrenalin going, things you want, need in a fire fight. Great training tool IIRC.

Bagpipes do that too. I severed in two Highland units and nothing like an going in on a Platoon or Coy attack on Ex with the pipes. During the period when I was in a non kilted unit I was on the receiving end of a Bag pipe "charge" in Nova Scotia and didn't like it one bit.

Tradition be damned, they are still around because they still work! Not the best weapon in our arsenal but better than nothing, and only an idiot believes in â Å“unarmed combat.â ?

 

[MJP]

Proposing that we use helmets, rifles or boots based on tradition is ridiculous at best.  I understand what you are trying to do, by viewing our current equipment from a historical standpoint,  but I think your argument falls flat.  Bayonets wether we like it or not our going to stay as part of our EIS for the time being, even if only four guys in section have them.  At least the new bayonet can be used to actually cut something..maybe that'll alleviate some of hate (mine included) for the current bayonet.

 

[HollywoodHitman]

Unarmed Combat.....The last resort for a soldier. Bayonet, E-Tool, Pick, whatever...........The bayonet is indeed a psychological tool as well as a deadly weapon. A motivated and ferocious Infantry Soldier with a bayonet fixed, is a man who is prepared to use it. That tells the enemy that it's time to do the business, and that a mere lack of ammo will not halt the attack.

That and the fact that when the ammo runs out and the force of 3000 enemy is overrunning your position, you have to do something, 'cause they're not going to let you live.

I like the bayonet, I just wish we um, had one, um we could be more 'proud?' of..........

 

[Jarnhamar]

2. Helmets - These have been around since the Dark Ages; but their usefulness is questionable.

I've been hit in the helmet with a ricochet from a C7 while in the butts at connaught. Had a huge tree Branch hit the sit of my helmet during the ice storm.  Had my helmet save me from cracking open my skull when our grizzly hit a huge hole , banging my head off the port. Wacked in the head with a steel picket from a troop horsing around and not paying attention. (Look at me, im darth maul, im a starwars looser). been kicked in the head pretty hard by an over zealous enemy force guy.

Just to name a few useful situations.

I think you should take a look at how many wounded soldiers in Iraq are owing their lives to body armor protecting their center of mass and helmets protecting their heads.  

Usefulness is questionable?

Riflemen are still the men that win the firefight with accurate fire (C9s can only suppress the enemy.) ANSWER - TRADITION

How i see it, in a platoon the C6 gunner is the MVP followed by the C9 gunners. ("2 C9s make up for 80% of the sections firepower")

It's interesting to look at it from a tradition point of view but I don't think your examples are very accurate.

 

[Infanteer]

1. Bagpipes in battle - I have seen this on exercise (Stalwart Guardian) with other highland regiments and in history (WW2 anyone?.) Why were they still used in WW2 for controlling the fight when radios were in existence? Why do units today still use them during raids or Coy level offensives? ANSWER - TRADITION

Lets see some examples of Bagpipes being used in an operational environment - Micheal seems to be saying you're full of it....

2. Helmets - These have been around since the Dark Ages; but their usefulness is questionable. While they give ballistic protection from "light" ordnance and shrapnel, they increase your silhouette and make your head an easier acquired target. Anyone can attest that a 5.56 or 7.62 round can bust up our helmet at 400 meters, so why not incorporate a new design (hemelts these days appear to be just variants of the US M1 helmet anyway, I think it's time to examine a new concept.) ANSWER - TRADITION

WRONG - the latest USMC Lessons-Learned to come out of the Battle of Fallujah were to ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS wear your protective gear.   I highly doubt this observation was included for the sake of tradition.   The guys in battle are saying "helmets work"....

3. Combat boots - I know this can get broad so I'll just refer to the MK 3s. Leather boot with rubber sole with resemblance to Vietnam Era jungle boots and even resemblance to WW2 3RD Division Cdn Infantry boots (minus the cuff of course.) Why do we still use these instead of more new designs completely other than cost concerns (Gore-Tex, Danners, la dee da dee da....) ANSWER - TRADITION

WRONG - it is a simple and effective boot to issue to soldiers.   MkIII's are strong leather, easily maintainable, and are a fairly high boot for ankle support.   You will also notice that the Temperate Combat Boot is meant to be the replacement for the MkIII - perhaps the CF isn't basing its footwear decisions on tradition but rather on new understanding of orthopedic health for footborne troops?  

3. Battle rifles - They have evolved, no doubt in that (automatic fire, high velocity small calibre ammo, optics, manufacture, e.t.c.); but there intended use and function has not changed. Riflemen are still the men that win the firefight with accurate fire (C9s can only suppress the enemy.) ANSWER - TRADITION

What are you talking about?   We use battle rifles because of tradition?   You're off your rocker.   If you think a C9 can only suppress the enemy, then try fighting against an entrenched Machine Gun.   I don't see one bit of tradition in using a rifle or a machine gun - perhaps, just perhaps, we are using them because they are effective?

Sounds to me like someone needs to read English's On Infantry to learn the basics of the trade....

Although these examples have other answers for their uses (not to mention they are few and between,) two of them essentially follow the motto "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" to a "T" much like the trusty Bayonet. As for the bagpipes, I'll let you figure that one out.

I remember Dave Grossman saying that even in recorded Bayonet fighting, most soldiers flip their rifles around and use them as clubs.   Perhaps the short little pointer on the end of a rifle isn't enough to be a suitable offensive tool for soldiers?

 

[Britney Spears]

Can we kindly stop quoting the A&SH/PWRR actions in Iraq as unequivical proof of the utility of the bayonet charge on the modern battlefield? One single anecdote is not sufficient evidence to validate an entire set of tactics. Would you like me to find some examples of bayonet charges being shot to ribbons by defenders with enough training to not run away at the first sight of the enemy? I'm sure there's been a few since the Boxer rebellion.

I guess I must be too young to be intimidated by sharp sticks. I imagine the sight of my position being painted by laser designators/rangefinders would be much more morale crushing, I know I'd take off like a jackrabbit if I ever saw one of those. For that purpose, a PEQ-2 mounted on a C8SFW is a pretty terrifying weapon.

 

[Infanteer]

Britney is right - I've seen first hand statements by American soldiers that Iraqi Hadji's are the only ones who can consistenly fuck up a two-sided ambush.  I'd hardly use fighters of this caliber, who run away from a fuming Brit, as validation for a bayonet charge.

 

[COBRA-6]

Kudos to your Sergeant for attempting to instill aggression in his soldiers, though....

I agree, modern combat effectiveness aside, nothing instills the spirit of violence and aggression like bayonet/pugil training or a bayonet assault course... really focuses the mind on the true end state of being a soldier...

 

[KevinB]

Tradition....

Well I for one beleive differently...

So much for tradition...

 

[KevinB]

I'm not to big on parades...

Besides I found more tradition...
;D

 

[CH1]

Something I learned many moons ago while posted south of the Mason/Dixie.  This little bit of wisdom was given by some very knowledge street people.  When you run out of bullets, you are fair game, but if you have a knife (bayonet), you have respect. Simple in thought but true.

so much for my 2 1/2 cents.

cheers

 

[a_majoor]

(This paper was 'published' in the Spring 2000 edition of the Canadian Army's Infantry Journal. Due to its relative length, it was listed in the publication's table of contents as internet only.)

A la bayonet, or, "hot blood and cold steel"

by: Capt Michael M. O'Leary, The RCR
Copyright, 1999

http://members.tripod.com/RegimentalRogue/papers/bayonet.htm

A well written dissetation on the bayonet

 

[Jungle]

The role of the Infantry is still to "Close with and destroy the enemy..." Although some people are romantically referring to them as "bayonet charges", these actions are simply the last phase of an assault on an enemy position. During an assault, all weapons in an Inf section move forward, regardless if they have a bayonet fixed or not. But if I have to close with and get personal with the enemy, I want all chances on my side; and yes, that includes a few bayonets in the Section/ Platoon.

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

    When our ancestors fought with cold steel, it was expected that you would look down the length of your arm to see your enemy dying on your steel, and feel his muscles spasming around your blade.  It takes a lot of nerve to kill at point blank range.  Tankers and Airmen can attack enemy systems, riflemen can shoot sight pictures, silouttes and keep an emotional distance.  Machine gunners can coldly lay down suppressing fire and "service" their targets.  When you go to zero range combat, you have to look your targets in the eye, and watch as your bullets take them apart.  That is as huge a psychological step from faceless sight picture as it was for our ancestors facing the enemy with 18" of shortsword.  The order to fix bayonets places the troops firmly in the mental place to look their enemy in the face, and watch them die.  Do not disreguard the psychological impact of this change.  The warrior spirit was easy to induce standing in ranks, shoulder to shoulder, you took your reenforcement from your brothers to the left and right, the massed fury of the army as it advanced.  Today, we fight more dispersed than at any time in history, and our individual troops are expected to show more initiative than juniour officers of a century ago would have.  A soldier must find within himself the tools to make the transition from modern soldier, the weapon technician, to warrior, the in-your-face killer, like flipping a switch.  Bayonet training is one method of giving our soldiers that "switch".  The order to fix bayonets builds the fire in the soldier, you are not going to snipe at range, you are going to close with and kill the enemy.  We don't get pipers or trumpets, or the sound of a thousand throats bellowing a warcry any more, they just don't fit in modern combat, but we have the same needs as the Hoplites at Troy, to nerve yourself to engage the enemy closely, and kill him.  In a game where seconds seperate the victors from the victims, anything that can prevent a half seconds hesitation in your troops, or give it to your enemies, is an effective weapon.  Can the same function be served by other means?  I think so, but I haven't seen them yet.  For now, the bayonet remains a part of the infantrymans training for a good reason, and not related to the slight chance of perforating some poor fool, but for its effects on the minds of the infantryman fixing the bayonet, and the people looking at receiving it.

 

[a_majoor]

Some closing thoughts:

If we are really discussing the utillity of "getting it on" at hand to hand range, then the rest of our equipment has to change as well. Soldiers need to wear "shot gloves" with enough weight in them to break bones when striking an opponent. Elbow and knee pads should have raised metal bosses so when you knee or elbow an opponent, it will leave an impression. The mounting bracket on helmets for the night visiion equipment is also useful when head butting an opponent. Finally, instead of having a bayonet or fighting knife (which is of limited utility against an armoured opponent anyway), each soldier should have a small club or extendable baton (like the ASP) which he can use once the stock of the rifle has been broken over the enemy's head.

On the other hand, if we are talking about conditioning the soldier for the battle, and having a secondary weapon for CCO or prisoner control, then the bayonet is still the way to go

 

[dutchie]

Soldiers need to wear "shot gloves" with enough weight in them to break bones when striking an opponent. Elbow and knee pads should have raised metal bosses so when you knee or elbow an opponent, it will leave an impression. The mounting bracket on helmets for the night visiion equipment is also useful when head butting an opponent. Finally, instead of having a bayonet or fighting knife (which is of limited utility against an armoured opponent anyway), each soldier should have a small club or extendable baton (like the ASP) which he can use once the stock of the rifle has been broken over the enemy's head.

Or we can just carry a pistol as a back up.....

 

[Kal]

Although the dialogue of this thread is quite interesting, I find it more interesting the mindsets of those posting, especially those of a proponent for the bayonet.  Here's where I become intrigued.  When someone states that the bayonet is still an effective weapon, someone else chimes in to say, well, I would rather have a pistol.  It is agreed that everyone would rather have a primary and secondary firearm before even thinking about engaging with a bayonet/knife/asp, etc.  But what if you were one of those poor f***s that ran out of bullets in somalia and had been killed by impact weapons or knives, seeing as knife use is very prevalent in that part of the world.  I almost find it encouraging to see those that want to mold the mind and soul and body into that of a warrior and a weapon, and I believe unarmed combatives and instead of 'knife fighting',  learning 'effective knife use' is one of the best avenues to do so.  As I and many have said that training with a knife trains the pyscoholical to be a warrior perhaps even more than the body. 

Now this isn't a post to bash the 'gun fighter' but to maybe show that there is more than gun fighting, and just because you have a gun does make it the end all be all and neglect or even think that one doesn't need the other areas of training.

 

[Loggy001]

Britney I think your just trying to piss people off and be stuipd.

A bayonet is not obsolete. Its has many uses and will always be an effective weapon in close quarter combat. Thats why it is still taught to all army soldiers.

A bayoent is also very silent for those momemts were stealth is required.