Bayonet obsolete? Not yet, apparently -

[daftandbarmy]

Well done Cpl Malone, CGC:

His citation described how on three separate occasions he took on the Taliban or helped rescue colleagues during his six month deployment to Helmand Province which ended in April.

On the first occasion when Cpl Malone's unit was ambushed by insurgents he was ordered to take them on and led the assault.

During the counter attack he ordered his colleagues to fix bayonets and together they charged the enemy who were routed and ran.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1235128/Hero-Royal-Marine-proposes-Buckingham-Palace-receiving-medal-bravery.html

 

[Fusaki]

No weapon, weapons system or training will be effective in 100% of the situations that arise, so it is good to be able to have the widest range of training and tools to deal with the widest range of potential situations you might encounter.

This just isn't possible.

The soldier only has a finite time in which to train and a finite load he's able to carry.  A specialized tool for every job is a pipe dream.

What the soldier needs is the fewest number of tools that work in the widest range of situations.  Modern war is about flexibility, not clinging to ancient doctrine "just in case" we need it again.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Nice to see British bayonets inspiring US allies... they don't like it up 'em!

US warfare experts inspired by bayonet charge by British troops 

Warfare experts in the US are using a famous bayonet charge by British troops as an example of how to tackle insurgents.

They were inspired by the heroic assault by 20 members of the 16th Air Assault Brigade in Basra in May 2004.

A convoy was ambushed by more than 100 members of the notorious Shia militia, the Mahdi Army. When they started to run out of ammunition the Brits fixed bayonets and charged at the enemy positions screaming.


Many of the Iraqis fled the British onslaught, which left more than 20 dead.

Just a handful of British soldiers were wounded and the incident is now being hailed as a major triumph for shock tactics.

The Urban Warfare Analysis Center said: "The attack captured the element of surprise. Enemy fighters probably believed propaganda stating that coalition troops were cowards, unwilling to fight in close combat."



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/04/14/us-inspired-by-bayonet-brits-115875-21277431/

 

[Fusaki]

*BROWN, MELVIN L.

Rank and organization: Private First Class, U.S. Army, Company D, 8th Engineer Combat Battalion. Place and date: Near Kasan, Korea, 4 September 1950. Entered service at: Erie, Pa. Birth: Mahaffey, Pa. G.O. No.: 11, 16 February 1951. Citation. Pfc. Brown, Company D distinguished himself by conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in action against the enemy. While his platoon was securing Hill 755 (the Walled City), the enemy, using heavy automatic weapons and small arms, counterattacked. Taking a position on a 50-foot-high wall he delivered heavy rifle fire on the enemy. His ammunition was soon expended and although wounded, he remained at his post and threw his few grenades into the attackers causing many casualties. When his supply of grenades was exhausted his comrades from nearby foxholes tossed others to him and he left his position, braving a hail of fire, to retrieve and throw them at the enemy. The attackers continued to assault his position and Pfc. Brown weaponless, drew his entrenching tool from his pack and calmly waited until they 1 by 1 peered over the wall, delivering each a crushing blow upon the head. Knocking 10 or 12 enemy from the wall, his daring action so inspired his platoon that they repelled the attack and held their position. Pfc. Brown's extraordinary heroism, gallantry, and intrepidity reflect the highest credit upon himself and was in keeping with the honored traditions of the military service. Reportedly missing in action and officially killed in action, September 5, 1950.

http://www.history.army.mil/html/moh/koreanwar.html

WILSON, BENJAMIN F.

Rank and organization: First Lieutenant (then M/Sgt.), U.S. Army Company I, 31st Infantry Regiment, 7th Infantry Division. Place and date: Near Hwach'on-Myon, Korea, 5 June 1951. Entered service at: Vashon, Wash. Birth: Vashon, Wash. G.O. No.: 69, 23 September 1954. Citation: 1st Lt. Wilson distinguished himself by conspicuous gallantry and indomitable courage above and beyond the call of duty in action against the enemy. Company I was committed to attack and secure commanding terrain stubbornly defended by a numerically superior hostile force emplaced in well-fortified positions. When the spearheading element was pinned down by withering hostile fire, he dashed forward and, firing his rifle and throwing grenades, neutralized the position denying the advance and killed 4 enemy soldiers manning submachineguns. After the assault platoon moved up, occupied the position, and a base of fire was established, he led a bayonet attack which reduced the objective and killed approximately 27 hostile soldiers. While friendly forces were consolidating the newly won gain, the enemy launched a counterattack and 1st Lt. Wilson, realizing the imminent threat of being overrun, made a determined lone-man charge, killing 7 and wounding 2 of the enemy, and routing the remainder in disorder. After the position was organized, he led an assault carrying to approximately 15 yards of the final objective, when enemy fire halted the advance. He ordered the platoon to withdraw and, although painfully wounded in this action, remained to provide covering fire. During an ensuing counterattack, the commanding officer and 1st Platoon leader became casualties. Unhesitatingly, 1st Lt. Wilson charged the enemy ranks and fought valiantly, killing 3 enemy soldiers with his rifle before it was wrested from his hands, and annihilating 4 others with his entrenching tool. His courageous delaying action enabled his comrades to reorganize and effect an orderly withdrawal. While directing evacuation of the wounded, he suffered a second wound, but elected to remain on the position until assured that all of the men had reached safety. 1st Lt. Wilson's sustained valor and intrepid actions reflect utmost credit upon himself and uphold the honored traditions of the military service.

http://www.history.army.mil/html/moh/koreanwar.html

Fight to the Death

According to his posthumously awarded Distinguished Service Cross citation, as the men fell back, Kahoohanohano -- although already wounded in the shoulder -- ordered his squad to a more defensible position while he gathered grenades and returned alone to the machine gun post.

As enemy troops tried to overrun Kahoohanohano's position, the 21-year-old from Wailuku fought back with bullets, grenades and then his hands, according to the citation.

"Private Kahoohanohano fought fiercely and courageously, delivering deadly accurate fire into the ranks of the onrushing enemy" until he was killed, the citation states.

A counterattack was launched, and the U.S. troops found 11 dead enemy Soldiers in front of Kahoohanohano's position, and two in the gun emplacement itself who had been beaten to death with an entrenching tool.

http://www.military.com/news/article/medal-of-honor-likely-for-isle-man.html?ESRC=eb.nl

Therefore, every soldier should carry an E-Tool on his FFO.  Just in case.

 

[OldSolduer]

An e-tool is a bit different from a bayonet. Your comparison is the proverbial apple orange debate.

While you make some very good  points,  there is nothing like a bayonet fixed to the end of a rifle, being used by some very dertermined troops to put the fear of whatever higher power you beleive in, in our enemy.

A bayonet weighs very little, and has more uses than just sticking on the end of a rifle.

But then again, what would dinosaurs like us know?

 

[Fusaki]

there is nothing like a bayonet fixed to the end of a rifle, being used by some very dertermined troops to put the fear of whatever higher power you beleive in, in our enemy.

Scarier then a determined troop trying to hack your head open with a serrated frikken shovel?

 

[OldSolduer]

Again, apples vs oranges. E-tools aren't issued that much anymore.
Bayonets are. :christmas happy:

 

[Fusaki]

Again, apples vs oranges. E-tools aren't issued that much anymore.
Bayonets are. :christmas happy:

I hope you're not calling me a dinosaur! ;D

 

[mariomike]

I bet you could take a guys head off with a shovel:
http://www.spetsnaz-gru.com/spetsnaz-entrenching-shovel-1.htm
Doesn't everyone in Canada carry one in the trunk of their car?

I know it's been mentioned on Milnet before. A shovel with a hole in it. The failed "MacAdam Shield-Shovel" of WW1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacAdam_Shield_Shovel

 

[a_majoor]

In the first world war, troops would reach for entrenching tools and other handy items to respond to trench raids. Trench raiders would also carry lethal devices such as home made maces, brass knuckles and trench daggers since the then issue bayonet was rather long and unweildy in a trench when attached to a rifle. (This does not mean bayonets wern't used, just not in the way the QM intended).

E tools (well the WWI kind anyway, not these ones) are handy for digging in, but are often carried in awkward locations to reach when on the move. Dropping your ruck and unstrapping the shovel for the climactic "e-tool charge" might make a good movie scene, but in the real world I think most angry men slicing away with shovels, picks and mattocks were the defenders in the trenches  rather than the attackers. (As an aside, while their Sergeant-Majors would have approved of the agression they showed, they were probably horrified the men did not down tools and fix bayonets like they were trained to do...make of that what you will!)

Once again the arguments are two fold: do the troops have the aggression and will to close with the enemy, and do they have appropriate tools to do so. Easily accessable tools like a bayonet make unleashing this much easier, rather than having to run back to the CQ to grab a shotgun, or more improbable add on devices like this

 

[OldSolduer]

Yes a sharpened shovel probably could take a head off.  There would be a few variables (ie strength of the shovel weilder, etc).
Having said that, I do not beleive that shovels are carried on patrols or offensive ops.

A bayonet is.

 

[Michael OLeary]

An e-tool is a bit different from a bayonet. Your comparison is the proverbial apple orange debate.

Both are ultimately single use tools which have been put to a variety of other purposes.  Both have demonstrated effectiveness as killing weapons (when models designed to be effective in that role are selected for the purpose of debate).  One advantage to the e-tool is that it's an instinctively applied bludgeon with an edge, handling a rifle and bayonet is not as simple as many wish to think - nor have we really updated its employment since HM Queen Victoria was handing our VCs.  If we're going to form square and have every man's left and right guarded by the next soldier less than a pace away, then standard bayonet fighting tactics work can work (as long as the enemy cooperates).  If you're in a melee, sometimes it's better to have something to swing about to channel your rage and pain through.  The right tool for the right job - the question is, does the right job for a single-purpose bayonet occur often enough to justify its weight for every soldier?  Alternatively, can we provide an effective multi-use bayonet that justifies it's carriage even when "pig-sticking" isn't likely to happen?  After all, why aren't all troops still carrying an e-tool? - perhaps because not enough soldiers needed it often enough to justify carrying it everywhere.

While you make some very good  points,  there is nothing like a bayonet fixed to the end of a rifle, being used by some very dertermined troops to put the fear of whatever higher power you beleive in, in our enemy.

That short sentence infers a large number of conditional qualifiers - then again we can ask the 24th Foot about the utility of bayonets in the hands of a trained and determined troops when the enemy is even more determined to kill you back.

A bayonet weighs very little, and has more uses than just sticking on the end of a rifle.

A good quality, well-designed bayonet does, yes.  But it has also been noted that some of the bayonets issued in the recent past barely qualified for use as prodders beyond their mostly theoretical usefulness as bayonets.

 

[Fusaki]

For the record, my original post about E-Tools was a response to daftandbarmy:

You can't cherry pick freak occurrences and cite them as evidence for the utility of any tool - that includes both bayonets and folding-serrated-war-shovels.

 

[daftandbarmy]

For the record, my original post about E-Tools was a response to daftandbarmy:

You can't cherry pick freak occurrences and cite them as evidence for the utility of any tool - that includes both bayonets and folding-serrated-war-shovels.

Good point. By the same logic I guess that means that most AA defensive weapons, as well as the air to air capabilities of most fighter aircraft, are just a waste of time and money. I'm sure the bayonet has been used, and been proven, in the role that it was designed for, more often, more recently.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Comparing rates of use to air defence weapons in a conflict with no air threat is presenting a red herring argument.  There was something said earlier about comparing apples to oranges .....

 

[sm1lodon]

How about this: The bayonet is among the least desirable weapons to be in a position to have to use, but that does not change the fact that for most militaries in the world it is still carried, and hopefully is an actually useful knife in and of itself, thus not just dead weight and space when not being affixed to the end of a rifle for that one-in-a-million chance a bayonet charge might be called for.

On occasion, even in modern warfare, the bayonet charge has been used to great effect. But this does not change the fact that it is among the least desirable methods to have to utilize, shooting your enemies from a protected spot at a decent distance obviously being more desirable by FAR.

Some believe in eliminating the bayonet and replacing its weight and space with something more useful, such as extra ammo, while others affirm that it removes a last-resort option that does not take up that much weight and space.

In summary, bayonets still exist and are on ultra-rare occasions, used for bayonet charges. Some believe it would be better off extinct, and others don't think so.

 

[KevinB]

Wow thats just not a waffle thats a Belgian waffle.  Pick a side, don't be a commentartor - we can all read.

Screw the bayonet -- issue everyone Flamethrowers...

 

[GAP]

76 posts of trolling.....

 

[Jungle]

How about this: The bayonet is among the least desirable weapons to be in a position to have to use, but that does not change the fact that for most militaries in the world it is still carried, and hopefully is an actually useful knife in and of itself, thus not just dead weight and space when not being affixed to the end of a rifle for that one-in-a-million chance a bayonet charge might be called for.

On occasion, even in modern warfare, the bayonet charge has been used to great effect. But this does not change the fact that it is among the least desirable methods to have to utilize, shooting your enemies from a protected spot at a decent distance obviously being more desirable by FAR.

Some believe in eliminating the bayonet and replacing its weight and space with something more useful, such as extra ammo, while others affirm that it removes a last-resort option that does not take up that much weight and space.

In summary, bayonets still exist and are on ultra-rare occasions, used for bayonet charges. Some believe it would be better off extinct, and others don't think so.

Dude, are you looking for a job with The Learning Channel or something ? (AKA The LC... crossthread points ?? )

Have you thought about going into politics ??

 

[vonGarvin]

Screw the bayonet -- issue everyone Flamethrowers...

:evil:
And for the artillery, one of these per battery!