Printable View
i have always had a interest in the war fought against Japan by British Commonwealth troops...in several books ..there has been refered to, that British troops who were issued the No.4 rifle were not happy,..and much prefered the SMLE..they were envious of Indian and Aussie troopies that packed the SMLE.....
i didn't think that the NO.4 rifle was issued in a very large scale to troops in the Far East...though i have seen several photo's of General Orde Wingate with a NO.4 rifle.....
Peep sights don't seem to have been very popular when a bolt action rifle is used in combat.
The peep sight caused fewer problems with maintaining a sight picture when firing and reaquiring a moving target when an autoloader was used, but manipulating a bolt action under stress made this very difficult.
Some US officers complained of the peep getting filled with debris or rain drops as well.
The No.4 was a bit heavier as well, not a lot though. The scimpy spike bayonet didn't contribute much to "The Spirit of the Bayonet" which was a major pyschological factor in those days, Ive even read of its impact on the outcome of battles in modern psychology books.
A nice hefty sword bayonet makes a better tool than a weapon in most cases, but that wimpy spike was like carrying a garden tool.
Despite the studies on wound characteristics and ease in withdrawing of the blade the spike was useless for slashing. The sword bayonet could take a hand off above the wrist or slash a throat, take off part of a face, etc.
As long as you remember to twist the blade the sword or knife bayonet comes out of a wound just fine.
You have some very good points...especially about the aperture sight being not as "user friendly"...and the spike bayonet was never popular with the troopies...not handy at all....that Pattern 1907 Sword bayonet is very intimidating when fixed to the SMLE
Thanks..good post:beerchug:
One nice feature of the No.4 Spike bayonet however is its use for locating mines, look at any modern tools for locating mines, and they are generally like the spike bayonet, eventhough a blade works too. I figure there has to be a reason right?
Dimitri
I believe the P1907 bayonet was not sharpened in service so I think you'd have a hell of a job trying to take a hand off. I was also under the impression that bayonet training involved thrusting with the point of the bayonet, parrying and clubbing with the butt :)
The No.4 rifle doesn't really appear to have been issued in great numbers to active theatres of war until D-Day from the photographic evidence I have seen. Apart from Orde Wingate, does anyone have any photos of the forgotten 14th Army, armed with No.4's?
According to the 'link' below it was No4s in use, but the picture is a No1 !!Quote:
Originally Posted by Amatikulu
http://homepage.mac.com/michaelrhys/blip/weapons.html
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...4thArmy1-1.jpg
I suspect it comes down to training. If an individual solder was trained on the No1MkIII and then handed a rifle with a totally new sighting system I feel that he would of course prefer the No1MkIII. As for the bayonet I’m sure the 1907 has much grater intimidation factor but I can’t imagine trying to use a No1MkIII fitted with one in any tight area like heavily wooded areas or house clearing. The No4 is already a bit long for ether of these jobs but in times of war you use the weapon at hand and if a Sten isn’t available…….
Just my 2cents
It takes far less of an edge to slice through meat and bone when the blade is at the end of 9 pounds of rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amatikulu
Besides which I've seen few well used bayonets that hadn't been sharpened to some extent, and broadswords seldom had an edge sharper than the average bayonet.
If you've ever cleared bush using a bushaxe or billhook you'll recognize the mechanics.
Too sharp a point or edge will lead to the blade hanging up in bone.
You aren't meant to swing the rifle wildly in an arc, but thats another desperation move that can buy you some breathing space.
Theres a Japanese martial art of bayonet fighting, forget the name of it, that seems based on the ancient use of the traditional pole arm with swordlike blade. The French also developed bayonet fighting to a high degree, and taught their methods to US instructors during WW1.
At Corregidor the Japanese were astounded by the skill of US sailors who fought off successive waves of imperial Marines. The US Navy was for a time known as the best Bayonet fighters in the world. Repelling boarders was still a major part of their training back then.
Open sights with long eye relief give the best chance at following and leading moving targets.
Some officers even suggested fitting the Garand with open sights.
A bayonet and sheath my brother once owned had built in spring loaded sharpening steels that honed the edge each time the blade was inserted and withdrawn.
PS
JNC: U.S. Marine Corps Individual Combat Course, July 1944
Quote:
1. Bayonet Fighting: This type of bayonet fighting uses a continuous slashing attack. Recent additions to this system are night fighting and group assault tactics for combinations of two and three bayonet fighters. The recently perfected system of Marine bayonet training uses no dummies or protective equipment. The man-against-man training is designed to condition fighting reflexes and to develop maximum speed and combat timing.
Quote:
BAYONET FIGHTING (Marine Method)
The new bayonet method outlined here is not a modification of the standard Army style, but a departure based of a different foundation. Changes from the Army bayonet system have been made in blade position, stance, footwork, attack movements, and tactics.
Essence of the new method is the slashing tactics developed during the past twenty-five years by Col. A.J. Drexel Biddle, USMC. Recent additions to this system include night fighting, group assault tactics, and a system of training based on conditioning reflexes. The effect is a fast, flexible slashing attack.
This method can be taught to Marines in 10 hours. There should be at least one instructor to each platoon. Training is built up logically in the natural sequence (as listed below) of stance, footwork, parries, handcuts, throat slashes, and follow-up movements, with individual and group combat tactics.
Also near as I can tell the Japanese civilian Jukendo is limited to thrusts, but the Military Jukenkukuto (sp?)Quote:
Bayonet movements and sequence of instruction:
Flat blade stance
Footwork (Steps forward, back, left, right, forward and rear pass, pivot)
Quick thrust (Intended to provide opposition for partner executing flat blade movements and as follow up movement after slashes.)
Slashes (vertical hand-cut, lateral, reverse.)
Parries (left and right)
Hand Cut – Throat Slash (with left Parry)
Double parry (left) – Hand Cut – Throat Slash.
Disengage (from left Parry) – Hand Cut – Throat Slash
Above three movements (Hand Cut, Double Parry and Disengage) done from right parry.
Downward Parry – Throat Slash
Feint Low – Slash (Left and Right)
Throw Point
Butt Strokes (Vertical, Horizontal, Smash, Rearward)
Night fighting tactics (Extremely low crouch with rifle butt close to or on deck and a minimum of movement, looking upward for opponent to be silhouetted against sky, maximum speed during attack).
Bayonet vs. Knife, vs. Club, vs. Unarmed Combat.
(Hand Cuts and throat slashes)
is more advanced.
>>>The No.4 rifle doesn't really appear to have been issued in great numbers to active theatres of war until D-Day from the photographic evidence I have seen.<<<
I have a #4 Mk1 that was FTR in 12/43 and again FTR 3/44.
Seems it got hard use some where wet.
Way to resurrect the thread but.....
I once read somewhere (anecdotaly of vourse) that in the jungle you didn't really have to "aim" a No1 over short distances as all you had to do was get the target between the "ears" and pull the trigger. Certainly there is a LOT of praise from aussies about the No1's reliabilty in muddy conditions.
My grandfather served in korea with the good old smelly, said that some american guys were unimpressed with the reliability of their rifles, but the smelly kept on going.