Bayonets: Are they practical?
- Thread starter mrhappyface
- Start date
Recommended Videos
They would help in close combat, but that happens so rarely these days that you could probally do without it.
In the British Army side arms are unheard of (except maybe spacial forces). There is little justification for side arms. Your rifle uses both your hands and if you have time to put that down and get a side arm out and ready then you probably have time to reload or sort out any stoppage. You are right about the authority though, as officers are taught to shot pistols, whereas non comissioned soldiers aren't.brucelee13245 said:
OT: How can it be a bad thing? At the very least the bayonet is a knife which is a basic survival tool
I'd rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it. It's really not all that heavy to carry around on top of all your other gear, either. Having to reach for your knife on your leg takes longer than having one on your rifle. Towards the actual use of bayonets, if you know what you're doing you should be fine, if you don't the other guy is still going to have time to kill you before he dies; Death by stab wound isn't usually instantaneous.
If you were in the right sort of conditions at the right time i suppose it could have it's uses.
As many others have said, sometimes.
Not unlike a condom, you might not always need it but bayonets are nice to have around when you want to do a little thrusting.
Not unlike a condom, you might not always need it but bayonets are nice to have around when you want to do a little thrusting.
Bayonets were useful in the early days of gun warfare when reloading was slow (during the Civil War, a good soldier could fire three aimed shots per minute). Nowadays, charging with a bayonet against even a low rounds per minute machine gun is a one way ticket to Valhalla (Yes I know the comparison involving Valhalla makes no sense, but it's still awesome)
Yeah, from a gaming stand point, this.MR T3D said:
From a real-life stand point, I doubt it'd be practical if you had to pull it out of leg. I mean, maybe if it was attached to the weapon...
I think the practicality of a bayonet all depends on how well the individual soldier is trained in using spear type weapons.
For example, a bayonet wouldn't be as practical for Western soldiers as it would be for Chinese soldiers, who have more of a tradition of using spears & polearms in their martial arts.
For example, a bayonet wouldn't be as practical for Western soldiers as it would be for Chinese soldiers, who have more of a tradition of using spears & polearms in their martial arts.
Absolutely not!
Carry a sword into battle!
"Any officer not equipped with a sword is improperly dressed." -Mad Jack Churchill, WW2
Carry a sword into battle!
"Any officer not equipped with a sword is improperly dressed." -Mad Jack Churchill, WW2
Back in the day when only bolt-action rifles existed in terms of handheld arms for instance, the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries WWI etc. they were practical, because of the long reload time and the short range of the guns you needed something to defend yourself with while you were reloading and if you were empty you could go ahead and attack an enemy who was reloading, so you didn't have to undergo a stressful "reload race" however with automatic fire and much faster reloads, nowadays not so much.
Well, think about it. If you were in a situation you'd be pulling out your knife, most likely that situation limits your ability to pull out a sidearm. So yeah, I guess a bayonet is pretty good.
