Hacken Slash

About 1984 or so Soldier of Fortune had an Knife Egg-Spurt that insisted that edje attacks with a knife were pointless and ineffective.

Because I was evn more arguementative then than now and happened to think the magazine writer was not entirely correct I trotted out into the back yard with a beef roast wrapped in two plastic grocery bags, dropped into a tied off GI fatigue trouser leg and suspended it from a rope to allow it to swing freely.

I then hack/Slashed at it (it being suspended to a height betwee my elbow and shoulder) with a Gerber fighting knife (Mark whatever full sized with the M3 style blade and scollops on the false edge) and a USGI M-5A1 bayonet for the M-1 Garand. I am right handed and swong frm the viewers right and after cutting down the beef placed the blades in the cuts to their deepest gash for this picture.

Does this look like attacking with the edge with a "combat knife" is ineffective to anyone?

-kBob

Having read the responses so far I should clarify a bit.

I fully understand the value of a thrust, so much so that when I patrolled outside Pershing Missle bases in Europe in the 1970's that I obtained and carried a FS knife, recognizing the need for penitrting deep just to get through winter clothing part of the year. I also considered this knife to be mainly useful in initiating an attack from surprise rather than any sort of face to face stand up confrontation. The FS has little forward weight and so is not a good hacker, though it was easy to sharpen way to much for use as a camp knife or tool and so could for a few slaches cut up a good bit of stuff with shallow "incisions"

On more than one occassion a sharpened e-tool was carried and there is not much one can do thrusting with those so it could be one extreme to the other.

There were long night time discussions on blades as weapons use and a deep stab was considered most desirable to deliver, but once an oponent was aware of an attack the hardest to deliver. There was a constant arguement as to whether multiple stabs were better than a single stab with grappling and so slashing the blade around inside the stab wound.

The sort of combined hack and slash I have tried to demonstrate was considered a good thing as it might be more dificult for an opponent not highly trained to deflect as apposed to a stab which is after all pretty much a punch such as folks often have experience deflecting from even childhood fights. No doubt that a single wound like the ones on that piece of beef are not likely fatal. On the other hand if you had say the Gerber wound only three inches deep across your arm six inches or above your elbow do you really think that arm is going to be very usable?. If that four and a half inch deep equally as wide cut from the M-5A1 was six inches or less above your knee do you really think you could stand on that leg?

It might make it a lot more easy for me to go for the thrust to the throat or thrust to the upper chest shown in the combatives manual if my opponent has loss the use of one or more limbs.

I was just trying to make it clear that a hack with a slashing follow through with a "battle knife" does have uses and can be effective in eventually stopping an attacker, not deny the desirability of a deep stab into major vessels or nerve trunks.

-kBob

Piuratical

Take a look at the knives in my test in the original post. A gerber with a 7 inch long very pointed blade and a GI M-5a1 bayonet with is very pointed and about the same length.

Either would be excellent for a stabbing attack and whe used from surprise would definatly have been used for such an attack.

The only thing I was trying to show was that the hacking slashing attack CAN be effective when it can be delivered.

I was never atempting to show that a hack was the preferred attack merely that it can be effective at reducing an enemy's ability to attack you or defend himself.

Consider when the discussions were taking place with my Army buddies for a moment. What was "threat" body armor like?

It was smallish plates in pockets over a thin "soft" jacket like our Korean war era vest and had greater coverage than the M1950 I wore often or the M1967 most of our guys wore.

Have you ever stabbed a "frag vest" or "flak jacket" or such with a knife? Even assuming I get by the enemy's attempt to block a stab to the chest area body armor of miltary style may well stop blunt or deflect the attack. My best immediat follow up might be the hack at the very arms and hands that came up to deflect the initial thrust.

In the past when bayonet fighting was more like a formal martial art and taught as a series of what looked a lot like formal katas the bayonet was used a lot more than it is now. Certainly the preferred attack was the thrust to the upper chest or neck region. We taught however both dragging type slashes and hacks of a sort generally as follow ups to failed thrust or for second strikes as we were taught to deliver at least two killing blows before leaving an enemy if at all possible. We also trained to use bludgeoning attacks such as vertical and horizontal butt strokes, especially as follow throughs to our own defenwsive actions sucha as exicuting parry right or left and following through with a blow with the buttstock. When possible that blow was followed through with a slash or hack and when possible that was followed by a thrust.

The old combatives manual also had some instruction of dragging slashes and hacks as again not the perferred attack but USEFULL in setting an enemy up for a thrust.

My early instructors were not martial artists. They were decorated combat vets of WWII and Korea some of whose citations actually meantioned the use of the bayonet or knife in dispatching enemy. They most certainly taught that the thrust was preferred, but the most important thing was to press th attack and use whatever could be used. Both used the bayonet on a rifle on more than one occassion and one used it as a fighting knife. Both taught that knowing how to slash and hack was important as you could not always thrust. One dispatched seven humans in a mater of seconds, four with close range rifle fire two with the rifle and bayonet and when the second bayonet kill momentarily held the rifle with the blade completely through his chest, he beat to death with a Mark II handgrenade the last enemy in the position.

In the first bayonet atack the enemy infact attempted to bayonet him and he parried, slashed and then thrust then attacked the next man who was fumbling with his own weapon allowing my instructor to go directly for a thrust which resulted in his lossing the use of his rifle and bayonet for a critical few seconds so he went to a less favorable attack than shooting or stabbing, but one that worked. Waiting even the two or three seconds for that perfect thrust to fully take effect in the hope of being able to launch another perfect thrust to the remaining enemy would have ended his life right there and then rather than 40 years later in bed at home with his wife in his sleep.

Go full bore and do not become fixated on "best" Best is the enemy of good enough in such situations.

-kBob