That's a sharp observation. I'm just taking a stab at it here but I think you are likely on the bleeding edge. I'm not sure if you have steeled yourself to the cutting comments you are likely to receive. I feel you have just scratched the surface.
I think we all get your point SharpDog.That's a sharp observation. I'm just taking a stab at it here but I think you are likely on the bleeding edge. I'm not sure if you have steeled yourself to the cutting comments you are likely to receive. I feel you have just scratched the surface.
My (incomplete) understanding was that the original "enemy" was actually wounded, dangerous game.The original reason for the creation of the bayonet was to have a way to continue fighting when the enemy closed upon you, in the era of slow-to-load single-shot firearms.
Until the universal adoption of the machine gun (and also armored vehicles), one of the primary "anti infantry" combat arms was cavalry, mounted troops in some guise. (Also why infantry companies were formed of four platoons, so they could "form square" against horse attack.My (incomplete) understanding was that the "enemy" was actually wounded, dangerous game
Surprisingly, it showed its utility in recent combat
I didn’t see that any were used. Seems like it’s utility might have even been less than good charging yell.
I figured their largest utility would be as wire cutters these days.
The M9 is a poor excuse for a bayonet (too big and heavy to hang on the muzzle). It might be OK as a combination utility knife and wire cutter, but who has need for such a big, heavy utility knife?Some units don't even issue bayonets for deployments such as when I went to Afghanistan in 2010, no bayonet on the packing list.
The M9 is a poor excuse for a bayonet (too big and heavy to hang on the muzzle). It might be OK as a combination utility knife and wire cutter, but who has need for such a big, heavy utility knife?