Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: croduh on November 20, 2007, 08:00:46 AM
-
A paste of informations about the new Croatian rifle, which will remove ak-47s from our army:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This new Croatian rifle, named VHS, was recently presented on iKA, an annual innovation display in Karlovac, Croatia.
Externally, it may look like a fuse of Tavor, Tavor 2 and FAMAS, but internally, there's a different story; when fired, gun powder gasses push the bolt backward via piston, that much is the same as in almost all assault rifles. However, the unique feature of this gun is that it has additional gas vent that leads some of the gases into a chamber located BEHIND the bolt. As the bolt moves backward, it's gradually slowed down and then softly stopped by a gas cushion, rather then coming into an abrupt stop as it reaches it's most backward position, causing recoil. This feature makes VHS, well, not recoilless, but very low recoil and easy to fire.
Some other features of the VHS rifle are the following; length 750mm, width 448mm, height 255mm. Barrel length 500mm(!) Calibre 5,56X45mm NATO
Cyclic rate of fire- 600rpm, single/auto/safe fire selector
Weight (without flash light, grenade launcher, bayonet or magazine)- only 2,3kg(!)
Pistol grip placed in weapon's center point, making it possible to fire with one hand.
Integral bipod that folds entirely into a serration in the grip.
Dove tail mount located under the barrel, infront of the pistol grip- for mounting flash light, laser or IC light.
Easy mounting 40mm underbarrel grenade launcher- when lower part of the front grip is removed, the GL mounts on the gun in the same manner as the bayonet.
Any kind of optical sight can be mounted ontop of a carry handle, which is also equipped with iron sight that shooter uses with both eyes open- apparently, this feature is common in some hunting rifles...I'd appreciate any additional info on that. (I'm familiar with military rifles, but know next to nothing about hunting rifles or shotguns...)
The VHS is developed by HS Produkt, the same factory that makes HS2000/ Springfield XD pistols. It's been thoroughly tested by HS Product team and presented as finished product, not prototype. It's currently undergoing testing by Croatian army. Rumor has it it's even been offered to US army...
Possible date of adaptation by Croatian army- some say Croatian contingent of MPs in Afghanistan will be equipped with VHS soon, other sources say the earliest VHS can be adopted is 2008...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some pictures:
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w122/nibnub/42452_IMG_0807_122_142lo.jpg)
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w122/nibnub/42446_IMG_0806_122_53lo.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/posejdon/puskHS.jpg)
All in all, sounds interesting to me as it will be (supposedly) the lightest assault rifle in the world, and h2 produkt has proven it's quality at gun making...
-
Thr trigger seems to be in the wind there. Not much of a guard from the pic that I can see.
-
now THAT is a good looking gun!
-
Notice the woman holding it.
-
The location of the clip looks like it would be alittle awkward to reload in a firefight. I could be wrong tho.
-
Wow, now that is an ugly rifle. Makes the FAMAS look good.
Originally posted by BlueJ1
The location of the clip looks like it would be alittle awkward to reload in a firefight. I could be wrong tho.
Thats one of the main critisisms of a bullpup configuration (though others say in-vehicle reloading is actually easier), but the advantage is huge- a rifle like this likely has a barrel roughly equivelent to that of the M16A2. (edit: yes, 500mm compared to the 508mm in the M16A2. In a gun that is about as long as shorter than an M4.)
-
http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as68-e.htm
IIRC Walmet (Finland) also made such a Kalashnikov mod.
Mikhail Timofeyevich is a genius. You simply can't spoil his design ;) Hard to imagine: he was a 20 years old sergeant from Tank corps... Got into hospital in Autumn 1941 and got a hobby...
-
Originally posted by Boroda
http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as68-e.htm
IIRC Walmet (Finland) also made such a Kalashnikov mod.
Mikhail Timofeyevich is a genius. You simply can't spoil his design ;) Hard to imagine: he was a 20 years old sergeant from Tank corps... Got into hospital in Autumn 1941 and got a hobby...
This is nowhere close to the VEPR. The VEPR is just an AK receiver with the pistol grip and all other ergonomic things moved to the front, and the stock deleted (a 'bullpup AK'). The subject of the thread is a completely different design.
Edit: gotta love the red dot sight mounted on the side of the carry handle :rofl
-
that aint ugly man, thats fediddlein beautiful! I WANT ONE :D
-
Originally posted by Boroda
http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as68-e.htm
IIRC Walmet (Finland) also made such a Kalashnikov mod.
Mikhail Timofeyevich is a genius. You simply can't spoil his design ;) Hard to imagine: he was a 20 years old sergeant from Tank corps... Got into hospital in Autumn 1941 and got a hobby...
I thought that this (http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as08-e.htm) was supposed to be the next Russian rifle. Reciprocating barrel, automatically varying cyclic rates for the burst setting... Was supposed to be impressive. What happened?
-
Originally posted by Neubob
I thought that this (http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as08-e.htm) was supposed to be the next Russian rifle. Reciprocating barrel, automatically varying cyclic rates for the burst setting... Was supposed to be impressive. What happened?
I think your thinking of something else. The Vepr is Ukrainian.
Im pretty sure your thinking of the AN-94. It was scrapped because... I guess it was to expensive or something. The Russians like their AK's, what more can I say? AN-94 (http://world.guns.ru/assault/as08-e.htm)
The AK-107/8 sounds much more interesting anyway.
-
Ummmm, the link I left was for the Abakan, Motherland, not the vepr. I know it was scrapped, I just think it sucks that it happened.
-
Originally posted by Neubob
Ummmm, the link I left was for the Abakan, Motherland, not the vepr. I know it was scrapped, I just think it sucks that it happened.
Ooh crap. I didnt see that 'this' was a link, I thought you were talking about the Vepr, since you had quoted Boroda's post. Sorry for the confusion.
Edit: I wish hyperlinks here were automatically highlighted/turned blue as they are on other forums. Many times I'll skip right over them without even noticing.
-
Originally posted by croduh
A paste of informations about the new Croatian rifle, which will remove ak-47s from our army:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/posejdon/puskHS.jpg)
Very impressive rifle. With it in the hands of Croatian soldiers, I do not think that any nation will ever dare attack Croatia again. I certainly would not want to fight soldiers so well armed.
It was amazing what a turnaround Croatia had in its war for independence, and how it turned the tables against its enemies. The Croatian people must be very tough and resourceful, to have made such a strong comeback against such adversity.
That United Nations arms embargo during the war was such an unfair joke, as the Serbs had obtained most of the arms of the former Yugoslavian military. So the embargo accomplished nothing to bring peace, and served only to give the Serbs a big advantage at the start of the war.
I remember reading in the news about the unfortunate massacre of civilians in the village of Ravno in 1991 at the start of the fighting, and how the Serbs then continued on to attack the beautiful and historic city of Dubrovnik, which was an international outrage.
No doubt Croatia wants to now be more self-sufficient when it comes to arms, which is a very smart thing for any nation that values its freedom to do.
I salute your military industry for making such a fine weapon.
I think that Croatia would make a good and strong partner in the NATO alliance with such a dedicated an professional military. I hope America is able to help Croatia to become a member of NATO next year. I know that Russia is very angry about so many European countries now joining NATO. However, I do not think that it would be wise for any western nations to put much trust with Russia.
SIG 220
-
If that weapon is as good as the XD, it's a champion.
-
Given the length of the weapon.
Other then pure aesthetics.
What is the point in having a bayonet on a weapon, that short?
Certainly is a nice looking weapon though
-
Finally.. a girl sized weapon that seriously kicks butts! :aok
(http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff232/Tigeress_ah/42452_IMG_0807_122_142lofemalesoldi.jpg)
TIGERESS
-
Interesting design. Would be nice to try it.
I got an invitation to come try our newest assault rifle (H&K 416) in the spring and im looking forward to that, but this one would be even more interesting to test :)
-
It looks very impressive. However I'd hate to have to clean it after a long day at the range. All those nooks and crannies!
-
Originally posted by Viking
It looks very impressive. However I'd hate to have to clean it after a long day at the range. All those nooks and crannies!
This gets overlooked too often by designers, doesn't it? :lol
-
Originally posted by Viking
It looks very impressive. However I'd hate to have to clean it after a long day at the range. All those nooks and crannies!
Not to mention what a day at the range can do to your nails.
I notice her nails looked well maintained as does her weapon! :aok
TIGERESS
-
Trying to envision how good it would be as a club in close quarters fighting...
Bayonet stab!
Butt strike!
Butt smash!
repeat until arms fall off
Smack someone with the butt and it looks like you might bend and jam the magazine in the gun. I don't know if that's worse than the older M-16s which would (I've heard) shatter if you whacked someone with it, but it's something you'd have to think about in close quarters fighting.
They put a bayonet on the thing so you know they thought at least a little bit about how to use it as a combination sword/spear/club, but I do wonder how the magazine and receiver will handle the abuse. Using your rifle as a club a few times shouldn't destroy the gun. IMHO.
-
Might get distracted by all that brass spewing out of your cheek. Or into it for lefties.
-
Originally posted by eagl
Trying to envision how good it would be as a club in close quarters fighting...
Bayonet stab!
Butt strike!
Butt smash!
repeat until arms fall off
Smack someone with the butt and it looks like you might bend and jam the magazine in the gun. I don't know if that's worse than the older M-16s which would (I've heard) shatter if you whacked someone with it, but it's something you'd have to think about in close quarters fighting.
They put a bayonet on the thing so you know they thought at least a little bit about how to use it as a combination sword/spear/club, but I do wonder how the magazine and receiver will handle the abuse. Using your rifle as a club a few times shouldn't destroy the gun. IMHO.
The butt stocks on the m16a1s and a2s are very solid, I'm not sure what they're made out of but it's very durable and has some heft. The old handguards on the other hand...
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
What is the point in having a bayonet on a weapon, that short?
Bayonets never need reloading. ;) Most likely, you'll never need it, but the one time you do, you'll regret it not being there. In the meantime, it can be used for all the useful things a good knife is needed for.
-
Wiki is good.
The new buttstock is ten times stronger than the original due to advances in polymer technology since the early 1960s. Original M16 stocks were made from fiberglass-impregnated resin; current stocks are engineered from DuPont Zytel glass-filled thermoset polymers.
I speculate that the new stocks were introduced with the a1.
-
i could be wrong but i thought the polymer stocks first appeared with the round handguard a2's. whatever.. zytel polymar is a tough plastic and was a big improvment over the brittle crack prone fibreglass stocks.
besides the earlier ar/m16's the original ar18/180 (dunno about the latter "b" version) wasn't exactly robust and reliable either. it was also saddled with weak glass handguards but i don't think that that was any real detraction to it since imo the rifle had much bigger problems.
-
Originally posted by Viking
It looks very impressive. However I'd hate to have to clean it after a long day at the range. All those nooks and crannies!
You talking about the girl or the gun now?
-
^ good one lol
anyways viking missed the obvious.. females + stuff that needs cleaning = problem solved ;)
-
Blued steel and walnut...
Any gunstock formed of polymers and injection molding is ugly as sin.
A nation with soldiers who worry about recoil is in serious trouble, if ya ask me.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
You talking about the girl or the gun now?
lol, I'd love to clean her ... every nook and crannie! ;)
-
Originally posted by Suave
The butt stocks on the m16a1s and a2s are very solid, I'm not sure what they're made out of but it's very durable and has some heft. The old handguards on the other hand...
Yea. That's pretty much my point. The original weapon requirements for the m-16 obviously didn't include the ability to whack someone with the rifle butt so this had to be part of a later revision. Looking at the new rifle that is the subject of this post, and looking at the location of the magazine, I wonder if the designers have accounted for the fact that the gun will on occasion be used as a club, and the person to whom the gun was issued will probably want it to continue functioning after being used in such a manner.
I know I'd be rather perturbed if I had to whack someone with the gun butt, the magazine got in the way and got bent, resulting in the rifle suddenly becoming about as useful as a cricket bat with a bayonet.
-
What Im most surprised about is that STANAG magazines are still predominately stamped metal... The Soviets have been making plastic magazines since what, the 60's? Plastic magazines are obviously lighter and probably stand up to combat better, since plastic 'gives' and then goes back to its original shape, as opposed to metal magazines, whice will dent/bend and then become useless...
-
If you made stanag mags out of plastic the plastic would have to be as thin as the steel is, so it wouldn't be very strong I think. Although, the g36 uses plastic mags but I've never had my hands on them so I don't know what they're like.
The bakelite and polymer ak mags are still metal at the part that connects with the rifle. They are heavier than stanag mags but I'm sure more durable.
-
The butt of the M16-a2 is pretty durable. We were at the range one time in Germany and there was a former Ranger there one of the regular Pfc,'s said something to the Ranger and the fight was on. Funny the Ranger gave the whole company a lesson on just how strong the butt stock was of the M16-a2. When we finally got the fight broke up the Pfc, was going to the hospital and the Ranger was on his way to the stockade. The M16-a2 was still in one piece.I'm glad the bayonet wasn't on the weapon it wold have been a murder charge. The only thing that was funny nether one of the soldiers used there hands to fight with they both used there rifles. It was like watching bayonet training all over again. Both of the soldiers landed some good strikes but the Ranger won of course.
And on another note thats a fine looking weapon but you can never beat the Kalashnikov AK-47 one of the few weapons you can treat like hell and it will still save your life.
-
Originally posted by eagl
snip
I know I'd be rather perturbed if I had to whack someone with the gun butt, the magazine got in the way and got bent, resulting in the rifle suddenly becoming about as useful as a cricket bat with a bayonet.
What I am having trouble with here is this - if you have any rounds left in the magazine, why would you want to whack someone with the butt? If there are no rounds left in the magazine, why not eject it?
-
Wow, attacking somebody at the rifle range. I'm assuming this didn't happen on the firing line since the range nco didn't shoot him. Now you know why the ranger bat DX'd him.
Did he hit the guy because he wasn't wearing his kevlar? In the states that's a big deal, if range controll sees people not wearing their kevlars at a range they'll close the range.
-
Originally posted by culero
What I am having trouble with here is this - if you have any rounds left in the magazine, why would you want to whack someone with the butt? If there are no rounds left in the magazine, why not eject it?
There is always a needed reason to have the ability to bash someones melon in with the butt end of a rifle.
-
Originally posted by culero
What I am having trouble with here is this - if you have any rounds left in the magazine, why would you want to whack someone with the butt? If there are no rounds left in the magazine, why not eject it?
Exactly,you will always have all the time you need to eject the clip:noid
-
Originally posted by culero
What I am having trouble with here is this - if you have any rounds left in the magazine, why would you want to whack someone with the butt? If there are no rounds left in the magazine, why not eject it?
When a guy wearing the wrong uniform jumps into your foxhole with you, or you walk around some shrubbery or a tree and again some guy with the wrong uniform is right there in your face, you may not be able to physically get the rifle pointed at the guy. In those cases, butt stroke, butt smash, bayonet stab could be the most appropriate drill.
Then when he's lying on the ground, back off a few feet and empty the mag into the bastage.
It's a bit like air to air combat... you carry around missiles and don't PLAN on getting into a visual BFM engagement where you have to use your gun, but things don't always go according to plan and if you arrive in a knife fight and you're the one dude without a knife...
-
Good points both KGB and eagl. Counterpoints:
If the mag is empty and in extremis you don't have time to eject it, sounds like a time when you might not need to worry about bending it.
Knowing you have a weapon configured like this one, you may wish to develop a training doctrine that teaches the buttstroke as delivered with the side of the butt rather than the bottom. That way the mag isn't likely to interfere.
Even more cogent is the fact that the configuration of the weapon itself takes close quarters engagement into account. The advantage to the receiver being behind the grip is that less of the weapon protrudes to the front. This not only allows a smaller profile for the shooter (less weapon protruding forward) for better concealment, but in close quarters its going to be much easier to bring the muzzle to bear on targets.
This last point allows me to agree with your last point, eagl...I'd rather shoot than stroke or stab. A weapon of conventional design is less likely to allow me to do that in a foxhole.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Bayonets never need reloading. ;) Most likely, you'll never need it, but the one time you do, you'll regret it not being there. In the meantime, it can be used for all the useful things a good knife is needed for.
The most recent Bayonet Charge (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article88661.ece)
Gotta love them British Highlanders!
-
Wow, attacking somebody at the rifle range. I'm assuming this didn't happen on the firing line since the range nco didn't shoot him. Now you know why the ranger bat DX'd him.
Did he hit the guy because he wasn't wearing his Kevlar? In the states that's a big deal, if range control sees people not wearing their Kevlar at a range they'll close the range.- by Suave
Not sure why the fight started. And no it wasn't on the firing line or the range NCO would have shot him. It happen in the staging area that was about 100yrd's from the firing line. I think that it was over a girl not for sure though. The Pfc, was wearing his cake pot before the Ranger got a hold of him. I saw the first blow because it started with some choice words as I looked up the big pop happened I guess the Pfc, didn't have his helmet strap buttoned up because it went flying off. the Ranger left his on so any strikes on him was just body shots. this happen in Grafenwoehr Germany.
-
Originally posted by culero
Knowing you have a weapon configured like this one, you may wish to develop a training doctrine that teaches the buttstroke as delivered with the side of the butt rather than the bottom. That way the mag isn't likely to interfere.
.
Ever swing a slab sided object? Feel the air resistance? Plus the wider surface area spreads energy out when it does hit.
-
Sounds like it was a good show. When I was in field arty we used to get FOs DX'd from ranger bat. Some of them were good soldiers with bum knees and stuff, but some of them were just 8 up sweetheart bags.
-
What F.A. were you with and on what arty. pice????
-
155 towed, the units don't exist anymore. I'm very very old.
-
155 towed is still around seen it a few times. I was with 1/33 FA Charlie Batt. MLRS tracked system in my last two yrs, in Bamberg Germany miss it too. well
ya old gun bunny dont worrie im a rocket jockey my self LOL
-
Originally posted by Shaky
The most recent Bayonet Charge (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article88661.ece)
Gotta love them British Highlanders!
Really? I never even knew the L85 had a bayonet lug.
-
I don't think you'll find a battle rifle or full length assault rifle in service anywhere that hasn't got a bayonet lug. A spear is just as effective in close combat now as it was 10,000 years ago.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Really? I never even knew the L85 had a bayonet lug.
It indeed doesn't have one.
The L85's bayonet has a hollow handle, that is designed to fit over the muzzle of the rifle. That is the way that it is attached, which is incredibly lame, in my opinion.
Here is a photo of the bayonet:
(http://www.wolfarmouries.co.uk/airsoft/bb/bin/image-lib/products/SA80BAY.jpg)
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by Viking
I don't think you'll find a battle rifle or full length assault rifle in service anywhere that hasn't got a bayonet lug. A spear is just as effective in close combat now as it was 10,000 years ago.
I seriously doubt that the German Lieutenant Endriss who led the bayonet charge against a single lone man: Alvin York, on 10/8/1918, would agree with you.
Contrary to the depiction in the Sergeant York movie, US Army investigators found 21 .45 ACP shell casings at the spot where York said he mowed down the bayonet charge. York had emptied a total of 3 magazines from his Colt 1911A1 pistol into the on-rushing German soldiers.
Not a single one ever got close enough to stab York. They all perished in the attempt.
This is clearly mightier than the bayonet:
(http://www.sellier-bellot.cz/img/foto-ammunition/sb31125-nd.jpg)
SIG 220
-
Video of rifle in action.Also you can see that there is a shield around the trigger.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oWqbKhCzZv4
-
Originally posted by SIG220
I seriously doubt that the German Lieutenant Endriss who led the bayonet charge against a single lone man: Alvin York, on 10/8/1918, would agree with you.
Contrary to the depiction in the Sergeant York movie, US Army investigators found 21 .45 ACP shell casings at the spot where York said he mowed down the bayonet charge. York had emptied a total of 3 magazines from his Colt 1911A1 pistol into the on-rushing German soldiers.
Not a single one ever got close enough to stab York. They all perished in the attempt.
This is clearly mightier than the bayonet:
(http://www.sellier-bellot.cz/img/foto-ammunition/sb31125-nd.jpg)
SIG 220
If you have to charge at the enemy you are not in close combat. 10.000 years ago a single archer could have done the same.
-
Originally posted by croduh
Video of rifle in action.Also you can see that there is a shield around the trigger.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oWqbKhCzZv4
That looks nothing like the pictures you posted. That just looks like like an FAMAS clone. :huh
(http://www.counterstrike-source-skins.info/images/armes.real/famas1.jpg)
-
Originally posted by SIG220
It indeed doesn't have one.
The L85's bayonet has a hollow handle, that is designed to fit over the muzzle of the rifle. That is the way that it is attached, which is incredibly lame, in my opinion.
Here is a photo of the bayonet:
(http://www.wolfarmouries.co.uk/airsoft/bb/bin/image-lib/products/SA80BAY.jpg)
Interesting engineering solution %)
As a close combat weapon - a needle bayonet is better, 3 or 4 sharp edges (don't know how to say it correctly) as on Russian rifles.
As a multi-tool this is no quite usefull too. AK bayonet is used as a wire-cutter with a sheath. This one has another special wire-cutting part.
How about thermal tempering? Does the handle work as a muzzle-compensator?
AK bayonets are made from over-hardened steel, hard to sharpen and easy to break. People say they are good only for opening tin cans.
And if there is a way to lose something - a warrior will lose it ASAP. Now knife-bayonets are used as a "weapon" for military patrols because it's silly to arm cadets or enlisted soldiers with firearms in the city, usually only an officer has a pistol.
-
There seems to be confusion, there are some very different pictures of the rifle on net.
The one in a movie may look more similar to FAMAS but take a closer look:
cartridge, butt, handle, things between the handle and barrels, etc.
I am still not sure what pics should represent the final version, or even if there are various version?
Here are some more pics:
(http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/IPDL-IMAGES/PCT-IMAGES/26072007/HR2006000010_26072007_pf_fp.x4-b.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Boroda
As a close combat weapon - a needle bayonet is better, 3 or 4 sharp edges (don't know how to say it correctly) as on Russian rifles.
i think you mean the spike bayonet
they aren’t much use on a civilian rifle but the chicom type 56s ak clone came with a cheesy knitting needle.. err spike bayonet, that was only useful for finishing off stubborn beer cans during plinking sessions
edit: almost forgot to say, you got to drink the beer first coz not only is it a scientific fact that booze makes you shoot straighter it also puts you in the right frame of mind for doing stupid stuff with a bayonet
-
Originally posted by Excel1
i think you mean the spike bayonet
they aren’t much use on a civilian rifle
I wanted to go to bed, but now I'll think of a bayonet useful on a civilian rifle o_O
Originally posted by Excel1
but the chicom type 56s ak clone came with a cheesy knitting needle.. err spike bayonet, that was only useful for finishing off stubborn beer cans during plinking sessions
Spike bayonets are harder to break, easier to extract, and leave bad wounds. In 1854 British soldiers with Russian bayonet wounds were brought not to a hospital, but directly to the cemetery. OTOH Russians had a very special bayonet training, hitting a little downwards and then lowering the gun before taking the bayonet out. (hard to explain)
-
Originally posted by Viking
If you have to charge at the enemy you are not in close combat. 10.000 years ago a single archer could have done the same.
If you think think that even the most modern bow today, ( much less an ancient relic of 8,000 BC ), can be fired as fast as a modern handgun, well, then you have obviously never used either weapon yourself.
My own great great great grandfather killed 3 American Indians at close quarters in 1854 while on horseback with his then new Colt Navy model revolver. The Indians were armed with bows and arrows, and also lances. Despite having a 2 to 1 advantage in numbers, the Indians broke and ran. Two other men from the armed party from their wagon train, also were armed with the new Colt revolvers.
A handgun can be wielded at far closer quarters than ANY long arm can be maneuvered. Period.
Here in the United States, a famous football player this week tried to defend his home against intruders with a machete. Problem is the intruder had a handgun. And a machete can be used in much closer quarters than any long arm with a bayonet.
Guess who died in this incident???
The Bayonet is totally irrelevant to close quarters combat in modern day warfare.
The urban combat that US troops in Iraq are currently facing is as close quartered as one can get. Yet none of them are bothering to fix useless bayonets to their rifles. Just check any of the thousands of news photos currently online showing American troops in combat.
SIG 220
-
It seems like bayonetting and smashing people with the rifle butt would bend the barrel of the rifle.
There were certainly cases of the butt of the M-16 breaking in hand to hand fighting. The ones I've read about were in the Ia Drang Valley.
-
Originally posted by SIG220
If you think think that even the most modern bow today, ( much less an ancient relic of 8,000 BC ), can be fired as fast as a modern handgun, well, then you have obviously never used either weapon yourself blah blah blah
I see you like to put words in my mouth. Please don't. A spear is as effective now as it was 10,000 years ago. That modern weapons are more effective does not change this basic truth. You obviously have a problem with simple logic.
And for your information I have quite frequently used a variety of infantry weapons, including pistol and bayonet.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
I wanted to go to bed, but now I'll think of a bayonet useful on a civilian rifle o_O
since they included a bayonet with the civilianised versian of their ak norinco must have thought its oversized tooth pick would be useful to the average recreational shooter. cant see it myself though, an extra mag would have been more useful
Originally posted by Boroda
Spike bayonets are harder to break, easier to extract, and leave bad wounds. In 1854 British soldiers with Russian bayonet wounds were brought not to a hospital, but directly to the cemetery. OTOH Russians had a very special bayonet training, hitting a little downwards and then lowering the gun before taking the bayonet out. (hard to explain)
interesting, and i think you explained it painfully well.
-
Originally posted by Excel1
since they included a bayonet with the civilianised versian of their ak norinco must have thought its oversized tooth pick would be useful to the average recreational shooter. cant see it myself though, an extra mag would have been more useful
Maybe it's because the automat is zeroed with a bayonet attached? Easer to sell it with a cheap bayonet then to change production lines.
Another thing about bayonets is that in many situations a bayonet attack is such a psychological pressure that enemy simply runs away. Seeing a crowd of people going berserk, with almost 2 meter long sharp spikes is not quite comfortable if you imagine this spike in your belly. Most of the people killed in bayonet attacks were stabbed in the back while running. There is a legend that Voroshilov wanted new bayonets made chromium-plated, shiny, so the enemy will be scared from a long distance seeing bayonets attached.
-
Originally posted by Viking
I see you like to put words in my mouth. Please don't. A spear is as effective now as it was 10,000 years ago. That modern weapons are more effective does not change this basic truth. You obviously have a problem with simple logic.
And for your information I have quite frequently used a variety of infantry weapons, including pistol and bayonet.
It is you who is using absolutely no logic at all here with your claim.
To say that a spear is as effective today as it was 10,000 years ago is completely false and untrue, as one's opponents today are now armed with modern weapons.
If spears truly were still effective combat weapons today ( as you claim ), then the military would still be using them. But the truth is THEY DON"T use them, as I plainly illustrated by how the US Military is currently fighting in close quarters urban combat in Iraq.
Both spears and bayonets are relics of the PAST. They are now totally irrelevant and useless in combat. They play no role at all in modern warfare anymore, as they are now totally ineffective and obsolete in today's urban warfare.
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Another thing about bayonets is that in many situations a bayonet attack is such a psychological pressure that enemy simply runs away.
Actually, such a bayonet charge now days could easily kill all of the opposing soldiers, as they would most likely die from laughing so hard.
Their internal organs would no doubt rupture from such uncontrollable laughing.
The attacking soldiers could thus then easily stick them with their bayonets, as the soldiers helplessly rolled around on the ground, writhing in agony from their intense laughter.
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by SIG220
It is you who is using absolutely no logic at all here with your claim.
To say that a spear is as effective today as it was 10,000 years ago is completely false and untrue, as one's opponents today are now armed with modern weapons.
SIG 220
So you are saying a 10,000 year old spear design would work better than a current spear design?
Or are you just being obtuse?
I'll break it down for you, just in case you really aren't getting it. A spear 10,000 years ago will do the same damage as a spear today. A spear is a spear is a spear.
Wether the opponent has a pistol or a suit of armor is irrelevant to what Viking wrote.
-
I think bayonetts are more useful today than they were in the 20th century. With the house to house, urban fighting experienced today, enemy combatants can literally be feet away before being detected. It takes time to change a magazine, weapons jam, but a quick stab in the chest or face with a bayonett can surely be accomplished in a fraction of the time required to remedy the aforementioned problems.
-
Originally posted by SIG220
Both spears and bayonets are relics of the PAST. They are now totally irrelevant and useless in combat. They play no role at all in modern warfare anymore, as they are now totally ineffective and obsolete in today's urban warfare.
SIG 220
Tell that to the Brits. I guess you didn't hear about their bayonet charge in Iraq.
Plenty of bad guys died from it, but I don't think they died of laughter. And the bad guys had SA, plenty of ammunition, and had the Brits effectively pinned before the bayonet charge was ordered.
What's your background with regards to close quarters combat? What have you been taught? Do you have any real-world experience? I ask because you seem to be of the opinion that as long as someone has a pistol, an opponent with a knife or some other type of close combat weapon is apparently a laughable threat.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
I think bayonetts are more useful today than they were in the 20th century. With the house to house, urban fighting experienced today, enemy combatants can literally be feet away before being detected. It takes time to change a magazine, weapons jam, but a quick stab in the chest or face with a bayonett can surely be accomplished in a fraction of the time required to remedy the aforementioned problems.
You aren't going to have a bayonet 'fixed' while you are planning to do any shooting.
If you had a surprise close contact, and you might want that badguy alive at a later date and/or you have a failure with your primary, one of your best options is just to muzzle strike the badguy in the face. It is a very, very effective technique/attack.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by wulfie-away
You aren't going to have a bayonet 'fixed' while you are planning to do any shooting.
-Mike/wulfie
Why not? We did when doing house inspection/clearing duty.
(http://daniel.amfibi.no/Storm/Mattis.jpg)
Not a very good image, but it gives you an idea of the bayonet setup.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Why not? We did when doing house inspection/clearing duty.
(http://daniel.amfibi.no/Storm/Mattis.jpg)
Not a very good image, but it gives you an idea of the bayonet setup.
Different military, different weapon, different unit/mission, etc.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by wulfie-away
Different military, different weapon, different unit/mission, etc.
-Mike/wulfie
Poor excuse. Again, why can you not have a bayonet fixed wile shooting?
There is no reason.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Poor excuse. Again, why can you not have a bayonet fixed wile shooting?
There is no reason.
It's not an excuse. I'm just telling you how it has been with me. Even in a CQC situation, with an M4, I am not going to have a bayonet fixed. That's how I've been trained, how it's been when I've been working, etc.
You may have misunderstood, I probably worded it badly as well. I wasn't trying to speak for every Soldier when I said I wouldn't have a bayonet fixed.
-Mike/wulfie
-
Ok. I still don't see any good reasons for not having a bayonet affixed, but that is your choice.
Oh and btw. you shouldn't use the word "you" when talking about yourself...
Originally posted by wulfie-away
You aren't going to have a bayonet 'fixed' while you are planning to do any shooting.
If you had a surprise close contact, and you might want that badguy alive at a later date and/or you have a failure with your primary, one of your best options is just to muzzle strike the badguy in the face. It is a very, very effective technique/attack.
-Mike/wulfie
... It tends to lead to misunderstandings. ;)