Hand-to-hand in combat

[Ron Humphrey]

Good point Ken. It is amazing how many kids joining the military have never gotten into any sort of physical altercation. I'm a big believer in boxing and hand-to-hand training...enough to build your confidence that you can in fact, handle yourself and survive.

The old saying about being able to take a lickin and keep on tickin probably takes on a whole new meaning when the one giving the licking will literally finish you off if you don't.

[Rifleman]

Sad story; slightly off topic, but it sort of goes along with this thread:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326148,00.html

[Coldstreamer]

An enormous degree of excellent analysis in all of this, but I must say a few -namely the gallant Will F Owen (holding his ground in the best infantry traditions) fail to understand the real utility of all unarmed combat, with edged weapons or otherwise.

Its for throwing your weight around when you're off duty, showing off in front of chicks in your boxer shorts once you've lured them back to your 'love dojo', and escaping from yobbos on the Kings Road after you've provoked them into violence by your Alpha Male vibes.

Most specialist forms of this art: FISH (fighting in some one's house), FIBAR (fighting in bars and restaurants) and RAWD (running away with dignity). The latter involves a few hand chops at the air, possibly a roll or two before fleeing at top speed.

[slapout9]

Check out these counter terrorist/ hostage rescue police dogs not sure what language they are speaking but they certainly know their H2H combat or is that Paw2Paw combat

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfi5F...eature=related

[William F. Owen]

An enormous degree of excellent analysis in all of this, but I must say a few -namely the gallant Will F Owen (holding his ground in the best infantry traditions) fail to understand the real utility of all unarmed combat, with edged weapons or otherwise.

Its for throwing your weight around when you're off duty, showing off in front of chicks in your boxer shorts once you've lured them back to your 'love dojo', and escaping from yobbos on the Kings Road after you've provoked them into violence by your Alpha Male vibes.

Most specialist forms of this art: FISH (fighting in some one's house), FIBAR (fighting in bars and restaurants) and RAWD (running away with dignity). The latter involves a few hand chops at the air, possibly a roll or two before fleeing at top speed.

Thank you, the House Hold Division Representative. Having spent a bit of time conducting FART (fighting around town) in can only concur with your analysis.

I have no problem skilling the boys up with a few shrewd moves, placed in the context of an operational reality, but I cannot, and probably never will see the point in teaching line infantry how to use a bayonet, or giving him one to use! - and I can'e see the point in foot drill either!!

[FL-CRACKER]

Classic post coldstreamer.

Are troops even issued bayonets anymore? I haven't heard of anyone using one or even being issued one over in Iraq, and I have several friends that are of the 11B / 03xx variety.

To me though, hand to hand combat training seems an essential part of a layered offense/defense. In the least, while a bayonet may not be necessary, I think anyone that is clearing a house should in least have a fighting knife such as a Kbar on them, other than a folding blade/multitool. I've also heard of accounts in Iraq, where guys have entered a room and quickly realized that there were several propane tanks or IEDs that would prevent them from engaging the insurgent with their rifle/carbine and when it came down to it, they ended up finishing the job with a folding knife of some type. This especially seems more necessary for the door kickers, who are less likely to have a pistol as their secondary weapon.

[Shek]

Classic post coldstreamer.

Are troops even issued bayonets anymore? I haven't heard of anyone using one or even being issued one over in Iraq, and I have several friends that are of the 11B / 03xx variety.

To me though, hand to hand combat training seems an essential part of a layered offense/defense. In the least, while a bayonet may not be necessary, I think anyone that is clearing a house should in least have a fighting knife such as a Kbar on them, other than a folding blade/multitool. I've also heard of accounts in Iraq, where guys have entered a room and quickly realized that there were several propane tanks or IEDs that would prevent them from engaging the insurgent with their rifle/carbine and when it came down to it, they ended up finishing the job with a folding knife of some type. This especially seems more necessary for the door kickers, who are less likely to have a pistol as their secondary weapon.

I had my rifle company carry bayonets on person all the time. I didn't see its primary purpose as a hand-to-hand weapon, but rather as a visible and serious escalation of force in crowd control situations. It's easy for folks to try to crowd you bare muzzles since they don't expect to get shot. Place a pointy object that will prick you if you crowd a soldier with a weapon, and you reduce the temptation to crowd too close to soldiers holding the line. This provides an option between trying to grapple with those that are too close and overescalation (warning shots), which runs the risk of devolving to chaos much quicker than a person that gets too uppity and walks away with a minor flesh wound.

I guess it's an ironic application of the bayonet - break out in case of low intensity operations.

[Shek]

I'm a day late on this one but I'll throw a question out there regarding hand-to-hand. The Army's new combatives training emphasizes going to the ground with your opponent. While I find this to be an interesting exercise in PT gear on a matted gym floor, I wonder why we are teaching the techniques when, in reality, most of the hand-to-hand combat actions are going to take place with a soldier wearing full body armor, helmet and assorted other gear to weigh him down. So you want me to train soldiers to go to the ground with their opponent when, in reality, your opponent most likely will have little to no extra weight on his person, and quite capable of maneuvering away from our poor, heavily weighed down turtle?

Am I off base here or is the purpose of this new combatives program to teach our soldiers no kidding, useful hand-to-hand skills or to make them feel better about themselves and learn just enough to get their asses kicked in a bar fight?

We had a NCO in a sister battalion in Mosul back in 2004 kill an insurgent with his knife (the insurgent pulled a knife as well) after grappling on the ground. I believe this soldier had done some BJJ outside of the combatives program within his battalion, so he was better than the average bear, but I think the key is that the new combatives program recognizes the fact that most fights end on the ground. As they say, train as you fight, and the old school judo throw way simply wasn't realistic.

[Ken White]

... but I think the key is that the new combatives program recognizes the fact that most fights end on the ground...

Being old and from an era where bar fights and such were far more common than they are today and having indulged in hand to hand with sundry folks with hostile intent in several parts of the world, I can agree that some fights end up on the ground but I think most don't and those that do generally end up with someone REALLY getting hurt -- and which one is a coin flip.

I know in most cases anyone who wants to stay alive should avoid the ground to the maximum extent possible..

...As they say, train as you fight, and the old school judo throw way simply wasn't realistic.

True, it was not -- and it wasn't taught to or used by anyone who might have to get seriously engaged; other techniques were. Ranger School used the old stuff as a teaching vehicle in much the same mode that grappling is used today, from there it sort of permeated the Army. Both were/are bad ideas. Train as you'll fight requires teaching everyone how to kill people with their hands or feet or, better, using any object that comes to hand (including your car keys) as a weapon -- not a well accepted idea in western society...

I have no problem with teaching grappling as a way for the kids to learn getting hurt is not life threatening -- but teaching anyone to go to ground if it can be avoided in a real life threatening situation is a very bad idea.

[Coldstreamer]

Thank you, the House Hold Division Representative. Having spent a bit of time conducting FART (fighting around town) in can only concur with your analysis.

I have no problem skilling the boys up with a few shrewd moves, placed in the context of an operational reality, but I cannot, and probably never will see the point in teaching line infantry how to use a bayonet, or giving him one to use! - and I can'e see the point in foot drill either!!

Well that's just silly. Foot Drill is the fastest and simplest form of bringing cohesion and teamwork to a disparate group of individuals as a behavioural basis for all future team activity. It also forms part of a wider doctrinal immersion that requires the sublimation of individual will to the collective benefit, for people who have hitherto had no discipline or restraint imposed upon them by family, education system or society.

Bayonets are like all other capabilities. Lose them at your peril. Lack of both bayonets and NVGs were cited as massive errors in the battle of Mogadishu, where they were left behind to minimise weight for a short duration op. You miss the human factors aspect of the edged weapon in your analysis, which is excellent but entirely metrics based. The number of people killed by edged weapons in operational analysis is infinitely less significant than the external and internal symbol of visceral commitment an infantryman makes when he fixes it. We live in a world of perceptions and symbology; you will damn well know a company of Guardsmen coming for you with bayonets fixed. And as an affirmation of 'betterness' over an enemy immediately prior to close engagements where fear and anxiety will be the prevalent emotions, it is an excellent tool. When we fix bayonets, we do it with the conscious intent to destroy. Armys which do not embrace this martial spirit tend to underperform in most other areas as well.

My company and I are currently on operations in Afghanistan, and we all carry bayonets.

[Jedburgh]

Being old and from an era where bar fights and such were far more common than they are today and having indulged in hand to hand with sundry folks with hostile intent in several parts of the world, I can agree that some fights end up on the ground but I think most don't and those that do generally end up with someone REALLY getting hurt -- and which one is a coin flip.

I know in most cases anyone who wants to stay alive should avoid the ground to the maximum extent possible..

True, it was not -- and it wasn't taught to or used by anyone who might have to get seriously engaged; other techniques were. Ranger School used the old stuff as a teaching vehicle in much the same mode that grappling is used today, from there it sort of permeated the Army. Both were/are bad ideas. Train as you'll fight requires teaching everyone how to kill people with their hands or feet or, better, using any object that comes to hand (including your car keys) as a weapon -- not a well accepted idea in western society...

I have no problem with teaching grappling as a way for the kids to learn getting hurt is not life threatening -- but teaching anyone to go to ground if it can be avoided in a real life threatening situation is a very bad idea.

What he said.

I also strongly disagree with the assertion that most fights end up on the ground. Going along with that, it was never my experience that the old judo throw way was ever part of serious H2H for combat soldiers.

As Ken stated, train as you fight means teaching the young'uns to kill the bad guy in a close encounter by the most expeditious means available. This is not just base skills training, its also awareness training - awareness of the bad guy, awareness of the surroundings and how to physically exploit both to the detriment of the former.

Slap has mentioned Fairbairn a number of times on the board. Fairbairn's methods are simple to teach, learn and execute - and they are meant to kill. Fairbairn understood the dangers of ending up in grappling contest or going to ground, and stressed eliminating the threat as quickly as possible. This, based on countless real world life or death encounters.

Sometimes I think that current combatives was more influenced by UFC/cage fighting than it was by anything to do with the cold necessity in a close encounter of killing your enemy as quickly as possible.

[Ron Humphrey]

What he said.

I also strongly disagree with the assertion that most fights end up on the ground. Going along with that, it was never my experience that the old judo throw way was ever part of serious H2H for combat soldiers.


Sometimes I think that current combatives was more influenced by UFC/cage fighting than it was by anything to do with the cold necessity in a close encounter of killing your enemy as quickly as possible.

I have often ended up in discussions with my siblings about that very thing as I try to explain that real fighting which ends up in one winner and one permanently losing. These bouts would be considerably different than what they see on TV.

I think thats the overwhelming point, for military there is no other point to H2H then to win at all cost thus any training should reflect that, not what we watch on Saturday night.

[FL-CRACKER]

Well that's just silly. Foot Drill is the fastest and simplest form of bringing cohesion and teamwork to a disparate group of individuals as a behavioural basis for all future team activity. It also forms part of a wider doctrinal immersion that requires the sublimation of individual will to the collective benefit, for people who have hitherto had no discipline or restraint imposed upon them by family, education system or society.

Bayonets are like all other capabilities. Lose them at your peril. Lack of both bayonets and NVGs were cited as massive errors in the battle of Mogadishu, where they were left behind to minimise weight for a short duration op. You miss the human factors aspect of the edged weapon in your analysis, which is excellent but entirely metrics based. The number of people killed by edged weapons in operational analysis is infinitely less significant than the external and internal symbol of visceral commitment an infantryman makes when he fixes it. We live in a world of perceptions and symbology; you will damn well know a company of Guardsmen coming for you with bayonets fixed. And as an affirmation of 'betterness' over an enemy immediately prior to close engagements where fear and anxiety will be the prevalent emotions, it is an excellent tool. When we fix bayonets, we do it with the conscious intent to destroy. Armys which do not embrace this martial spirit tend to underperform in most other areas as well.

My company and I are currently on operations in Afghanistan, and we all carry bayonets.

Great post.

Bayonet training may not be of "doctrinal importance" since Infantry has never cared much for "doctrine" in the first place. It is very important to the "killing mindset" though, which may not concern a commander in a dry, warm office, but is of the uptmost importance to the boots on the ground.

Besides, how many famous battles over the years were won with a Commander's rallying cry, "FIX BAYONETS!!!!" the order in and of itself is adrenaline pumping.

His advice would be very good for our enemies to heed though, seeing as how I prefer my enemy to not be trained in bayonet skill.

Thanks for the info coldstream and for serving. Be safe out there and watch your six.

[Ken White]

Well that's just silly...

Bayonets are like all other capabilities. Lose them at your peril. Lack of both bayonets and NVGs were cited as massive errors in the battle of Mogadishu, where they were left behind to minimise weight for a short duration op. You miss the human factors aspect of the edged weapon in your analysis, which is excellent but entirely metrics based.

My company and I are currently on operations in Afghanistan, and we all carry bayonets.

Point down -- so of course the Heralds will be perturbed...

There are those who forget the human element in their theorizing particularly if over enamored of numbers. Frankly, if I were to design an ideal Armed Force, there'd be no humans involved, they are so pesky about little things...

I'm still working on how to do that.

[William F. Owen]

....Foot Drill is the fastest and simplest form of bringing cohesion and teamwork to a disparate group of individuals as a behavioural basis for all future team activity. ...
.

Don't worry Colstreamer. SO2 Inf EC, is a Guardsman and is trying to get all the section weapons fitted with bayonets! I've even sat through the presentation

As long as we acknowledge that i fulfils a psychological/emotional need and not an operational one, I guess UK can justify the weight versus another 30 rd mag and the training time, versus something else.

[Ken White]

is a Rifle Company in peacetime. It has plenty of training time. That excess of training time is not available in wartime but a little drill or a little bayonet instruction isn't all that time consuming and it feeds into what N. Bonaparte said; "In war, the moral is to the physical as three is to one."

Most people carry and use too much ammo anyway. If you need more than six 30 round mags, somebody has already screwed up to the point that more ammo likely will make little difference.

As Shek said above, the bayonet is great for crowd control -- a mission in most Armies at one time or another; if the kids aren't used to using them, they stick themselves or others inadvertently. The same effect of lack of familiarity that leads to accidental shootings when an Army gets deployed after years of peace.

Not to mention the bayonet can be a good utility knife which every soldier ought to have to do semi legal or illegal things with...

[William F. Owen]

is a Rifle Company in peacetime. It has plenty of training time. That excess of training time is not available in wartime but a little drill or a little bayonet instruction isn't all that time consuming and it feeds into what N. Bonaparte said; "In war, the moral is to the physical as three is to one."

Most people carry and use too much ammo anyway. If you need more than six 30 round mags, somebody has already screwed up to the point that more ammo likely will make little difference.

As Shek said above, the bayonet is great for crowd control -- a mission in most Armies at one time or another; if the kids aren't used to using them, they stick themselves or others inadvertently. The same effect of lack of familiarity that leads to accidental shootings when an Army gets deployed after years of peace.

Not to mention the bayonet can be a good utility knife which every soldier ought to have to do semi legal or illegal things with...

Almost all good points. You have kinda covered why I spend so much time working on infantry doctrine, but we are still left with the elephant in the corner that cannot explain why Infantry does the things it does without explicit recognition of operational realities and human factor constraints. The UK infantry man is now more overloaded than at any time in history. Shows we don't know much more than we did in 1917.

I agree about mags. Mags aint the issue. It's all the other ammo natures.

Yes, Bayonets are good for crowd control, but what happens when you use them? You can't fix bayonets without being prepared to stick someone and do you want your men bayoneting civilians?

Bayonet as a good knife? Well I submit there are better tools to carry.

[Ken White]

...The UK infantry man is now more overloaded than at any time in history. Shows we don't know much more than we did in 1917.

So, generally is the US Infantryman. However, in good units, that load is half or less what it is in not so good units -- all that extraneous stuff is left behind. It's not a question of detailed analysis, merely a question of training and competence. One of my pet examples of this is to view pictures of the 82d and 101st on the 5th of June 1944. the 101st was going into combat for the first time and they were so overloaded they could barley move. The 82d having been in Sicily and Italy had weapon, ammo and little more.

I agree about mags. Mags aint the issue. It's all the other ammo natures.

Those other Ammo natures have finite weights, if you want to carry X more rounds, you need Y more people -- any other solution will adversely impact your combat capability. Nowadays Ammo isn't nearly the problem batteries are...

Yes, Bayonets are good for crowd control, but what happens when you use them? You can't fix bayonets without being prepared to stick someone and do you want your men bayoneting civilians?

If the civilians need to be stuck, I'd smack the kids upside the head if they did not stick them. Sticking is no worse than a muzzle slash -- and it's a better deterrent. Trust me on that one...

Bayonet as a good knife? Well I submit there are better tools to carry.

Really? What? I've been looking for years and haven't found anything better than an old clunky K-Bar. I've got a Victorinox, A Gerber Tool and a Leatherman and two or three other assorted knives. All have their uses, none are as overall useful in the field as a good hefty knife. However, if you've got a better idea, I'm all for it.

[William F. Owen]

So, generally is the US Infantryman. However, in good units, that load is half or less what it is in not so good units -- all that extraneous stuff is left behind.

Sure, the skill of your Chain of Command is everything. I gave a lecture at the RUSI in London on exactly this issues. It's on the net somewhere. The problem is that weight just gets added eg the new radio weighs 50% more than the old one!

Those other Ammo natures have finite weights, if you want to carry X more rounds, you need Y more people -- any other solution will adversely impact your combat capability. Nowadays Ammo isn't nearly the problem batteries are...

I hear you. So why when the UK created the 5-man Manoeuvre Support Section in 1995 did it have 5 men and 2 x GPMG. Yet when we had Lewis Gun sections in 1917-1934 there was one gun supported by 6-men? I've been dealing with the obvious stuff since day 1. Why does no one do anything about it. - again, if Bayonets were so critical to UK infantry capability, how come only 25% of platoon weapons can fix them?

If the civilians need to be stuck, I'd smack the kids upside the head if they did not stick them. Sticking is no worse than a muzzle slash -- and it's a better deterrent. Trust me on that one...

I concur. However when one of your guys fatally bayonets some 18 year old girl in a riot, the flow down effect could be something similar to Haditha or Abu Graib. I don't ever remember Bayonets being carried in Northern Ireland.

Really? What? I've been looking for years and haven't found anything better than an old clunky K-Bar. I've got a Victorinox.

Well I only have my personal experience to go on. As a very young Rifleman I went and found an M3 Combat knife, and found it was useless. I then got an MOD Arctic Survival knife, and an MOD Clasp knife. which worked great for a long while. I don't know about Arctic but it worked very well in the Negev desert. Some years later I binned the Clasp knife for a Leatherman, and I can't see how I would improve on that.

[Ken White]

Sure, the skill of your Chain of Command is everything. I gave a lecture at the RUSI in London on exactly this issues. It's on the net somewhere. The problem is that weight just gets added eg the new radio weighs 50% more than the old one!

Why you do that? Our new one weighs less and does more.

I hear you. So why when the UK created the 5-man Manoeuvre Support Section in 1995 did it have 5 men and 2 x GPMG. Yet when we had Lewis Gun sections in 1917-1934 there was one gun supported by 6-men? I've been dealing with the obvious stuff since day 1. Why does no one do anything about it.

Because manpower is the most expensive item in any defense budget and politicians are always trying to impose strength cuts on the Forces. Said Forces comply but not always intelligently -- mostly because the manpower bean counters try to make their job easy and they sell the Generals their dumb ideas and the Dtar wearers accept it because know the troops will somehow make even the dumbest ideas work. I've converted more than one rear area straphanger into an unwilling Ammo bearer.

...again, if Bayonets were so critical to UK infantry capability, how come only 25% of platoon weapons can fix them?

Dunno. Our ratio isn't much better but I don't think they're critical, just very useful for some purposes and of very small consequence in their adverse impacts.

I concur. However when one of your guys fatally bayonets some 18 year old girl in a riot, the flow down effect could be something similar to Haditha or Abu Graib. I don't ever remember Bayonets being carried in Northern Ireland.

Could be, particularly in this day and age. Things are tough all over. It's far more probable that the bayonets will chill things before that happens but rioters take chances and doo-doo occurs. I believe in doing everything possible to avoid civilian casualties but one can go too far in worrying about appearances. You cannot bluff in riot actions. We've fixed bayonets in several domestic crowd control situations yet to my knowledge, no one has been bayoneted in the US in the last 50 plus years.

Well I only have my personal experience to go on. As a very young Rifleman I went and found an M3 Combat knife, and found it was useless. I then got an MOD Arctic Survival knife, and an MOD Clasp knife. which worked great for a long while. I don't know about Arctic but it worked very well in the Negev desert. Some years later I binned the Clasp knife for a Leatherman, and I can't see how I would improve on that.

Lotta neat gadgets but many of them not terribly durable plus the knife blade is of marginal utility. I like my Gerber a little better because it can be operated with one hand but in the woods, I still prefer my Ka-Bar. Different approaches -- that's why they make Toyotas and Hyundais and Opels and Holdens and ...