Blood grooves on Bayonets

[harryamb2]

having had to deal with stabbing wounds I found that the thinner blade was more lethal,ie buthers or fish shop knives. but as far as regular bayonets go as Mr jones used to say they don't like it up em Mr mannering.

- - Updated - -

should be butchers.

[Scout]

The Heart was just an example, i'm pretty sure that when your in the heat of a frenzied close quarter battle, you dont have time to make an accurate stab to the heart, the idea is to incapacitate your foe anyway you can, the mere fact someone has been stabbed is enough to make them buckle initially, perhaps adrenaline can take over, but a bayonet thrust to the stomach is enough to make an opponent fall to their knees, i have personally been stabbed in the back with a phillips headed screw driver and believe me its a heck of a shock and for some reason you do feel weak in the legs and straight away, even though no major damage was done it still incapacitated me for a few minutes , probably the result of shock to the body

Ouch, I'm sorry to hear that. Hope you are okay now and with no lasting effects.

Im sure most people would react to being stabbed like you did be it with a knife, screw driver or other implement.
The screw driver implication really drives home the point about knife laws (no pun intended).
Many tools can be used as a weapon. Its hard to outlaw screw drivers, which are amongst the more often used weapons.
Both a Phillips or a sharpened ordinary screw driver is a weapon, which can serve a purpose.
The Besh Wedge mentioned earlier is basically a glorified screw driver.

How ever it must be said in regards to the Besh, any screw driver, spike bayonets and any other weapon of that type with a small diameter, that there is also the fact, that a wound will 'close the door,' so to speak.

Upon extracting a spike type weapon, the wound channel in flesh will close back on itself. Makes for less chance of bleeding out an opponent in a hurry, unless you shut him down by hitting vitals.

A wider blade will make for a bigger wound channel i.e. faster and more bleeding out and higher chance of a quick kille - less risk of injury to #1.

In regards to 'not having time to hit the heart' and what the idea of knife fighting is: There are different schools of knife fighting depending of the knife fighting ability of your foe.

Most knife fights will be over in a flash as hardly any foes are ever matched evenly or the odds are stacked. As in your case with an attack from behind.

A few fights will drag on and be deceided by different means. Some fighters believe in many small cuts making an impact on the mind of the foe. Few ordinary people can stand the sight of their own blood in copious amounts.
Further more, there are many vital points to hit close to the skin in several places on the human body.

In regards to how people react to a stabbing - i.e. 'a thrust to the stomach is enough to make an opponent fall to their knees' and the fact that you felt weak right away:
Different people react in different ways. Again, I have no doubt, that most would react as you did, but some others react differently and continue to fight. Either because of conditioning, esperience, stamina, mindset or a myriad of other possiilities.

Arguably the most famous knife fight in history (or at least American history) is that of James 'Jim' Bowie.
On the Vidalia sandbar, on that fateful day, JB was a second in a duel. The duel being over and the duellers and seconds walking away alive, an enemy of JB deceided that it was a good time to settle their differences.

Long story short, JB was shot in the hip and stabbed. A man named Wright stabbed the already wounded Bowie with a sword cane, which snapped and left the blade sticking in Jim Bowie (see spike weapons above).

JB used the moment of Wrights surprise of seeing his foe still alive though with a blade sticking in him to good effect; Jim Bowie grabbed Wright and evicerated him with a large butcher knife (no fuller).

Bowie was then stabbed several more times but still managed to cut off part of the arm hitherto attached to one of his other attackers. The rest fled.

Bowie lived to tell the tale and later died at the Alamo.

There were several witnesses to the fight, though Bowie killed some of them.

That fight was a long time ago, but not only were there surviving witnesses, the examples of others performing feats though gravely wounded, missing limbs or even dying all through history (and two world wars) are legion.

[Scout]

having had to deal with stabbing wounds I found that the thinner blade was more lethal,ie buthers ............ knives..

I agree.

[Wagriff]

Oddly enough, the bottom line is still pretty much the same in any case. Whether the grooves were made that way for strength, lightness, to break body suction and facilitate easier removal, or something totally unknown-they were made that way with the idea in mind-whether it was practical and worked or not. One can easily see the changing concepts and ideas over time by viewing the different blade designs. Perhaps one generation felt one way was the truth and the next generation of blade designers that came along threw out the idea and went with a new design.
Take, for example, the famous Zulu spear-the Iklwa. It was supposedly named this bizarre name because of the odd sucking noise that it made when being pulled from an enemy's body. When reading over the various Zulu epic battles, one finds many instances of the spear being wrenched from the stabber's hand by the falling body it was inserted in to. The Zulus tried several different methods and designs to counter this often deadly occurrence in battle. For instance, they would put their Iklwa head onto a wooden shaft with a wider end handle on the far end, to give the warrior abit more of something to hold onto when pulling the spear from the body it was stuck in.
But, at any rate, I do believe that all of the theories are more or less correct when explaining fighting blade designs. The famous Moro Kris wavy edge blades are yet another example of a blade that was purposefully designed to open the edges of the wound for both a more deadly wound and to facilitate easier blade removal. If you lose your only weapon in a fight, you're not in a good position, for sure. Even the Nepal Kukri's saw fit to employ a very narrow channel in their blades which could certainly have done nothing to lighten or strengthen them, and yet they felt obliged to have one. So, for whatever theory or design idea was prevalent at any given era in time, you'll either find blood grooves or not. I'm sure that if you ask a dozen different knife designers like Loveless, Fairbairn, etc. you'll get a dozen different replies. Is only 1 right and the rest are all wrong? Or, are they All right in their own way of thinking and explaining?

[Scout]

Oddly enough, the bottom line is still pretty much the same in any case. Whether the grooves were made that way for strength, lightness, to break body suction and facilitate easier removal, or something totally unknown-they were made that way with the idea in mind-whether it was practical and worked or not. One can easily see the changing concepts and ideas over time by viewing the different blade designs. Perhaps one generation felt one way was the truth and the next generation of blade designers that came along threw out the idea and went with a new design.
Take, for example, the famous Zulu spear-the Iklwa. It was supposedly named this bizarre name because of the odd sucking noise that it made when being pulled from an enemy's body. When reading over the various Zulu epic battles, one finds many instances of the spear being wrenched from the stabber's hand by the falling body it was inserted in to. The Zulus tried several different methods and designs to counter this often deadly occurrence in battle. For instance, they would put their Iklwa head onto a wooden shaft with a wider end handle on the far end, to give the warrior abit more of something to hold onto when pulling the spear from the body it was stuck in.
But, at any rate, I do believe that all of the theories are more or less correct when explaining fighting blade designs. The famous Moro Kris wavy edge blades are yet another example of a blade that was purposefully designed to open the edges of the wound for both a more deadly wound and to facilitate easier blade removal. If you lose your only weapon in a fight, you're not in a good position, for sure. Even the Nepal Kukri's saw fit to employ a very narrow channel in their blades which could certainly have done nothing to lighten or strengthen them, and yet they felt obliged to have one. So, for whatever theory or design idea was prevalent at any given era in time, you'll either find blood grooves or not. I'm sure that if you ask a dozen different knife designers like Loveless, Fairbairn, etc. you'll get a dozen different replies. Is only 1 right and the rest are all wrong? Or, are they All right in their own way of thinking and explaining?

The truth is not something to be 'changed over generations.'
Fact: Its called a fuller not a blood groove.
Fact: The purpose of a fuller is to lighten and at the same time strenghten the blade.

A light weight Zulu spear might be wrenched away by a stuck foe, but I cant see, why this is drawn into the debate.
A short flimsy light weight Zulu spear can in not way be compared to the considerable heft of a heavy Garand with a substantial bayonet at the end. If you had handled a very short Zulu stabbing spear and a very heavy Garand with bayonet attached, you would instantly know why. I have handled a Garand for a considerable amount of time, run with it, carried it, disassembled it, cleaned it, drilled with it and shot thousands of rounds with it - that thing has some HEFT to it!
A Garand is much heavier than both the Iklwa......and the Assegai too for that matter.
No comparison in sticking characteristics, feel or weight.

Several Kukri features are still enigmas - at least still debated in the Western Hemisphere.
For example, there is a notch in the blade near the handle. Is it meant to wick off the blood of a foe or purely ornamental? Different camps deate this.
Its the same with various ornamental features like the very narrow grooves on some Kukris.
I say, on 'some' Kukris, because there are vast quantities of Kukri designs beyond that of the typical cheap tourist souvenir with a notch in the blade and one or more very narrow parallel grooves in the blade, which is the design most people know and latch on to.

Many Kukri blades have no ornamental features at all. Blade smooth, no grooves, no notch, no nothing.

Were/are these various notches and grooves etc religious, ornamental or actually serving a purpose? We dont know.

Fact is, that there are MANY different Kukri design according to purpose of the blade, region made and what ever person felt like making a Kukri in his own distinct style.

Many/most original Kukris were made by the village blacksmith. You do the math, as to how many variations there are.

You mention Loveless and Fairbairn for some reason. Both are bad examples to use as arguments for your point of view (gun, foot, bang?).

Loveless is an American knife making icon. He is known for a very distinct style of making a knife. A grind which is distinguished by being a deep hollow ground blade WITHOUT fullers.

A style so distinct and famous world wide, that many knifemakers, also in Europe, try to get the corners and grind exactly like Loveless. Most fail.

Loveless has made several different knives, but most are in the distinct Loveless style mentioned above.

I've have seen and handled many Loveless knives and Loveless style knives, but have yet to see one with fullers.

Fairbairn is a knife fighting icon best known by the general public for a very distinct dagger made in a collab with Sykes. The dagger has NO fuller.
I own, have handled and seen many Fairbairn knives, but have never seen one with a fuller.

Not any Applegate-Fairbairn, not any Fairbairn-Sykes, not the Smatchet - no Fairbairn knife or Fairbairn collab has fullers, that I know of.

................but it doesnt really matter what I say, as you basically repeat the same litany, no matter what I say
I dont think, you neither can nor want to be swayed by what I say, as you have made up your mind according to your point of view and want to stand by that.

And that is fine.

You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. Im sure, I cant be correct in all my statements.

But.....
......my opinion is shaped upon emphirical data collected in the field.

[Wagriff]

Wow.....

[AZPhil]

I need a blood groove in my pekker.

Blue pill Steve!!!!}8)
Then you can hammer nails into wood with that badboy!!!!!LMAO

\
But back to the topic I think the fuller/blood groove is used to lighten and strenghten the blade.
The blades that don't have a fuller usually have a beefier center for the added strenght.

[Eric Zentner]

Here is a great link on the subject............http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...zUklyGm-kghAFQ.............

Eric

[Frogprince]

.................. But back to the topic I think the fuller/blood groove is used to lighten and strenghten the blade.
The blades that don't have a fuller usually have a beefier center for the added strenght.

A U.S. M-1 Garand rifle is indeed a formidable weapon, and the training drills for the use of bayonets with the rifles included the rifle’s buttstock (which made for a reasonably effective club in hand to hand combat). With the second generation of bayonets for the rifle using the shorter flat/tapered blade of the M-1 carbine’s M-4 bayonet. With unlike the much longer bayonets of previous generations, the short bladed types not subject to as much deflection (bending), or as much of a weight penalty.

With I think the much earlier experiences of the French heavy calvary perhaps illustrating some of the considerations that military usage has sometimes forced upon designers. Because after going through different models of swords, the French elected to use the Model AN IX which was a (tapered) flat bladed sword. But the sword had too many problems. And they went back to a multiple fullered blade with the Model AN XI. With one of its successors, the Model 1854, having some really deep fullers (IMO) that contributed to making a blade that had the required stiffness, but was still light enough to use effectively. With some of the deeply fullered Yataghan types of bayonets of the 19th century also I think showing the tradeoffs of stiffness versus weight.

PS: In the field we also used to use our bayonets for other things like digging, and opening things (etc.). Fred

[Scout]

Here is a great link on the subject............http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...zUklyGm-kghAFQ.............

Eric

Most interesting and excellent article. I could not agree more with the content. Thank you, I enjoyed reading that. Sums it up really well.

Interesting also, because it supports a lot of what I have stated (and with interesting new (to me) info added).

Firstly, to recruits already familiar with the concept of killing another man for a just cause: the idea further steels him for battle and instils a measure of blood-lust. Arguably its about conditioning a man to kill another – paper rifle targets don’t have the same effect.

In order to condition recruits to stab something.

The BS Historian also mentions swords. It reminded me of the 1796 Light Cavalry Sabres (commonly known as Blücher Sabres), that I have.

A few of mine:


They basically have one big fuller scooped out the entired length of the blade - bar the last couple of inches near the tip, which were deliberately made heavier for adding weight to the slashing, which were the main use of the 1796. Light blade, heavy tip made for fearsome slashing ability. The 1796 was known for hacking off limbs in a single stroke.

The results of the 1796 in use are horrific. So much so, that the enemy supposedly complained over the use of the sabre......but then soon after started using it themselves.

Soon the British forces and the major continental armies all used the 1796 - it was just that effective with a re-inforced heavy tip which came crashing down on the target with ensuing horrific wounds.

The Germans kept using it well into the 20. century.

The 1796 is primarily a curved slashing sabre - arguably one of the most effective designs ever.

Though called a light sabre, it would have been a strain to wield in battle for prolonged periods - especially when slashing - had it been heavier hence it was lightened using fullers to both strenghten and lighten the blade.

The fullers lightening the blade also made for added force in regards to the swing and the heavy re-inforced last few inches near the tip.

Giant scooped out grooves in a sabre used for slashing. Clearly not 'blood grooves,' as its a slashing sabre.