The US Army developed the M3 fighting knife in 1943 because they felt the troops needed a combat knife.
The M4, M5, M6 and M7 bayonets are simply M3 fighting knives with attachments for their respective guns.
The troops broke them by the case-load.
Why?
Because the troops also needed utility knives.
The USMC acknowledged this by issuing the Ka-Bar. It's kind of a mid-point between a utility and fighting knife.
The M9 bayonet appears to have dropped all pretense of being a fighting knife in favor of utility functions, even to the point of compromising its functionality as a fighting bayonet. It's function as a pointy thing on the end of a rifle to prod prisoners is uncompromised.
The USMC OKC-3S is more optimized for fighting. Kind of the philosophy of the ka-bar applied to a bayonet. Good as a fighting knife, good as a fighting bayonet, good for utility. That it was best at some of the categories is a plus, but not part of the goals.
I don't know if the Ka-bar is still issued alongside the bayonet or not. I know I've seen lots of pictures of Jarheads toting both.
25 July 2018
1 comment:
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I was not issued a bayonet by virtue of having a -203. But I carried a USMC marked Ka-Bar that my Jarhead cousin took with him when he was a FAC for 1st Mar Div in 2003.
ReplyDelete