MilitaryForums.co.uk

This may be a rather lame post mods, for which i apologise. But I was wondering whether bayonet training is taught at lympstone, if so where/how is it conducted and at what stage in the 32 weeks? it seems a bit overt and non-tactical to me. I may be wrong but I thought that the Marines were more concerned with 'silent-strikes' and stealth type raids. Or both?

Also, how much unarmed combat is taught, does it take up a significant amount of the training schedule or are you taught just a few basic moves.

These questions are directed at anyone who has past expereince or current, of training.

Kind regards

Sykes.

Train hard, fight easy!

So far we have had a few sessions focusing on stance, punches, movement, and grapples. Fairly basic but effective moves and holds.

Felias wrote:So far we have had a few sessions focusing on stance, punches, movement, and grapples. Fairly basic but effective moves and holds.

Punches?! Punching's bad, mmmmmm'kay...

Reason being if you punch someone your likely to break bones in your hand, if you break your hand your not gonna be able to operate your weapon to well. Or your rifle for that matter

Besides elbows are better: faster more efficient movement with 60% more power that hits your bod with a sharper point.

Spooky wrote:Besides elbows are better: faster more efficient movement with 60% more power that hits your bod with a sharper point.

Yeah until you hit your funny bone!

from what we were told by the PTI on PRMC, the unarmed combat starts off with basics like how to stand and how to clench your fist, he did say though that it starts to get more advanced in the latter stages and you learn things like, how to strangle someone and how to pop their shoulder out of their socket, and other things that really messes someone up. sounds like fun

'On Guard'
Then on the order 'Lunge' ......You lunge at the straw target
and the paunched rabbits guts or chicken giblets fall out all
twisted round your bayonet and your oppos see you spew up.
Lovely jubbley and 'Oh what a surprise'.
Now is this a bite or does it happen ?
You have been warned.

lol, our pt told us that if we get to the stage where we have to do hand to hand combat, then you some how screwed up terrible, because even 10 feet away you should still be able to shoot them!

I am just old fashioned and we took bayonet fighting seriously.
My instructors were WW2 cdos. So I am really a crusty old fart !
Sometimes one needs the bayonet. Fantastic job done by PWWR in
Iraq and they used the bayonet in section attacks.
Your instructor is not correct. Because you have to physically
close with the enemy does not mean everything has gone tits up.
Read some history on human wave attacks and positions possibly going
to be overrun.

Hankins wrote:lol, our pt told us that if we get to the stage where we have to do hand to hand combat, then you some how screwed up terrible, because even 10 feet away you should still be able to shoot them!

Next time your in ask him why the MoD still buys bayonets then, and refer him to Chas's (whats the 's for Chas, Chas?!) post up there.

Spooky wrote:
and refer him to Chas's (whats the 's for Chas, Chas?!) post up there.

Just Chas'

For PWWR read PWRR 'mea culpa'. I had the honour to serve with the
Queen's Regt- HSF as an officer. Now the RM had two chummy regiments
The Queen's Regt and the Argyles. Now the Queens amalgamated with
the Royal Hampshire Regt. to become The Princess of Wales Royal Regt. i.e.
the PWRR. And they were fantastic with the bayonet in Iraq.
So it is utter nonsense to say that the bayonet is outmoded or never required.
I served several years with Royal, (Mne + Officer) the Colonial Police and with the HSF.

Mike The Sceptic wrote:

Spooky wrote:
and refer him to Chas's (whats the 's for Chas, Chas?!) post up there.

Just Chas'

Nope, it's chas's since chas isn't a plural, it's just a singular that happens to end in s. You only use the apostrophe by itself if you're talking about the possessive of a plural that ends in s.


My that was fun..

Brian- wrote:

Mike The Sceptic wrote:

Spooky wrote:
and refer him to Chas's (whats the 's for Chas, Chas?!) post up there.

Just Chas'

Nope, it's chas's since chas isn't a plural, it's just a singular that happens to end in s. You only use the apostrophe by itself if you're talking about the possessive of a plural that ends in s.


My that was fun..

Cheers, my brain hurts now!

Brian- wrote:

Mike The Sceptic wrote:

Spooky wrote:
and refer him to Chas's (whats the 's for Chas, Chas?!) post up there.

Just Chas'

Nope, it's chas's since chas isn't a plural, it's just a singular that happens to end in s. You only use the apostrophe by itself if you're talking about the possessive of a plural that ends in s.


My that was fun..

SPOTTER

Spooky, are you in Recruit training because if you are then i would love to see you ask our PTI that sarcastic comment you made. Our PTI was a section commander in Iraq, one of the first troops onto the Al Faw peninsula and I would reckon he knows what hes talking about. Its ok Hankins 927 troop forever!!