Who would win in Hand-hand combat?

JamesK

Active member
Now this is one of the many questions my cabin fevere striken brain has come up with while trying to seperate my self from the criminal element I once hung around with. Who would win in hand-hand combat between YOUR nations best trained soldier and a 12th or 13th century knight. Being that knights were the "elite" of that time. Who would win? Describe the situation. Dont affraid to be comical now! Mind you the rules are the knight has his full armor and sword while your soldier is equiped with what is usually used in hand to hand (i.e. rifle with bayonet, KABAR knife) so on and so on. Consider this a free writing assignment! What would occur?


P.S. Now this isnt really a military discussion I guess. Well in a way it is... So MODs please feel free to move it to the appropriate section, which in this time I can not figure out.
 
What idiot would use a knife in combat when he has a trenching tool. You can part some ones hair right down to the tip of their nose with a good blow from a shovel
 
Le - quite so. My cousin was the guy who did just that in Korea with the Argylls. Face to face along a trench . He is the responsible for the event in the books. He served from youth in Kenya and Korea, and returned to us as a sergeant, mentioned in despatches. He was a great fearsome soldier , highly respected by all when sober. But he drank a lot and sometimes woke up screaming when he slept, reportedly. He lost his stripes one by one and ended up with a dishonourable discharge and 18 months in Shepton Mallet for a drunken brawl in town after he had despatched me back to barracks early as he could see his company mates spoiling for trouble.

He returned to Glasgow and for years had to deal with challenges to his reputation as a fighting man from the idiots, and one day opened his front door to be faced by 2 guys with a shotgun. He said he had to wrap the shotgun arounf their necks and was arrested for attempted murder but that came to nothing.

And then, thank God, he found the ideal job for him - on the oil rigs. The last letter I had from him I still have - he had given up the drink completely and was a grandfather to a little girl.

He had been one of the main reasons why I had chosen my regiment when conscripted. His dad and my stepfather had served together in India but his dad died as a young soldier.

I don't think the armour would have bothered him - he was very very fast on his feet and ferocious, although dressed in his clothes you would not
have recognised that, he was lean and mean with a great smile and sense of humour. If he had put the armoured one down he would have called for the crane to lift him up again.
 
If you can plant a knife in the neck, it's over. I quick snappy hit with the butt of the rifle to the head and then planting your bayonet where ever it see fit.
 
Consider a knife of any kind as a last resort weapon. If you have something to use as a club, use it until you are actually grappling with the enemy. Then a boot knife will come in handy.
 
Do the British and US armies still train in bayonet warfare, and bayonet charges?

The regiments of the Highland Brigade, when I served, specifically trained in wide single lines of bayonet charges, screaming and firing en masse one bullet on each individual command of 'Bullets' as we went. Hence the accusation aimed at our enemies of 'They don't like it up 'em'. I am talking early 1950's here.

Does such training still happen? Of course, the wail of the bagpipes didn't add to the comfort of the recipients.
 
Last edited:
They do, or at least did when I was in.
However, I don't know if I would actually say train, more like do it a little or enough to where I would say it is more of a familiarization course.
 
OK, thanks. And do they still entail learning the five killing points of bayonet charges?

As a matter of interest, My father-in-law, a 30 year Sergeant -Major, used to tell me that it was often preferable to damage opponents, rather than going for a kill, hoping to leave the enemy with extra manouvrability problems.
 
Well, I would say your Father was right but of course, depending on the mission. If you want to take someone out quietly, having them scream in agony would kind of make your mission look like the three stooges were in charge. As for the details of the training, this depended on the Instructor and his "true" knowledge/competence of what he was teaching.
 
Yep. I guess we was fortunate at that time in that in our forces were so many serving senior trainers from WW11 experience such as Arnheim and El Alamain, and Burma, Monte Casino , etc. etc. as well as D-day, and Korea, and our continual wars thereafter.
 
Last edited:
Whatever the case, Sgt Maj. Poppa's a good man and he deserves a big Thanks for being our ally, doing a good job and being a hardcharger.
 
Well thank you, and I know that he returned the compliment at the time. He was also a Champion (Bisley) shot, and eventually was training certain very specialised units in very specialised warfare, early days and hardly heard of at the time.
 
Well, did he bathe regularly?
If I skip a day or two or an hour in this heat, I'd be scarin ya too and I also promise you.
 
Last edited:
One of our "best" trained soldiers?
There are many different kinds of soldiers.

Also, there are many different kinds of people. Unless you know of the the individuals' exact physical and mental attributes, you cannot be 100% certain who'd win in a hand-to-hand fight.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top