M1/Bayonet Question
Rhino
guy" (replacement) walking across a field with his unit toward some
anticipated action. He announces that he is going to fix his bayonet but a
non-com informs him that, if he does so, his rifle will not fire straight.
They had no less than six official military advisers on Band of Brothers as
well as many armourers who are presumably very knowledgeable about these
things so I assume that this is technically accurate. But I'm baffled. WHY
would the presence or absence of the bayonet affect the accuracy of the
weapon?
The scenes make it clear how the bayonet attaches to the M1 and I can't see
anything that would cause inaccuracy in the rifle; it's not like the bayonet
is blocking the barrel in any way. My best guess is that the weight of the
bayonet may bias the sights in some way so that you aim higher or lower than
you otherwise would but I'm not sure if that even makes sense. I'm not a gun
person.
Does anyone here know why a bayonet would affect the accuracy of an M1
rifle? Or did the technical advisers simply miss this mistake?
--
Rhino
Lloyd Olson
news:j33inj$sph$1...@news.datemas.de...
>
> Does anyone here know why a bayonet would affect the accuracy of an M1
> rifle? Or did the technical advisers simply miss this mistake?
>
> --
> Rhino
I believe the difference is if you sighted the rifle in without it, with it
on changes the barrel harmonics, and where the bullet goes.
james
wrote:
Band of Brothers is based on Stephen Ambrose's book, which in turn is
based on the recollections of members of the unit.
My assumption therefore is that that statement, whether not it is
actually true, may have been common at that time.
Similarly on several occasions during the series, the troops complain
about getting hammered by 88s, when they are not in a direct line to
German AT guns. They are getting hit by indirect fire from various
types of German artillery, and not 88mm AA/AT guns, but thats what
they thought/said at the time, so thats what is being used for the
film's dialogue. Similarly the attack at Brecort on DDay was against
105mm artillery guns, but they were referred to as 88s.
My guess is that it may have been "common knowledge" about the bayonet
and accuracy, and the incident was used to show how raw the recruits
were. I don't think it would effect the accuracy per se, but would
change the balance of the weapon. If you were used to firing it always
without the bayonet, the subtle change might throw the user off.
Bill Shatzer
Apparently it is possible for the weight of the bayonet to alter the
rife barrel's harmonic vibration and thus affect accuracy, particularly
at extreme ranges.
I don't know this for a fact but I seem to remeber reading it somewhere.
Dave Smith
> Does anyone here know why a bayonet would affect the accuracy of an M1
> rifle? Or did the technical advisers simply miss this mistake?
I'll have to watch that segment with the sarcasm detector turned on.
It's like like a high degree of accuracy is going to be expected from
most riflemen in a situation like that. The bayonet would weigh about
3/4 pound, which is about 8% of the weight of the rifle, and attached to
the far end of the barrel, which is going to through off the balance and
make it harder to arm. It's also going to be bouncing up and down with
the recoil. That is a significant amount of extra weight way out there,
and when it goes up after a shot, it is going to go back down harder
than the muzzle of a rifle without a bayonet. But throwing off the
accuracy?.... I doubt it.
Rhino
of a friend who is a career soldier in the Canadian Forces and he said the
following:
"The weight of a bayonet or any other accessory on the end of the barrel
will physically change the point of balance and thus the user's hold on the
weapon (it isn't pointing quite where you think it is). There is also a
slight bending movement to the barrel itself (many accessory rails are not
attached to the barrel, so the Surefire flashlight or laser pointer on
modern weapons do not bend the barrel), and the harmonics (i.e the way the
barrel vibrates when the weapon is fired) change, disturbing the interior
ballistics (the path the bullet takes inside the barrel). Now each of these
changes is very minor in of itself, and a marksman or well trained rifleman
can compensate, especially if they are shooting in a controlled manner like
on a range. Combat shooting is anything but controlled, so the ability to
compensate is much reduced. Perhaps the biggest factor is the weight and
balance issue, which must have been a b**ch when 22" sword bayonets were
common."
It looks like the non-com was absolutely right in warning the "new guy" that
the bayonet would affect the accuracy of his M1.
--
Rhino
Shawn Wilson
wrote:
> It looks like the non-com was absolutely right in warning the "new guy" that
> the bayonet would affect the accuracy of his M1.
Well... yes and no. Yes, a sniper would notice the difference.
Whatsisname from Band of Brothers* who always seemed to hit with his
old, worn rifle would notice the difference. New guy, fresh out of
Basic firing in conditions that make a bayonet on the end a good idea
(ie likely close quarters, not sniping at range).? I doubt it. The
difference isn't THAT much.
*I JUST finished listening to the audiobook of that, of course I have
read the book book and seen the 'movie' as well. The audiobook
specifically is most excellent.
Alan Nordin
> Whatsisname from Band of Brothers*
Darrell "Shifty" Powers. He died recently.
I've read the book and seen the series. For me, the best part was the
interviews with the actual soldiers that was done as part of the
series.
Alan
Rhino
news:f2aca003-3ba3-4502...@w28g2000yqw.googlegroups.com...
I still remember the first time I saw the series. Initially, I didn't
realize that the guys who were being interviewed were the actual Easy
Company survivors. I just thought they were other WW II veterans who were
reminiscing about combat to bring a bit of gravitas to the presentation.
Then the details of what they were saying started to penetrate and I
realized that these must be Easy Company men. But since the actors
themselves didn't resemble the men they were playing, it wasn't until the
end that you realized who each of the older men were.
This is definitely my all-time favourite miniseries.
--
Rhino
james
wrote:
But since the actors
> themselves didn't resemble the men they were playing, it wasn't until the
> end that you realized who each of the older men were.
>
they were recruited into easy company, you'd find there are
resemblences between the actors and the young real life members of
Easy.
James
Stephen Gluck
IMO I believe it would through the sight picture off. The M1 has a
front sight and a reticle at the rear. The sight picture is usually
adjusted for accuracy at 50 or 100 meters that is the windage and
ekevation is set to hit a target accurately at that distance. The
aiming pointy is adjusted by aiming higher or lower to allow for
distance changes. the protruding blade of the bayonet blade might
interfere with the sight picture. An old adage is when you hear " fix
bayonets" keep one round in the cxhamber.
Andrew Chaplin
news:tdna67t793jadv8i1...@4ax.com:
> The M1 has a front sight and a reticle at the rear
Perhaps we are divided by a common language, but as I understand it the
Garand has a blade front sight and an aperture rear sight.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
GFH
wrote:
> Stephen Gluck <sglu...@verizon.net> wrote innews:tdna67t793jadv8i1...@4ax.com:
>
> > The M1 has a front sight and a reticle at the rear
>
> Perhaps we are divided by a common language, but as I understand it the
> Garand has a blade front sight and an aperture rear sight.
The M1 I used had an aperture rear sight.
GFH
Stephen Gluck
<ab.ch...@yourfinger.rogers.com> wrote:
>Stephen Gluck <sgl...@verizon.net> wrote in
>news:tdna67t793jadv8i1...@4ax.com:
>
>> The M1 has a front sight and a reticle at the rear
>
>Perhaps we are divided by a common language, but as I understand it the
>Garand has a blade front sight and an aperture rear sight.
Yes we are divided by a comon language but I will accept yours as
being correct. In either case hitting a target with the bayonet
attached is much more difficult. I used the M-14 while in the military
and taught basic M-1 training to the ARVN in another war. I liked both
weapons although the M-1 was far less prome to jamming than the M-14.
As I remember it they both had similar sights.
Dave Smith
> IMO I believe it would through the sight picture off. The M1 has a
> front sight and a reticle at the rear.