Kukri Bayonet ??

Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
230
I always thought khuks were for choppin' and bayonets were fore pokin', but I guess I could have been wrong. :confused: Go to ebay and do a search on "kukri bayonet" and see the item that comes up. Is it for real? Is/was it a joke/gag item when it was made? :confused: Someone's bastardization/nightmare? Ain't never seen nuttin' like dat afore.

James
 
Its fake, modern mass production, angle grinders & welders etc. You can order them buy the thousand.

There come & go on ebay all the time. Thats just a $2 mk.3 blade welded onto a $1 reproduction brown bess socket.

The Victoreans made beetter fakes than that, at least they used old parts!

Thier were real kukri bayonets in Nepal & for the East India company 175 years ago.

But they dont look like that. But they were a workable design.

Spiral
 
Hmm, if you had a real khukuri bayonet, I imagine it would function almost like a glaive...
 
To use I think they would be rather like the old Yataghan bayonets the English,French & Germans used commonly in the 1850 to 1880 period.

Spiral
 
I also thought that bayonet is for poking, but kukri bayonet? Spiraltwista, pls elaborate further on how to use khukri as bayonet. Thanks in advance.
 
Ill dig out a picture for you tommorow of real ones, they were used to stab.

But incedently ww2 & earlier military kukris will stab as well as chop, they have lots of distal taper & points like needles when originaly made. it is recorded that in WW2 in Burma amongst some units it was commen to stab at the guts first then go for the decapitation blow to follow in hand to hand fighting.

Spiral
 
Heres a real one.

Nepal.jpg





Spiral
 
Thanks Spiral - the blade IMO looks like traditional Malay weapons such as Achehnese Rencong, Tumbuk lada or sewah. And yes, they are one hell of stabbers as well as disembowellers.
 
email sent on spiral bayonet

there is a rumour that the 2/24th carried them on their martinis at rourke's drift on the 22/23rd of january, 1879 & were the main reason that 150 men repulsed the attack of 4000 zulu's.
 
email sent on spiral bayonet

there is a rumour that the 2/24th carried them on their martinis at rourke's drift on the 22/23rd of january, 1879 & were the main reason that 150 men repulsed the attack of 4000 zulu's.


Sadley its not mine, :( it belongs to a bayonet collector. ;)

I have never seen evidence of anyone other than the Nepal army or East india Company {British.} gurkhas using them. All though i am sure some Indian state forces could have had them as well.

Spiral
 
email sent on spiral bayonet

there is a rumour that the 2/24th carried them on their martinis at rourke's drift on the 22/23rd of january, 1879 & were the main reason that 150 men repulsed the attack of 4000 zulu's.


2000-2400 .45 rounds a minute might have had something to do with it. :D
 
2000-2400 .45 rounds a minute might have had something to do with it. :D

considerably more than that & a couple of field pieces didn't help at isandlwhana just before that. of course bad tactics by his lordship there really lost the battle. also, it was a good example of the bean counters effect on a battle, while it was true that they did not issue screwdrivers to open the ammo boxes, it was also true that the boxes could easily be opened with a rifle butt and a bayonet. the bean counters making them requisition and sign for each round and turn in their used brass during the battle didn't help. and the relative thinness of the martini round casing caused jams after the rifle heated up & got a bit dirty, but the bean counters did save money on brass.
recent plots of spent brass on the battle field indicates the brits were too far forward and too spread out to support themselves & they were easily outflanked & wiped out while lord chelmsford ate his breakfast a few miles away with the rest of the troops, secure in the knowledge that no cowardly native rabble with spears could best his crack regiments.

it was a bit of a pyrric victory tho as the zulus lost 3000-4000 men against the british 1200 or so.

rourke's drift was a microcosm of future battles, the zulu king warned his brother to 1. do not cross the river into british territory which would lose them the moral high ground as the brits were the aggressors to start off. 2. do not attack fixed british positions as they'll massacre you before you get close enough to use your iklwa, which is basically what happened. most zulu's at rourkes drift were killed at over 300 yds. by accurate volley fire.

the zulus could just not support their losses, and no amount of courage could replace a soldier who had taken a life-time and a whole nations culture to train vs. british rifles & artillery that took at worst a few months to learn. eventually they were just out-resourced & couldn't kill brits fast enough. it would take the boers a few years later to do that. the brits would have lost that one if they hadn't invented concentration camps and started burning out boer villages and killing their women and children in the camps by not feeding them. not a high point in british history.
 
concentration camps . . . not a high point in british history.

See http://www.historyofcuba.com/gallery/gal10.htm. (Warning: not for the tender stomach.)

Spanish General Weyler gets pride of place for inventing "reconcentrados" in 1896. Others then used the approach of clearing an area of civilians, including the U.S. in the Philippines. Hard to match Weyler for, shall we say, "intensity" until we get to "modern" times.
 
Back
Top