Enfield # 9 Bayonet?

I think it was intended for the No4Mk2, but will fit all the No4 rifles.

The "spikes" of WW2 were not pretty enough after the war, and thus the No9 bayonet was made to have a blade format again, for the No4Mk2 rifle.

I may be slightly mislead...

Neal
 
Also, a blade is a much better useage than a spike, in all regards. The Austrians had it right I think, a bladed bayonet with the blade on the UPPER side. Designed to stick, and gut upwards. Very nasty, very effective.
 
The Austrian bayonet worked well for them because they developed a special bayonet drill to go with it.

With ours, it was BLOCK, followed by a down-and across SLASH bringing the rifle down almost to waist level, then THRUST, WITHDRAW and BUTTSTROKE.... which put you nicely back almost ready for your next BLOCK.

Nastiest bayonet work I ever saw in a film was in the NFB/BBC/CBC co-production GOING HOME, about a mutiny in one of the Welsh camps after the Great War. I have no idea who trained the 'Redcaps' in the film, but it was plain ugly. Movie also has a stripped Ross in it. Movie was shown exactly ONCE on Canadian television, then quietly withdrawn from circulation. Ask for it now and they'll tell you that it's "not available". They are, of course, lying: they are hiding it because it said some very ugly (and very true) things about the situation at that time..... no transport available to bring the Army back home, but every bottom was busy transporting Western Canadian grain to Europe for top dollar (it's only in the last couple of years that wheat has again reached the 1919 dollar price, and a dollar buys now what a nickel bought back then) and making money by the ton for the Right People. There HAS to be a bootleg copy out there SOMEWHERE that you can see. If so, let me know: mine got 'borrowed'!

Takes all kinds, I guess.

Have fun!
 
On the face of it, you would think that if market conditions were drawing so many ships into transporting grain from N.America to Europe, that would have led to a lot of ships travelling back the other way for another load of grain, and not particularly wanting to make the westward passage empty. And the liners that could carry large numbers of troops wouldn't have been great grain carriers anyway.
 
A ship travels a lot faster without a load.

AND it can take a week to load a ship with troops and their returning equipment, you have to have facilities to feed them and so forth. MUCH faster just to transport grain, load after load and let the troopies rot in the camps. After all, the Gummint was paying the troopies out of tax money; the money that was being made went to the people who were well-connected. Read up on it; it was a national scandal at the time and was one of the (many) reasons for the Strikes after the War.

Of course, strikers can always be dispersed with a couple of bursts of machine-gun fire. Just ask them in Winnipeg.

In Brandon, the Government didn't have machine-guns and men willing to use them at its disposal. Brandon had FIVE strikes and the OBU boys, many of them ex-troopies, shut the whole city down for weeks. Nineteen-nineteen was a very interesting year in a lot of ways.
 
Come to think on it, Elizabeth I actually did much the same thing at one point. She had an army and didn't have the money to pay them.

Simple solution: leave them in camps and let disease and starvation take care of most of them, pay the relatively-few survivors.

Anyone who thinks that Government is inherently benevolent has never read a history book.... or spoken with anyone 30 years older than themselves.
 
Thanks for that, smellie, it's a period of Canadian history I haven't looked at.

And "anyone who thinks that Government is inherently benevolent" doesn't include me.
 
101_6318.jpg


101_6320.jpg


POF91.jpg
 
Good to know we're all on the same side here.

And that is one BEAUTIFUL Number 4 and bayonet combo. Makes mine look positively shabby. Congrats!

Have fun!
 
Back
Top Bottom