If someone came running into a battle with a sword, it would be mildly effective

[Harm94]

Gun nut here. A British soldier got hit in the back with a 7.62x39 and got knocked over, said it hit hard. I would fear both.

Even 1 stupid terrorist would shoot you dead

very stupid terrorist indeed

[Ad Bot]

[SpitFir3Tornado³]

I don't think you realize what a "battlefield" is now-a-days. It's typically 500m between two parties, one is typically a military and the other is typically a radicalist group. Radicalists groups typically will be using mock-soviet weaponry, commonly a Chinese Type 56. If one of the "soldiers" from the military group charges the radicalists with a sword, he will rapidly be in a fairly innacurate but still likely effective hail of 7.62x39mm rounds. He has to run 500m, which in typically military gear would be difficult, and would take about 1 minute. The radicalists have 1 minute to shoot him. They will likely hit him multiple times, causing broken bones, internal bleeding, if hit in unprotected areas, bullet wounds and likely death within that minute.


It wouldn't be effective at all. That's why we stopped using swords commonly as soon as we discovered effective guns.

[Tomcat]

I don't think you realize what a "battlefield" is now-a-days. It's typically 500m between two parties, one is typically a military and the other is typically a radicalist group. Radicalists groups typically will be using mock-soviet weaponry, commonly a Chinese Type 56. If one of the "soldiers" from the military group charges the radicalists with a sword, he will rapidly be in a fairly innacurate but still likely effective hail of 7.62x39mm rounds. He has to run 500m, which in typically military gear would be difficult, and would take about 1 minute. The radicalists have 1 minute to shoot him. They will likely hit him multiple times, causing broken bones, internal bleeding, if hit in unprotected areas, bullet wounds and likely death within that minute.


It wouldn't be effective at all. That's why we stopped using swords commonly as soon as we discovered effective guns.

ironically a british units mounted a bayonet charge and succesfully overcame the enemy (insurgents) with little to no casualties.

[Man 2]

I suppose if you got the drop on your enemy, it might. I can't imagine modern military training covers swordplay.

That's actually a really interesting concept. Makes me think.

[SlayerZ99]

shoot the man running at you with a sword?

The idea of swords or daggers arent too old.

My father trained with bayonets in basic training

[.Atlas]

Glad to see I'm not the only one who laughed my ass off when I read the op.

Army and marines are still trained with bayonettes and how to defend against them. A charging melee combatant would be put down quickly and with little panic by any one with any sort of training.

[SlayerZ99]

If you were in the military and in combat and you saw someone running at you with a sword and you panicked, you probably should be in combat.

[TristanLuigi]

Why is this thread alive
it should be dead

[shyGriff]

Why is this thread alive
it should be dead

then lock it

[Mr.jacksaunt]

quality topic op

[.Atlas]

Fun fact. The armor plates american soldiers wear overseas are rated to stop two or three rifle rounds from a standard ak before being considered unusable for combat. Recently, troops have begun carrying extra plates, adding another 20 lbs per plate to an all ready heavy kit.