Introduction
A series of articles about the already legendary "three-line", which pleased the visitors of the site "Voennoye Obozreniye" V. O. Shpakovsky, formally completed. The work certainly deserves attention. Moreover, not only for the amount of material that was processed and presented. Not everyone will tackle the topic on which, without exaggeration, volumes of literature have been written in order to supplement it with new materials and conclusions. Of course, there are, let's say, controversial points in the article. But, firstly, they do not affect the overall positive assessment, and secondly, they allow us to continue the discussion of a rather interesting topic.
One such moment is the bayonet and its effect on rifle combat. There is a lot of information on this topic. Moreover, rare islets are reliable. But there are a lot of versions that are far from the truth, and sometimes even fantastic. Even on Wikipedia.
Therefore, it is interesting to consider this issue in more detail. To support the tone of the article under discussion, we will try to rely on primary sources.
Introduction
So, we have the next paragraph. Let's split it for convenience.
A) “Note that both the infantry and the dragoon rifle were required to shoot with a bayonet on the barrel, and when firing, he had to be close to the rifle, since otherwise the point of impact of the bullets was greatly shifted to the side.
In this part, everything is logical.
B) The bayonet adjoined the Mosin rifle on the right side of the barrel. If the bayonet is installed from below, as it is often shown in old Soviet films, then at the moment of a shot the powder gases will outrun the bullet, partially reflect from the bayonet and "take" it upwards, and so, under their influence, it went to the left. That is, the bayonet played the role of a derivation compensator. The fact is that the barrel of our rifle had a “right” rifling pitch, in contrast to the “left” “Lebel” one. And the "left" step of the rifling with a bayonet on the right would give an even greater bullet shift to the left. In Lebel's rifle, the derivation was compensated by shifting the front sight to the left by 0.2 points ("point" - 1 tenth of a line, a line - 1 tenth of an inch), which would have required additional and high-precision operations during the assembly of the rifle, if it weren't for a bayonet!"
Not everything is logical here. Why the powder gases, reflected from the bayonet installed from below, will take the bullet to the left, is still a mystery. Logic dictates that from a bayonet mounted below, the gases will be reflected upward, and the bullet will be taken upward. And it is not clear why the French, instead of installing a bayonet on the other side, resorted to such a complex method to compensate for the derivation.
Let's try to find the answers.
Chapter one.
Why did the "3-line rifle of the 1891 model of the year" shoot with a bayonet?
Let's start by considering which document determines how to fire a particular weapon correctly. And in the Russian Empire, in the USSR, and in modern Russia, such a document is the same: "Manual on the shooting business." The only difference is that in the Russian Empire the document had a slightly different name: "Manual for training in shooting."
This is the official document that regulates the training of personnel in the use of weapons.
Except for minor details, this document contains the following sections:
Arrangement of a sample of weapons, handling, care and conservation.
General information.
Disassembly and assembly.
Appointment and arrangement of parts and mechanisms, accessories and ammunition.
The work of parts and mechanisms.
Shooting delays and how to fix them.
Weapon care, storage and conservation.
Inspection and preparation for shooting.
Bringing to normal combat.
Shooting techniques and rules.
Applications (technical characteristics of weapons and ammunition, ballistic tables, rates of ammunition consumption for hitting targets in various conditions, etc.).
It is precisely the section "Bringing to normal combat" that determines the procedure for zeroing in the weapon. The utmost attention is always paid to this process. The quality of bringing the weapon to normal combat has a significant impact on the results of firing. Therefore, all weapons in subunits must always be brought to normal combat, and have verified sights. Shooting from weapons that have not been brought to normal combat, and with incorrect sights, is strictly prohibited, because this leads not only to poor results in shooting, but also has a negative effect on the morale of the personnel, causing him to disbelieve in the power of his weapon.
"Manual for shooting rifles, carbines and revolvers." 1916 year.
"Manual on shooting". 1941 year.
"Manual on shooting" 1954.
The closest study of all these instructions leads to two discoveries.
The first - despite the fact that between the first and last books more than fifty years, their content does not differ much. Sometimes the style is the same. There is a clear continuity.
The second discovery is even more interesting - there is not a word about the need to shoot a rifle with a bayonet. I emphasize - "shoot a rifle with a bayonet." In support of this, I quote in full Chapter V NSD-38 "Checking the battle of rifles and bringing them to normal combat."
"Rules for bringing a rifle to precise combat" 1933.
In this document, the same, but in even more detail. And here, too, there is not a word about the need for zeroing with a bayonet. However, when reading all these documents, there is a strong impression that the people who wrote them for more than fifty years were sure of one immutable truth - the bayonet is always present on the rifle. Even when the rifle is stored in a pyramid. And you can take it off in special cases, for example, when traveling in wagons. Moreover, if, due to special circumstances, you had to remove the bayonet, there is nowhere to put it. The manual recommends putting it on the ramrod. Exclusively as a temporary measure before joining again.
We find confirmation of this in the section "Inspection of rifles before testing" of the "Rules for bringing a rifle to precise combat."
The "Rules …" explicitly states the need to check the condition of the bayonet before bringing the rifle to normal combat. That is, it goes without saying, since you have in your hands ready for battle.
"3-line rifle, model 1891" - the bayonet is present a priori.
Let us now turn to another category of documents - combat manuals. The combat manual is an official governing document that establishes the fundamentals of the combat activity of troops. It defines the goals, tasks, methods, principles of the use of troops, the main provisions for the organization and conduct of hostilities. True, the term "combat regulations" itself appeared already in the Red Army, but this does not change the essence.
At the time of the adoption of the "3-line rifle of the 1891 model of the year", this document was in force in the Russian army.
This document describes in detail the tactical methods of action in the battle of the company and battalion, and the methods of training personnel in these actions. It is indicated which commands are given and when. A tactical technique such as a bayonet strike is described separately. But there is not a word about when the bayonet is supposed to join the rifle, when to remove it. And then there is a chapter on how to put rifles in the box.
As is clear from the text, it is impossible to carry out this procedure without a bayonet. That is, the infantryman's bayonet had to be constantly attached to the rifle.
And what about other types of troops, for example, cavalry? The cavalry, while sitting in the saddle, could not attach the bayonet. But as soon as she dismounted, that's all, to join the bayonets. In this charter, a separate chapter is devoted to the dismounting procedure. We will only be interested in dragoons, since other types of cavalry were armed with a Cossack version of the rifle, which did not have a bayonet.
I think that the facts considered are quite enough to draw the following conclusion. Infantry and dragoon rifles were fired with a bayonet not because it was impossible to shoot from them without a bayonet, but because the use of these rifles was simply not envisaged without a bayonet. If, for some reason, it was necessary to use a rifle without a bayonet, it was simply necessary to bring it to normal combat, but without a bayonet. By the way, the sniper version of the rifle was aimed at - without a bayonet.
