>А мне запомнилось из мемуаров о Корейской войне - на вопрос, почему участники со стороны "войск ООН" уважительно относились к бойцам эфиопского батальона "Кагнью", ответ был таким - "при атаках коммунистов, особенно китайских добровольцев, они принимали штыковой бой. Остальные, как правило, пытались этого избежать"... А
>это уже начало 50-х, пистолетов-пулеметов с обеих сторон хватало, но штык ни с Мосинки, ни с Гаранда, никто не снимал...
Взгляд на применение штыка с американской стороны ВМВ на Тихоокеанском театре: http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/chapter1.htm
>Edged Weapons, Hand Actuated
>Although bayonets were attached to most Japanese rifles, they were not considered a primary cause of wounds. Among the 2,335 casualties studied in the Bougainville campaign, only 2 were listed as having had wounds caused by this weapon. A New Georgia-Burma casualty survey unit studied 393 casualties. Of 319 of these casualties that required hospitalization or that were killed in action, there were only 3 bayonet-wound cases. Two of these were accidentally inflicted with a U.S. bayonet, and in the third case the bayonet wound was secondarily inflicted following primary small arms wounds to the lower extremities. Notwithstanding this relatively small sampling of the total U.S. casualties incurred against the Japanese forces, it would appear that the bayonet was not a major, primary wound-producing weapon and that most bayonet and knife wounds were secondarily inflicted following a primary-missile wound. Infantry personnel through their personal experiences could probably reveal some variations as to the comp
2335 американских потерь, 2 штыковых.
393 потери, 3 штыковых, 2 из них - саморез собственным штыком, третий случай - добивание застреленного.
Таковой вот ближний бой в джунглях выходил.
