Cutlass for the Marines

[Xerxeskingofking]

I like your idea of the Vilani tradition, but right now we have body armour that withstands blows from bladed weapons and handguns, so improving armour isn't likely to change the equations significantly.



Not with a cutlass, but the bayonet is still in use. Royal Marines I believe (British, Belgian, Dutch). I'm not sure about the US Marine Corps or Russian Naval Infantry.

the bayonet is still part of basic training for all arms in the british army and standard issue for troops going on tour. I've taken mine with me both times I went to afgan, and I'm a REMF. it sat at the bottom of my bag for 6 months both times, but I had it, and had the option to mount it if I needed too. as far as I know, the US army is the same.

However, I know the RAF personnel I was working with had never even seen a bayonet, let alone use one, so it's not a given.


but we havn't been issued swords as standard since.... English civil war? before 1700, at least.

 

[Reban]

but we havn't been issued swords as standard since.... English civil war? before 1700, at least.

The Rifles had "sword bayonets" up until the 1870s-ish.

They filled or created the niche "really-big-bayonet/kinda-small-sword"



EDIT: Actually bandsmen and pioneers were also issued swords into the mid 1800s.

 

[atpollard]

but we havn't been issued swords as standard since.... English civil war? before 1700, at least.

Which is probably what has kept us from expanding off this rock into a proper Star Empire!
How can Vilanni scouts possibly waste time on a people who can't even fight with a cutlass. :file_28:

 

[Kaeto]

When I went through U.S. Navy boot camp in 1981 they instructed us in the use of the cutlass. I currently have an 1860 Union Navy cutlass that is identical to the one I trained with.

Reban They issued Medical officers swords until 1865 as well. The last known use of swords and lances in combat was during the German attack on Poland when the Polish Cavalry fought the Wehrmacht with them during WW II.

 

[Reban]

Reban They issued Medical officers swords until 1865 as well. The last known use of swords and lances in combat was during the German attack on Poland when the Polish Cavalry fought the Wehrmacht with them during WW II.

Thats a good point, but in the case of officers including medical officers the sword is as much a badge of rank as a useful weapon.

However the cavalry sword is a good case in point (do you see what I did there :rofl. The Pattern 1908 and 1912 British Cavalry Swords are often cited as the pinnacle of sword technology because it was optimized perfectly for the job it did; thrusting with the point from the saddle of a cavalry horse.

So here's the thing about the "Marine Cutlass", it must be the best tool for the job.

But from this thread there's no exact agreement on what that job is. Maybe we can assume some things and see what its useful for. If its defined as a cutlass it probably has a short slightly curved blade. It probably uses some advanced materials. There's probably a handguard and its probably big enough for use with a gloved hand (spacesuit or battledress). There's probably a ring for a lanyard to stop it floating away in zero-g.

Curved blade says its useful for cutting and slashing, but most cutlasses come to a point that can be used for thrusting, however its short so you have to be in close. The handguard can be used for bludgeoning or punching. On the subject of bludgeoning you can also use the flat or side of the blade.

So that optimizes it for what?.......

 

[aramis]

So that optimizes it for what?.......

Port Guard Detail. The slung rifle is discouragement for the serious threats, the cutlass for the rabble who simply hate the impies...

 

[Reban]

Port Guard Detail. The slung rifle is discouragement for the serious threats, the cutlass for the rabble who simply hate the impies...

Which is where my personal take on the cutlass as a security and/or public order and riot control weapon comes from.



"When the Imperial marines arrive its all over"...... unless

 

[Ulsyus]

However, I know the RAF personnel I was working with had never even seen a bayonet, let alone use one, so it's not a given.

Civilians in uniform they are. Did you really expect them to know how to fight short of throwing their officers in the general direction of the enemy at high speed?

The Rifles had "sword bayonets" up until the 1870s-ish.

They filled or created the niche "really-big-bayonet/kinda-small-sword"

Some of the bayonets used in WW1 were sized pretty impressively. The cavalry charge at Beersheba in 1917 say the guys on horses using their bayonets as small swords from horseback

 

[sabredog]

However the cavalry sword is a good case in point (do you see what I did there :rofl. The Pattern 1908 and 1912 British Cavalry Swords are often cited as the pinnacle of sword technology because it was optimized perfectly for the job it did; thrusting with the point from the saddle of a cavalry horse.

The US Pattern 1913 Saber designed by Patton was designed for cutting and thrusting both, on horseback as well as on foot. The blade is straight but has a good edge for the cut, and a strong cross section for the thrust. It looks a lot like a modern sport fencing saber (which takes its lighter form from this particular weapon), and having used those for nearly 15 years competitively I can tell you the argument over what part of the sword is best to stick and opponent by isn't over yet.

When I first learned to fence with sabre you had to know the same thrusts and parries for them that you learned with foil or epee. Judging for sabre was done without the electronics (only epee and foil used them) so thrusts were as important as the cuts. It wasn't until the electronic scoring was perfected for sabres that thrusting was dropped from that form and only cuts used.

If you ask fencers in the type about it you get into a quite heated argument depending on how old they are: around my age and we think the point was more important...younger guys think only the edge is best. I imagine this sort of thing will persist into the far future when the Imperial Marines have yet another Board commissioned to study the problem and come up with yet another definitive sword for its troops.

 

[Epee]

The same argument goes way back too; at least to the Renessance fencing manuals. The general concensus is that a thrust is more deadly yet a deep cut or slash is more disabling. However, a thrust takes less energy / strength to be effective and is harder to block than a slash.

The reasoning is; a really deep cut severs muscle and tendon rendering the limb useless although reasonable medical treatment can likely save the victims life. A thrust may pierce a lung or abdominal organ and result in the victim's death but still allow them enough active time to injure the attacker.

Naturally this is speaking in generalities...

 

[Reban]

The reasoning is; a really deep cut severs muscle and tendon rendering the limb useless although reasonable medical treatment can likely save the victims life. A thrust may pierce a lung or abdominal organ and result in the victim's death but still allow them enough active time to injure the attacker.

Naturally this is speaking in generalities...

There's a thing too; the cut in Traveller more than likely has to cut through either hard armor or though fabric/plastics used in vacc suits and combat armour rather than the clothing of the Renaissance era.

The same argument could be made against the thrust with the point (especially if the clothing is protection against ballistic threats such as micro meteors or projectiles from weapons).

On the other hand vacc suits might be more vulnerable to a slashing attacks against exposed fittings like pipes, seals, etc.

Really might it be better to look further back to the medieval great sword and its crushing attacks against armoured opponents? Equally the humble billhook might be more useful than the cutlass.

 

[aramis]

There's also the argument against the percussive cut in that it leads to the parry-molinet, which risks bystanders and furniture far more than the parry-riposte.

And also, arguments for the tip slash, especially to the face, as being superior for blinding while much reduced risk of killing... but those are mostly from duellists, rather than those interested in efficient defense; the whole schlager school s 18th C face carving at its finest, and is that argument taken to ridiculous extremes.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

bear in mind a large cut along a fabic suit limb in vacumn may result in a much more effective decompression than a puncture wound might.

I can't comment on all rule sets. but In MgT a standard cutlass is perfectly able to deal damage through a civvie vac suit (2d6+4 damage (ave of 11) vs TL 12 suit armour of 6. not sure how armour works in other systems, but MgT it reduces damage by Armour value .)

So, in a boarding action at sufficiently close quarters, it's actually more effective than a snub pistol (3d6-3 in MGT)

emphasis on "sufficiently close quarters"

 

[sabredog]

It all depends, as does everything technical, in your definition.

An effective cut is not just a quick chop or hack like you're using a cleaver or ax. When attacking infantry from horseback the cavalry used different weapons depending on how they used the weapons and how that particular type of cavalry was used.

Heavy cavalry used brute force from boot to boot charges of heavy horse to smash through the infantry and they used relatively straight (or completely so) heavy sabres to chop down on infantry as they forced their way through. They didn't try to stick around to clean up after, and they had to have something heavy enough to get through a shako, leather pack and bedroll, and possibly a blocking musket. Nothing fancy was needed. A straight sword also made it easier to spear infantry past all that, but it had the risk of sticking in the body and gear and not allowing the weapon to be with drawn as the trooper rose past - leading to getting dragged out of the saddle or breaking your wrist. So the point wasn't used so much until the British made a big deal of it in 1907 with the redesigned for "modern" cavalry sabre.

Light cavalry, like hussars and such, used more heavily curved sabres in a different technique - more of a draw cut than chop, against other light horse units. Yes, they sometimes engaged infantry, but mainly they tried to stay away from them unless they were giving chase to a broken foot unit. Their mission was different, and accordingly their weapons were different. A draw cut is more effective in wounding than a chop, and the blade has to have a curve to it to make the cut really deep and long. The katana is perhaps an exception, but technique can make a difference there, too.

SO, with cutlasses and sabres we need to determine the type of cut used before going at it comparing cross-techniques from this century and weapon vs. another entirely different weapon and time period. Weapons and technique are tied to closely to each other for to much of that nonsense. Does the cutlass chop or draw the cut? Yes, you can thrust but is that even in the manual of arms for the thing? If the blade is curved, why? How deep is the curve?

 

[Kaeto]

Well the 1860 Union Navy Cutlass looks like this. (This is an original, not a repro.)

 

[sabredog]

And here is the manual of arms for cutlass from 1904: the link is on the bottom of the page.

http://www.goatlocker.org/resources/cpo/history/cutlass.htm

It is very instructive and reminds me a lot of what sabre fencing is like on foot. It is obviously designed for close combat in restricted spaces so you'll be using the wrist for cuts instead of the whole forearm as you would on horse with a heavy sabre. And stabbing....its a stabby pointy sort of sword, more so than you would expect for a "cutlass", which befits tight spaces.

I think this drill would work pretty well for shipboard combat in Traveller. Combine it with a snub or laser pistol in the other hand and you'd be pretty effective.

 

[aramis]

Well the 1860 Union Navy Cutlass looks like this. (This is an original, not a repro.)

Having been up close to 3 different USCW era cutlasses... let's just remember that the USN relied upon local suppliers at every provisioning location with an armory. There's a LOT of variation. (None of the three I've seen matched that blade profile... tho' one may have been sharpened down from it. The other two were more strongly curved, and the baskets varied widely.)

also remember that Petty Officers and Marine NCO's were allowed to purchase their own personal weapons, and when they did, those weapons could be embellished. Sometimes enameled, sometimes blade etchings, sometimes exquisite guard castings, sometimes tooled or even inlayed scabbards.

Standard dress sidearms today are almost always etched blades with either etched or sand-cast decorated hilts. They can be, if one spends the money, also be made as practical weapons. Cold Steel Armories makes USMC and USN authorized dress sidearms as practical weapons that happen to meet the dress weapon requirements.

 

[Kaeto]

That is an Ames manufactured cutlass.

 

[Epee]

As to penetrating armor (or perhaps having an effect within the armor is a more accurate description); this varies from point to edge depending on the weapon and the armor. Some favor thrust versus hard armor while using the edge versus soft or no armor; others cleave or crush hard armor with the edge while the point remains effective versus gaps or soft armor.

Accutely curved blades, while generally sharpened for slicing can also deliver a highly effective chop as they concentrate their weight on a small area like an axe.

 

[Travellerspud]

...And also, arguments for the tip slash, especially to the face, as being superior for blinding while much reduced risk of killing... but those are mostly from duellists, rather than those interested in efficient defense...

If I understand this, it suggests the Cutlass might be more used in personal non-fatal (but scarring) duels marine-to-marine (or able spaceman-to-able spaceman) than as a primary weapon for attacks vs. the "enemy"...I think that is a brilliant explanation!