Hand to Hand training

[Guest]

It's very interesting to see that there are some WWII German vets who post to this board.
This gives me a golden opportunity to pick their brains!
I study and collect WWII hand to hand combat manuals, and train in a similiar combatives system for self defense.
I was wondering if the Wermacht/WaffenSS vets here might tell me about the unarmed combat training they recieved (if any)
Any details at all you could provide would be gratefully accepted.

Thank you in advance,
Otto

[joscha]

During my brief stay in the infantry, that is 1940/1941, we received no hand to hand combat training in the sense of martial arts. There was a short course in a sort of "savat" street fighting, but no jiu jitsu, aikido, and so on. Actually, it was a sort of formalized brawling.

Sorry. Joscha

[Guest]

Joscha.

First off, thank you for taking the time to reply. Secondly, by Savat, were you refering to the French martial art/street fighting style of Savate, or is that a German word I'm not familiar with?
I am a bit of a general martial arts buff, in addition to my primary fixation on the WWII combatives techniques, and I've actually studied Savate a bit.
I found to my dismay that I am not flexible enough to perform some of the techniques, and tore the seams out of a couple of pairs of pants before I learned my lesson. :)
Also, during your training, other than marksmanship training, was there ANY sort of hand-to-hand combat preparation? (Other than bayonet training of course, which I believe was standard for nearly all armies at the time)
I have read accounts of fights on the Eastern front that degenerated into hand-to-hand brawls using bayonets and sharpened shovels, and wondered if the non-bayonet fighting techniques were taught, or simply desperate measures used at the spur of the moment.
And unless I'm mistaken, I read somewhere that the German army placed little or no emphasis on the use of rifle butt-strokes in it's bayonet fighting, preferring to concentrate on the use of the blade alone.
(This is something I agree with, as the bayonet seems much more likely to wound or kill than the wooden rifle stock)
Well, I will close now that I have run off at the mouth, and I thank you again for your patience, especially since the things I'm asking about happened many years ago, and cant be easy to recall ( I can barely remember what I ate this morning at breakfast )

again, thank you
Otto

[The Chief]

In WW1 the German (and probably everyone else!) Army primarily used their shovels in hand to hand fighting on the Western Front. I'm not sure if there was any formal training at this, but it probably varied from squad to squad. This technique was probably dropped after the war. Also, notice that the modern E-tool has a serrated edge!

[Gerhard]

It's very interesting to see that there are some WWII German vets who post to this board.
This gives me a golden opportunity to pick their brains!
I study and collect WWII hand to hand combat manuals, and train in a similiar combatives system for self defense.
I was wondering if the Wermacht/WaffenSS vets here might tell me about the unarmed combat training they recieved (if any)
Any details at all you could provide would be gratefully accepted.

Thank you in advance,
Otto

When receiving my basic training in 1943 we had no hand to hand training what so ever we just made sure we always had lots of ammo, ours or theirs.
Gerhard

[joscha]

So you split a pair of pants, too, huh? As I said, it was more brawling than orderly motions. Kicks to the knees, the pelvis, and (here I disagree with Gerhard), ramming buttstrokes into the chest that could stop the heart. The accounts you read about hand-to-hand fighting are true. Cherkassy comes to mind and other places where, in the night, the fighting was done by feel - what kind of steel helmet, hairs or no hairs? The Soviet soldier all were shaven headed and the steel helmet were rather diastinctly different..., No night vision goggles then, so you got desparate and did what you had to do to save your ace.

My best. Joscha

[jimmyfatwing]

An old thread I know but I came across it c/o a search for some info on unarmed combat in the German army during WW2.

Some interesting points made by you there Joscha, sounds like basic dirty fighting tactics. The 'savat' you mention could have been a take on the French art of Savate. Though it's pretty sport orientated now there are a lot of dirty tricks and nasty techniques in it's history and it does emphasise kicks.

Butt strokes with the rifle are common in many WW2 era field manuals, and still to this day. Though most I have seen have been aimed at the head in a swinging motion (like a hook punch). What you said sounds like a straight thrust with the butt to the chest, right?

Interesting and I hope we can bring the thread back to life.

Oh, did anybody ever contact Otto? Sounds like a guy it would be good for me to have a chat to!

[The Chief]

Hey James,
Well when I went through my basic training (1998) we were never trained to swing out rifles like a baseball (or cricket) bat, that way you have a lot less control over your weapon...if they catch the stock and you have a round in the chamber, you could wind up un a world of hurt. When using the butt of the weapon, it was usually more of an over the shoulder motion. I've found out in practice that this motion can be quite effective when I took a dummy rifle to the face...mask. I of course had a helmet and face protection on but it still knocked me off balence long enough to be taken down. For now it looks like an SA-80 is a bit short to be pulling off these manuvres though. Back to WW2, the rifles and carbines of the day had a good enough length to be able to pull off quite a harsh blow. Depending on where the opponant was in relation, it would probably be more of a head/upper torso attack.

This help?

-Rick

[jimmyfatwing]

Cheers Rick. The motion i'm trying to describe is not really a wild swing - it was usually a short sharp rotation of the rifle so the butt connected with the temple area. Does that make sense? Kinda hard to describe.....i'll see if i can rip a couple of pic's maybe.

[Taylor Collector]

When the Americans stormed the Yorktown redoubt they swung there rifles like clubs meeting British Bayonets.

TS Allen

[Spandau]

Avete,

having studied and/or competed in Karate, Aikido, Jiu-Jitsu, Tae Kwon Do, Jeet Kun Do and various weapons courses, I would have to say that the German army wasn't particularly missing out on anything. The amount of training and conditioning required to effectively apply these would take too long. Well, Jeet Kun Do might be the exception in this case, but the rest really won't help unless you have mastered them to some degree. Unless you have had a lot of experience, most unarmed or hand to hand just comes down to whoever has the initiative or who is bigger and stronger.
The Martial Art that I was able to gain competancy the fastest was Jeet Kun Do, but that wasn't around in the 40's, so it wasn't an option for the German Army. Most martial arts, especially the Japanese ones, are centered around agonizing (and sometimes they are!) repetitions and conditioning that is to make certian motions reflexive and to build speed, strength, overall awareness and timing. The time it would take for this is not worth it in modern warfare. But I recommend it for us civilians.

Valete,

-Spandau

[jimmyfatwing]

The time it would take for this is not worth it in modern warfare.

Hello Spandau

Much of the WW2 material I have seen was cut down Ju Jutsu / Boxing / Wrestling with only the simple and effective core left behind. Depending on who you were you could have had just 8hrs or so for your 'unarmed combat' lessons. Not much time.

Modern military seem to be taking a more martial arts route, but that's off topic here so I'll leave it there.

Original material i have seen is all allied thoug, apart from one questionable German manual and an Italian that was more knife orientated.

[Spandau]

Much of the WW2 material I have seen was cut down Ju Jutsu / Boxing / Wrestling with only the simple and effective core left behind. Depending on who you were you could have had just 8hrs or so for your 'unarmed combat' lessons. Not much time.

Modern military seem to be taking a more martial arts route, but that's off topic here so I'll leave it there.

Ave jimmyfatwing,

Indeed, the diagrams I have seen incorporate some of many styles. But learning the motions for some nasty moves is very different from being able to apply them in an actual fight.

I have met several 12 and 13 year old kids who officially possess a blackbelt in Karate or Tae Kwon Do. If they got into a street fight I doubt they would win using their martial arts. They know the moves but can't dance to the music, so to speak. It takes more than just knowing the motions. If you are thinking about how the motions go in a fight, you will be too slow and will be defeated by someone who is throwing jabs. Your body must know the motions and your mind must be devoted to awareness. For most people, achieving this takes A LOT of training and sparring, the military's time would be better spent training soldiers to cope with modern battlefield conditions or getting them in shape. Chances are, the soldiers are not going to encounter a martial artist in street combat!

Valete,

-Spandau

[jimmyfatwing]

Indeed, the diagrams I have seen incorporate some of many styles. But learning the motions for some nasty moves is very different from being able to apply them in an actual fight.

One of the plus points for still having the bayonet training etc., a good means to improve the killer instinct in soldiers.

Understand your comments about the 12/13 year olds, though I don't think age is the key factor....I think training is the factor. If you never have any verbal in training and it's not part of your upbringing you may well freeze the first time somebody calls you an #$*& in anger. Think that goes for a 43 year old as well as a kid. Same with a non compliant uke. Though this is off topic for sure so I'll drag it back to WW2.


So does anybody have any more knowledge of the hand-to-hand methods taught in the 1940's German military, any branch? There used to be a manual online called "ABWEHR ENGLISCHER GANGSTER-METHODEN" but the site hoasting has gone down for the time being. That's really all I've seen, plus an image on another forum from an unknown manual.

The "ABWEHR ENGLISCHER GANGSTER-METHODEN" has been questioned by some due to it's lack of official numbering etc. Maybe a proof that was never put to print?

Any ideas?

[jimmyfatwing]

From: Axis History Forum