Posted: 3/1/2011 9:14:17 AM EDT
|
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ARMY_NEW_FITNESS_TEST?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
The head of Army initial training, Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, told reporters the test had to be revamped because exercises like sit-ups don't translate into survival on a battlefield.
I thought that's how we stopped the British at Yorktown; Washington challenged Cornwallis to a sit-up contest. |
|
Quoted:
About damn time. I see the local reserve unit doing push-ups and sit-ups in the field next to the armory all the time and I'm thinking WTF does this have to do with anything? Didn't they run an obstacle course back in the 60's? Yes. My father told me there were four events and one of them was some sort of course. |
|
Hmmm...will be interesting to see what happens.
I was a cop back in TX and our entrance had a lot of the obstacle course and drag-n-carry, and it was admittedly pretty weak. Affirmative action hiring was in good speed, though. I thought training was what translated into survival, and the PT was to make sure a soldier/Marine's body was up to the task of training. I used to do good on my PT tests, so I may be biased, but it was what it was: just to make sure your body met minimum standards for the training, which is perhaps where things ought to really change. If it works, then more power to them. We should have the best. But it faintly smells of affirmative action with all the push on for sexual deviants to openly serve, and next women to be in combat units. A lot of papers have been written recently focusing on the training, which would seem to be the biggest area for improvement if anything. But I've been out for years, so what do I know? |
|
Quoted:
Hmmm...will be interesting to see what happens. I was a cop back in TX and our entrance had a lot of the obstacle course and drag-n-carry, and it was admittedly pretty weak. Affirmative action hiring was in good speed, though. I thought training was what translated into survival, and the PT was to make sure a soldier/Marine's body was up to the task of training. I used to do good on my PT tests, so I may be biased, but it was what it was: just to make sure your body met minimum standards for the training, which is perhaps where things ought to really change. If it works, then more power to them. We should have the best. But it faintly smells of affirmative action with all the push on for sexual deviants to openly serve, and next women to be in combat units. A lot of papers have been written recently focusing on the training, which would seem to be the biggest area for improvement if anything. But I've been out for years, so what do I know? Do you guys think this change is really about paving the way for women in the military? They don't have to bee seen weakening the requirements, instead they can change them altogether. Just a thought. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hmmm...will be interesting to see what happens. I was a cop back in TX and our entrance had a lot of the obstacle course and drag-n-carry, and it was admittedly pretty weak. Affirmative action hiring was in good speed, though. I thought training was what translated into survival, and the PT was to make sure a soldier/Marine's body was up to the task of training. I used to do good on my PT tests, so I may be biased, but it was what it was: just to make sure your body met minimum standards for the training, which is perhaps where things ought to really change. If it works, then more power to them. We should have the best. But it faintly smells of affirmative action with all the push on for sexual deviants to openly serve, and next women to be in combat units. A lot of papers have been written recently focusing on the training, which would seem to be the biggest area for improvement if anything. But I've been out for years, so what do I know? Do you guys think this change is really about paving the way for women in the military? They don't have to bee seen weakening the requirements, instead they can change them altogether. Just a thought. http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/65819558/m/3700085862001 it say the scoring will be the same for men and women so yes |
|
PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't.
If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. |
|
Quoted: PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't. If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. Don't cloud the issue with facts |
|
Quoted:
I personally find situps far more practical than a 2 mile run...realistically it should be a 300-400 meter sprint. The average soldier is going to just run to their armored vehicle anyway...but what do I know? I enlisted...  I think a sprint, crunches (full situps cause hyperextension injuries, especially when you have people trying to do them quickly), and some sort of ruck march would be good. I absolutely hated rucking, but its a far more realistic test of a person's ability to move quickly for long distances in combat than running in a PT uniform is. |
| Sensetivity trainings and now this? Come on, the PFT was a simple and very easy standard. So instead of having those that dislike or struggle to reach that standard we determine that this performance measurement is no longer valid. What is happening to the Army? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't. If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. Don't cloud the issue with facts The use of facts and common sense is against Army policy and is punishable by UCMJ action.
|
|
Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. |
|
Quoted:
so what is the new test going to be? From the yahoo web site news story "The new "physical readiness" test adds such things as a 60-yard shuttle run and a standing long jump to one minute of push-ups and a 1.5-mile timed run. This might be given every six months, said Frank Palkoska, head of the Army's Fitness School at Fort Jackson. A "combat readiness" test includes running 400 meters with a rifle, moving through an obstacle course in full combat gear, and crawling and vaulting over obstacles while aiming a rifle. Soldiers also have to run on a balance beam while carrying a 30-pound ammo box and do an agility sprint around a course field of cones. To test pulling a fallen comrade from the battlefield, soldiers must drag a sled weighted with 180 pounds of sandbags. That combat portion of the test might be given only before deployments, but that has not been decided. The tests will be given to all soldiers and officers, including Army Reserves and National Guard, even those recalled soldiers who are now 60-years plus, officials said." |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't. If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. Don't cloud the issue with facts The use of facts and common sense is against Army policy and is punishable by UCMJ action. I have always wondered how sit-ups make me a better Army Anesthesiologist. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't. If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. Don't cloud the issue with facts The use of facts and common sense is against Army policy and is punishable by UCMJ action. I have always wondered how sit-ups make me a better Army Anesthesiologist. In your case nothing, but neither does the pushups or run. The Army can't be filled with fatbodies in uniform. |
|
Marines did this a while back. Seems to be working out well. Instead of the traditional PFT (3 mile run, pullups, 2 minutes of crunches) twice a year, we only do the PFT once a year, and now do a combat fitness test once a year. The CFT consists of an 800 meter sprint in boots and utilities, a 2 minute 30 pound ammo can lift (as many times as you can lift it from your chest to fully extended over your head), and a 300 meter shuttle run type "movement under fire" event, consisting of runing with ammo cans, high crawl, low crawl, fireman carry, body drag. |
|
Quoted:
Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. Have you heard of the new "Comprehensive Soldier Fitness" and other changes at BCT?? Setting these young men and women up for failure is what they're doing. |
|
Quoted: http://www.army.mil/-news/2010/03/11/35645-taking-shape-new-pt-program-relates-to-soldier-tasks/  One significant change to the PRT is that in order to prevent injuries, the new program limits the number of repetitions for each exercise. In the past, Soldiers were required to do 50 to 100 reps for some exercises. In the new program, they are limited to doing five four-counts in the beginning stages, and work their way up to 10, or work on timed sets or circuits, Palkoska said. ???? work their way up to 20 push-ups or sit-ups????  |
|
Quoted:
Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. Check the new physical readiness exercises, more core muscle building there than just sit-ups: http://www.armyprt.com/strength_and_mobility_activities/index.shtml |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. Have you heard of the new "Comprehensive Soldier Fitness" and other changes at BCT?? Setting these young men and women up for failure is what they're doing. As a master fitness trainer (back when it was fitness and not "resiliancy") I have tried to keep up. What they are describing is good PT and needs to be done. But you simply can't build a fair and comprehensive testing regime around it. I speak as a mediocre runner, but running is the absolute best use of training time out there for cardio? Core is critical, Sit Ups build core. Maybe crunches, but the theory is still sound. You could measure planks maybe (5 minutes of planks for max) Every installation's obstacle course is different. Ours is over 2 miles up here. some are less than 500M What they are describing is physical fitness training, but it shouldn't be the test. You want to get rid of the test? fine. But are you going to kick people out based upon Cdr's appraisal of their ability? I dont think so. Crossfit and P90X are breaking people. Too much stress on joints. Its great. Right until they blow out their shoulder. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. Check the new physical readiness exercises, more core muscle building there than just sit-ups: http://www.armyprt.com/strength_and_mobility_activities/index.shtml The PT test is not training. And training is not the PT test. I don't think I ever did Sit Ups for training when I was in a troop unit. But still knocked out 100+ on the PT test when the time came. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sit ups corresponde nicely to those who can handle the weight. Core muscles support that 70 pounds of shit. Pull ups are good, Army should have kept those. the APFT is a decent measure of combat fitness. Good runners are good ruckers, generally speaking. A guy who can knock out push ups has enough upper body strength. Core muscles are important. New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. Crossfit was a bitch, but a good workout, I've never been more smoked in my life than doing an hour and a half of that shit with the Bn Cdr. The shitty thing about this whole change is that pt will most likely not change, especially in places like Bragg.. where we run, run and run some more... 4x a week sucks ass. Even if this change goes through I bet pt will still be pushups, situps and running 4+ miles. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Crossfit ..... breaking people. Too much stress on joints. Its great. Right until they blow out their shoulder. They they're doing it wrong. Blame the trainers not the training. If its that difficult, lets stick with army training. As long as it isn't team sports, we generally don't break people. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
so what is the new test going to be? From the yahoo web site news story "The new "physical readiness" test adds such things as a 60-yard shuttle run and a standing long jump to one minute of push-ups and a 1.5-mile timed run. This might be given every six months, said Frank Palkoska, head of the Army's Fitness School at Fort Jackson. A "combat readiness" test includes running 400 meters with a rifle, moving through an obstacle course in full combat gear, and crawling and vaulting over obstacles while aiming a rifle. Soldiers also have to run on a balance beam while carrying a 30-pound ammo box and do an agility sprint around a course field of cones. To test pulling a fallen comrade from the battlefield, soldiers must drag a sled weighted with 180 pounds of sandbags. That combat portion of the test might be given only before deployments, but that has not been decided. The tests will be given to all soldiers and officers, including Army Reserves and National Guard, even those recalled soldiers who are now 60-years plus, officials said." From a Guard point of view, the great thing about the current PT test is that it can be performed almost anywhere. Now individual guard armories are going to have to build obstacle courses or spend extra time transporting soldiers to somewhere with the proper facilities. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
PT tests and standards should be MOS specific, not age or gender. You can either do the job or you can't. If a truck has to be loaded with 70# boxes, just because you are a woman doesn't make them any lighter to load. Holding a 40 yo neurosurgeon to the same standard as a company or battalion commander is silly too. A commander must be able to lead from the front by example, but I prefer my neurosurgeon have steady hands instead of maxing the sit-ups. Don't cloud the issue with facts This is the Army we are talking about here. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
New faggotry isn't going to change the fact that soldiers coming in now are fat bodies. At MEPS in '89, I can recall potential enlistees being told to come back when they'd GAINED a few pounds. I damn near got kicked out in 86 during our weigh in after the first few weeks of basic. I was 5lbs under weight.
The DS put his foot on the scale, told the medic I passed and then had me at the end of the chow serving line pulling stuff off the fat guys plates to put on mine and watch me eat it. |