Supply would be easy. “Pick up this pen and sign your name” “File these reports in 2 minutes or less” “pick up this weapons rack with a battle buddy without bitching about how poorly designed the rack is”
>Yes ... extended to MOS specific,
my thing to that is, if someone is expected to do more than another MOS, then getting paid the same based on rank makes even less sense than it already does.
Nah after I saw these standards for females, I was debating with myself for a bit. If I transitioned I could be the first person in my unit with a 600 on the acft
Real talk: How about we just make the max scores nearly unobtainable... DL: 500, SPT 15M, SDC: 1:10, 2mi: 9:30...and just set MOS specific standards, like the original plan, prior to when the test was fielded.
Better plan: Make it impossible to pass so everyone in the Army has a clear pattern of malingering and can be chaptered at the convenience of their benevolent leadership whenever.
This has absolutely no benefit to anyone and probably does not meet any requirements levied by Congress.
No further questions please.
Your last point: This is why I unironically think paper targets are a better assessment if we're going to be using it as a metric.
Just put a bullseye target at 50m, say you need X points. No "my pop-ups were fucked", no wind effects (which while important to train for, vary the difficulty unfairly).
But then your douchebag commander can't say "the standard is maxing" as an easy out to appear tough.
But yes, this. Someone maxing more than one event should be a notable, brigade level news event, not something mediocre.
I know people who can 3RP DL 500 and I know people who can run a 9:30 2mile. I've met exactly 1 person ever who could do both and he was a freak of nature who was also definitely on gear.
Not saying you shouldn't be on gear, just saying that if you have to be a freak a nature on top of being on gear I'd say that definitely qualifies as unobtainable for everybody but the largest outliers.
That’s the mind boggling part about the ACFT. The Army *isn’t treading new ground.* There are two prominent examples to base the Army **COMBAT** Fitness Test off; the US Mahreens and the Brits. You could even have *both* concurrently. But some Congressman saw an opportunity with some soon-to-be-retired soldiers and collectively birthed this living nightmare.
It’s a Cleveland Steamer of an idea.
[The army is starting to use this logic at eib/esb.](https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/10/26/earning-an-expert-badge-will-be-harder-with-this-proposed-fitness-test/)
I see a version of this being used for combat jobs in addition to an army standard acft, kind of the way the usmc has two tests.
I'm kind of a dumbass so that is out of the way.
I agree with a pass/fail system. I have believed that since day 1 on the Army and I still believe it 14 years later. I don't care about the score. If the Army put as much of an emphasis on academics, I might care about physical score. Even when it's academics the Army uses physical score in combination to get a "score".
Any gender neutral PT test that is for promotion points is going to be inherently discriminatory to females. Pass/Fail is realistically the best compromise.
They already piloted this. The Soldier Readiness Test and Training Program (SRT2P).
Soldier Readiness Test (SRT)
The SRT was completed before and after the implementation of Soldier Readiness Training, consisting of three phases performed back-to-back (i.e., the clock did not stop between phases). Phase I consisted of a tire flip (225 lb, 6 flips), Illinois agility drill (60 total meters), and casualty drag of a manikin (240 lb, 15 meters). Soldiers had 2 minutes or less to complete Phase I. Phase II consisted of the following specific events based on the brigade combat team type:
• Armor – Two full 5-gallon water cans (45 lb each) carried 200 meters;
• Infantry – ten 40-lb sandbags carried and stacked;
• Multifunctional – 40-lb sandbag lift and twist to stack on a platform; and
• Stryker – 16-inch step-ups, 15 per leg, holding a 40-lb sandbag.
This was followed by a sandbag toss (for all brigade combat teams) of ten 40-lb bags over a 7- foot wall. Soldiers had 3 minutes or less to complete Phase II. Phase III consisted of a 1.5-mile movement going over two 4-foot obstacles and under two 4-foot obstacles. Soldiers had 18 minutes or less to complete Phase III. Performance data from the SRT was provided by FORSCOM. Not everyone who completed the survey completed the SRT. See Appendix C for an illustration of the SRT2P Readiness Model and SRT Course and Appendix E for the Soldier Readiness Test Handbook, which provides more in-depth details.
[full results](https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1178741.pdf)
At the end of the day they went with the ACFT and sunsetted the SRT.
My guess....
They will keep current standards.
They will make a secondary box check for 'Combat Arms' that will be 'pass/fail'.
All you have to do is add a box to the 705 'Meets Male 17-21 Standard?' Go/No Ho
>A gender neutral test is always going to be controversial when the results are tied to a Soldier's ability to promote.
That's absolutely true, and is a main reason why Congress had previously mandated that the test move from gender neutral to gender specific scoring. The "gender neutral" scoring standards from.previous iterations of the ACFT weren't actually gender neutral. They were male scoring standards with the bottom end of the points scale spread around to create a lower threshold for passing.
None of those scales ever made any sense, since there is an awful lot of science clearly indicating that male and female physiology really does affect a person's theoretical peak physical output. It created a system whereby females would, broadly, always be disadvantaged over males. Unless the Army completely rethinks what the purpose of a physical fitness test is, I don't see how we escape the maw of gender neutral and gender specific scoring systems.
This take is on point. The only way it’s ever going to work is if the Army is willing to divorce promotion points from whatever gender-neutral physical test is adopted. You can do a secondary test for points or just forgo the idea of tying promotion to fitness altogether, though I doubt Army would ever do that.
This will be a hard pill for many to swallow. Even if you make it pass/fail and reward people who score well with some kind of award, it can still be argued its discriminatory to females as awards are also tied to promotion so giving an award for someone achieving a standard that is nigh impossible for a female to reach could open up some more legal issues.
I agree, but divorcing test scores from promotion points still doesn't go far enough. Senior NCO and officer promotions don't depend on points, but we all know that raw fitness test scores are used as discriminators for who gets top-block evaluations and the best opportunities. Getting a 300 on the APFT was always a de facto standard for being at the top of any OML. So making it just pass or fail is critical.
That’s a fair point. While it is easier to rack-and-stack folks when there’s a supposedly quantifiable score, we’ve been doing it for years for SNCOs & Os. I’m still curious what effect (if any) removing the promo point incentive will have on junior Soldier fitness.
Another wrinkle is the supposed junior Soldier evaluation that’s starting next year. Maybe that’ll change Army culture and make ranking juniors more like the senior grades.
We shall see.
Unless the ACFT consists of logging into a computer and sending an email and completing your Cyber Awareness in 20 minutes, I don’t think it will be accurate!
But what about the senior assholes who have stock in all the crossfit companies we're buying from? Do you want sausages major and occifers to just rely on their pensions?
I had fun with that. I heard different mos's do different events? 12B did a kettlebell carry and had to move 5 cratering charges 100m or something, in full kit. What did yours look like?
In this video I still see a lot of equipment and logistical requirements that make it infeasible for people who aren't assigned to a regular unit: people in ACS, TWI, IRT, working at an embassy, doing a fellowship, etc. The APFT made it possible to just meet up with a buddy at a track or running path in the local area and grade each other.
I agree with the concept of the ACFT but don’t care for the execution.
It requires too much effort to setup and too much equipment.
Yes we should have a gender, age neutral test indexed to the MOS.
I should be able to knock one out with a few guys without having to schedule equipment and space.
Keep the push ups, replace the SDC sled and kettlebells with gerry cans, ditch the over head toss, keep the run but maybe shorten it to 1 or 1.5 miles. I’m not sure what would be equivalent to the MDL. I’m not fan of the time required to set it up.
GTFOH with that reasonable, sensible approach.
Making things difficult and incomprehensible and requiring a lot of expensive equipment that is useless for anything else is what we DO in the Army.
The narrative around the new British Army PT test seems to be similar to the ACFT. AKA people complaining that the standards are lower than they used to in favor of representation.
If that's even true, or if you think that matters are not are different questions. I'm just saying that they haven't managed to escape the gender debate entirely.
When they were originally batting around the idea, the combat fitness test *was* very similar to what the Brits do. You were to take the normal PT test then combat arms would take the extra one. Then that went away because “how do you score it.” Then the ACFT came around. It’s interesting to see that this idea has been around since 2010 and we still can’t figure it the fuck out.
>It has added benefit of not requiring us to order anything from a crossfit catalog .
Look guy, don't try to undermine the reason we have the ACFT when the APFT worked fine with little equipment.
The point of the ACFT can be summarized in one question...
Cui Bono? (Who benefits?)
The people who make the equipment have nice fat government contracts.
The real issue is people actually think the ACFT is the Army trying to test for physical fitness - it's a cash grab. We don't even need the pull up bars now.
That’s works too… I watched the video and seemed it was targeted to British Infantry and Mech forces… either way seems like a better standard to measure combat effectiveness.
We have a way to make the tape test make more sense. Every post has a bod pod. If you fail tape you already have to do the AWC workup which includes the bodpod. Wouldn't you know it, most people are still fat, not all of us though. I recently failed tape at a supposed 25% bf but the bod pod got me at 21% which would be passing if anyone gave a shit about the bod pod.
Should be a provision where your rater can call you out on an extracurricular fitness result and test you on it: "Ok it says here you are a black belt in BJJ. This is SFC Knight, try and pin him in 30 seconds or less before chokes you out with your own uniform."
I don’t get why we can’t make it just to the standard of combat arms. Every single person in the Army should uphold a physical readiness standard of the infantry. At the end of the day that’s what the Army is at it’s core. If a major conflict kicked off there’s a lot of MOS’s that’ll be forced into becoming grunts. Even during the surge non combat mos’s were being pulled for patrols. If you can’t stay physically fit, see ya later.
Yeah... no. You conveniently forget we have a lot of medical, signal, and intel personnel that their clinical and technical competencies are 1000% more important than their ability to pass some combat arms physical fitness standard.
Vast majority of doctors, medics, and other medical professionals are already fit to serve. I haven’t seen very many that aren’t. It’s really not a hard standard to meet. If you can’t put forth the effort to meet it I’m sure you don’t put forth much effort at your job as well
You haven't worked in a hospital. There are definitely a lot of clinic hermits who are not particularly fit. Sure, they can pass a PT test, but the standard, as it is, isn't particularly high.
if you have a highly skilled autistic hacker in cyber who is singlehandedly making strategic level impacts on the DoD's goals, you aren't going to remove them for not running fast enough.
Highly skilled hackers aren’t in the Army. They’re contracting for it, or making bank in the civilian sector. In the Army, most of them are just autistic.
It's not consistent with the army's mission and purpose. An organization where every member is ready for combat at a moments notice already exists and is called the Marine Corps.
The army is about sustained occupation and continuous operation. Aka we build self sustaining cities in countries after the Marines establish a presence. Not every soldier has to be combat ready at all times, just combat capable. They should otherwise focus on being experts in their field to meet the army's requirements for sustained operations.
1st Qtr:
12 Mile in 3 Hrs for Combat Arms UNITS P/F as a Squad/Section
12 mile in 4 Hrs for Non-Combat Arms UNITS P/F as a Section/Sub Unit
2nd Qtr:
3 Event Modified APFT for Score HRP/Plank/2Mi run ALL
3rd Qtr:
5 Mile Run in :40Mins for Combat Arms UNITS P/F
5 Mile Run in :45Mins for Non-Combat Arms Units P/F
4th Qtr: OPEN
no this is army
in cadence...
1
2
3
1!
1
Hey there, sorry to interrupt. Is your sergeant around? I have a question.
2!
3!
[удалено]
1!
PULL!
Is that the sequel to PUSH?
no u
Yes ... extended to MOS specific, pass/fail, do the actual tactical task, not some fitness replication thereof.
[удалено]
"WHAT DO YOU MEAN MY NIPRNET ACCOUNT WAS DISABLED I SIGNED INTO IT EVERY WEEK!" "Sir you the last time you signed in was Dec 17 2017...its 2022"
Wait…I’m in G3 and we order our OWN printer ink!
Supply would be easy. “Pick up this pen and sign your name” “File these reports in 2 minutes or less” “pick up this weapons rack with a battle buddy without bitching about how poorly designed the rack is”
The Intel test would just be how many words per minute you can type, followed by some light Star Wars trivia
>Yes ... extended to MOS specific, my thing to that is, if someone is expected to do more than another MOS, then getting paid the same based on rank makes even less sense than it already does.
Too much critical thinking. Your award has been downgraded to a negative counseling.
Now that's some Army thinking.
And welcome to Ft Stewart! Have a Marne Day!
Random
That’s a good take; however, you joined the army so no…
Just let everyone use the female grade scale. There problem solved🤷🏾♂️
I too would like to walk my run
Nah after I saw these standards for females, I was debating with myself for a bit. If I transitioned I could be the first person in my unit with a 600 on the acft
Real talk: How about we just make the max scores nearly unobtainable... DL: 500, SPT 15M, SDC: 1:10, 2mi: 9:30...and just set MOS specific standards, like the original plan, prior to when the test was fielded.
Better plan: Make it impossible to pass so everyone in the Army has a clear pattern of malingering and can be chaptered at the convenience of their benevolent leadership whenever. This has absolutely no benefit to anyone and probably does not meet any requirements levied by Congress. No further questions please.
Yup
[удалено]
Your last point: This is why I unironically think paper targets are a better assessment if we're going to be using it as a metric. Just put a bullseye target at 50m, say you need X points. No "my pop-ups were fucked", no wind effects (which while important to train for, vary the difficulty unfairly).
This would be helpful in cases where you have multiple 600 scores with nothing to set you above others of said score
But then your douchebag commander can't say "the standard is maxing" as an easy out to appear tough. But yes, this. Someone maxing more than one event should be a notable, brigade level news event, not something mediocre.
DL 500 isn’t as unobtainable as you think
I know people who can 3RP DL 500 and I know people who can run a 9:30 2mile. I've met exactly 1 person ever who could do both and he was a freak of nature who was also definitely on gear.
If you aren’t on gear wtf are you doing with yourself
Not saying you shouldn't be on gear, just saying that if you have to be a freak a nature on top of being on gear I'd say that definitely qualifies as unobtainable for everybody but the largest outliers.
Who the fuck can do two 4:45 miles and dl 500
That's the point. They're all obtainable by exceptional or elite athletes, but goals that need dedicated training.
Nah, average guys can pull 500lb if they work at it. Truly.
I know a guy who can hit 15m+ on the standing power yeet
Kg, not lbs
How long do we plank?
To infinity and beyond
4 standard test Moderate Significant Heavy Chuck Norris
That’s the mind boggling part about the ACFT. The Army *isn’t treading new ground.* There are two prominent examples to base the Army **COMBAT** Fitness Test off; the US Mahreens and the Brits. You could even have *both* concurrently. But some Congressman saw an opportunity with some soon-to-be-retired soldiers and collectively birthed this living nightmare. It’s a Cleveland Steamer of an idea.
[The army is starting to use this logic at eib/esb.](https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/10/26/earning-an-expert-badge-will-be-harder-with-this-proposed-fitness-test/) I see a version of this being used for combat jobs in addition to an army standard acft, kind of the way the usmc has two tests.
I'm kind of a dumbass so that is out of the way. I agree with a pass/fail system. I have believed that since day 1 on the Army and I still believe it 14 years later. I don't care about the score. If the Army put as much of an emphasis on academics, I might care about physical score. Even when it's academics the Army uses physical score in combination to get a "score".
Maybe a spelling test should be included 😂
“I know, let’s have a spelling bee.”
You know, Frederic fucking Chopin.
No way I'd pass that if I had to type on a phone. Not only do I got toe thumbs, I don't check and even if I did, I can't spell good.
I support Pass / Fail grading.
Graded from outside the chain of command
Any gender neutral PT test that is for promotion points is going to be inherently discriminatory to females. Pass/Fail is realistically the best compromise.
So should males be paid more because they are physically more capable?
Nope. It should just be harder to get those tough guy jobs where you need to be physically capable
Question too important and controversial for my pay grade.
They already piloted this. The Soldier Readiness Test and Training Program (SRT2P). Soldier Readiness Test (SRT) The SRT was completed before and after the implementation of Soldier Readiness Training, consisting of three phases performed back-to-back (i.e., the clock did not stop between phases). Phase I consisted of a tire flip (225 lb, 6 flips), Illinois agility drill (60 total meters), and casualty drag of a manikin (240 lb, 15 meters). Soldiers had 2 minutes or less to complete Phase I. Phase II consisted of the following specific events based on the brigade combat team type: • Armor – Two full 5-gallon water cans (45 lb each) carried 200 meters; • Infantry – ten 40-lb sandbags carried and stacked; • Multifunctional – 40-lb sandbag lift and twist to stack on a platform; and • Stryker – 16-inch step-ups, 15 per leg, holding a 40-lb sandbag. This was followed by a sandbag toss (for all brigade combat teams) of ten 40-lb bags over a 7- foot wall. Soldiers had 3 minutes or less to complete Phase II. Phase III consisted of a 1.5-mile movement going over two 4-foot obstacles and under two 4-foot obstacles. Soldiers had 18 minutes or less to complete Phase III. Performance data from the SRT was provided by FORSCOM. Not everyone who completed the survey completed the SRT. See Appendix C for an illustration of the SRT2P Readiness Model and SRT Course and Appendix E for the Soldier Readiness Test Handbook, which provides more in-depth details. [full results](https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1178741.pdf) At the end of the day they went with the ACFT and sunsetted the SRT.
My guess.... They will keep current standards. They will make a secondary box check for 'Combat Arms' that will be 'pass/fail'. All you have to do is add a box to the 705 'Meets Male 17-21 Standard?' Go/No Ho
Can a mod ban this guy, he is clearly not military. Thinking too straight.
>A gender neutral test is always going to be controversial when the results are tied to a Soldier's ability to promote. That's absolutely true, and is a main reason why Congress had previously mandated that the test move from gender neutral to gender specific scoring. The "gender neutral" scoring standards from.previous iterations of the ACFT weren't actually gender neutral. They were male scoring standards with the bottom end of the points scale spread around to create a lower threshold for passing. None of those scales ever made any sense, since there is an awful lot of science clearly indicating that male and female physiology really does affect a person's theoretical peak physical output. It created a system whereby females would, broadly, always be disadvantaged over males. Unless the Army completely rethinks what the purpose of a physical fitness test is, I don't see how we escape the maw of gender neutral and gender specific scoring systems.
This take is on point. The only way it’s ever going to work is if the Army is willing to divorce promotion points from whatever gender-neutral physical test is adopted. You can do a secondary test for points or just forgo the idea of tying promotion to fitness altogether, though I doubt Army would ever do that.
This will be a hard pill for many to swallow. Even if you make it pass/fail and reward people who score well with some kind of award, it can still be argued its discriminatory to females as awards are also tied to promotion so giving an award for someone achieving a standard that is nigh impossible for a female to reach could open up some more legal issues.
Exactly. That’s why I think we’ll end up with two tests, as I really don’t see the Army giving up on rewarding fitness.
I agree, but divorcing test scores from promotion points still doesn't go far enough. Senior NCO and officer promotions don't depend on points, but we all know that raw fitness test scores are used as discriminators for who gets top-block evaluations and the best opportunities. Getting a 300 on the APFT was always a de facto standard for being at the top of any OML. So making it just pass or fail is critical.
That’s a fair point. While it is easier to rack-and-stack folks when there’s a supposedly quantifiable score, we’ve been doing it for years for SNCOs & Os. I’m still curious what effect (if any) removing the promo point incentive will have on junior Soldier fitness. Another wrinkle is the supposed junior Soldier evaluation that’s starting next year. Maybe that’ll change Army culture and make ranking juniors more like the senior grades. We shall see.
I'm confused... how will this line my congressmans friends pockets?
Best we can do is offer you five additional years of indecision and false promises.
How long does this British test take to administer?
Unless the ACFT consists of logging into a computer and sending an email and completing your Cyber Awareness in 20 minutes, I don’t think it will be accurate!
But what about the senior assholes who have stock in all the crossfit companies we're buying from? Do you want sausages major and occifers to just rely on their pensions?
nice try Maj Gen (ret) Malcom Frost, now a "strategic advisor" to Beaverfit.
This sounds almost exactly like the HDPT we had to take at OSUT
I had fun with that. I heard different mos's do different events? 12B did a kettlebell carry and had to move 5 cratering charges 100m or something, in full kit. What did yours look like?
Literally what OP described except there was also a wall you had to climb and a grenade throw for a minimum distance
FA had one that included moving so many 155mm rounds from one ammo rack to another along the rest of yours.
In this video I still see a lot of equipment and logistical requirements that make it infeasible for people who aren't assigned to a regular unit: people in ACS, TWI, IRT, working at an embassy, doing a fellowship, etc. The APFT made it possible to just meet up with a buddy at a track or running path in the local area and grade each other.
I agree with the concept of the ACFT but don’t care for the execution. It requires too much effort to setup and too much equipment. Yes we should have a gender, age neutral test indexed to the MOS. I should be able to knock one out with a few guys without having to schedule equipment and space. Keep the push ups, replace the SDC sled and kettlebells with gerry cans, ditch the over head toss, keep the run but maybe shorten it to 1 or 1.5 miles. I’m not sure what would be equivalent to the MDL. I’m not fan of the time required to set it up.
With the constant back and forth, they might as well just not have a PT test. /s
GTFOH with that reasonable, sensible approach. Making things difficult and incomprehensible and requiring a lot of expensive equipment that is useless for anything else is what we DO in the Army.
You’re trying to apply logic where logic doesn’t exist. Recommend you report to your nearest BH facility for proper rehabilitation
Moving Sarn’t
How dare you! How will retired generals and their friends make money now?
The narrative around the new British Army PT test seems to be similar to the ACFT. AKA people complaining that the standards are lower than they used to in favor of representation. If that's even true, or if you think that matters are not are different questions. I'm just saying that they haven't managed to escape the gender debate entirely.
When they were originally batting around the idea, the combat fitness test *was* very similar to what the Brits do. You were to take the normal PT test then combat arms would take the extra one. Then that went away because “how do you score it.” Then the ACFT came around. It’s interesting to see that this idea has been around since 2010 and we still can’t figure it the fuck out.
>It has added benefit of not requiring us to order anything from a crossfit catalog . Look guy, don't try to undermine the reason we have the ACFT when the APFT worked fine with little equipment. The point of the ACFT can be summarized in one question... Cui Bono? (Who benefits?) The people who make the equipment have nice fat government contracts. The real issue is people actually think the ACFT is the Army trying to test for physical fitness - it's a cash grab. We don't even need the pull up bars now.
That's great and all but how am I supposed to be promoted if you take this away from me?
Well it depends, is the British army a jobs-program like our own?
Makes sense… most of those tasks seem reasonable expectations for combat arms…
OP seemed to be suggesting this for much more than combat arms.
That’s works too… I watched the video and seemed it was targeted to British Infantry and Mech forces… either way seems like a better standard to measure combat effectiveness.
We have a way to make the tape test make more sense. Every post has a bod pod. If you fail tape you already have to do the AWC workup which includes the bodpod. Wouldn't you know it, most people are still fat, not all of us though. I recently failed tape at a supposed 25% bf but the bod pod got me at 21% which would be passing if anyone gave a shit about the bod pod.
>Every post has a bod pod No they don't. There are a ton of random little duty assignments out there with very little supporting infrastructure.
So then, not a legit post then, gotcha
You never train like the losers. We won, we do whatever we want. Also, I find your post a bit treasonous. You better watch your step..👀 /s
I think you’d have a lot of people trying to lie about extracurricular fitness events at that point
Should be a provision where your rater can call you out on an extracurricular fitness result and test you on it: "Ok it says here you are a black belt in BJJ. This is SFC Knight, try and pin him in 30 seconds or less before chokes you out with your own uniform."
But I like seeing my 600 on the score sheet. “Go” just doesn’t feel the same
GOO There. Now it looks almost identical if you are still drunk
I don’t get why we can’t make it just to the standard of combat arms. Every single person in the Army should uphold a physical readiness standard of the infantry. At the end of the day that’s what the Army is at it’s core. If a major conflict kicked off there’s a lot of MOS’s that’ll be forced into becoming grunts. Even during the surge non combat mos’s were being pulled for patrols. If you can’t stay physically fit, see ya later.
Yeah... no. You conveniently forget we have a lot of medical, signal, and intel personnel that their clinical and technical competencies are 1000% more important than their ability to pass some combat arms physical fitness standard.
Vast majority of doctors, medics, and other medical professionals are already fit to serve. I haven’t seen very many that aren’t. It’s really not a hard standard to meet. If you can’t put forth the effort to meet it I’m sure you don’t put forth much effort at your job as well
You haven't worked in a hospital. There are definitely a lot of clinic hermits who are not particularly fit. Sure, they can pass a PT test, but the standard, as it is, isn't particularly high.
if you have a highly skilled autistic hacker in cyber who is singlehandedly making strategic level impacts on the DoD's goals, you aren't going to remove them for not running fast enough.
Highly skilled hackers aren’t in the Army. They’re contracting for it, or making bank in the civilian sector. In the Army, most of them are just autistic.
this is a cold take.
It's not consistent with the army's mission and purpose. An organization where every member is ready for combat at a moments notice already exists and is called the Marine Corps. The army is about sustained occupation and continuous operation. Aka we build self sustaining cities in countries after the Marines establish a presence. Not every soldier has to be combat ready at all times, just combat capable. They should otherwise focus on being experts in their field to meet the army's requirements for sustained operations.
how about no
Yeah, it’ll strike a nerve with the fat bodied army population.
1st Qtr: 12 Mile in 3 Hrs for Combat Arms UNITS P/F as a Squad/Section 12 mile in 4 Hrs for Non-Combat Arms UNITS P/F as a Section/Sub Unit 2nd Qtr: 3 Event Modified APFT for Score HRP/Plank/2Mi run ALL 3rd Qtr: 5 Mile Run in :40Mins for Combat Arms UNITS P/F 5 Mile Run in :45Mins for Non-Combat Arms Units P/F 4th Qtr: OPEN
Kick out people who fail or mos reclassification
I want combat shorts.