Posted on Aug 10, 2015
Army's fitness training fails the combat test. Why is the Army using standards based on information from the '80s and '90s?
6.12K
65
27
10
10
0
How do you feel about this report? I thought it would be interesting to see your viewpoints.
The Army is in an era when it is shrinking and needs its troops to truly meet the requirements of the best Soldiers.The Army will need both the best physically and mentally trained Soldiers. The question is: Why doesn't Army use the most current resources to make sure Soldiers are truly physically prepared for the battlefield?
Why is the Army using physical fitness testing standards based on information from the '80s and '90s? Why is the Army using a body fat assessment that has no scientific justification on telling if a Soldier is actually overweight?
Check out this article from Army Times:
Commentary: Army's fitness training fails the combat test
http://www.armytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/08/10/commentary-armys-fitness-training-fails-combat-test/31283677/
The Army is in an era when it is shrinking and needs its troops to truly meet the requirements of the best Soldiers.The Army will need both the best physically and mentally trained Soldiers. The question is: Why doesn't Army use the most current resources to make sure Soldiers are truly physically prepared for the battlefield?
Why is the Army using physical fitness testing standards based on information from the '80s and '90s? Why is the Army using a body fat assessment that has no scientific justification on telling if a Soldier is actually overweight?
Check out this article from Army Times:
Commentary: Army's fitness training fails the combat test
http://www.armytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/08/10/commentary-armys-fitness-training-fails-combat-test/31283677/
Fitness
Training
Training Soldiers
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
5
5
0
The average weight of a male is really 200lbs? Maybe for the general population, but I don't feel like that's the average for the military population. I think this article is spot with what's wrong with the body fat measurements and PRT. We need to increase stamina and energy in combat so we can outlast the enemy and give our troops the best chance of getting out safely. PRT is a joke, and I would really love to have a conversation with whoever came up with it to understand what they were thinking.
(5)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SGT Kristin Wiley, Thank you for your comments. I can see where some changes in exercising need upgraded. Although, the training we received in my era, made me the most fit I've ever been in my life. Like all things, you get out of it what you put into it. Y'all wear shorts and Tees. We wore BDU's and combat boots to exercise and run in.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGT Kristin Wiley Here's the CDC Link for both men and women:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm
Keep in mind that these numbers can be manipulated rather easily though. This puts average US male height at 5'9"+ and female at 5'4"~. When you add in "super obese" it tilts the scale heavily to one side, and there is no way to tilt it back, as there is no corresponding "weight class" on the other side.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm
Keep in mind that these numbers can be manipulated rather easily though. This puts average US male height at 5'9"+ and female at 5'4"~. When you add in "super obese" it tilts the scale heavily to one side, and there is no way to tilt it back, as there is no corresponding "weight class" on the other side.
Source: Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and Adults: United States, 2007-2010, tables 4, 6, 10, 12, 19, 20 [PDF - 1.7 MB]
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
SGT (Join to see) Makes sense. I never liked the tape for that very reason. Sit-ups have caused countless injuries. This troops suggestions make sense. The Army is currently looking at new tests. I believe we need a basic Soldiers fitness standard - weight and fitness, and then MOS specific standards for physical fitness job by job.
(5)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
COL Charles Williams - Colonel; "Sit-backs" are physiologically much safer than "Sit-ups" and end up achieving the same end.
The advantage of "Sit-backs" over "Sit-ups" is that "Sit-backs" to NOT require an initial 100% (of final desired level) muscle stress level and can be gradually increased in the amount of muscle stress level required as the troop builds effective muscle mass.
The advantage of "Sit-backs" over "Sit-ups" is that "Sit-backs" to NOT require an initial 100% (of final desired level) muscle stress level and can be gradually increased in the amount of muscle stress level required as the troop builds effective muscle mass.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
COL Charles Williams, COL Mikel J. Burroughs, COL Ted Mc, Wearing shorts and Tees would have been a lot more comfortable than BDU's but the PT wouldn't have been as effective, IMO
(2)
(0)
COL Charles Williams
SGT (Join to see) - We had Boots, green pants, and W t-shirts for PT when I came in 1980.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
COL Charles Williams, You're just a youngster. LOL We had to wear tees and long sleeves for PT, all day long.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
The Army needs to realizes the advancements in PT and go with something that works in this day and age!
(5)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
The fat standard stood out with me. Has the Army made any changes in PT since I was in?
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Absolutely none. The tape test makes no sense for muscular Soldiers. And the APFT events don't measure anything in terms of true fitness.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google