Posted on Jan 8, 2015
Does every MOS/Rate need the same level of fitness? What about an MOS/Rate specific PT test or events?
83.5K
659
567
23
20
3
I really hope this happens. Not all MOS require the same level of Fitness. I wouldn't use it for an promotion packet against all MOSs as it wouldn't be the same for everyone but I would like to see additional events that address some of the specific tasks that are measures of fitness for some MOSs. For infantry I would add pull ups or even a ruck. If you were a mechanics you might have to be able to hand carry a certain weight over a short distance. I would let senior NCOs in that MOS decide what they would require. The Army should not make every MOS have a different tst. This would impossible. But an example of how this would look is that any one in combat arms or in a combat arms unit would be required to perform pulls and a ruck. If you were in a field medical or medical support unit you may have to do a body drag.
*****************************EDITED*************************************
Be advised. The standard should not be LOWERED. The base APFT with 180 should not be lowered. I think it should be higher. I think it should be especially higher for some areas, such as the combat arms. What this would look like is using the standard test for everyone but adding an additional event. So if you are a soldier that doesn't much physical labor you wouldn't be effected by this. If you were a combat engineer in the 82ND you would be required to a bit more.
*****************************EDITED*************************************
Be advised. The standard should not be LOWERED. The base APFT with 180 should not be lowered. I think it should be higher. I think it should be especially higher for some areas, such as the combat arms. What this would look like is using the standard test for everyone but adding an additional event. So if you are a soldier that doesn't much physical labor you wouldn't be effected by this. If you were a combat engineer in the 82ND you would be required to a bit more.
MOS
APFT
Fitness
Edited 9 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 198
0
0
0
Are you talking about the same test, but with different standards per MOS? In reserve units with several types of MOS, such as training units, the logistics would suck.
I also wonder about a soldier who is no longer active in a particular MOS. This happens a lot in reserves. Should a field arty SFC who is working Ops/S3 be tested the same as a field arty PSG in an active artillery unit?
I also wonder about a soldier who is no longer active in a particular MOS. This happens a lot in reserves. Should a field arty SFC who is working Ops/S3 be tested the same as a field arty PSG in an active artillery unit?
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
It would suck if they had to track different types of events for different mos's. At least in my unit, just running a standard PT test takes away too many training hours, especially for monthly diagnostics.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I think the only way it would be possible is to make a standard 3 event test for all soldiers. If you were in some of the more physically demanding MOSs you would have a 4th and 5th possibly. Like infantry may have a rope climb and a ruck march.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
I liked the timed obstacle course that was used by the Navy aviator candidates in officer and a gentleman, something like that could be used, but the logistical problem with the part time forces could be an issue
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
All soldiers should be held to the same standard regardless of their MOS. The current pt test is a measure of overall fitness and should not be altered to a specific measure of fitness for specific jobs.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Both sides make really good points. My concern is however that we saw in some cases (rare I admit) when they are put in a situation that requires them to be in physical shape. Cooks, admin and finance people all had to defend their post when they were ambushed.
maybe the army should outsource jobs that don't require physical aptitude? I can see some resentment within the ranks that this soldier is on a different standard. Doesn't have to do the same thing, and I have seen different standard tear apart otherwise good units.
Even if MOS stick to one unit, there will be times that they will be opconed to another unit that doesn't follow that which will potentially create animosity. In addition, any branch and rank can be a CSM, 1SG. If you can't do PT at that high of a rank, I think it will be difficult to get the respect you need.
maybe the army should outsource jobs that don't require physical aptitude? I can see some resentment within the ranks that this soldier is on a different standard. Doesn't have to do the same thing, and I have seen different standard tear apart otherwise good units.
Even if MOS stick to one unit, there will be times that they will be opconed to another unit that doesn't follow that which will potentially create animosity. In addition, any branch and rank can be a CSM, 1SG. If you can't do PT at that high of a rank, I think it will be difficult to get the respect you need.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I'm sorry but that dog just won't hunt. There is already a base line for everyone. They do have to defend themselves. That is a basic function and some of them have difficultly doing that. If you watch documentaries like Restrepo or korengal you will see what I am talking out. I didn't see any cooks, admin, or finance people on the outposts in the Afghan hill sides. I may be wrong. If you know any support units that ran a COP in Afghan I would love to know. It was an extremely difficult fight. We sooner we realize that we are not all the same the better we will be. We should perform to the standard but the army asks more of some.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
How about scoring based upon MTOE or unit? This would mitigate the headache of various MOS standards within a unit. That means that all personnel assigned by MTOE to an infantry company would have to complete a different standard than those assigned to the BSB.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SPC Scott Mayhew Thank you for laying out the status quo. This conversation is about changing the that.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
I am not complaining about CAT IV ASVAB scores here nor am I discussing the over 40 enlistments which happened ca. 2006. We're discussing the APFT based upon different needs, primarily those special skills which are very much in demand. A kid who can take two years to learn Arabic is hardly the kind you seem to be discussing.
BTW, I am not some shammer. I have scored over 270 on my APFT since 2010, and haven't sniffed under 290 since 2011. However, I have worked with physical beasts who were idiots and slugs who were some of the best Soldiers when it came to mission accomplishment. While it doesn't have to be an either/or, my money is on mission accomplishment over seemingly arbitrary (I know, actuarial science went into the creation of the APFT standards. One of my friends is an ORSA) metrics. Those metrics aren't set in stone, and I think a discussion about change can be healthy. Heck, it seems to be one of the hot topics in the force right now. Just crack open Military Review or visit the numerous blogs which are concerned with issues such as these. I recommend "The Bridge" on Medium.com or Warcouncil.org.
BTW, I am not some shammer. I have scored over 270 on my APFT since 2010, and haven't sniffed under 290 since 2011. However, I have worked with physical beasts who were idiots and slugs who were some of the best Soldiers when it came to mission accomplishment. While it doesn't have to be an either/or, my money is on mission accomplishment over seemingly arbitrary (I know, actuarial science went into the creation of the APFT standards. One of my friends is an ORSA) metrics. Those metrics aren't set in stone, and I think a discussion about change can be healthy. Heck, it seems to be one of the hot topics in the force right now. Just crack open Military Review or visit the numerous blogs which are concerned with issues such as these. I recommend "The Bridge" on Medium.com or Warcouncil.org.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Aside from all the jokes and pokes I'd like to take against other MOS's ... This would only be benifcial if it was (1) remove from All Promotions/ NCOERs/ ORERs
(2) It would need to be set a BDG Level based on METT ... During periods OIF / OEF FA units were retrained to assist the large number of required MP units.
You say that it should be more MOS specific; how ever, during a convoy ambush or FOB attack everyone becomes a "Trigger Puller" which in its self is none MOS specific.
(My thought would be) If too much of a standard separates of one MOS from another you are likely to have both non physically and non deplorable Soldiers. Add too a BDE level Standard to evation for high impact / ready deployable unit
(2) It would need to be set a BDG Level based on METT ... During periods OIF / OEF FA units were retrained to assist the large number of required MP units.
You say that it should be more MOS specific; how ever, during a convoy ambush or FOB attack everyone becomes a "Trigger Puller" which in its self is none MOS specific.
(My thought would be) If too much of a standard separates of one MOS from another you are likely to have both non physically and non deplorable Soldiers. Add too a BDE level Standard to evation for high impact / ready deployable unit
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
What I envision, I know that is a Lt saying big words but bear with me, would look much the same for everyone. I would only add an event or two to some MOSs that require a greater feat of strength. Like making a Ruck march required for infantry. You are going to ruck in the infantry. It does directly affect your job. But do anything in the APFT show your fitness level in relation to rucking.
I have seen soldiers get high scores and can't ruck for anything. That is what i would be addressing with this.
I have seen soldiers get high scores and can't ruck for anything. That is what i would be addressing with this.
(0)
(0)
SFC Wesley Arnold, Jr
The part that I believe should be looked at is different standards and different events, when is APFT applicable for discharge or other disciplinary actions. Unless the additional events and/or requirements are part of a new SQT, with grounds for reclassification and forfeiture of Bonuses an other MOS specific perks that are part of a Soldiers enlistment
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
CPT (Join to see)
But we already don't. If you want to go to the Rangers they have a higher standard and so does SF. Should they be forced to reduce their expectation of fitness to the regular 180 standard of the APFT.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Keith Hebert
each service has their basic standards
you can always go over the standard never below
you can always go over the standard never below
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
CPT (Join to see)
Maybe it would be a timed read while doing push ups and you would be graded on your comprehension of what you read. But in all honestly I believe it would only affect those MOSs that require physical activity beyond an average soldier.
(1)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
SFC Chris Smith I'm in a MI unit and I know what you are talking about. Not just their clearence but also the 35P in their first unit station, while their are getting their clearance or haven't been assigned to a mission yet don't practice their language and you have to pass the DLPT yearly. I've seen some 35P PF that have struggled to pass it. And all that is beside the APFT.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I would like to see some sort of test to stay current int he infantry. But I am not sure how that would look. I like the idea.
(0)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
CPT (Join to see) even when I'm not in a language MOS, I need to pass the DLPT every year to keep those 10 promotions points in my PPW. I don't know anything about infantry but it would be good to see something likely.
(1)
(0)
0
-1
1
That's why the Army is weak. They also allow walkers instead of running 2miles
(0)
(1)
COL Charles Williams
The Army is weak.... All 3 military departments are reviewing what jobs women can or should be allowed in, as well as physical fitness standards for the 5 military branches
(2)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
But it is highly frowned upon. I would say called the Army weak is a bold statement. I haven't seen too many in the Navy on the fighting face to face with the enemy, excluding the seals.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPL Alex Kohn I would add that the only place that every NCO is strong is Ranger Batt or SF. I was in 252nd AR also. There were weak ones there but I was there to counter that. It is easy to blame everyone is weak and that you know how things are done but the true challenge is how you fix it. I was a SGT and SSG in the Guard and the Guard made me a strong NCO and now a Strong Officer. Also, I have been down range several times. I have a lot of place in the Regular Army and in the Guard. It is not just the Guard.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google