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
2
2
0
Yes, ultimately everyone is a foot soldier in the Big Conflict. Your MOS/Job may not require a high level of fitness. But, in a conflict your environment/location may. I don't care what your MOS is, other lives depend on you to be able to do your Job anywhere you are needed.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
This is one of the dumbest ideas I have heard in a while. We already give different tests for different ages. I have to say I really like fewer brackets not more. The battlefield is being blurred where the lines are so the days of rear echelons are about gone
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
should stay one standard for all not just for some MOS special forces are required to do harder pt but that is what they accepted it. everyone is expected to fight if required cant have a fat guy running ammo to the front line if he dies from not being able to breath
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Well,
I truly just read this stuff for entertainment, but most should consider the fact that the weight and PASSING the APFT, or PT isn't that hard. It may be hard to get 300s or excellent, but passing... Weight, maybe hold down the fork?
I truly just read this stuff for entertainment, but most should consider the fact that the weight and PASSING the APFT, or PT isn't that hard. It may be hard to get 300s or excellent, but passing... Weight, maybe hold down the fork?
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Lowering the standards for the weak instead of making them perform is what's wrong with the world today. Look at no child left behind. The intent was to be helpful but all it did was let people move up who weren't ready. My son is an example. He is a senior this year only because it was given to him. He didn't earn it and now he struggles with his senior classes more than he did as a junior. If we keep lowering the standard there will be none.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Lowering the standards for the weak is why we currently have desk jockeys being held to the same fitness standard as people walking the motor pool or in the field all day. The desk jockeys have to put in even more time just to catch the standard than the police callers.
It's also why we already have a difference in gender and age standards.
It's also why we already have a difference in gender and age standards.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Way way Back, like 1970, there were at least 3 pt tests, one for combat forces, one for soldiers with administrative duties, and then the women's test
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
From day 1, we as Soldiers are told that our Primary MOS is 11B, Infantry. We need to have and do have a minimum standard that EVERYONE in the Army has to meet. If your base is overrun and the fighting kills all of the "fighting forces" i.e. infantry, and all you have is PACC clerks and cooks, you will wish that they had the same level of fitness as the infantry. So why go through all of that? One standard for the Army, you know, the ARMY standard.
(2)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I would question a few different aspects. I don't believe that everyone in the Army is infantry. Infantry is Infantry. I would say that all soldiers are rifleman. If you can show me any doctrine to support this I would appreciate it.
I wouldn't go reduce the standard but I would raise it in certain areas. It is already being done in SOF unit in the army. Getting a 180, or the equivalent, in Ranger School and RASP is a failure. But the Rangers and SF are also in the Army and are Everyone.
If a base with an Infantry unit on it was over ran and all of the infantry were killed you might as well call a JDAM on yourself. A defending infantry unit can hold off units as large as three times their size. In Afghan they did that and more. At times walls were breached and enemy did make into bases and compounds. But base defense isn't an exclusive task to infantry. Any soldier should be able to do that.
I would want everyone else in the Army to be in as shape as the infantry. But I don't want the Infantry to be as out of shape as the rest of the Army. Not all jobs are as physically intensive as infantry. I wouldn't expect a 42A to ruck the same distance and pace as an 11C. If they can't should we then hold the 11C to a standard that the 42A could pass?
I wouldn't go reduce the standard but I would raise it in certain areas. It is already being done in SOF unit in the army. Getting a 180, or the equivalent, in Ranger School and RASP is a failure. But the Rangers and SF are also in the Army and are Everyone.
If a base with an Infantry unit on it was over ran and all of the infantry were killed you might as well call a JDAM on yourself. A defending infantry unit can hold off units as large as three times their size. In Afghan they did that and more. At times walls were breached and enemy did make into bases and compounds. But base defense isn't an exclusive task to infantry. Any soldier should be able to do that.
I would want everyone else in the Army to be in as shape as the infantry. But I don't want the Infantry to be as out of shape as the rest of the Army. Not all jobs are as physically intensive as infantry. I wouldn't expect a 42A to ruck the same distance and pace as an 11C. If they can't should we then hold the 11C to a standard that the 42A could pass?
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
I would very much expect a 42A to ruck the same distance as an 11C, but then again I'm from the "old Army" where we grew up as Warriors first and technicians second. BLUF a Soldier is a Soldier and I should be able to take any Soldier and place them where they are needed. I'm going to push my 25 series just as hard as I would push my 11 series. Hell, I would even implement cross training of everyone's jobs to ensure that every position can be filled at any time. The problem is where my mentality used to be the norm, the Army got soft and now my mentality is some weird type outside of the box way of thinking. My mentality comes from the Army before September 11th, 2001, where training hard, discipline, and standards were the word of law. I can honestly say that 13 years of war has put a hurting on the Army and the way we conduct business. We have moved out a lot of strong leaders due to retirement or QSP/QMP, and now the "new school" that allowed Soldiers to get tattoos on their necks have taken charge. We have allowed the new school mentality of your MOS is all you do to take a foothold in the Army, and that has made us want to do lazy things (such as come up with the idea for MOS specific APFT).
Everyone wearing this uniform should be able to meet one standard, period. The APFT should be a test of your physical prowess, but it shouldn't be the guideline to making your Soldiers more fit and/or stronger. Units should be doing way more than just prepping for the APFT. The two standard crap that we have now is just that, CRAP, and it should be abolished. One standard for males and females should be the test, how you train for toughness and strength in your formations is a totally different animal in itself.
Everyone wearing this uniform should be able to meet one standard, period. The APFT should be a test of your physical prowess, but it shouldn't be the guideline to making your Soldiers more fit and/or stronger. Units should be doing way more than just prepping for the APFT. The two standard crap that we have now is just that, CRAP, and it should be abolished. One standard for males and females should be the test, how you train for toughness and strength in your formations is a totally different animal in itself.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see) I wish the Army had more NCOs like you. You made a very good point. The Army did change. I may be a 1LT but I have 14 years in the Army. I was in before the years started. I know what you are talking about. Things changed and the Army changed. I would say that if you showed up to a new unit and told some 25B that he had to keep pace with an 11B on a ruck you would get some crazy stares.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
He may stare at me crazy, but I guarantee that his ass will be rucked up and moving out at the same pace as everyone else in the formation lol!!! As an old Drill Sergeant I don't accept the MOS excuse. If you have legs and they work pretty good, then you can keep up with the pack.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
There is a standard for a reason. You are aware that your primary MOS is 11B right? You are a Soldier act like one.
(2)
(0)
SPC Charles Griffith
WTH has happened to my Army??? Do they not teach soldiers in basic that we are all infantry anymore? That's the whole reason for basic to teach us how to be able to pick up our rifles and fight if need be.My god I thought the problem in our current wars was government interference but listing to this drivel I start to wonder???
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
SPC Charles Griffith Being an 11 series soldier is more than just being able to shoot and defend your base. I just finished planning a training mission with a Squad Leader of mine. He is a 11B. He knows how far a ORP should be from the RP, how from the RP should be from the SBF, and how to overlay TRPs vs. TGTs on an objective. If you know what I am talking about then you may have been trained an 11B. That is what we do. Fighting is a bit more complex then "Hey, there is the bad guy! Let's go over there and shoot him!" It would be like saying that I was taught how to replace a track on a Bradley so I am pretty much a Tracked Vehicle Mechanic. Just because you know the most basic tasks doesn't mean you are qualified.
(1)
(0)
SPC Charles Griffith
So what you are saying is you think the current training regimen is inadequate? I just think that the standard has been set and it seams to be working great as is. Why change it with something that is 1)not needed and 2)going to be costly to implement?
(0)
(0)
SPC Charles Griffith
No I was in no way implying that our 11b qualified soldiers are lesser soldiers. As an 11b qualified soldier you would be trained in more indepth areas of battlefield tactics and small unit maneuvers. as I said in an earlier post we all have our place in the big scheme of things and with out support the warfighters go down but without the warfighters support gets eaten. so I don't understand how anyone would take my position to be one of superiority? The OP was about the idea of an MOS specific AFPT. My position is that it is not needed and that the standard is just that a standard that can be exceeded if one so chooses.Now I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of rewarding those troops who choose to exceed the standard but to change the standard is in my personal opinion not needed or fiscally responsible ATT.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
It would appear to me, and even though mine was strictly peacetime service. That if you've signed on the Dotted Line as a Soldier of the United States of America, that You therefore could Assume that Your Service MIGHT include a tenure in a Combat environment. Even though I served during peacetime, I was also educated by my NCO's & Change of command that Physical Fitness is of Tantamount Importance IF ever Deployed. Therefore, I was motivated to hit the gym a little more in addition to being pushed in Regular Battalion, Battery and Platoon PT. There MUST be ALWAYS be Lofty Fitness Standards set forth for ALL Soldiers. It is the only way to ensure that ALL troops, Male & Female are at Top Readiness Standards. Each Individual Soldier should Also Feel that They MUST be in Top Shape to Defend the Freedom's & Liberties that we are charged with Protecting. Simply my Thoughts.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SPC Charles Griffith
Well I don't know what has happened to my Army but when I went to basic it was taught that we are all infantry? hell that's the whole reason for basic to teach us how to pick up a weapon and fight if need be.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google