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
1
1
0
There needs to be one standard period. If a unit/branch or base wants to impose a higher standard locally that is their choice. If they went down that road the PT test would become a nightmare, the graders would have to know and have on hand every different one for the members of their units. More wasted taxpayer money and taking away from training and mission dollars.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Since in the Marine Corps, every Marine is considered a rifleman first, MOS second, I do believe that fitness standards should be the same. I think infantry already gets more humps and weight added on their humps(hikes). But the minimum should stay the same.
(1)
(0)
COL Charles Williams
OK... Marines also have two standards, and even two separate basic (boot camps) trainings... This study DOD is doing is for all 3 departments.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Sasha Cruz
They may be gender separate boot camps, but the training is still the same. Same for all PT. Gender specific different, but same for everyone across the board regardless of MOS or rank.
(0)
(0)
Sgt (Join to see)
Different standards per MOS makes integrating those MOSes with units difficult. Take communicators for example. Their PT standards will not prepare them for integration into the infantry, artillery, or ANGLICOs. In fact, holding them to their own standards would be detrimental to their abilities to perform in those combat heavy environments, leading to the theory that all communicators must have higher standards. The same can be said of admin, embark, motor transport, intel, cooks, armorers, pilots (FACs) and civil affairs. Eventually all MOSes are linked to a higher standard in this regard, resulting in a higher standard across the board. MOS specific standards are then no longer MOS specific, since they are altered to keep up with the unit each individual is assigned to.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
We kind of already do have varying standards. Example: my PT routines with 3/10 (Arty) were much different than with 2/6 and 1/8 (Infantry) and 5th Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company. We still were only tested on the Corps wide standards, but each unit trains differently depending on their mission, METLs, and SOPs.
Making new standards for each unit debunks the promotions process, as an FO who sits at the Division FFCC will not have the same requirements as one who is with the infantry. When the Infantry FO doesn't meet the assumed higher standards of the infantry, that is grounds for a non-rec come promotions, while the FFCC FO, who is in the same shape, doesn't face such consequences due to the assumed unchanged standards of his unit.
Making new standards for each unit debunks the promotions process, as an FO who sits at the Division FFCC will not have the same requirements as one who is with the infantry. When the Infantry FO doesn't meet the assumed higher standards of the infantry, that is grounds for a non-rec come promotions, while the FFCC FO, who is in the same shape, doesn't face such consequences due to the assumed unchanged standards of his unit.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
leave the standard like it is. It should just be a baseline to measure fitness, all other concerns should be left up to the commander. If a soldier is not fit for combat arms the commander should be able to refer the soldier to a POG unit. And a POG unit ought to be able to decide for itself whether a particular soldier is an asset or liability. 10-1 odds that anyone wounded in Iraq/Afghanistan was treated by someone that should have been kicked out for failing to meet the pt standards at some point in their career.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No matter what you job is your primary is infantryman. The test should be centered on that. One job one test, no variations.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I don't necessarily agree that everyone is infantry. Everyone is a soldier. A lot of what is thought to be infantry task are not really infantry tasks at all. They are basic soldier skills. If one was an infantryman they would know what a beaten zone and a cone of fire are. They would also know when to use a PDF vs. a FPL.
(2)
(0)
COL Jon Thompson
We often hear the every Soldier is an Infantryman but the reality is far from that. Everyone needs to know their basic Soldier skills but to say that everyone is an Infantryman makes it seem like anyone can pick up a rifle and do that job. Reality is that being a proficient Infantry Soldier requires long, hard training sessions starting only at the Soldier level and going up to the larger echelons of command. People who say otherwise do not know how challenging the Infantry actually is.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The Army is one team, one fight. It should also be one team, one standard.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Everyone should have the same requirements for the AFPT, the problem lies in the fact that we have already allowed for separate standards to be made. If we are willing to allow for the lowering of standards for females and older Soldiers, then why is it a stretch to allow for changes based on MOS? We should adopt a one standard AFPT, we should not change requirements based on MOS, gender or age.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I totally agree with you. We already have different standards. I don't understand why it would be so difficult to grasp. I keep see everyone say that anyone could end up in combat. Then why is a 37 year old female expected to do so much less than a 18 year old male.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
As an infantryman I can see both sides of this. The military has changed in the years since I joined. When I first joined, scoring a 300 on a PT test was looked as a goal not the standard. NCOs were marked well on their NCOER and there's a badge that's awarded (but never worn). Instead now your expected to score a 300 on the PT test in the Infantry and are looked down on if you don't. It's a shift in perspective for combat MOS' that has led to some feeling different standards for PT tests are needed.
I don't think different standards are needed. NCOs run PT plans meeting their officers guidelines. You train your soldiers to the standards you want them to be at and provide them with the time and the tools to meet those standards. Want higher PT scores two a day PT schedules.
In our military we are all supposed to be held to the same standards and look the same. We keep relaxing that in a time where I feel it's most important to be inforcing that in our military.
Let unit standards keep combat arms PT scores where the unit wants them, no need to creat separate tests.
I don't think different standards are needed. NCOs run PT plans meeting their officers guidelines. You train your soldiers to the standards you want them to be at and provide them with the time and the tools to meet those standards. Want higher PT scores two a day PT schedules.
In our military we are all supposed to be held to the same standards and look the same. We keep relaxing that in a time where I feel it's most important to be inforcing that in our military.
Let unit standards keep combat arms PT scores where the unit wants them, no need to creat separate tests.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Bad idea. End of the, we're all Soldiers, and there's one standard that we have to meet. Leaders need to ensure that one standard is met. I'm all for MOS PT to increase proficiency, but again that should be leader driven. If we had an MOS where everyone was scoring a 300, then there would be thought for consideration, but we all know that's certainly not the case. An MOS APFT is just a precursor to lowering the standard.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I completely agree it should be specific to MOS but some food for thought is it really fair that I will have to work twice as hard as some soft skill MOS to meet my standards but when it comes to DA boards we get looked at the same?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google