Does the APFT accurately assess an individual's fitness level?

To me, if you look at things logically and you look at the things we do when we're fighting a war, common sense dictates that some form of sprints, obstacle courses, and ruck marches are a much better way to measure someone's battle readiness than push ups, sit ups, pull ups, and a 2 mile run.

I don't know about anyone else, but I've never been out on patrol and had to drop and bang out 50 to achieve anything.

- APFT is a way and not the way to assess individual fitness level.
- The APFT is a compromise solution and not an optimal solution.
- Compromise solution = best option with resources available that is agreeable to most or all of the stakeholders.
+ APFT can be taken with minimal resources in any location.
- Measures endurance and cariovascular but not strength so much.
- Does not measure fitness or athletic skills directly used in combat (sprint, climb, carry heavy load/person, etc).
+ Provide one standard that is measurable and understandable across all ranks, components and domains.
- Optimal solution = best solution period but may not be best for all or may require obscene amount of resources.
- Other recommend solutions require infrastructure or equipment that is not easily or cheaply obtained in combat or by the National Guard/Reserve.
- Better able to meaure combat skills but see above note.
- Arguable that not all skills needed for all MOS.

How would I change the APFT? Boy, I'm glad you asked.

First event: Pull ups - 1 minute max
Second event: crunches - 1 minute max
Third event: Pushups - 1 minute max
Fourth event: 50-yard shuttle run - 6 reps
Fifth event: 1 mile run

That should get everyone good and gassed.

the APFT is garbage. Especially the sit-up portion. So many better ways to measure fitness.

But I doubt the APFT will ever change. It's garbage, but it's our garbage, and we don't like change.

You simply cannot measure fitness in any cheaper way. It's not like we have the money to build expensive obstacle courses everywhere, and all attempts to change the APFT fail because they all introduce exercises that require additional equipment.

A new, cheap APFT could keep the run at 2 miles, to measure cardiovascular fitness; keep the push-ups, to measure upper body strength; ax the sit-ups, as they are dangerous and don't measure much; add pull-ups, to measure upper body strength in a different way; and then add a core exercise and a flexibility exercise to measure those components.

To address combat tasks, I like the mos-specific test concept. While the infantry might need to be good at rucking and the low-crawl and the 3-5 second rush, a surgeon probably doesn't need to be. But cost is again a factor, and the mos tests need to be simple and cheap.

I think it should encompass something more like an obstacle course like zero day at Air Assault school. You are using every muscle group and flexibility as well.

Not even close. I have known many a "PT stud" who smoke the APFT but can't make it more than a mile on a ruck march or get their own body weight over a 5 foot wall. Like was said previously, the APFT is a compromise solution because it is easy to conduct with minimal resources. My biggest complaint is how so many people tend to put so much stock in the results of the APFT when they measure the value of a soldier. I've seen plenty of cases where the PT stud is the golden boy of the unit even though he/she is one of the worst soldiers in the unit. Dumb as a rock, sucks at their job but, by God, they can score a 300 on the APFT...

I would say no at least the sit-ups in my opinion. You do not have to be in shape to do sit-ups and most people use their hip flexors anyways. I do agree on the push-ups but it can be harder/easier dependent on your arm-length. The run is accurate and I agree with it. Many people disagree with the length of the run and if it should be two miles or not though.
I think we should incorporate pull-ups into the PT test as you have to do them in most selection based programs. I think it is something a lot of people are weak at (to include me) and could be more important in a combat situation.

Question for those of you who have said dead hangs and sprints what would you use as an alternate event for those of us who can't do the dead hang as I have had 3 shoulder surgeries but can still do my job and I have migraines brought on by the run among other things? Not everyone is in great shape but that doe not mean they can not do their jobs right? I use to be a mechanic and was in great shape but now am over 45 and have been in for 20+ years should I be forced out? If you get rid of all of those in the same boat as I am most of the medical profession and office jobs will have to go then who will lead? Just a thought there will always be a need for those who can not perform the same as everyone else does that make them less of a soldier or leader?

Yes. The level of the lowest denominator

I feel current fitness test adequate. Still in great shape