I just left the Army Chief of Staff Townhall Meeting on Ft. Campbell. Do you want to know some of the things he said?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 18:50:36 -0400

GEN Odierno was on Ft. Campbell today, and held a Q&A Townhall style meeting with soldiers from all Ft. Campbell units. While I do not recall all the questions asked (I am not a reporter or journalist), here are a couple answers he gave regarding some current questions across the force:

- In an answer about future changes to the APFT, he answered, "Over the past three years there have been two different versions of the APFT presented that I have shot down. I didn't think they reflected what the force needs. I'm leaning towards a two separate test system. Within the next six months you will start hearing about a new "standard" test that is intended to gauging overall physical fitness. That is the test everybody will use for promotions, points, and Army schools. Sometime after that, there will be an MOS specific test released that focuses on the specific physical tasks related to your MOS. For example, an Artilleryman moving 100lbs shells will need more upper body strength. An Infantryman carrying a ruck will need more core and lower body strength."

- In reference to NCO development, "We are going back to a 'Select, Train, Evaluate, Promote' system." and "You will soon hear about Army University"

- In reference to a question about toxic leaders and them being held accountable, "23 Commanders have been relieved over the past year for toxic command climate, which effectively ruins their career. I just don't publish it in the newspaper every time we do it. A two-star general was relieved with in the last two months for a toxic command climate. So they are being held accountable, I just don't advertise it."

- In reference to the active duty suicide rate, "We are addressing it through the Surgeon General channels. While we are seeing a decrease since our high in 2012, the amount of Active Duty suicide is far too high."

- In reference to a question about women in combat arms, "In January 2013 the Secretary of Defense removed a ban on women serving in combat arms related MOSs. For the past two years, the Army has been conducting a study on women serving in jobs they were previously banned from. We must submit our results of that study in the September/October time frame. This is not my opinion, nor is this my opinion, but there are people out there who believe if a person is capable and meets the standard, everyone should have a chance to do whatever they want. Of the female soldiers I've talked to, they do not want the standard changed for them. The way I will look at the issue is: does it impact unit readiness? If I feel it does impact unit readiness, I will have to request an exception to policy to keep women out of combat arms and SOF units."

These are only few of the questions that were asked. To be honest, they are the ones I recall off the top of my head.

What are your thoughts on his answers?

Response by SGT Nia Chiaraluce made May 14 at 2015 6:52 PM

SGT Nia Chiaraluce — Thu, 14 May 2015 18:52:11 -0400

You definitely have my attention.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 14 at 2015 7:00 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:00:46 -0400

1) Seems similar to the PFT & Combat Fitness Test the USMC uses, but tailored to the Army's needs. Makes sense from a scaling perspective.

2) Army University parallels Marine Corps University. It should exist! Sounds great!

3) Perfect answer.

4) Appropriate answer.

5) Appropriate answer.

Response by SFC Charles S. made May 14 at 2015 7:05 PM

SFC Charles S. — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:05:09 -0400

SFC Private RallyPoint Member That is a great sharing of the information you were privy to... thank you very much for bringing it here. This is the place where that kind of information can be extremely useful.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made May 14 at 2015 7:05 PM

SSG Kevin McCulley — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:05:55 -0400

More useless army nonsense. They sure make it public when they crush enlisted... You're telling me that is ALL? Just give it up and subcontract the Army like everything else the defense industry does. They obviously care nothing for national security... might as well follow Army tradition and let someone else take the blame entirely.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 14 at 2015 7:11 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:11:22 -0400

Thank you for the report.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 7:14 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:14:48 -0400

Thanks for sharing. Had no idea GEN Odierno was here today.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made May 14 at 2015 7:21 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Thu, 14 May 2015 19:21:22 -0400

Thanks for passing this on SFC Private RallyPoint Member. Semper fi ...

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 8:20 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 20:20:16 -0400

Good information to pass along. Thanks for posting it. It'll be interesting to see how things change once we have a new CSA.

Response by COL Charles Williams made May 14 at 2015 8:30 PM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 14 May 2015 20:30:43 -0400

Good stuff, thanks! SFC Private RallyPoint Member. I agree with the MOS specific PT standards, so long as there is one for men and women.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 8:36 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 20:36:57 -0400

Thanks for sharing

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 8:42 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 20:42:46 -0400

Perhaps with the rise of a combat arms SMA and soon to be chief of staff, maybe the army will get away from some of the garrison pog mindset that seems to run rampant. A change of commander in chief following the next election may have an impact on the focus and direction of the army as well.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 8:44 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 20:44:13 -0400

Thank you for sharing. I would really like to know more about the proposed Army U. This was the first I'd heard of it. The APFT sounds like it may be promising if it can be adequately standardized.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 9:55 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 May 2015 21:55:39 -0400

Sounds like house is being cleaned and change is coming. I am interested to see what future changes are enacted with the new changes in leadership.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 2:10 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 May 2015 02:10:01 -0400

That is all good stuff. I had a posted a question a long time ago about the APFT and adding on a MOS specific events in some MOSs. It just makes sense.

Response by SFC Stephen King made May 15 at 2015 5:41 AM

SFC Stephen King — Fri, 15 May 2015 05:41:19 -0400

SFC Aaron Myall

Thank you, for the insight I appreciate all the information of the upcoming changes.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made May 15 at 2015 5:52 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Fri, 15 May 2015 17:52:57 -0400

Hopefully "Army University" will be accredited like the "Community College of the Air Force'...

Response by PVT William Bresch made Dec 29 at 2015 9:37 AM

PVT William Bresch — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 09:37:14 -0500

In the Computer World, we call them there answers, "CANNED ANSWERS"...ol boy, was trained like a K-9 to a Drug Bust. next time go to the source, not some puppet on a string.

Response by SGT Kennith Mcduffie made Jan 9 at 2016 12:08 PM

SGT Kennith Mcduffie — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 12:08:46 -0500

That was alot of good info. Hopefully we can build and weed out the weak.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 9 at 2017 2:00 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Oct 2017 14:00:12 -0400

I trust the statements of few officers above the rank of O-5 and never above O-6. Two exceptions, GEN Pete Schoomaker and LTG "Jerry" Boykin. Why? Because I served under both at one time or another and both are unusually candid with their subordinates.