If you remember different PT tests, such as "Staff & Faculty", should that return?

You already know my answer to that question and statement Jeffrey. I do remember you being tied to a chair and cockpit and having to do quite a bit of running to get with it! I know I comment on a lot of PT subjects here on RP, it is not the fact that I am a stud and perform to a plateau way above the standard, but the fact remains I have been able to go without doing PT for 4 years and pass the test without even trying to hard. When folks FAIL the minimum standard, then I seriously have issues with everything that goes along with it.

The recovery for things medically wrong with folks is okay, if enforced, but not used as an excuse.

Jeff, the folks last week at the BDE Schools APFT laughed when I showed up, remarking as to why I was there. Some simply said I had to blow into a breath meter to see how far/long I could hold the little blue ball there! Thing was, I took it next to Soldiers not displaying any excuses and came in a bit faster then some who actually needed it to attend WLC. Again, no excuse for them to allow the "OLD MAN" to place ahead.

If I had to make up a test for you, it would be a dead lift of the desk you sit behind, a beer run to the store down the street and the ability to either see or touch your toes!

PT has never proven much.

We all know that the VERY FIRST THING you do when the bullets start flying is drop and knock out 10. [TJFIC]

Look, if I'm ever in the situation where I have to do the Mogadishu Mile to survive, that's on me. In fact, I expect I'd ask for extra magazine from my soldiers, and then try to give them some cover, in hopes they'd send someone to pick up my old ass later. I think that might have something to do with a military virtue, i.e. the good of the unit/mission comes first. Funny how we can't test commitment, honor, and valor, but we can test how fit you are.

SGM (Join to see) , I find it interesting that you say we don't need separate standards. I think we do have separate standards now. We have many standards for PT by age and gender. How does it make sense that a 26 year old male helicopter pilot must be able to do 40 push-ups, but a 47 year old female helicopter pilot must be able to do 10? The do the same job, fly the same helicopter and face the same risks if it goes down in bad guy land. I would submit that standards based on MOS make more sense than the system we have now.

CW4 (P) Jeff Starritt , I agree with you that we have separate standards, and further that the jobs we do require differing levels of fitness. As I said above, in SARCASM, the first thing you do when bullets start flying is drop and knock out 10.

What I suggest is a single standard to STRIVE towards, indicating mastery. Not unlike Master Aircrew, or Master Parachutist, or Master EOD. If we had a system which recognize a high quality skill or ability, we could weigh that against those skills which are substandard and make a better decision on which soldiers are retainable.

As others have pointed out, people have been discharged for being overweight, even though they could run with a 155 howitzer round under each arm. The Army needs SF soldiers, and Blackwater is hiring them away.

What I am suggesting is that for EACH skill the Army needs, we need a scale, 1) Untrained, 2) Marginal, 3) Competent, 4) Expert, 5) Keep this soldier at all costs. ONE standard for each skill rated on the above chart. Then instead of making a career decision based on a single skill, or as you say, having unequal standard for no apparent reason, we would have a clear view of the value of the soldier to the service.

I dont think there should be a difference between staff and faculty, both should always be combat ready and both should have the same standards. I saw too many fat NCO's and upper officers while I served, to me they were disgraces to the uniform, it got so bad in one unit our Brigade commander started what was known as a fat boy program to rid his ranks of overweight soldiers, was a good Idea until it turned out that the overweight NCO's disregarded it and picked on soldiers.

Everyone in the Army is supposed to have the basic skill set of Bullet Launcher. Accordingly it is appropriate to test their ability, even if their regular job does not require it. But that doesn't mean that we should lose trained and valuable personnel just because they are substandard Bullet Launchers.

I'm not sure I believe the ability to do push-ups, sit-ups, and run fast equates to "leadership".

Cpt Willaims, you have obviously never had a leader with a pot gut barking out how miserable you are and you know damn well they couldnt run 50 feet to save their lives. I had a CPT that did just that back in basic /ait. He would let Top get us all warmed up and then take the formation only to do 5 push ups with us, get back on his feet huffing and puffing telling us how weak we were and how miserable we were and give the formation back to Top barely able to speak. Once underway on our run a taxi would pass us with his sorry ass in it and sure enough a few miles down the road there he was, yelling profanity at us to move our sorry ass's, take the formation from Top again for the max 2 minutes he could handle and this went on for the entire run EVERY run. Lead by example and set standards that soldiers will respect and look up to.