Is it time for the Army to create new height & weight standards and a new body fat test?

It's time to do away with them completely. If you can pass the ACFT, which the Army says is the standard level of performance required to be a Soldier, then clearly your body is good enough to be in the Army. If you're carrying a bit of excess potential energy around the waistline, oh well.
Performance is more important than apearance. Right?.....Right?

On my last NCOER I was rated the best NCO in the company by my 1SG. I have maxed out my civilian education and consistently at the top of the OML. I tape between 25 and 26% which is in regs for my age group. But, because I couldn't get down to 2% or more below the upper limit my CoC wouldn't send me to NCOES. I bench over 300 lbs, deadlift over 350 lbs, back squat 275 lbs, military press 175 lbs, do 66 push ups, 40 sit ups, and pass the bike and walk (either one depending on the day of test). I spend about 2 hours a day in the gym. I am not a couch potato, but at the same time I have thyroid issues and have a hard time getting my waist smaller. I got frustrated with all of that, and all of my joints hurt, so I retired. I think if a soldier can perform well above standard, that is better than having someone who meets the weight screening tables and can barely eek out enough push ups or sit ups to just barely pass. I mean, the enemy won't give a flying fu@k what my BMI is. With the weight of the gear we have to hump dismounted, I would think greater muscle mass would be more desirable. Something has got to change.

The Army doesn't have unrealistic standards for body fat, these are the standards put forth by current medical information. It is not unreasonable to expect a 20 year old male Soldier to be at or below 20% body fat or a 41 year old male like myself to be at or below 26% body fat. That is within the range considered acceptable by medical professionals.

There is a common misconception that the ABC program is based on Body Mass Index or that BMI and body fat % are the same thing. BMI is just a number that indicates your height to weight ratio. The Army uses a BMI table to screen out people who do not need to be taped. If you're 5 ft and 90 pounds you almost certainly are below the 20% body fat level and don't need to be taped.

Theres also a myth of the Soldier who crushes the PT test but can't pass tape. While everyone may have met that "one" Soldier, those people are outliers and you can't create Army policy based on the occasional outliers. The data shows that people who fail height and weight also do poorly on the APFT or fail it. From what I've seen when looking at spreadsheets of flags at the BDE level and down over the years, at least 80% of Soldiers flagged for height and weight are also flagged for APFT failure at some as well.

As for a better evaluation method, it's the best of what we've got available. The Army needs something that is portable, easily trainable, and not expensive. Consider the other viable options: calipers, bod pod, body scanners, immersion test, and electric resistance. In any testing method you have an margin of accuracy in the test itself and a second margin of error for the person giving the test. Electrical resistance gives wildly varied results depending on how hydrated someone is so it's too inaccurate to use. Scanners, bod pod, and immersion testing are all very accurate and easy to use, but prohibitively expensive or bulky. That leaves calipers and tape test that meet the requirements for inexpensive, portable, and trainable. Calipers are more accurate however they are harder to train someone on and more likely for the tester to make an error. Tape has a higher margin of error in the test itself, but is easier to train someone on and administer. For those who say the tape test gets screwed up a lot, the calipers would be even worse. With the tape you can be off by a half inch and that's only a deviation of about a single percentage. Also, the regulation requires the taper to round the measurements in the Soldiers favor, up for the neck and down for the waist on males.

So, while I would like to see more accurate testing, the tape is the best alternative until the Army springs for the cost of installing, maintaining, and calibrating some fancy new bod pods or DXA scanners at every unit

It has been suggested that with the new ACFT that Soldiers will find themselves growing in muscle mass and that this may adversely affect height and weight standards. I have been and will probably always be a tape Soldier for the rest of my career as I have not been the weight required since high school and that is not likely to return without extreme dieting as I age.

Perhaps they should be reconsidered, but I don't have the knowledge to make any suggestions one way or the other.

I honestly believe that they should brother SSG(P) (Join to see) , a lot of military personnel work out, and that adds to body mass.

I think we should do away with H/W standards, but physical fitness standards should be raised and heavily enforced.

I say if you pass the ACFT for your MOS/AOC then forget tape or height weight. If you have a long neck or a neck then it’s harder to pass tape. I’ve seen guys who have a gut hanging over their trousers by several inches tape and pass easily and you can tell they are more like close to 30% body fat. Then you have people like me who can wear size 34 trousers but because I have a long neck I always run the fine line of passing tape always.

I once saw a female soldier who looked like she was 9 months pregnant but passed tape because her neck was so fat. She was clearly overweight and body fat but due to her proportions she managed to pass the tape test.

I don't like BMI, it's a standard developed by some chicken legged guy with no butt, but the tape test usually works out IF it is done correctly. What I would do instead of replacing it is allow a more accurate test, maybe ADP or 3D Body Scanning, if there is a chance the soldier is within standards. I don't remember ever seeing anyone fail it that I though met the Body Fat percentages. I taped every weight in after I started lifting weights, it always came pretty close to what I tracked at the time. The soldier I had that I thought got over on the tape test was built like a frog, no neck and big around the middle. His neck would tape out at something like 19 1/2" and he couldn't have been more than 5'7". I've ran his calculations myself and he would pass, but I didn't see that it was possible for him to be at 22% body fat.

Yes and it's also time to shave that mustache.