Posted on Feb 12, 2014
MSG Bo Lathrop
21.6K
111
86
4
4
0
I personally don't agree with it. As an Infantryman, I think all PT tests should be the same. What do you think?<br>
Posted in these groups: P542 APFTExpertsights e1324327272686 MOS
Avatar feed
Responses: 28
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
1SG Visual Information Operations Chief
1
1
0
While everyone debates about the PT test, I am going to physically train my body and read my ranger hand book while riding my spinner bike. LOL
(1)
Comment
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
SSG V. Michelle Woods
>1 y
Uhhhh yeah me too lol. 
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Detachment Commander
1
1
0
PT test should be the same across the Army. If they had different standards for different MOSs why not change weapons qualification standards for MOSs. Hell, just take aways weapons from all support MOSs.
(1)
Comment
(0)
SFC Intelligence Analyst
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y
SSG Redondo, please come over here to DLI and tell them that the Army's perspective is that every Soldier is a fighter. In here is all about the language, anything else is an obstacle to language training
(0)
Reply
(1)
CPT All Source Intelligence
CPT (Join to see)
>1 y
SFC Dominguez,

And DLI is doing it right.  When we rolled out on convoys in Iraq, there were 30-50 Soldiers wanting to man the gun - all qualified to do so.  We had a 1SG that demanded that everyone who had less than a 270 APFT take remedial PT 6 days a week which added 2 hours to their 12 hour shifts (my guys were falling asleep at their desks).  So even though we had a slew of PT studs and marksmen, we had just 3 Arabic linguists and only 2 of them were proficient enough for missions.    When we got back to the rear, we were told there was no money to send linguists for refresher training, but we were burning cash on more PT equipment and range ops.  It was like everyone's brains were erased and no one remembered all we went through because people were not capable in their basic MOS skills.

That said, fitness is important and there have to be ways to integrate basic fitness into the day.  More than that is unnecessary and should be cut during language training.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SGT Team Leader
SGT (Join to see)
>1 y
CPT Wolfer,

Your point about DLI is spot on. MOS proficiency leads to a better fighting force. That's the reason why we have MOS's in the first place. Otherwise, let's just send everyone to infantry basic and sort them out afterwards (some people would love this, but it is not efficient at all).

I went to DLI, and the constant language engagement was paramount to my success there. But when I arrived at my next unit (a year later) and requested refresher training from my unit, I was flattly told that they don't speak Arabic in Afghanistan, and that they didn't need to send me to refresher training.

They also didn't need me to run 2 miles and do 2 minutes of pushups and situps, but I still had to do PT every day. But somehow, I still managed to be useful in my language while downrange, and I never had to do pushups in front of the enemy...

I guess I just made my point. CPT Wolfer, keep doing the right thing by your soldiers, and they will appreciate this. And the Army will also.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SFC Intelligence Analyst
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y

CPT Wolfer

 

I understand your point about language refresher training, and I agree that is a priority, where I disagree with you is the mentality of I am a (Insert MOS here) first, we are all Soldiers and we have certain tasks that everyone needs to be proficient in to include PT, Weapons training, etc, if not, let's make all the (Insert MOS here again) civilians so we won't have to worry about them having to do anything else but their job

(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Dan Goforth
2
1
1
Edited >1 y ago
SFC Lathrop, I wouldn't want 97 or 200+ different PT tests, but I do believe that the combat side (CMFs 11-19, and any medics, commo or maintenance personnel assigned to such units) should be able to set a higher standard, and maybe add an event or two.  Some people just can't maintain the physical standards to be an infantryman or combat engineer, but would make great intel or commo soldiers, and shouldn't be assigned to ground combat line units.
(2)
Comment
(1)
MSG Bo Lathrop
MSG Bo Lathrop
>1 y
So what you're saying is that combat MOS's should be given a higher standard of physical demands than other Soldiers? I just don't feel as though that it right. That's like saying the a commo soldier assigned to an Infantry unit, that has to walk every mile with these soldiers shouldn't be held accountable for not maintaining the same physical readiness. I just don't agree.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Dan Goforth
SPC Dan Goforth
>1 y
SFC Lathrop, I'm saying the commo guy assigned to an infantry unit should maintain the infantry physical fitness standard.  I'm saying, don't make ground combat units suffer, or the individual soldier suffer, because they don't have the physical capacity to meet the demands.  60-60-60 is great for the soldier sitting behind a desk most duty days, it means they're not as likely to keel over of a heart attack from lack of exercise.  But that minimal PT score doesn't cover the demands of a unit that could need to ruck out 12 miles, bivouac and hold ground for who knows how long.  The flip side of this equation is that if we required 80-80-80 for all soldiers, then we lose out on a lot of support services, because some people just don't have the ability to maintain that level of fitness.  Only 1 in 4 high school graduates qualifies for military service as it is.  I feel the Army would be better off not having people who can't meet the demands of an MOS/unit in that MOS/unit, and can do better than chapter for failure to adapt because someone got talked into a bad selection of MOS.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSG Bo Lathrop
MSG Bo Lathrop
>1 y
The problem with your logic is that the commo guy, medic, etc... does not know if they are going to be in an infantry unit or not... If someone got talked into a bad MOS, that is not just the recruiters fault. As a former recruiter, I know from experience that applicants do a lot of research prior to joining the Army. Not all, but most do. It is a life changing decision. To not do research shows a lack of decision making skills. Some infantrymen can't pass PT tests, and guess what? They get kicked out. That's the way the Army works. If they can't find the motivation to work out on their own in order to keep up in a 12 mile road march, they should not be in the Army. Even desk jobs can work out at a gym after work, or put on a MOLLE ruck sack with some weight and start marching. I'm 5'5 119 pounds, if I can do it... anyone can.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Ait Platoon Sergeant
0
0
0
same across the board....no difference between Soldiers
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PVT John Williams
0
0
0
Oh hell no. They should be the same.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Christopher Parrish
0
0
0
I think the APFT should be the same across the board. That doesn't mean there can't be an MOS specific test in addition, to make sure troops can meet those specific needs.

Take the PT scores required as an Infantryman and then compare them to RASP or SFQC, they are all different but everyone has to pass the basic Soldier PT test.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Adam Jennings
0
0
0
Everyone should be held to the same physical standards regardless of MOS. There is no "in the rear with the gear" with this eeney we fight now.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Training Nco
0
0
0
The question should be should the PT test be the same across the military.  As we are seeing more Joint Bases and there are more Joint Operation positions opening, how does it look when you have a soldier and a sailor or a marine and an airman works side by side but have different PT standards.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Training Nco
0
0
0
I don't agree.  As a Personnel SGT I feel we need to have high standards because it is very easy to fall off when sitting behind a desk everyday.  When I was an Active Component Soldier PT was the most important time of the day because that was the time of the day when a Company Can get together and do the same thing.  Working in S-1 when a new soldier arrives to a unit The S-1 section is the first place where they report to.  What kind of impression does it give a new soldier when the first person they come in to contact with on arrival has an appearance of being unfit?
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG(P) Casualty Operations Ncoic
0
0
0

I don't agree.  Each MOS does a different job and has different requirements.  Two MOS' that I know-- 15U and 42A for examples:

Chinook rotor blades weigh upwards of 300 pounds.  Sometimes you only have two people to carry them.  If you are the one on the inboard end, you get the heavier end.  Also, passing equipment up from and down to the ground.  Yeah it sounds easy, but it gets heavy and tiring.  Climbing up and down the aircraft all day will tire you out.  Everything on the CH-47 is heavy, bulky, odd-shaped, and awkward to handle.


Working in an S-1 shop, the heaviest thing you are going to lift is the copier toner cartridge or occasionally a case of paper.  Physical demands are nearly nil. 


Those who reclass to/from different MOS' may have a rude awakening should MOS-specific PT tests be instituted!  All Soldiers need to have a base level of fitness.  Thus this is why we have one standard.  Now to get male and female standards the same...

(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.