TRADOC Changes Requirements to Graduate from Basic ...Again

COL Jim Kohlmann — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 00:21:51 -0400

TRADOC is tinkering with Basic again. Looks like they are heading in the right direction, but they are missing the boat by STILL not requiring trainees to pass the APFT. That was one of my biggest gripes as a Battalion Commander in Korea - if they can't make it in a training environment, don't pass the problem on to us in the field! What do you think? http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/enlisted/2015/09/27/these-new-tests-army-recruits-must-pass-basic-training/72754566/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

These are the new tests Army recruits must pass at basic training

Soldiers in basic training will soon have to pass a test after every phase of the course.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 12:23 AM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 00:23:53 -0400

Marine Corps has been doing that for years. I assumed the Army did the same thing.

Response by LTC Joseph Gross made Sep 29 at 2015 12:37 AM

LTC Joseph Gross — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 00:37:24 -0400

I would disagree. TRADOC learned long ago that the lower standard greatly reduced PT related injuries and still allowed Soldiers to complete AIT in good shape where they ARE required to pass the APFT at the Army standard. If you had Soldiers showing up unable to pass the APFT that was not an IET problem. That they showed up without shin splints is the result of the current training standards.

By the way, during my two years as a BCT Commander at Fort Jackson, we averaged 234 despite only being required to meet the BCT lower standard. It was rare that we had a Soldier graduate only meeting the BCT standard. If there is a problem it is not at BCT.

Response by SSG Jamil Spruill made Sep 29 at 2015 1:55 AM

SSG Jamil Spruill — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 01:55:12 -0400

I think the APFT should still be a requirement because it seems more and more injury prone or out of shape soldiers arrive at duty stations. I've seen guys with excellent physiques but they can't run more than half a mile without giving up on themselves. I do agree that is does reduce injuries before soldiers attend AIT and there is a APFT there also to verify they are in somewhat decent shape before arriving at the duty station.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 3:37 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 03:37:24 -0400

They should pass the APFT and also weight and tape!!! I'm so tired of seeing people walking around in uniform who are clearly out of regulation.

Want to downsize the Army, put out an ALARACT message; 60 days, record APFT, height and weight, you fail, you go home.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 4:09 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 04:09:13 -0400

Sir, How it was explained to me when I went through AIT that it seems to be a misconception that BCT is meant to weed people out and see who can't pass. My instructors told me that BCT was more meant to instill the discipline necessary for the Army and teach the basics and fundamentals. It was their understanding that AIT was meant to do the weeding. Those that could pass AIT should be considered fit for duty. I think the shortfall might land on AITs not properly enforcing the standards and weeding those out who can't pass. It seems that sometimes there is an "everybody is a winner" idea and that they have to work to get everyone to "pass" when really it is not their job to pass and retain people. I think there needs to be more of a focus on enforcing the standards, especially for those so new to the service, as well as more of a focus on weeding out those who are not committed enough to do what they need to to pass the courses. Leaders should be able to expect new soldiers to come in properly trained and ready to roll.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Sep 29 at 2015 8:13 AM

MSG Brad Sand — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 08:13:15 -0400

On one level, I can see allowing the soldier to complete Basic without passing the APFT but not AIT or OSUT. IF they are not able to complete this in a training environment, how or why would they in a unit? MAYBE the correct answer is not passing the failure farther and farther down the system but cutting our losses earlier? Instead of allowing people to pass through the system without meeting the standard, let's raise the entry standards...especially during a downsizing.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Sep 29 at 2015 9:18 AM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:18:30 -0400

We had to pass APFT when I went through. We actually had a couple of Guys recycled to the holder over Platoon till they passed. Seen them at Campbell 4 months after I got there

Response by SPC Christopher Perrien made Sep 29 at 2015 10:10 AM

SPC Christopher Perrien — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 10:10:28 -0400

How things change. When I joined 1985, you were not going to leave Basic/AIT without passing the PT test . 40pu/40su/2m-15:00mins. Now this was Armor US Army. And at a regular duty station if you could not pass 2 tests with a 6 month interval you were gone.

Normal days , our officers, who didn't go break track, or have bust ass details, or drink all night, would have us running 1 1/2+ to 5 miles a day , 4 times a week. I hated running and I think it has lead to back problems now. We on occasion(monthly, or Bi-mn) did 7-8 mile runs. Try that with a "hating-life" hangover and/or being a 40+ year old NCO. LOL

More important , our infantry minded officers with their 5+ mile runs , and they then play tennis in the afternoon, rather than slinging a sledge:), just did not understand ,

Tankers ain't Infantry, if a tanker has to run, it means we have lost the war. :)

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Sep 29 at 2015 10:54 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 10:54:49 -0400

The downfall of today's Army began in the early-90's when BCT/OSUT standards began to be "softened" from where it was when I graduated 19E OSUT just 4-5 years earlier. We NCOs, and the Army as a whole, were "told" that this was due to Enlistees being "smarter and more technically savvy" so discipline was not administered in the same manner in which it had been, the APFT requirements to pass BCT/IET were no longer the same standard which the Army as a whole was held to, as it had been a mere 4-5 years prior, and the quality of Soldier arriving to their 1st duty station in shape enough to pass the APFT was below where it had been and this took away from the unit's readiness and placed further requirements upon NCOs to get these sub-par Soldiers in shape and capable of passing the APFT. This took not only those Soldiers but NCOs away from training that at the time was difficult enough due to budgetary constraints at the time under the Bush-41 and Clinton administrations. I am glad to see some of these changes being implemented, but IMO, we should never have gotten to the point where the Army needed to go back to what worked for so long.

Response by 1SG Cameron M. Wesson made Sep 29 at 2015 12:28 PM

1SG Cameron M. Wesson — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:28:25 -0400

Team,

I been around a day or two like many of you so lets agree that requirements change and experiences vary. Now to the topic at hand:

Issue #1. TR 350-6 (ENLISTED INITIAL ENTRY TRAINING POLICIES AND ADMINISTRATION) DTD 25 SEP 2015 (this week) provides OSUT/AIT was only meant to get you a soldier that was at the 60% mark. You have a very short period of time to mold and move them out. The units take them and get them to the next levels. What ever those levels are. Realisitically, that is a bear to do. Ask any DS out here. The specifc chapter and verses that talks PRT/APFT is 5-8, 5-9 and 5-10.

OSUT does an incredible job getting over 95% (probably greater) of their soldiers to higher standard than "60%" I know... I got many Infantrymen from the "Benning School for Wayward Boys" from 85-95 and it was the rare PVT that wasn't able to do what was asked. No, many were not use to the "god awful" weight of a ruck and gear... but they... most of them in my experience... adapted and gained the strength. I think we confuse the "few" with the majority of the good we get from the training base.

Issue #2. TR 350-6 (ENLISTED INITIAL ENTRY TRAINING POLICIES AND ADMINISTRATION) DTD 25 SEP 2015 (this week) provides for enlisted IET. These have not change very much in recent time.
OSUT soliders must pass the PRT/APFT prior to graduation... hell I did in 1983 and to a greater extent everyone in my OSUT had well over 210... I actually had a 300 and got my first LTC CoA for doing so (hey... that was 5 promotion points then). BCT was/is different... the requirement has been 50% because they must pass the APFT prior to graduation from AIT. Remember... OSUT is BCT and AIT rolled up into one! Again, the specifc chapter and verses that talks PRT/APFT is 5-8, 5-9 and 5-10.

I also know about the above concerning AIT because when I was medically reclass from the INF as a senior SSG in 96... and I attended AIT at Fort Eustis. While there the Drill Sergeants asked for my help with the adminsitration of the monthly diagnostic APFT" and "APFT failures". This is where I learned that a diagnostic PRT/APFT was required monthly untill graduation... at which time... two week prior to graduation the student soldiers would be adminstiered a "for Record" APFT. Here I want you to remember that these soldiers "remedial" soldiers were also rare exception... not the rule. In the AIT company I was attached less than 20 out of a 300+ AIT company. That's not a bad OR rating in my book.

Issue #3 Injurys... I won't belabor the point that LTC Joseph Gross provided in this thread. I will only amplify this by saying that those of use that graduated the Master Fitness Course learned well that the injurys that were sustained by 1st termers were mostly due to PT... and accounted for most medical retention boards. Any CO/1SG and CSM on here can probably attest to this! and not for only a 1st termer... but for careerist also. As a MFT it was our responsibility to ensure that a APFT program was established for "total fitness"... which simply does not happen over night... and try to minimize the risk for injury.

Lastly, the BIG ARMY agreed to enlist a soldier for X years. For the case of many... 3-4 years. The idea is to get a soldier to a "BASIC" level knowledge, training, education, and yes fitness... and then get them out to the Army to perform a mission. If you want to keep a soldier in the TTHS account to obtain a great given level of any of those areas... then the big Army most understand that units... all units... will have those resources for a shorter period of time. If this is acceptable... then so be it.

My opinion? Give me a kid that is in the last stages of the forming process... I'm an NCO... or I was... I'd get them ready for that next "'100M". Thank goodness I had leadership that felt the same way!

My two cents

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 1:38 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 13:38:27 -0400

COL Jim Kihlmann, My wife and I were reading this last night. It's surprising to me that how to address an Officer and an NCO isn't just part of indoctrination and drilled into a Soldiers consciousness, but is part of the actual test, now. I do not remember that as part of the end of cycle test in 87, it may have been, but I do remember the Claymore Mine, LAW, M16 Functions check, PRC77 send and receive, Phonetic Alphabet, and First Aid being on the test. I believe the last task was the 18 mile ruck march.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 2:03 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:03:18 -0400

Correct me if I am wrong, we are a ALL volunteer Military, correct? What happened to setting standards high, reward those who do well, create competition and if you don't make the cut then you go home.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2015 10:37 PM

1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 22:37:11 -0400

I don't quite understand. Aside from reciting the Army Values, we had to pass ALL OF THAT in BCT in 93. Did the training requirements soften over time???

Response by SSG John Erny made Sep 30 at 2015 2:13 PM

SSG John Erny — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:13:02 -0400

COL Jim Kohlmann LTC Joseph Gross 1SG Cameron M. Wesson 1SG Michael Blount Gentlemen,
The variable is AIT, some are a couple of weeks and others longer, in my case Rigger School was 12 weeks. After twelve weeks most rigger students were in very good physical condition and the fact we were pushed to meet airborne standards. An AIT soldier with a very short time to prepare may not be able to make the 60% mark if they are already struggling with PT.

On the guard side I have seen several soldiers who made it through basic and AIT and admitted that they were pencil whipped through PT just so the active side did not have to deal with them. They were now the guards problem. They never amounted to much BTW.

Response by MAJ Jim Woods made Sep 30 at 2015 6:41 PM

MAJ Jim Woods — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:41:19 -0400

Agree with Col. Jim Kohlmann. There was a time, in th e50's - 60's - 70's when you couldn't get out of Basic without passing the PT Test. Then we got it several more times in AIT....... but.... that was in the cotton fatigue days and it was taken with BLACK LEATHER COMBAT BOOTS in the snow uphill both ways. Tennis shoes were not allowed. I am not saying either is right (I would have preferred the tenny runners).

Crap, I'm startin' to tear up just thinkin' about the good ole' days..... ROTF!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2015 9:17 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:17:49 -0400

Completely agree with you Sir, why would they let them leave basic without passing the APFT? Currently I have at least 4 Soldiers that either have failed it or struggle to pass it with the minimum.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 11:17 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:17:09 -0500

That would be awesome sir!! There a ton of Army Reserve drill sergeants who would love to operate a program like that with the help of Recruiters. I had no idea the Marines did this.