Why is it that ACFT scores differ by MOS if we are all Soldiers?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 22:01:39 -0400

I am sure this has been asked over the years but I just can't find it.

This morning I watched the sunrise as we began the continuing assessment of progress towards ACFT. While waiting for the deadlift I started to wonder... why did we think it was ok to assign scores by MOS. I am currently serving as an MEOA at the hospital but previously a nurse. At no point did I assume that because of my MOS I could function more or less in overall combat operations.

What is the rationale behind saying Infantry, Medics, and others you all need to be in top physical shape but in other MOS... you all are good, just be mediocre. An admin, supply, nursing, or similar "combat service support" MOS can be just as likely to end up on the battlefield or combat scenario as is a "combat arms" individual. I am witness to this in previous operations. As a previous combat medic, I was on the line and saw them having to do the same things that I was expected to do.

To me, this is a slap in the face and directly insinuates that those MOS are not Soldiers (one who fights in an army) at all. If we are saying that why not just continue to do what we have been doing over the years and hire DA Civilians or non-combatants to do those jobs.

If my Field Hospital came under attack (which can be the case in the next combat scenario which is expected to be against a neer-peer or peer), wouldn't I also need to be able to do things for the emergency evacuation of my patients, movement of medical equipment, etc? If I was in a Forward Surgical Team, and parallel with the main combat forces would I not need to be ready. If I was sitting in an office but then a mortar round or RPG went through the window would I not have to pull people out or take up arms if being overrun. To me, it doesn't make sense.

When SECDEF Mattis' started the big push for a more "lethal" force the ACFT was developed. The Army attempted to take a harder stance on obesity and fitness. A harder stance to me means take it seriously and not say let do it for some and half for others.

If someone can explain how it is ok for us to essentially say well... you are kinda like a Soldier but not really, please let me know. And if we are talking about the likelihood of never having to be in direct combat I gave examples of why stuff can instantly change and has. I have seen cooks, admin, supply, nurses, doctors, etc on a gun and/or patrol. So please explain this math to me. How can you create a more lethal force but a significant portion of that force be "somewhat" ready for the rigors of combat?

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Aug 6 at 2021 10:09 PM

SSG Carlos Madden — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 22:09:02 -0400

I mean no disrespect but wasn’t the ACFT implemented specifically to set standards by MOS? IOW, it didn’t make sense, or realistic, for a 42A to have the same physical standards as an 11B. I’ve been out for awhile so correct me if I’m wrong but that was my understanding.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2021 10:12 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 22:12:53 -0400

I don’t know. Because they realized they were Laing too many in the support elements and it was simpler to change/lower the standards for certain groups so they could keep them? They’ve lost sight of “One Army”? They’ve already invested so much time and effort into a program that was crap right out of the gate, no one wants to admit they were wrong so they’re going to make it work, come hell or high water?

Response by MSG Gary Eckert made Aug 6 at 2021 10:13 PM

MSG Gary Eckert — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 22:13:59 -0400

Your thinking is so 1980 when the MOS immaterial advanced PT test was implemented. Prior to that support MOSs took the staff and specialist PT test. It was the same 5 event PT that everyone else took except we could get our 300 points any was we could whereas the combat arms had to score 300 with art least 60 per event. The reasoning to make everything take the sane test because everyone could end up on the battlefield.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2021 10:29 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 22:29:11 -0400

68W yes you will more likely be in combat situations and have to drag a wounded soldier or litter carry than say a supply guy might of a medical doctor might. You also forgot a lot of army support folks do not go down range. Yes any of us could be in a firefight if the role 2 or 3 was attacked. That’s why we all are weapons qualified and know the basics at least.

Your same thinking could be flipped and say that shouldn’t the surgeons know how to kick in doors and conduct combat patrols? No. The army has different skill sets for a reason. One force one mission, but we all have an integral part and it’s not the same.

As for a basic standard they have that and it was supposed to be age and gender neutral and based on the physical demands of your MOS or AOC. That’s why certain events are not removed even if on profile. You need to be able to deadlift 130 lbs at minimum which could be lifting debris off another soldier, helping lift a litter or help lift a soldier. Sprint drag carry. He able to sprint a short distance pick up a wounded soldier by his kit and drag him to safety, pick up 40 lbs of ammo in each hand and run with it. All tasks all soldiers must now do in the ACFT at a minimum. You are worried about why there are different standards, but I see plenty of people not able to meet the minimum standard right now and it’s not like the APFT where you can be out of shape and train for a month and slide by. It’s a harder test.

Hey I think it’s great if that field surgeon can deadlift 300 lbs and do 30 leg tucks, but all I care about is can that surgeon do the normal required tasks in a pinch of a soldier and more importantly can that surgeon be a great surgeon on the battlefield in combat stress situations.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2021 11:03 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 23:03:47 -0400

My understanding was they got rid of MOS specific standards in the last iteration.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2021 11:05 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 23:05:11 -0400

ACFT 3.0 took away the requirements by MOS. Every soldier has to get at least 60 in each event.

Response by SSG Brian G. made Aug 6 at 2021 11:14 PM

SSG Brian G. — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 23:14:25 -0400

Here is the reality of it. This is not PC and really, it does not need to be. This is more political test tube bullshit. In essence people were bitching and moaning about the APFT because it was two standards... male and female and was subdivided into age brackets for minimums. That meant that an 11B that was 19 years old was had the same scoring mechanism as an 19 YO 88M or any other MOS that had a male that was 19 YO. Too many bitched about the fact that they were not combat arms why should they need to? Additionally the APFT needed an overhaul because well as it was it was unrealistic of what we train for which is war time. It was 3 events and only one of which was actually used in combat. It did not measure whether a troop could pull another across a battlefield, or lift another up that was wounded or even lift munitions and equipment as they might do in reality.

It's rather stupid that a physical fitness evaluation is being tailored to an MOS or group of MOS. No other branch has that, nor should they. It's beyond stupid. Every MOS has that potential for being in combat. The test should be neutral across the board.

In reality I see the current ACFT as a clusterfuck that if implemented as is... will see a lot of fatbodies and people unable to perform should they reclass or get reclassed.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2021 11:55 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 23:55:49 -0400

Different standards during to weight lifting requirements whether you work on a line in a Combat MOS, versus Combat Support, versus Combat Service Support.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2021 6:08 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 06:08:23 -0400

Apparently the Army is now on ACFT version 5.5, and it's still not approved. We have no idea what standards the ACFT will have once it's finally approved.

Response by LTC David Brown made Aug 7 at 2021 6:46 AM

LTC David Brown — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 06:46:47 -0400

I often wonder about the PT test. When I first went in we did horizontal ladder, run dodge jump, etc. then it went to push ups, sit ups and mile run. At first over 40 could walk. One thing that stuck out was Units in combat arms had time for physical training built into their day. I spent most of my Army career at med centers. I arrived at work between 6 AM to 6:30 AM to set up and prepare for cases. Then we got done usually around 4 pm. Often all we got was a 15 min morning break , 1/2 hour for lunch, and 15 min afternoon break. So I then went to do PT.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2021 8:09 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 08:09:14 -0400

I think they did away with MOS specific scores, but they do make sense.
Even if your forward hospital got attacked, your day to day job wouldnt require you to be as strong as an Infantryman. An Army Doc or HR specialist isnt out every day patrolling, nor would they be expected to ruck 15 miles with 75lbs or more of gear THEN launch an attack. Yeah it would be nice if every Soldier was at that level but its not a realistic expectation.
The day to day life of Combat Arms is essentially working out every day (not just PT but rucking, battle drills/physical labor of training) and training on weapons. Other jobs have a non-physical task to complete, so they just dont have the time.

Response by SSG Brian L. made Aug 7 at 2021 11:51 AM

SSG Brian L. — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 11:51:49 -0400

Agreed... or pay us differently...

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made Aug 7 at 2021 12:48 PM

MSG Thomas Currie — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 12:48:17 -0400

By that same logic, you should be required to know how to perform surgery -- and so should each infantryman, cook, and clerk. After all, you're all "Soldiers" so you should all be fully qualified to do every job in the Army. And, of course, everyone should be required to have a 111111 profile too.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Aug 7 at 2021 12:59 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 12:59:46 -0400

The ACFT endeavor has made me question if we have adult leadership in the army. They created a test that has a gender bias.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2021 2:30 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 14:30:07 -0400

I'm not understanding why we are complaining about the different standards for the ACFT as if the APFT didn't have didn't standards as well. As we can recall, the APFT depending on gender and age. In theory, an 18 year old 11B and a 35 year old 11B would have different standards on the PT test. Did anyone complain about that? I'm sure they both still accomplished the mission even though the PT standards were different. It didn't make the older soldier any less lethal just because he got more time on his run.

Response by SFC Casey O'Mally made Aug 7 at 2021 2:39 PM

SFC Casey O'Mally — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 14:39:27 -0400

Yes, it is true that any MOS CAN end up in direct contact. However, some MOSs EXPECT to end up in direct contact.

Additionally, while you may be called upon to do MEDEVAC, or carry a casualty, or even repel invaders inside the wire, you are never going to be doing days-long foot patrols through uneven terrain and creating your own trail to do so. You are never going to be humping a rucksack for 15 miles. You are never going to be walking through the streets for 12-16 hours in 120 degree heat.

Quite simply put, your MOS has a lower physical demand, at every phase of the operation. Even if the shit hits the fan, you will be engaged in immediate defense and/or CASEVAC. You will not do immediate defense and THEN go on a counter-attack.

And *that*, my friend, is why we expect the infantry to have a higher level of fitness. Not becuase of what they *might* do once or twice if things go badly, but because of what they *expect* to do day in and day out.

That doesn't make you *less* of a Soldier. It makes them more of one.

Speaking as a former Infantryman who went MI.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2021 4:37 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 16:37:17 -0400

Well there aren't MOS specific standards anymore. There's just a baseline minimum and max.

We are on ACFT 3.0. (unless there's a new version that came out again)

Response by SGT Charles Bartell made Aug 7 at 2021 6:09 PM

SGT Charles Bartell — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:09:03 -0400

This may not be what people want to hear. But i think those at the top that come up with all the M.O.S. change's and thing's like this just are trying to come up with stuff that makes them look like they are doing something up in D.C.
Now it can not hurt to cross train people in reacting to real combat situations before deployment.
I am not talking about training for a month before they go.
But like it was back in the 70's and 80's train like you fight, And do it over and over along with bringing in the cross training at the same time.
I don't know my be I am just set in the old way's that have not been thought for real in a very long time.

Response by MAJ Byron Oyler made Aug 7 at 2021 6:40 PM

MAJ Byron Oyler — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:40:53 -0400

I understand your comments and appreciate them but I have a few questions. Ancef or vancomycin for a routine ankle fx? Does your facility do zosyn over 30mins or over four hours? Finally, how many RNs do you know that could kick your ass? In a perfect world, we all have soldier skills at a set level and can do the grunt shit at the same level however we have different jobs and expectations. As a 68C you need to know those abx questions and be able to hit an enemy with your assigned weapon the length of a patient ward but do you really need to hit someone at 200m? The last question I asked about an RN kicking your ass, as boys that is something a lot of us talk about growing up. I was punished for two fights in school as a kid growing up, wrestled for three years, and coaching wrestling now. That is in my mentality but so many nurses and doctors it is not and you cannot train that fight into people. My last trip to the range I hit 33/40 with iron sights on a borrowed weapon; give me the same tools as the infantry I will out shoot many of them because shooting is important to me. Many healthcare providers it is not. I realize this question refers to the ACFT but I wrote to show how in such a big Army we have our own important areas we need to be the top at and having lower PT standards for nurses is not allowing for mediocre soldiers but rather gives room to expect the best healthcare team in the world is there when you get blown up. Oh and least I forget, 225 is still easy for this old man to deadlift. I might even be able to still bench press it as well.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 8 at 2021 9:54 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Aug 2021 09:54:50 -0400

I always wondered what battles we would engage in wearing tennis shoes, shorts and t-shirts. Always seemed to me that PT should be done in a more realistic manner. Instead of running on a hard surface /track would not a cross country run be better in uniform.

Response by COL David Turk made Aug 11 at 2021 9:04 AM

COL David Turk — Wed, 11 Aug 2021 09:04:28 -0400

Guess I missed this change (must have occurred after I retired). It used to be the only differential was age, sex, or medical profile.