1st women in Ranger School given extra help, sources say

[LittleLebowski]

This is my surprised face. Meanwhile, the Secretary of the Navy is ignoring (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17230-Secretary-of-Navy-ignores-Marine-Corps-study-on-gender-integrated-infantry&highlight=mabus) the Marines' honest findings on women in the infantry.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3249690/First-women-pass-Ranger-School-given-extra-training-lowered-benchmarks-general-vowed-one-pass-sources-claim.html

Sources now allege they were given help not on offer to the men:

Female candidates were reportedly given three months of extra coaching before the men started the same course
'Pressure was put on trainers' to make sure at least one woman graduated
The Army denies the existence of a special training unit that allowed the women to prepare for Fort Benning before the school started

[peterb]

I don't have a problem with extra training/coaching IF it was open to everyone.
Lowering standards and/or pressuring trainers to pass certain students is not acceptable.
It'd be interesting to hear the women tell their version, but I suspect they won't be allowed to. They're probably not enjoying the politics either.

One thing I liked about the Marine report was that it highlighted how much infantry work involves moving heavy stuff and the physical stress that imposes. They had women with all the grit and attitude you could want whose bodies just broke down under the required loads. That's not sexist, it's physiology. There's no policy that'll change that.

One good outcome might(should?)be an increased emphsis on reducing the loads for ALL infantry.

[LittleLebowski]

I keep repeating this because ol' Frank Herbert was prescient. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007PRZP0G/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B007PRZP0G&linkCode=as2&tag=ratio07-20)




Once, long ago, a tyrannical majority captured the government. They said they would make all individuals equal. They meant they would not let any individual be better than another at doing anything. Excellence was to be suppressed or concealed. The tyrants made their government act at great speed 'in the name of the people.' They removed delays and red tape wherever found. There was little deliberation. Unaware that they acted out of an unconscious compulsion to prevent all change, the tyrants tried to enforce a gray sameness upon the population.

Then the powerful governmental machine blundered along at increasingly reckless speed. It took commerce and all the important elements of society with it. Laws were thought of and passed in hours. Society came to be twisted in a suicidal pattern. People became unprepared for those changes which the universe demands. They were unable to change.

It was the time of brittle money, 'appropriated in the morning and gone by nightfall.' In their passion for sameness, the tyrants made themselves more and more powerful. All others grew correspondingly weaker and weaker. New bureaus and directorates, odd departments, leaped into existence for the most improbable purposes. These became the citadel of a new aristocracy, rulers who kept the giant wheel of government careening along, spreading destruction, violence, and chaos wherever they touched.

[NETim]

http://wordfight.org/bnw/bnw-unit_packet.pdf

[GardoneVT]

This is my surprised face. Meanwhile, the Secretary of the Navy is ignoring (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17230-Secretary-of-Navy-ignores-Marine-Corps-study-on-gender-integrated-infantry&highlight=mabus) the Marines' honest findings on women in the infantry.


Not the first time the Navy ignored reality for the sake of political appearances. Here's what happened on the first go-around;(skip to 2:07)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLLqtvVXeWM

[Tamara]

http://weaponsman.com/?p=25745

[BehindBlueI's]

When I was in basic, the fat kids got extra training. The slow kids got extra training. The dumb kids got extra training. The goal was to bring everyone up to standards. I have zero issues with extra training. Reduced standards, I have a problem with. If you think this is new to the military, though, I'd suggest you look at a PT chart. The issue is they measure things that are irrelevant to the job, they measure things that are easy to measure. Man or woman, I don't care how many pushups you can do. If soldier A is 250 lb and does 30 push ups and Soldier B is 125 lbs and does 45, then "B" passes the PT test but "A" fails it. Now have them both hump two 40 lb cratering charges and see who quits first. Have both off them try to lift a guy out of a tank hatch when he's dead weight. I had medics who couldn't lift me, but did great on the APFT. Easy to measure, not a measure of who can do the job.

So, if I were king for a day, I'd redesign the whole test for task demonstrations and make it per MOS. Medics, can you lift a 200 lb guy out of a tank hatch by the straps on the CCV uniform made for that? Engineers, can you hump 80 lbs of demo 10k? Bridge layers, can you sling X number of Bailey sections in X minutes? Set a base level general fitness test and then MOS specific tasks, and male or female, 20 or 40, if you can do them you can do that job. If you can't, you can't.

[LittleLebowski]

http://weaponsman.com/?p=25745

Inbound PM. Mods here are shit.

[LOKNLOD]

The issue is they measure things that are irrelevant to the job, they measure things that are easy to measure.

"Managers who don't know how to measure what they want settle for wanting what they can measure."
Russell L. Ackoff

[peterb]

?...So, if I were king for a day, I'd redesign the whole test for task demonstrations and make it per MOS. Medics, can you lift a 200 lb guy out of a tank hatch by the straps on the CCV uniform made for that? Engineers, can you hump 80 lbs of demo 10k? Bridge layers, can you sling X number of Bailey sections in X minutes? Set a base level general fitness test and then MOS specific tasks, and male or female, 20 or 40, if you can do them you can do that job. If you can't, you can't.

Which is what happened in the fire service. Physical fitness tests went from isolated strength tests like bench presses to more task-specific things like hose or mannequin drags.
http://breakingmuscle.com/military-first-responders/the-cpat-the-events-in-the-fire-department-physical-ability-test

[punkey71]

Which is what happened in the fire service. Physical fitness tests went from isolated strength tests like bench presses to more task-specific things like hose or mannequin drags.
http://breakingmuscle.com/military-first-responders/the-cpat-the-events-in-the-fire-department-physical-ability-test

True.

But now the time allowed is so ridiculously high in many cases that it's nearly useless as a job performance measure.

ETA - as a time measured entrance qualification with more points awarded for being faster, it's great.

As a pass/fail yearly qual it keeps people on the job who are unfit for duty.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[peterb]

Which just shows that any good idea can be screwed up if not properly managed.

[Alpha Sierra]

Not the first time the Navy ignored reality for the sake of political appearances. Here's what happened on the first go-around;(skip to 2:07)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLLqtvVXeWM

I'm wondering what her gender had to do with fucking up an approach and killing herself

PLENTY of men have done the same (or similar) mistakes with the same result, both at sea and on land while flying the same aircraft or others of equal or more difficulty

[TGS]

Which just shows that any good idea can be screwed up if not properly managed.

Well, you're talking about FF unions, which are getting to the point of being a version of welfare; some departments these days have even gotten their contracts to state that FF's are not to wash their trucks, as it's demeaning and outside the scope of their duties.

You're not going to get any sort of meaningful job standard enforced in that environment, no matter how much sense it makes.

[okie john]

I don't have a problem with extra training/coaching IF it was open to everyone.
Lowering standards and/or pressuring trainers to pass certain students is not acceptable.
It'd be interesting to hear the women tell their version, but I suspect they won't be allowed to. They're probably not enjoying the politics either.

One thing I liked about the Marine report was that it highlighted how much infantry work involves moving heavy stuff and the physical stress that imposes. They had women with all the grit and attitude you could want whose bodies just broke down under the required loads. That's not sexist, it's physiology. There's no policy that'll change that.

One good outcome might(should?)be an increased emphsis on reducing the loads for ALL infantry.

Much wisdom here, especially about cutting the load for grunts.

Guys coming to Ranger School from the 75th Ranger Regiment get weeks of specialized help (Ranger Indoctrination Program, Ranger Officer Program, pre-Ranger) designed specifically to get them through the course. People coming from outside the regiment rarely get that because most of the time nobody in their units knows how to conduct it. So if these women got extra training before they reported, then it's no different than the various Ranger prep courses or pre-Scuba or hitting the range a few extra times before SOTIC or anything else that happens every freaking day across the infantry and special ops communities.

This is a non-story created by a small-time legislator in hopes of making himself look important in the run up to an election.


Okie John

[Kukuforguns]

I don't have a problem with extra training/coaching IF it was open to everyone.
Lowering standards and/or pressuring trainers to pass certain students is not acceptable.
It'd be interesting to hear the women tell their version, but I suspect they won't be allowed to. They're probably not enjoying the politics either.

One thing I liked about the Marine report was that it highlighted how much infantry work involves moving heavy stuff and the physical stress that imposes. They had women with all the grit and attitude you could want whose bodies just broke down under the required loads. That's not sexist, it's physiology. There's no policy that'll change that.

One good outcome might(should?)be an increased emphsis on reducing the loads for ALL infantry.
I heard a radio story a few years ago that addresses the issue of the weight of infantry pack. The takeaway is that the weight has been remarkably consistent over time. Any time some component has been made lighter, new equipment is added. My conclusion is that the weight of the pack is determined by what most young, physically fit men can carry.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[okie john]

My conclusion is that the weight of the pack is determined by what most young, physically fit men can carry.

Yes, but the figure is determined by some headquarters pinky who doesn't have to worry about his knees exploding from humping 120 pound of lightweight gear over rough terrain month after month, plus 10% added by some O-4 who is even stupider.

As a result of some studies done before WWII, the Wehrmacht tried to limit the weight that their guys humped to something like 30% of body weight because heavier loads would beat troops up too much. It wasn't a bad plan, and it gave us the blitzkrieg and motorized infantry, but the US military can't seem to get their heads around it.


Okie John

[Dagga Boy]

When I was in basic, the fat kids got extra training. The slow kids got extra training. The dumb kids got extra training. The goal was to bring everyone up to standards. I have zero issues with extra training. Reduced standards, I have a problem with. If you think this is new to the military, though, I'd suggest you look at a PT chart. The issue is they measure things that are irrelevant to the job, they measure things that are easy to measure. Man or woman, I don't care how many pushups you can do. If soldier A is 250 lb and does 30 push ups and Soldier B is 125 lbs and does 45, then "B" passes the PT test but "A" fails it. Now have them both hump two 40 lb cratering charges and see who quits first. Have both off them try to lift a guy out of a tank hatch when he's dead weight. I had medics who couldn't lift me, but did great on the APFT. Easy to measure, not a measure of who can do the job.

So, if I were king for a day, I'd redesign the whole test for task demonstrations and make it per MOS. Medics, can you lift a 200 lb guy out of a tank hatch by the straps on the CCV uniform made for that? Engineers, can you hump 80 lbs of demo 10k? Bridge layers, can you sling X number of Bailey sections in X minutes? Set a base level general fitness test and then MOS specific tasks, and male or female, 20 or 40, if you can do them you can do that job. If you can't, you can't.

Great post.

In the LE arena we have been dealing with this a long time. It isn't just women, its little people, soft people, and others. Different folks are good at different things based on physical differences, and it is not all gender based. The key to me was always putting the right tool in the box for the job, not just any tool in the box. Many jobs start getting filled with everyone trying to be a crescent wrench.....sometimes you need a hammer or a screwdriver.

Something else to consider is adapting the training. There isn't exactly a long history of training female rangers. It isn't like the two women could get mentored by decades of former female Rangers on how to get through Ranger school or how to specifically train. Its new....so if it took a few months of extra work so THEY COULD MAKE THE STANDARD (this is all I am concerned with rather than changing the standards), then I don't have an issue.

There was a time in LE when a PoliceMAN had to be at least 6' tall.......we have had to change over the years to train and adapt to not having all 6' tall males. This is a good thing. The reality is I would take a Pat Rogers or a Craig Douglas over the last 6'4" Adonis I had as a trainee......big good looking kid with so much potential.....and such a wimp. Two of the meanest, toughest cops I ever worked with were a pair of 5'2" females....they worked with a level of brutality unmatched in the industry. Unfortunately, they were not the norm. What I learned from them was that most of this is based on will and figuring out how to be a good tool in the box rather than every tool in the box.

[Jeep]

Much wisdom here, especially about cutting the load for grunts.

Guys coming to Ranger School from the 75th Ranger Regiment get weeks of specialized help (Ranger Indoctrination Program, Ranger Officer Program, pre-Ranger) designed specifically to get them through the course. People coming from outside the regiment rarely get that because most of the time nobody in their units knows how to conduct it. So if these women got extra training before they reported, then it's no different than the various Ranger prep courses or pre-Scuba or hitting the range a few extra times before SOTIC or anything else that happens every freaking day across the infantry and special ops communities.

This is a non-story created by a small-time legislator in hopes of making himself look important in the run up to an election.


Okie John

I'm not so sure about that. I graduated from Ranger School quite a few years ago, and perhaps things are different now, but "back in the day" the rule was officers could only get recycled for injuries. If you flunked a phase, you were out (and I came pretty close to getting kicked out). In addition, there weren't any prep programs. You were required to get yourself ready. The idea of someone getting 90 days at Benning to get ready would have struck the Infantry School as an enormous waste of money, since they had more volunteers for Ranger School than they could place. Perhaps that is no longer the case, but my guess is that with 90 days of prep time, the graduation rate in my class would have gone from around 40% to over 90%.

More troubling is the report that they ran through the land navigation course ahead of time. Lots of guys washed out after land nav, but its only Benning after all. The terrain is pretty flat, the course recognizable and after a run or two through the course pretty much anyone could have done it from memory without a map or compass.

Much more troubling is the report of command influence on grading and the reports about more sleep and more food for those in the women's unit. I would have killed for another half hour of sleep a night (or, in the mountains, any sleep at all), or another couple of C ration crackers in Florida.

I don't know if this is true, but I saw enough similar things in the Army that it doesn't sound totally foreign and I think it needs to be looked at carefully. I personally think that putting women into combat units is a mistake because of all the boy/girl stuff will take away from unit efficiency, but if it is going to be done, standards need to be the same. This kind of "help" will make the task that much harder.

[JHC]

The majority of males recycle RS at least once. Many multiple times. Numerous factors come into play to determine recycle or drop. BN and Bde boards occur to sort out close calls. I know of plenty of males that spend 6 mos completing this 62 day course.

Females that volunteered for this program had the opportunity to train up. Big deal. The Soldiers that play RS opfor watch numerous iterations of RS tasks and when they get their shot they recycle too. Any Soldier with motivation avails himself of his unit Ranger prep programs. They are common at many posts.
Big difference for the females is their day job was far removed from Ranger tasks vs many who do this sort of work for years before RS.

A close friend is a recently retired 11B E7 and former RI. He dug into this deeply within his Ranger network. He concluded they held to standard and the females absolutely earned their tabs. He defies anyone to find an active RI that tells them different.

Really solid Rangers have put their name on this outstanding effort by the RTB to do this right and folks who call them liars with their anonymously sourced rumors can go suck a dead rats dick.

[GardoneVT]

I'm wondering what her gender had to do with fucking up an approach and killing herself

PLENTY of men have done the same (or similar) mistakes with the same result, both at sea and on land while flying the same aircraft or others of equal or more difficulty
Her gender? Nothing.

The Navy brass? Everything.

Read the official incident report on the accident. It wasn't the first time Lt. Hultgreen made an error like this. Had she been a less politically pressured flight candidate she would have been washed from the program. But "FIRST FEMALE FIGHTER PILOT OR BUST!!" was the word from above, so training errors and flight mistakes were buried and concealed.

The end result of all that political juking was her death and the destruction of a 50 million dollar jet. She was as much of a victim as her evaluators ; in reading the offical accident report we get the sense they couldnt grade her fairly without serious career damage, and she couldn't quit for the same reason. The brass wanted a girl Tomcat pilot at all costs, and it turned out the price was her life.

[Kevin B.]

I do not find the idea of a woman wearing a Ranger Tab objectionable nor do I feel in devalues the one I earned.

That they benefitted from preparation far in excess of what any male would receive, let alone a male MP officer or male AH-64 pilot, is undeniable.

That the Department of the Army was aware of it is equally unquestionable.

Did they actually earn their Ranger Tab? I do not know. I do know they passed RAP (twice) and that is something quite a few males fail to do.

ETA:
RIP/ROP (now RASP I/II) are focused on assessing suitability for service in the Ranger Regiment not preparing the individual for Ranger School. Virtually every organization now hhas some kind of "Pre-Ranger" though they vary in quality.

[GardoneVT]

I do not find the idea of a woman wearing a Ranger Tab objectionable nor do I feel in devalues the one I earned.


I don't think gender is the issue here. All of us here can name cases where women have throuroughly trounced men in the boot-to-ass category.

That being said; people of any class, creed, gender, social group, skin color, or nationality that are advanced in career positions they are not objectively qualified for due to political considerations IS A PROBLEM. I'd say the same thing if it were the first time 6'2" white males were at Ranger School and only women to date had passed it.

[Kevin B.]

I don't think gender is the issue here. All of us here can name cases where women have throuroughly trounced men in the boot-to-ass category.

Gender is the issue insofar as it was the driving force behind the preferential treatment they received in preparing for Ranger School. Beyond that, I agree.

[Dave J]

The majority of males recycle RS at least once. Many multiple times. Numerous factors come into play to determine recycle or drop. BN and Bde boards occur to sort out close calls. I know of plenty of males that spend 6 mos completing this 62 day course.

Females that volunteered for this program had the opportunity to train up. Big deal. The Soldiers that play RS opfor watch numerous iterations of RS tasks and when they get their shot they recycle too. Any Soldier with motivation avails himself of his unit Ranger prep programs. They are common at many posts.
Big difference for the females is their day job was far removed from Ranger tasks vs many who do this sort of work for years before RS.

A close friend is a recently retired 11B E7 and former RI. He dug into this deeply within his Ranger network. He concluded they held to standard and the females absolutely earned their tabs. He defies anyone to find an active RI that tells them different.

Really solid Rangers have put their name on this outstanding effort by the RTB to do this right and folks who call them liars with their anonymously sourced rumors can go suck a dead rats dick.

RI's I know have basically said the same thing.

Although the extra attention may have helped, IMHO Ranger school has never been fair nor equal to begin with. For example, just by dumb luck, I led all my graded patrols on Day 3 in each phase. There were other guys who didn't get their turn at PL until Day 5 or 6, and by then the everyone was much more sleep deprived, which contributed to things going wrong, and they failed or recycled. I got lucky, they didn't. But in no way was it really an equal test when it was just us males.

As for the land nav course, unless things have changed, it's not exclusive to RTB. If you're an Infantry LT, or stationed at Ft. Benning, you've already been on that course prior to Ranger school anyway. So, BFD, if they got a little practice in. Unless they were lucky enough to draw the exact same points as they did before, which is unlikely, they still had to go find them in the time limit, just like everyone else.

Bottom line for me is that the female grads passed peer evals. That wouldn't have happened if they didn't pull their own weight.

[LittleLebowski]

Really solid Rangers have put their name on this outstanding effort by the RTB to do this right and folks who call them liars with their anonymously sourced rumors can go suck a dead rats dick.

I have one of those anonymous sources. Active duty SF officer. I'm short on dead rats though, I'll have to go look around :D

[Drang]

As an MI Geek the closest I ever got to Ranger School, for even Ft Ord's Ranger Indoctrination Program, was watching a couple of PT-stud buddys go... and wash out. The Highest Speed, Lowest Drag MI Geek, even one who was prior 11B, wasn't quite up to speed, despite the official DA policy that every unit in the Light Divisions would be heavy on Ranger School Grads.
At least one of them had some Bad Luck that may or may not have been him being targeted for elimination.

Bottom line for me is that the female grads passed peer evals. That wouldn't have happened if they didn't pull their own weight.
This is a significant point.
I suppose peer evals could be crooked, but what's the point?

[Kevin B.]

Although the extra attention may have helped, IMHO Ranger school has never been fair nor equal to begin with. For example, just by dumb luck, I led all my graded patrols on Day 3 in each phase. There were other guys who didn't get their turn at PL until Day 5 or 6, and by then the everyone was much more sleep deprived, which contributed to things going wrong, and they failed or recycled. I got lucky, they didn't. But in no way was it really an equal test when it was just us males.

As for the land nav course, unless things have changed, it's not exclusive to RTB. If you're an Infantry LT, or stationed at Ft. Benning, you've already been on that course prior to Ranger school anyway. So, BFD, if they got a little practice in. Unless they were lucky enough to draw the exact same points as they did before, which is unlikely, they still had to go find them in the time limit, just like everyone else.

While I agree with you, I doubt that arguement would hold water if the Army were SD-ing white males to Fort Benning for a 90-day tutor session with an RI followed by mandatory completion of the pre-Ranger program with the highest success rate, while everyone else was left to the mercy of their unit to get them ready. I think quite a few people would see the inherent benefits/unfairness then.

Of course, it is all academic since we all know that my class was the last "hard" class. :cool:

[Dave J]

While I agree with you, I doubt that arguement would hold water if the Army were SD-ing white males to Fort Benning for a 90-day tutor session with an RI followed by mandatory completion of the pre-Ranger program with the highest success rate, while everyone else was left to the mercy of their unit to get them ready. I think quite a few people would see the inherent benefits/unfairness then.

Agreed. I'm hopeful that people will look at the vast effort that it took to produce two (probably 3 here soon) female Ranger grads, and recognize that is unsustainable.


Of course, it is all academic since we all know that my class was the last "hard" class. :cool:

Truth :)

[Wondering Beard]

I keep repeating this because ol' Frank Herbert was prescient. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007PRZP0G/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B007PRZP0G&linkCode=as2&tag=ratio07-20)

I've been thinking for a long time that our politics would benefit from Bureau of Sabotage.

[PPGMD]

Her gender? Nothing.

The Navy brass? Everything.

Read the official incident report on the accident. It wasn't the first time Lt. Hultgreen made an error like this. Had she been a less politically pressured flight candidate she would have been washed from the program. But "FIRST FEMALE FIGHTER PILOT OR BUST!!" was the word from above, so training errors and flight mistakes were buried and concealed.

The end result of all that political juking was her death and the destruction of a 50 million dollar jet. She was as much of a victim as her evaluators ; in reading the offical accident report we get the sense they couldnt grade her fairly without serious career damage, and she couldn't quit for the same reason. The brass wanted a girl Tomcat pilot at all costs, and it turned out the price was her life.

And about twenty years before that we have the case of Ed Dwight. In the name of diversity the brass sometimes tries to push through unqualified applicants to schools/positions where they shouldn't be.

[JHC]

I have one of those anonymous sources. Active duty SF officer. I'm short on dead rats though, I'll have to go look around :D

Yeah well thank you for taking it with the sense of humor - I can't honestly say I intended any when I wrote it. But I don't give a rat's anymore being distracted by the 3.5" pre-Model 27 I just walked into for half the $$$ of the last one I saw for sale. But, I think your source is completely wrong but then mine are from Ranger lineage vs SF and there is a thing there. ;) But is he saying Ranger School lowered the standard or that they got extra train up opportunity? Two different things.

[LittleLebowski]

Yeah well thank you for taking it with the sense of humor - I can't honestly say I intended any when I wrote it. But I don't give a rat's anymore being distracted by the 3.5" pre-Model 27 I just walked into for half the $$$ of the last one I saw for sale. But, I think your source is completely wrong but then mine are from Ranger lineage vs SF and there is a thing there. ;) But is he saying Ranger School lowered the standard or that they got extra train up opportunity? Two different things.

PM inbound.

[LittleLebowski]

Yeah well thank you for taking it with the sense of humor

How seriously do you expect a Marine infantry sergeant to take an Army occifer :D

[Jeep]

Yeah well thank you for taking it with the sense of humor - I can't honestly say I intended any when I wrote it. But I don't give a rat's anymore being distracted by the 3.5" pre-Model 27 I just walked into for half the $$$ of the last one I saw for sale. But, I think your source is completely wrong but then mine are from Ranger lineage vs SF and there is a thing there. ;) But is he saying Ranger School lowered the standard or that they got extra train up opportunity? Two different things.

Back in the mid 1970's most of the RI's were former SF or SOG types so there wasn't any difference then. The pipeline to Bragg was wide open. I take it that is no longer the case? Anyway, tell us more about the pre-Model 27.

[Suvorov]

never mind

[JHC]

How seriously do you expect a Marine infantry sergeant to take an Army occifer :D

No comment. I've used up my karma. ;)

Thank you so much for your PM!

Let me repeat, males routinely double recycle the same phase. It's not an automatic drop. Many RS students and their families think so and ask us about this. There are multiple graded "tracks" and a thick book of rules. One must pass a patrol in a leadership slot in each phase to pass that phase. But one could pass patrols and fail peers and go to a board and likely recycle for that, or not. But say they did. Next try they may fail patrols and recycle for that.

Ranger School is the Army's premier combat leadership school. It changed to that from an Infantry commando school long ago. Decades I think. If a student has the guts, is learning and improving; and is judged to have the potential, they may get many opportunities to recycle. Some cannot bear to face a phase again and opt out.

But they sure as hell don't announce to friends they LOMed.

Twice recycled Darby and 3 females accepted a Day 1 restart for a third try. That's a full on kick in the cunt/balls. They took it. There were a couple guys offered the same deal and they bailed.

Best regards

[Drang]

....Ranger School is the Army's premier combat leadership school. It changed to that from an Infantry commando school long ago. Decades I think.
Since the 70s that I know of.