Are you kitten kittening me?? Military personnel need lipo to pass fat test??

[JConn]

Just as a side note, I understand the conversation had shifted. I do know a guy who failed weight and tape and maxed the army pt test. The guy isn't jacked either, he runs ultra marathons. So it does happen. He is the rare exception not the rule.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[JHC]

And I just learned my 24 year old has been taped a few times. He's 5' 8" or 9", weighs about 190 with thick shoulders, back and thighs. He can run 8 miles under 8 minute pace, deadlift 405, leave a stain on the platform back squat 335 and overhead squats 205. And gets taped. That's hysterical. I just learned that part.

[will_1400]

Thinking about our bases in South Korea, I have to ask........do you know the plan? Or are you just spreading RUMINT? Also, I have to wonder what does fitness really have to do with the price of tea in China, or anything else for that matter when your base is being overrun? How many Air Force, Navy, or even Army "non-combat arms" people even know which end of the gun is for business? Even the "every Marine a rifleman" only goes so far for the non-combat arms people.

Being a tub of lard is the very least of your concerns when the risk of being overrun is looming.

Theory and reality are getting further and further apart in this thread.

That's how it was explained to me by some of my sergeants a while ago, but it's RUMINT as far as I know.

[SGT_Calle]

Agreed.
Former Air Force desk puke here.

Lets bring this back on track.IMO, the problem here is twofold.One, the military of today has limited training resources.If we spend money to make our finance techs and personnel managers deadly warriors, that takes away training resources for those support jobs.What good is a support cadre of deadly ninjas if they can't perform their primary duties?

On balance, I'd rather have a tub of lard who makes sure my pay is correct, my rank is proper, and my ammo and food are delivered on time then a ninja who fails at their primary job.I don't say that lightly:while I was just a desk jockey ,I've seen enough support unit screwups to know that accomplishing a mission without money, proper recognition of your duty status ,or unreliable /nonexistent gear due to logistics failure sucks kitten.

This argument is stupid. This isn't about making everyone killing machines, it's about a messed up measure of body fat. It is about basic physical fitness. Please explain what precious "training resources" are needed for someone to spend 45 minutes doing push-ups, sit-ups, and going for a run (other than time)?
We don't have to choose between good physicality and acceptable job performance, that is a false choice. If you can't do both, find another job where you won't be expected to meet those standards.

Actually back on track, the Army body fat standards are not physiologically sound (as noted early on by Doc and others). The military as a whole is cutting back and looking for ways to get people out. I have never been a super-Soldier ninja sniper but I was good at my job and met the standards.

[Kyle Reese]

Actually back on track, the Army body fat standards are not physiologically sound (as noted early on by Doc and others). The military as a whole is cutting back and looking for ways to get people out. I have never been a super-Soldier ninja sniper but I was good at my job and met the standards.

Nothing new under the sun. I saw people getting chaptered out due failing tape at Ft.Hood around 1999-2000. Our BN/BDE CSM's flat out said that any NCO who flunked a PT test or failed tape more than once needed to pack their QMP bags / stand before a reduction board and lose their rank. Once 9/11/2001 hit, the Mickey-Mouse bull-kitten seemed to ease up just a skosh, and it didn't seem to matter as much. Fast forward to 2003-2004; I get soldiers out of OSUT who cannot meet unit PT requirements, and was told that it was our job to get them up to snuff.

[SGT_Calle]

Nothing new under the sun. I saw people getting chaptered out due failing tape at Ft.Hood around 1999-2000. Our BN/BDE CSM's flat out said that any NCO who flunked a PT test or failed tape more than once needed to pack their QMP bags / stand before a reduction board and lose their rank. Once 9/11/2001 hit, the Mickey-Mouse bull-kitten seemed to ease up just a skosh, and it didn't seem to matter as much. Fast forward to 2003-2004; I get soldiers out of OSUT who cannot meet unit PT requirements, and was told that it was our job to get them up to snuff.

That mirrors my experience as well. I remember my first year or two in the Army seeing QMP things always happening and being talked about. In '03-'05 I was recruiting and saw first hand the lowering of standards just trying like crazy to make our recruiting mission.

[KeeFus]

Nothing new under the sun. I saw people getting chaptered out due failing tape at Ft.Hood around 1999-2000. Our BN/BDE CSM's flat out said that any NCO who flunked a PT test or failed tape more than once needed to pack their QMP bags / stand before a reduction board and lose their rank. Once 9/11/2001 hit, the Mickey-Mouse bull-kitten seemed to ease up just a skosh, and it didn't seem to matter as much. Fast forward to 2003-2004; I get soldiers out of OSUT who cannot meet unit PT requirements, and was told that it was our job to get them up to snuff.

Seriously??? When I left Ft McClellan in Jan 1990 if you were failing APFT they put your rear in FTC (Fitness Training Company aka First To Chow) til you could pass....which meant you got recycled to another TRNG BTN thereby extending your stay there in OSUT. I would think that it would be a slap in the face to those TRNG BTN's for a soldier to show up and then fail APFT. SMH.

[David Armstrong]

But physical performance standards are unfair, David! Some people are genetically gifted, have rich parents to help prepare them, wah, wah, wahwah, wah, wah wah....

All standards, including the caliper standards, are unfair at some point. Performance standards are not unfair when one focuses on the idea of job performance. Job performance can at least be objectively related to performance standards, something that most other tests cannot do.

[David Armstrong]

I agree and only add that people also have to not look like 15 pounds of crap in a 10 pound bag in uniform. That is subjective, and therefore difficult to standardize.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There we differ. I don't care what they look like, I just want them to be able to do the job appropriately.

[David Armstrong]

The notion that certain jobs do not require fitness demonstrates a gross lack of understanding of the modern battlefield. Bottom line, if you are present in a combat environment, regardless of your job, you need to be physically prepared to participate in combat. If you are not, you are a liability to yourself and others.

I think the question becomes if the standards accurately reflect fitness. Two quick examples, one was a guy who was denied military re-enlistment based on weight, but he had passed the PT test that cycle with a 396 out of 400. The other was a guy who wanted to join a major PD but was denied becaue he was too thin for his height. He had also won an Olympic medal for wrestling the year before. I agree, it doesn't matter if you are a cook or a clerk, everyone in the service needs to bea ble to pick up a rifle and go to war. But if one can do that we really shouldn't get too excited about how they look, IMO.