Gender Neutral Fitness Tests

#21
Neither will the average "he" either, of course.

Also, hands up who here has been on a "fireswept battlefield". Nobody? How about how many soldiers ever have been? Also vanishingly few, you say? Funny that.
Neither will the average "he" either, of course.

Also, hands up who here has been on a "fireswept battlefield". Nobody? How about how many soldiers ever have been? Also vanishingly few, you say? Funny that.

Just because places like Iwo Jima have historically happened, doesn't mean they are anywhere near to the norm or that it is sensible to train to that ultra worst case scenario. Also, behaving as if all war is like a Transformers film on crack - as some are inclined to do - doesn't really help the military in any way.

Example: there are plenty of trades, units or disciplines in the military who get lost in the worst case (usually also the most ally) potential of the job, and so focus their kit, recruitment, training and chat on that. This sounds, to a degree, sensible: except that it often means that the normal running elements of the job, which they actually do day in and out, and which may be the most important part, get ignored. The result is that they are great at stuff they never do, but less than spectacular at their core job. The classic example is recce type units who spend all their training time on contact drills, and little to none on recce skills. There are others. I'm sure anyone with a bit of experience who has been in recently can think of units who big time the mechanics or sexy bits of the unit, but aren't actually much hack at their core role.

Fitness is like that. Training to the ultra worst case scenario all the time just breaks people. Tailoring it to reality is a sensible approach.
My hand is up....many times. Suffice it to say we will agree to disagree with the thrust of your post.
 
#24
Neither will the average "he" either, of course.

Also, hands up who here has been on a "fireswept battlefield". Nobody? How about how many soldiers ever have been? Also vanishingly few, you say? Funny that.

Just because places like Iwo Jima have historically happened, doesn't mean they are anywhere near to the norm or that it is sensible to train to that ultra worst case scenario. Also, behaving as if all war is like a Transformers film on crack - as some are inclined to do - doesn't really help the military in any way.

Example: there are plenty of trades, units or disciplines in the military who get lost in the worst case (usually also the most ally) potential of the job, and so focus their kit, recruitment, training and chat on that. This sounds, to a degree, sensible: except that it often means that the normal running elements of the job, which they actually do day in and out, and which may be the most important part, get ignored. The result is that they are great at stuff they never do, but less than spectacular at their core job. The classic example is recce type units who spend all their training time on contact drills, and little to none on recce skills. There are others. I'm sure anyone with a bit of experience who has been in recently can think of units who big time the mechanics or sexy bits of the unit, but aren't actually much hack at their core role.

Fitness is like that. Training to the ultra worst case scenario all the time just breaks people. Tailoring it to reality is a sensible approach.
But there's no known reality to tailor for in war. We probably won't know what the next one looks like. So to me a professional Army will train for the unknown. That also means being ready to go and not presuming there will be a pre deployment work up.

Of course units should focus on their core role but.. If a soldier is a soldier first, fitness training, SAA training and basic fieldcraft should be seen as part of that core role training. Not an unwelcome add on just to pass annual tests.
 
#25
Neither will the average "he" either, of course.

Also, hands up who here has been on a "fireswept battlefield". Nobody? How about how many soldiers ever have been? Also vanishingly few, you say? Funny that.

Just because places like Iwo Jima have historically happened, doesn't mean they are anywhere near to the norm or that it is sensible to train to that ultra worst case scenario. Also, behaving as if all war is like a Transformers film on crack - as some are inclined to do - doesn't really help the military in any way.

Example: there are plenty of trades, units or disciplines in the military who get lost in the worst case (usually also the most ally) potential of the job, and so focus their kit, recruitment, training and chat on that. This sounds, to a degree, sensible: except that it often means that the normal running elements of the job, which they actually do day in and out, and which may be the most important part, get ignored. The result is that they are great at stuff they never do, but less than spectacular at their core job. The classic example is recce type units who spend all their training time on contact drills, and little to none on recce skills. There are others. I'm sure anyone with a bit of experience who has been in recently can think of units who big time the mechanics or sexy bits of the unit, but aren't actually much hack at their core role.

Fitness is like that. Training to the ultra worst case scenario all the time just breaks people. Tailoring it to reality is a sensible approach.
I do think that some form of casualty drag is a very good test though, its an ability/skill/test that every soldier should be able to do.
I would say a lot of support units focus their efforts on getting people to run 1.5 miles in their allocated time because that affect the stats and that is all that matters.

Tailoring fitness could be a good thing if it was done properly but we all know its just going to be an excuse to make things easier to boost recruitment and retention.
 
#30
They already have and they have the medals to prove it.
The "average" she? Because most of the bints I know fail miserably at it when on tests, even with the lightest people being dragged,
 
#31
They already have and they have the medals to prove it.
And a Naval girl as well!

From Wiki........

The primary action for which Nesbitt received the Military Cross was for acts during a Taliban ambush. On 12 March 2009, while under fire from Taliban forces, Nesbitt administered emergency medical treatment which saved the life of Lance Corporal John List, a 22-year-old soldier of 1st Battalion, The Rifles (1 RIFLES), from Holsworthy, Devon.[1][2][10]

On that day, List's unit was undertaking a five-day operation in Marjah district, Helmand Province, securing the area for the forthcoming Afghan elections.[1][2][8] In the mid-afternoon, during a Taliban ambush and ensuing gun-battle, List was shot in the neck.[1][2][8] Nesbitt, on being informed by radio of a "man down" and the location, ran 60 to 70 metres under fire and found List struggling to breathe, as the bullet had gone through his top lip, ruptured his jaw and come out of his neck.[1] She administered aid for around 45 minutes, stemming the blood loss, and providing him with another airway.[1] During treatment they were subject to gun and rocket fire from the Taliban forces.[2][8] List said of the incident, "I felt the impact go through my jaw, and the next thing I knew I was on my back. I thought that was it. Kate appeared from nowhere, reassuring me everything would be ok".[10] List was later airlifted to hospital by Merlin helicopter.[1]
 
#34
With great respect, I said average and I stand by my assertion. QUOTE="dingerr, post: 8812852, member: 8760"]They already have and they have the medals to prove it.[/QUOTE]
 
#35
And a Naval girl as well!

From Wiki........

The primary action for which Nesbitt received the Military Cross was for acts during a Taliban ambush. On 12 March 2009, while under fire from Taliban forces, Nesbitt administered emergency medical treatment which saved the life of Lance Corporal John List, a 22-year-old soldier of 1st Battalion, The Rifles (1 RIFLES), from Holsworthy, Devon.[1][2][10]

On that day, List's unit was undertaking a five-day operation in Marjah district, Helmand Province, securing the area for the forthcoming Afghan elections.[1][2][8] In the mid-afternoon, during a Taliban ambush and ensuing gun-battle, List was shot in the neck.[1][2][8] Nesbitt, on being informed by radio of a "man down" and the location, ran 60 to 70 metres under fire and found List struggling to breathe, as the bullet had gone through his top lip, ruptured his jaw and come out of his neck.[1] She administered aid for around 45 minutes, stemming the blood loss, and providing him with another airway.[1] During treatment they were subject to gun and rocket fire from the Taliban forces.[2][8] List said of the incident, "I felt the impact go through my jaw, and the next thing I knew I was on my back. I thought that was it. Kate appeared from nowhere, reassuring me everything would be ok".[10] List was later airlifted to hospital by Merlin helicopter.[1]
Without in any way minimizing the bravery of this woman, she did not, according to the report, drag the casualty. That was my only and quite precise point. I do not at all question the proven bravery of some women on the battlefield.
 
#36
And a Naval girl as well!

From Wiki........

The primary action for which Nesbitt received the Military Cross was for acts during a Taliban ambush. On 12 March 2009, while under fire from Taliban forces, Nesbitt administered emergency medical treatment which saved the life of Lance Corporal John List, a 22-year-old soldier of 1st Battalion, The Rifles (1 RIFLES), from Holsworthy, Devon.[1][2][10]

On that day, List's unit was undertaking a five-day operation in Marjah district, Helmand Province, securing the area for the forthcoming Afghan elections.[1][2][8] In the mid-afternoon, during a Taliban ambush and ensuing gun-battle, List was shot in the neck.[1][2][8] Nesbitt, on being informed by radio of a "man down" and the location, ran 60 to 70 metres under fire and found List struggling to breathe, as the bullet had gone through his top lip, ruptured his jaw and come out of his neck.[1] She administered aid for around 45 minutes, stemming the blood loss, and providing him with another airway.[1] During treatment they were subject to gun and rocket fire from the Taliban forces.[2][8] List said of the incident, "I felt the impact go through my jaw, and the next thing I knew I was on my back. I thought that was it. Kate appeared from nowhere, reassuring me everything would be ok".[10] List was later airlifted to hospital by Merlin helicopter.[1]
A well deserved MC, and anyone who saw her outside the Palace and didn't want to give her the biggest hug ever, has no soul.
However, what she didn't do was chuck him over her shoulder and run 100m because the vast majority of female frames, and with muscles in peak fitness, cannot do this.
I think that is the point being made a few posts above.
 
#37
I do think that some form of casualty drag is a very good test though, its an ability/skill/test that every soldier should be able to do.

Without in any way minimizing the bravery of this woman, she did not, according to the report, drag the casualty. That was my only and quite precise point. I do not at all question the proven bravery of some women on the battlefield.
Let’s see what the RMT standards for the casualty drag actually comes in at. There’s plenty of blokes who will fail a test consisting of drag of a dead weight of equivalent to say, a 14 stone body plus 55lbs odd of fighting equipment over a grass playing field, and is a test based on a scenario of one person dragging one casualty actually realistic?
 
#38
Let’s see what the RMT standards for the casualty drag actually comes in at. There’s plenty of blokes who will fail a test consisting of drag of a dead weight of equivalent to say, a 14 stone body plus 55lbs odd of fighting equipment over a grass playing field, and is a test based on a scenario of one person dragging one casualty actually realistic?
I think a scenario of one person dragging a casualty is very realistic, its nice if there are lots of people sticking one person on a poncho and carrying them but if you dont have that luxury you dont want to be waiting around until someone else rocks up to help.

There will have to be a set weight, time and distance for all rather than the bollocks it is at the moment where females are allowed to find the smallest person and then most of the time fail to drag them.
 
#39
Let’s see what the RMT standards for the casualty drag actually comes in at. There’s plenty of blokes who will fail a test consisting of drag of a dead weight of equivalent to say, a 14 stone body plus 55lbs odd of fighting equipment over a grass playing field, and is a test based on a scenario of one person dragging one casualty actually realistic?
I definitely remember having to get a person off the ground, over my shoulder and carried a set distance in a set time.
I would have failed to do this if I'd had to carry his Fighting Order, and/ or weapon as well.
 
#40
I definitely remember having to get a person off the ground, over my shoulder and carried a set distance in a set time.
I would have failed to do this if I'd had to carry his Fighting Order, and/ or weapon as well.
That used to be a test at the end of the CFT, although Im sure we had to carry both weapons.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Bax709 The Intelligence Cell 203
ExREME..TECH The NAAFI Bar 66
Forastero The Intelligence Cell 0

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top