Officer/PTI?

#1
In the various brochures I have regarding Officer roles/responsibilities, I have noticed that officers are responsible for the fitness of their men.

Basically, I am wondering what this entails?

Just to cover my back, I am very interested in exercise physiology and what not, and am a part time personal trainer. However, I am curious as to the logistics of providing an adequate fitness regime for 30 individuals with presumably different strengths and capabilities etc.

Do you have to tailor PT to suit the make up of a platoon or is it a case of just taking them out for a run every day? (I am referring to Infantry regiments btw.)

Thanks again.
 
#2
An interesting question.

Officers are not PTIs - though some think they are!

Officers can do ETL - Endurance Training Leader - to enable them to take people out on runs. A worthwhile course.

To my mind, PT should be tailored to include everyone from the unfittest clerk ( and before anyone says it there are some very fit (?) clerks) to the fittest racing snake. The ones that need PT are the ones that don't do any training in their own time. Therefore programmed PT of any kind is good.

Officers can also do the Unit Fitness Training Officers course...but a girl on mine said they were talking rubbish. She had a Sports Education degree so I took her word for it!!
 
#3
Does anyone know anything about Endurance Training Leader?

I spoke to my PSI and he doesn't recognise it, nor can he find any detials on the course.

Thanks

Scott
 
#4
The Endurance Leader training - which YO's complete as part of the PT syllabus at RMAS - is set by the APTC. Suggest your PSI approaches their HQ in Aldershot for advice.
 
#5
The fitness of the soldiers is something you can influence through a programme of regular physical training (and threats) but this needs to be squeezed in amongst work commitments so people need to also train in their own time. The key is to keep everyone interested so variety is essential - gym work, assault course, running, battle PT, swimming, team sports, and the hundreds of other alternatives including adventurous training. And the military has its PT experts ('twice round my beautiful body ... go') to provide advise and run the sessions.

I see PT as more than a beasting - it's a chance to see the team working together, notably in helping the less able. More than that though, it's a fantastic opportunity to gauge people's character - I've more time for a struggler who grits his teeth and tries his best than for a fit individual who coasts through a session with no effort.
 
#6
Don't take it too literally.

You are responsible for the fitness of your soldiers. This means that you should ensure that those medically unfit are going the right way about getting better, those physically unfit have a structured program of improvement and that the rest can maintain an appropriate level of fitness. You do not need to know how many press-ups your soldiers can do, that is a PTIs job, you just need to be fit yourself (example) and are ultimately responsible for all aspects of your soldiers' abilities. Forget phys qualifications, if you want to do phys with your soldiers, plan it in advance and arrange a PTI.
 
#9
tafftoff said:
And the military has its PT experts ('twice round my beautiful body ... go') to provide advise and run the sessions.
So officers (i.e., lieutenants) don't actually run the PT session? :?
No, that's what the gym staff are paid for. Even ETL trained personnel can't beast the lads, IIRC, 70% of the most unfit twaats maximum effort.

Gone are the days when the Tp / Coy cmdrs or SNCOs can rag the lads round the training areas. It's gone far too pink and fluffy in this era we live in. God forbid, you'll make the little lambs wear big boots to work next.
 
#10
IIRC, 70% of the most unfit twaats maximum effort.
What does this mean, GB? (Thanks for your response btw)

So platoon leaders don't train the soldiers. I may be opening a can of worms here, but in general, are officers fitter than their soldiers? I mean, in the RM the YO's complete the same course as the soldiers, except they have to do certain events in shorter times etc., thus ostensibly proving their physical superiority (for want of a better term) and vindicating their position of authority.

I realise that they aren't representative of army officers (not by a long shot), it's just...well... the OTC chaps in general seem to be terribly unfit. They certainly don't play any sport. I'm not trying to provoke anyone, just wondering what the story is, esp. considering that they don't lead PT etc.
 
#11
tafftoff said:
IIRC, 70% of the most unfit twaats maximum effort.
What does this mean, GB? (Thanks for your response btw)

So platoon leaders don't train the soldiers. I may be opening a can of worms here, but in general, are officers fitter than their soldiers? I mean, in the RM the YO's complete the same course as the soldiers, except they have to do certain events in shorter times etc., thus ostensibly proving their physical superiority (for want of a better term) and vindicating their position of authority.

I realise that they aren't representative of army officers (not by a long shot), it's just...well... the OTC chaps in general seem to be terribly unfit. They certainly don't play any sport. I'm not trying to provoke anyone, just wondering what the story is, esp. considering that they don't lead PT etc.
In an ideal world the Tp OCs etc would be fitter than the blokes, leading from the front and all that hard on inducing stuff. In reality that is not normally the case. I have not met many young subbies that can turn their blokes inside out on the phys front. If you are one of the very few then apologies. However, a Tp OC should be able to motivate the lads under the most arduous of conditions. This still does not mean that you can take the Tp out on a PT session unless you have a PTI or you or one of your SNCOs / Offcrs is ETL trained.

The 70% of the fat lazy git thing means you can only run / tab etc at 70% of the afore mentioned fat gits fitness ( if ETL trained ).

For example if fat lad can run a mile in a maximum of 10 mins ( God forbid ) then the ETL trained personnel can only run a squad with him / her in it at 70% of that 10 min mile pace, so that would be a minimum time of 10 mins plus that 70% - whatever that works out to be!

If I've got the facts and figures wrong then PT Corps feel free to dry bum me!.
 
#13
tafftoff said:
IIRC, 70% of the most unfit twaats maximum effort.
What does this mean, GB? (Thanks for your response btw)

So platoon leaders don't train the soldiers. I may be opening a can of worms here, but in general, are officers fitter than their soldiers? I mean, in the RM the YO's complete the same course as the soldiers, except they have to do certain events in shorter times etc., thus ostensibly proving their physical superiority (for want of a better term) and vindicating their position of authority.

I realise that they aren't representative of army officers (not by a long shot), it's just...well... the OTC chaps in general seem to be terribly unfit. They certainly don't play any sport. I'm not trying to provoke anyone, just wondering what the story is, esp. considering that they don't lead PT etc.
Everyone, thought you may have realised this is a wah...

If it is not a wah, then Lt Taftoff sir, you are a dull **** with no knowledge of the army. I suggest you join it, keep your eyes open and learn about it; rather than trying to discuss it in a committee!

Edited by Mod
 
#14
Thanks for the clarification GB.

you are a dull cnut with no knowledge of the army
Thank you for your kind words Hellfyyr.

I realise that I have no knowledge of the internal workings of the army. That is why I am asking questions re. PT and other such issues.

I suggest you join it
I intend to.

Why do you think PO's post on this site? To preach about life in the army?
 
#15
tafftoff said:
Thanks for the clarification GB.

you are a dull cnut with no knowledge of the army
Thank you for your kind words Hellfyyr.

I realise that I have no knowledge of the internal workings of the army. That is why I am asking questions re. PT and other such issues.

I suggest you join it
I intend to.

Why do you think PO's post on this site? To preach about life in the army?
You seem to be missing the point and reading between the lines, suggesting the Marines are superior in some way :roll:

My point, if you can be bothered to learn from someone senior, is that we will train you properly; no need to learn from the internet...
 
#16
Forgive me for pointing out a fact, i.e., the marine PO's have to complete the requisite fitness tests in shorter times than their men. They also complete these courses alongside them. I did not insinuate that the RM was superior in anyway, nor that I had any particular preference for their particular mode of training. If you took that the wrong way perhaps you should blame your own insecurities, not my curiosity.

My point, if you can be bothered to learn from someone senior, is that we will train you properly; no need to learn from the internet...

I don't doubt that the BA training is second to none. It is perfectly reasonable for someone to enquire about the specific nature of the role of officers, especially when the booklets and so forth that you get sent are generally vague -'As a BA soldier you have to be the best that you can be. As a BA officer you have to ensure that 30 soldiers can be the best they can be' etc. It is afterall a career, and it would be foolish to rush into it without first finding out what it entails.

Edited by Mod
 
#19
I think it's great that you intend to learn to lead men by pamphlet and conversation, more power to you my friend...

I personally would wait until I got to Sandhurst. Your comment about just trying to find out what happens would be fine, except you are going too far in depth, hence my advice. You also need to be a little less arrogant and people will not label you a dull cnut, well not so often anyway.
 
#20
tafftoff,

I do not think it is easy to consider RM YO trg and Army YO trg as alike. An essential difference exists between the two organisations (their ethos) that demands different things of their officers.

The Army's YO trg at Sandhurst satisfies the requirement the Army demands of its YOs. If you were to take the infantry as an example you would note that combined Ph1/Ph2 for soldiers takes approx 6 months. Whereas officer trg takes 12 months to complete the commissioning course, a further 3 months for the Pl Comds Battle Course and just less again for the Armoured Infantry Pl Comds Course.

Officers are not required to be the experts in particular fields (PT, Skill at Arms, Gunnery) and are more generalist in approach - the specialists are our JNCOs and SNCOs who officers command and in turn learn from. As a pl comd you would devise a trg prog (or have a coy one imposed on you) whereby the specialist subjects would be taught by a variety of subject matter experts - thus allowing you to lead your soldiers in the various disciplines.

Physically leading your soldiers is different from taking a lesson.
 

Latest Threads