The PFA is dead. Long live the PFA!

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#61
So some more details have come out that were presented to ECAB, and might soften @stacker1 's very valid cynicism about it being a way to make things easier for the women in ground close combat project.

New tests with Entry requirement (E) and Standard requirement (S):

Heave: 2 (E), 4 (S)
Lift (20-60kg up to 1.5m height) : 15 (E) 35 (S)
Throw (seated 4kg medicine ball throw) : 1 (E), 5 (S)
Deadlift: 50 (E) 70 (S)
Aerobic, 2km Run: 13 mins (E) 11 minutes (S)

Combined with Body Mass Measurements

It will also bring in Standards including:
- Single lift to 1.5m 20-60kg
- Jerry can carry 30m shuttles
- Repeated lift and carry, 20x20kg sandbags 30m carry
- 4km TAB, 50 minutes, 40kg weight (with a 25kg weight as well, 4km, time to be confirmed)
- Fire and movement, 7.5m bounds over 150m. 5x30 shuttles. 15m crawl and 15m sprint.
- casualty extraction using 40-110kg pull using a rope
- casualty drag 111kg over 20m
- tactical movement in urban terrain, zig-zag sprints, window entry, 10m crawl, 15m sprint

So it seems pretty comprehensive, unsure how it's going to work in practice.
One has to question why, if a physical testing programme has any merit whatsoever, it requires a body mass measurement element.
 
#62
Good news for the blokes (time to start smoking and drinking) however for the females. Doing a PFT in 13 mins is approx 11,076 metres an hour. 2km at 11 mins is 10,909 metres an hour.
As for women doing 4 heaves haha haha haha, I remember doing them in basic training, the men had to do 8 to pass out amd if the PTI didnt like you he made you hang there like a baboon before he said start, the women had to do 15 (I think) from a starting position of sitting on the floor.

I reckon that the details commentator has found are either for one trade/cap badge or has a range of allowance's based on sex/age. The run times alone would **** up every female over the age of 30 who comes in a PFT over 13 mins (and still currently passes).
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#63
4km TAB, 50 minutes, 40kg weight (with a 25kg weight as well, 4km, time to be confirmed)

If they bin the ridiculous 15kg fancy walks for Corps, and have everyone do a standardised, heavier but shorter and slower tab, that will be a good move and reflective of reality.
This is the one improvement to the tests that I actually like. The PFA is an overt lowering of standards to allow women to pass and most of the functional tests are pretty basic, but I've always hated the CFT because its representative of almost nothing that you might concievably do in combat.
 
#64
Just to clarify those standards are for GCC units, research is planned until 2021 for other arms.

Non GCC units are to continue using the AFT but stop the PFA from Jan 19 at the latest (some are stopping it from August 18 )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
#65
Just to clarify those standards are for GCC units, research is planned until 2021 for other arms.

For **** sakes, I want 10 minutes to walk 100 metres while I'm still serving
 
#66
One thing - this is definitely not a program designed to be easier for the average woman. The switch towards strength and heavier weights will favour men, and the slower run times are bringing men down a lot and women down a fraction to a common standard. This is going to require Army women to do a lot more weight and strength training while running the same speed, and men to just...well, do what they did before really, but a bit slower. So the women-in-ground-combat argument seems a bit of a bust.
If what Commentator says is true, its going to make it a lot easier for females and the blokes) in non teeth armed units.

I'm unsure why you think a 4km tab in 50 minutes reflects reality, even Ive done longer tabs out on the ground and Im a REMF (With body armour and extra kit it probably was 40kg though).

With the exception of the tab (which I believe might surprise people with the 40kg weight), there is nothing there that can really be regarded as a hardship, as I said before I had to do a minimum of 8 heaves to pass out of training, now the MOD are saying teeth arms need to do 4 in the regular army.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#67
With the exception of the tab (which I believe might surprise people with the 40kg weight), there is nothing there that can really be regarded as a hardship, as I said before I had to do a minimum of 8 heaves to pass out of training, now the MOD are saying teeth arms need to do 4 in the regular army.
I think the 40kgs will come as a surprise to some but it is a fairly realistic weight rather than the spurious 15-25kg for the CFT so definitely an improvement.

I'm surprised by how pathetic the upper body tests are though. A single very light deadlift that I'm pretty sure my mother could manage, only four heaves and a med ball throw doesn't make for a high bar to cross.
 
#68
I put this question on the site last week and minutes later the ARRSE died on it's arse so cross your fingers.

Does anyone know what the requirements for over 60 are?
 
#69
I'm surprised by how pathetic the upper body tests are though. A single very light deadlift that I'm pretty sure my mother could manage, only four heaves and a med ball throw doesn't make for a high bar to cross.
I'm sure it will be pointed out that the test is for all, therefore not allowances have not been made for females, no sirree bob.
 
#70
I put this question on the site last week and minutes later the ARRSE died on it's arse so cross your fingers.

Does anyone know what the requirements for over 60 are?
It will probably involve a zimmer frame.
 
#72
Well, not sure how some of this is going to prove @stacker1 's cynicism wrong:

Aerobic, 2km Run: 13 mins (E) 11 minutes (S)

That's 80% the speed of the old standard, and a shorter distance too. Which is quite a large reduction. Additionally the fact that some of the entry standards are basically "can you stand up without dying", is unlikely to convince anyone who believes that standards are dropping. If the ATCs start turning out 100% pass rates at the (S) numbers there, rather than a mishmash of 'trained' soldiers somewhere above the (E) numbers, fine. But since the trend seems to have been to pass the problem onto Phase 2 establishments or units to get them up to speed, you could see why not everyone is convinced.

Otherwise:

4km TAB, 50 minutes, 40kg weight (with a 25kg weight as well, 4km, time to be confirmed)

If they bin the ridiculous 15kg fancy walks for Corps, and have everyone do a standardised, heavier but shorter and slower tab, that will be a good move and reflective of reality.

Heave: 2 (E), 4 (S)
Lift (20-60kg up to 1.5m height) : 15 (E) 35 (S)
Throw (seated 4kg medicine ball throw) : 1 (E), 5 (S)
Deadlift: 50 (E) 70 (S)


So they want fewer racing snakes and more soldiers with functional upper body strength and core strength. Entirely sensible, hope it works out.

One thing - this is definitely not a program designed to be easier for the average woman. The switch towards strength and heavier weights will favour men, and the slower run times are bringing men down a lot and women down a fraction to a common standard. This is going to require Army women to do a lot more weight and strength training while running the same speed, and men to just...well, do what they did before really, but a bit slower. So the women-in-ground-combat argument seems a bit of a bust.
Is the (E) standard for starting basic training or passing phase 1?
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#73
Is the (E) standard for starting basic training or passing phase 1?
[assumption]Only really makes sense for starting basic training, otherwise there would have to be another lower standard for...pre-entry.[/assumption]
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#74
I'm surprised by how pathetic the upper body tests are though. A single very light deadlift that I'm pretty sure my mother could manage, only four heaves and a med ball throw doesn't make for a high bar to cross.
Sure, but 10.30 and 50/50 wasn't a very high bar to cross either...the real money for anywhere that used a PFT as an actual test of fitness was in how far you could exceed those by.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#75
Sure, but 10.30 and 50/50 wasn't a very high bar to cross either...the real money for anywhere that used a PFT as an actual test of fitness was in how far you could exceed those by.
PFT was a bad test of anything military* and I'm glad we've moved onto something else. However, the logic of this was that we would move to a more rounded fitness assesment that would test the skills needed to do the job and wouldn't involve making things easier for women.

What an utter surprise that the run has been made dramatically easier and a number of very simple tests have been added that an average person off the street should be able to pass. The insulting thing is that they don't even come close to assessing the real requirements of the job as they were meant to. Just for starters, the 70kg dead lift involves lifting less weight than I had for an 8 mile insertion tab on my troop leader's course. If the standards aren't even appropriate to match the intensity of basic officer courses then something is very wrong.


*I get the logic of it as a basic test of cardio fitness and it's not too bad for that.
 
#77
Drag very different to fireman's lift and carry CASEVAC though. Also with the lighter dummies.

A drag of a 60-80kg dummy I can definitely see. Getting every non-combat arms soldier, male and female, up to age 50, who hasn't done the technique to lift someone from the ground since basic, to lift a 120kg dummy is such an obviously bad idea and an open invitation to thousands of preventable back injuries that even the Army can't have come up with...

...oh bollocks.

It's gen.
I was cursed with a "similar sized" casualty for my bottom field firemans carry. The South African prop forward with full webbing and rifle was a joy to propel the length of the bottom field. I think all in I was carrying 32-33 stone /215 kg
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#78
I was cursed with a "similar sized" casualty for my bottom field firemans carry. The South African prop forward with full webbing and rifle was a joy to propel the length of the bottom field. I think all in I was carrying 32-33 stone /215 kg
Tasty. Done something similar on a different course, but mine was 170kg over 500m. How the hell did you make up 215? I had a 105kg bloke plus 2 sets of webbing, 2 rifles and a daysack, full scales etc, and we worked that out as about 170kg. Your guy must have weighed 22 stone!

Anyway, I know it happens, but in both those cases we are talking the extreme high end of infantry tests, not an annual bimble for clerks and vets.
 
#79
Tasty. Done something similar on a different course, but mine was 170kg over 500m. How the hell did you make up 215? I had a 105kg bloke plus 2 sets of webbing, 2 rifles and a daysack, full scales etc, and we worked that out as about 170kg. Your guy must have weighed 22 stone!

Anyway, I know it happens, but in both those cases we are talking the extreme high end of infantry tests, not an annual bimble for clerks and vets.
Shit maths badly rounded up. A v large bloke and kit and a v v large bloke and kit :mrgreen: he weighed in at 17.5 stone no kit

Chuck in mud and wet and a bit for good measure :mrgreen:
 
#80
One has to question why, if a physical testing programme has any merit whatsoever, it requires a body mass measurement element.
Agreed 100% - if it's arbitrary and gender and age free, and particularly if it involves moving your 'body mass' over a distance / height / heave / obstacle / wall etc, BMI should be completely irrelevant.

As for the rest, it must be Mr (or Ms) Fat Barsteward's dream come true.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BFPO The Training Wing 47
W AGC, RAPTC and SASC 9
Davros_the_Dalek The Intelligence Cell 2

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top