Whither Our Warriors-The Lowering of Standards

[bossi]

...As for "PT not being everything" well, that sounds like something the troops in PAT platoon spew. PT is the foundation of everything we do in the Infantry. The best shot in the world is useless if he passed out on the way to the battle! I've seen it on deployments where the "heavy" CSS types go down first with everything from twisted ankles to sore throats. The unfit are sickened and injured faster than the fit.

Comments welcome.

Unfortunately the only test for the inverse relationship between arrogance and maturity is called time ... ah, well ... it's nostalgic to hear the hollow rattle of urine and vinegar (some things never change ...).

What can a soldier do who charges when out of breath?
-- Vegetius:  De Re Militari, iii, 378

Nations have passed away and left no traces,
And history gives the naked cause of it -
One single, simple reason in all cases,
They fell because their peoples were not fit.
-- Rudyard Kipling:  Land and Sea Tales for Scouts and Guides, 1923

A man who takes a lot of exercise rarely exercises his mind adequately.
-- B.H. Liddell Hart:  Thoughts on War, xi, 1944

"The best form of 'welfare' for the troops is first-class training."
-- Erwin Rommel;  Rommel Papers, ix, 1953

Is it really true that a seven-mile cross-country run is inforced upon all in this division, from generals to privates? ... It looks to me rather excessive.  A colonel or a general ought not to exhaust himself in trying to compete with young boys running across country seven miles at a time.  The duty of officers is no doubt to keep themselves fit, but still more to think of their men, and to take decisions affecting their safety and comfort.  Who is the general of this division, and does he run the seven miles himself?  If so, he may be more useful for football than for war.  Could Napoleon have run seven miles across country at Austerlitz?  Perhaps it was the other fellow he made run.  In my experience, based on many years' observation, officers with high athletic qualifications are not usually successful in the higher ranks.
Winston Churchill:  Note for the Secretary of State for War, 4 February 1944

More brawn than brain.
-- Cornelius Nepos:  Epamnondas, v, c. 75 B.C.

 

[DogOfWar]

CSS = Combat Service Support

Wogs to some of us, pogues to Americans and REMFs to all - get the picture?

you're quite enamoured with yourself arent you? Ive been working out at the Garrison when the infanteers come wandering through. They certainly dont exert themselves in the gym. Or perhaps I should bring up my last express test that I ran with 2 infanteers who gave up as soon as they hit the minimums for their age groups. Didnt seem to be a "matter of pride" to them. You have bags in every trade. Some of poor mind some of poor body.

 

[GO!!!]

you're quite enamoured with yourself arent you? Ive been working out at the Garrison when the infanteers come wandering through. They certainly dont exert themselves in the gym. Or perhaps I should bring up my last express test that I ran with 2 infanteers who gave up as soon as they hit the minimums for their age groups. Didnt seem to be a "matter of pride" to them. You have bags in every trade. Some of poor mind some of poor body.

No, no one has ever accused me of having low self - esteem. Get over it.

The points I attempted to make were;

1) our current training standards for fitness are too low, they must be boosted and enforced, perhaps with a corresponding link to career progression. You can't lead from the rear, and lose a great deal of credibility with cbt arms soldiers if you lack the discipline to restrict your caloric intake and as a bare minimum, do some cardio 3-4 times a week.

2) As for GS Bn being, as a group, too fat? You are delusional as well as myopic if you can't see that - it's not even up for discussion. It's a fact.

3) Go ask a medic if being out of shape will make you more likely to get sick or injured. What did he say? Thought so.

In regards to the brains over brawn issue, The last 2 COs' and a majority of the officers in 3VP have done the Mountain Man race at some time in the past, as do their troops. The third has won the major unit trophy what - 6 times now? And if we are all a bunch of arrogant fitness freaks, we must be doing something right, as all of the deployments seem to be coming our way.

"The civilians today are saying that we should be making love, not war. We in the Airborne consider it our privilige to excel at both" 82nd airborne div Cdr

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

And if we are all a bunch of arrogant fitness freaks, we must be doing something right, as all of the deployments seem to be coming our way.

Oh, please stop...  This isn't true and you know it.  3VP hasn't been selected for deployment for any "particular" reason other than how it fits into the high readiness framework.

GO!! - you make some good points, but they're usually lost in your diatribes against other units, other trades, and/or other parts of the CF.  You are from an excellent unit, but it isn't the only combat effective one in the Army. 

 

[GO!!!]

OK OK, I retract the implication that we get all the tours because our Bn, as a group is fitter.

How about we replace the BFT with a real test of soldier skills, in addition to a serious physical challenge. Perhaps a Cambrian Patrol style of competition/evaluation, where there are various stands that must be tactically navigated to and successfully completed. Marksmanship, navigation, medical, bridging and other obstacles, comms, knots, unarmed combat, the possibilities are endless.

If one wanted to make it trade specific, have a shorter one for svc trades, with stands relevant to their jobs / possible employment, but the major ones common to all.

If one was to go really hardcore with it, the successful and ranked completion of the race could be tied to career progression as an identification of skills. (ie: you can't get Mastered on your PER/PDR if you tank the competition.

This would provide members with a positive, competitive method of determining their own level of skill progression against their peers, as well as providing an incentive to remain fit and current at all times.

Needless to say, this would have to be applied nationally and to all units for a real ranking of skills to be effective.

Any comments?

 

[Haggis]

How about we replace the BFT with a real test of soldier skills, in addition to a serious physical challenge. Perhaps a Cambrian Patrol style of competition/evaluation, where there are various stands that must be tactically navigated to and successfully completed. Marksmanship, navigation, medical, bridging and other obstacles, comms, knots, unarmed combat, the possibilities are endless.

Any comments?

In preparation for Bosnia's Roto 13 in 2003, 23 Fd Sqn of the RCD Battle Group did something similar.  They interspersed their 13 Km BFT route with stand tests. 

The Army has taken a step towards raising the fitness bar in implementing the new Three Task Fitness Test.  The new portion is a simulated timed "trench dig" exercise. Not much, bit it is value added to the test.

Unfortunately one of the biggest hurdles has yet to be overcome and that is the settiing of standards for the Army Reserve, close to 50% of all Canadian Army soldiers.  Before anybody jumps on me, I know that, in theory at least, the Army reserve is supposed to meet the same standards as the Reg F.

The problem is twofold:

1. Army Reserve units are not funded to "do PT".  I know, it's up to the COs to decide how funds are spent in training, but there's never enough dollars to meet mandated training requirements plus fund courses and exercises as is.  COs everywhere have to decide what non-deliverables will get cut from the budget to meet the commander's intent.  Regular PT, or even the six week BFT workup program, are going to be on that list.

2. Reg F soldiers are paid for doing PT and covered in the event they get injured while doing PT, even on thier own time (providing a CF 279 was properly completed).  They should be covered, as this is part of the job.  The same could be said for the Class "A" Joe Army Reservist, who throws out his back BFT'ing on a Saturday morning with his unit buddies, on his own time, so he can go on PLQ.  But he's not.

In fact, he is Shyte out of Luck.

He's off work or out of school, he's off PLQ and he's out of pocket for all that and his medical expenses.  And he's not even getting paid!

Until the Army figures out a way to cover Reservists who want to and do train the body hard on their own time it's quite unreasonable to impose standards on them which could lead to the loss of thier civilian livelihood.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

OK OK, I retract the implication that we get all the tours because our Bn, as a group is fitter.

Ack.  On to the issue at hand:

How about we replace the BFT with a real test of soldier skills, in addition to a serious physical challenge. Perhaps a Cambrian Patrol style of competition/evaluation, where there are various stands that must be tactically navigated to and successfully completed. Marksmanship, navigation, medical, bridging and other obstacles, comms, knots, unarmed combat, the possibilities are endless.

This IS a constructive suggestion - so constructive that it has, believe it or not, been tried before.  You may not have been around when the entire Army went through the so-called "Warrior" program.  For the uninitiated, this was an Army-wide individual evaluation that involved a small-arms test (C-7), fitness (3.2 km run in combats - with boots, helmet, weapon and webbing), and "basic" soldier skills (first aid, navigation, voice procedure, cam and concealment, etc..).  Every soldier - Reg and Res - was expected to pass the test and we all wore badges (gold, silver and bronze) to show how well we performed.  It only lasted a couple of years, largely because it was so time and resource intensive.  Besides, (IMHO) the combat arm guys found the "basic" skills a tad too "basic" and that being tested on them was a little demeaning as a result.

Basic skills and fitness should already form part of everyone's PER and PDR.  If it isn't there (at least in "Applies Job Knowlege"), there's something wrong.

Cheers,

TR

 

[aesop081]

I remember the first year of the warrior program when it was just an LFCA thing.  Still have the little handbook with the camo cover.  It was a good idea but as mentioned, maybe a little too basic for the reg combat arms types.  The mag loading stand instantly comes to mind.  Even though in execution it didnt pan out well, the concept was there.  I fully agree that the 13km march is inadequate as a fitnesss test.  Why do w have to do work-ups for the BFT ?  IMHO, if it is a minimum standrd, you should be able to do it at any time.  I liked the old days where we would do the 13 km ruck march one day and do a 16 km webbing run/march the next, whith the 6 foot wall, the fireman;s carry and the "trench jump".

 

[Haggis]

 Every soldier - Reg and Res - was expected to pass the test and we all wore badges (gold, silver and bronze) to show how well we performed.

Lots of folks jumped on the Warrior Badge bandwagon.  Not too long after the program fired up (within a couple of weeks), Reserve employment opportunity messages started to read "only members who have acheived the Gold Standard may apply."  Fair enough.  But most units hadn't even finished testing yet and not everyone can score Gold overnight.  I know some awesomely fit troops who can't hit a bull in the ass with a shovel, let alone a snap target at 300 metres.

It's more than fitness.  It's everything all taken together that makes or breaks a good soldier.

 

[Strike]

GO!!!

It all sounds like a good idea but with everyone being so busy keeping up their quals and doing all the other wonderful jobs they have to do (2ndary duties and such) who would have the time to plan such a monumental task, including the tests and trials to standardize and determine the levels required?

I nominate GO!!!  Have fun.  ;D ;D

 

[COBRA-6]

The USMC seems able to test everyone's fitness and marksmanship level each year... it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a decent set of realistic standards... (marching with combat eqpt & loadout over a course with sufficient hills under a certain time, shooting at fixed and moving targets at known and unkown ranges etc...)

 

[GO!!!]

As for who would plan and organise this - there seem to be a large number of "under - employed" mbrs with two bars of equal size on their epaullettes. Perhaps Bde HQ could spare a few? They seem to leave at 1500 daily - so they must have time. >

I would gladly organise such a prgrm, if only I had the resources.

This program would replace all of the quals for the cbt arms, freeing up more time for other trg.

I will call it the "GO!!! forth and do army stuff test"

And "gold standard only may apply" is a great idea - for both reg and res soldiers, then you would see who was the most motivated on an individual basis - perhaps a better indicator than collective unit rankings.

 

[Haggis]

And "gold standard only may apply" is a great idea - for both reg and res soldiers, then you would see who was the most motivated on an individual basis - perhaps a better indicator than collective unit rankings.

Agreed... to a point.  By doing it this way you discriminate against and disqualify 2/3 of your soldiers.  Your profile indicates that you weren't around in the Warrior Program's heydey ('93 -'96 or so)so I'll toss in a bit of history.

Back in the day, not everyone could qualify "Gold", even in Reg F line units. First I have to point out that what we were testing in the Warrior Programme were generic soldier skills.  Nothing trade specific, just the basics.  Meeting the trade/unit Battle Task Standards took care of ther rest.

The two determining factors for the badges were marksmanship and fitness.  For a soldier who's an excellent shot but can't run to Gold standard, he can work on that on his own time (I knocked 6 minutes off my own time from year one to next.).  But a gazelle who can't shoot requires time and resources to be made available from his unit in order to improve.  That was one of the reasons the program was shelved.  It was very resource intensive.

A better way is "One Army - One Standard."  You either make it or you don't.  The trick here is finding a standard that is applicable to and attainable by all trades/ages. It's unrealistic to expect a 50 year old EME sergeant-major to meet the same fitness and shooting standards as a 20 year old paratrooper. 

 

[bossi]

... The two determining factors for the badges were marksmanship and fitness.   ...  But a gazelle who can't shoot requires time and resources to be made available from his unit in order to improve.   That was one of the reasons the program was shelved.   It was very resource intensive.

A better way is "One Army - One Standard."   You either make it or you don't.   The trick here is finding a standard that is applicable to and attainable by all trades/ages. ...  

Agreed - I noticed quite a few younger people grumbling about how it was unfair ... because they felt older people had an unfair advantage in marksmanship (oddly enough, these same people never felt if necessary to acknowledge us older folks who earned our gold badges ...).  Again, the culprit is urine and vinegar.

Badges aren't the "be all and end all" - some of us aren't allowed (by dress regulations) to wear the badge on our sleeve to prove we qualified "marksman" ... unlike some folks whose ego swells disproportionately when they get to sew on a bauble/trinket or wear pink headdress that doesn't even keep the rain or sun out of their eyes ...

Demissos animo et tacitos vitare memento;
Quod flumen placidum est, forsan latet altius unda.

 

[Haggis]

The USMC seems able to test everyone's fitness and marksmanship level each year... it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a decent set of realistic standards...

I've seen this thought in a previous thread (old War Diary IIRC) on PT: "Let's make the standards tougher".  "Lets add this..."

My thought is that this stems from the belief that our standards are not tough enough as evidenced by the amount of SpandexPAT seen waddling around these days. (These are the same folks that don't remember (or care) that the narrow end of the rifle is the dangerous end.)  In fact, our standards are plenty tough for those who fear to attempt the test.  They dodge, get chits, find excuses, get tasked away, etc. at testing time.

Desigining and implementing standards takes time, effort and money away from other activities.  We already have the EXPRES Test, BFT, IBTS, BTSI, a myriad of CTSs, ELOC, MLOC, DLOC, TMST, Army Fitness Manual, JTF2 Coopers Test, Pre Para Fitness Test, Firefighters Fitness Test, etc. etc. as viable and achievable standards.  Instead of re-inventing the wheel we should re-double our efforts to test to and enforce the standards we already have, and universally at that.  Fund the training.  Provide the resources and facilities to train to the standard.

Are you a Reservist?  Same standard as your Reg F bretheren.  Worried about losing your civvy job if you get hurt?  Here's legislated pension and liability coverage for you when you train on your own.

One Army.
One Standard.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Haggis:

I couldn't agree more and was about to post the same thing.  We already have extensive standards, but routinely (for a variety of reasons) ignore them either individually or institutionally.  For instance, there is a PWT for all soldiers, but how many actually fire it every year??  Answer:  no time, no bullets, on and on...

Having said this, the bottom line is that individuals have to bear some responsibility for sorting out their own personal operational readiness, Reg or Res, CSS or Combat Arms...  As you say - One Army, One (achievable) Standard.

TR

 

[paracowboy]

I've seen this thought in a previous thread (old War Diary IIRC) on PT: "Let's make the standards tougher".   "Lets add this..."

My thought is that this stems from the belief that our standards are not tough enough as evidenced by the amount of SpandexPAT seen waddling around these days. (These are the same folks that don't remember (or care) that the narrow end of the rifle is the dangerous end.)   In fact, our standards are plenty tough for those who fear to attempt the test.   They dodge, get chits, find excuses, get tasked away, etc. at testing time.

Desigining and implementing standards takes time, effort and money away from other activities.   We already have the EXPRES Test, BFT, IBTS, BTSI, a myriad of CTSs, ELOC, MLOC, DLOC, TMST, Army Fitness Manual, JTF2 Coopers Test, Pre Para Fitness Test, Firefighters Fitness Test, etc. etc. as viable and achievable standards.    Instead of re-inventing the wheel we should re-double our efforts to test to and enforce the standards we already have, and universally at that.   Fund the training.   Provide the resources and facilities to train to the standard.

Are you a Reservist?   Same standard as your Reg F bretheren.   Worried about losing your civvy job if you get hurt?   Here's legislated pension and liability coverage for you when you train on your own.

One Army.
One Standard.

what he said. (But with some vulgarity thrown in for colour.)

 

[KevinB]

what he said. (But with some vulgarity thrown in for colour.)

Preach it bro...