If I recall correctly (I haven't read the linked article but have read others), a perfect score for males is 20.
If I recall correctly (I haven't read the linked article but have read others), a perfect score for males is 20.
At the moment, that doesn't appear to be where the military is headed. Affirmative action, irrespective of qualifications, seems to be the future for women in the military -- it sounds like it's all about achieving the right percentages.Seems like a simple issue to me. Women SHOULD be allowed in any military role, including combat, as men and SHOULD be judged by the same criteria for competence.
You are absolutely correct. The Combat Fitness Test required testing equipment that was not always available, so it was scrapped in favor of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) which only requires a stopwatch and a flat 2-mile course.I think this was a proposed idea not too long ago- have a "battlefield" PT test with sprints in gear, etc. From the Army's point of view though, this isn't a great idea because it requires "special equipment" and facilities. They want a pt test that can be done anywhere. The current test can be taken anywhere there is a bit of road or a path. Also, it would compound the "problem" of not having a single physical standard to fall back on when it comes to promotions, awards, etc. Personally, I think this type of test would be much more productive. But those are reasons I don't think it will happen.
The armed forces need women to flesh out the ranks of Military Occupational Specialities (MOSes or jobs) that are frankly not that demanding physically (admin, intell analyst, some of the non-field medical stuff), to leave the young bucks to do the MOSes that are more demanding physically (infantry, SF, FO, cav/armor, maybe gun bunny in the arty).And sadly, the push seems to be "how can we increase the number of women in the military and in combat arms" instead of "how can we best prepare our soldiers for combat". Its a job opportunity focus, not a combat readiness focus. And I don't see it changing anytime soon, going by formersoldier's last post. _blank:
http://news.yahoo.com/sexual-harassment-military-female-cadets-211701388.htmlA clear theme that comes through in the survey, too, is that cadets of both genders feel that because the physical standards for female cadets are not as strenuous as those for male cadets, the men may have less respect for the women.
Some will read that story and come away with the conclusion that increasing physical standards for women is the way ahead. Some will come away with the idea that eliminating gender-based exclusions from infantry units will help eliminate or at least reduce sexual assault in the military.
Sorry but it is hard for me to believe you "carried" a 150lbs ruck. I do not disagree with your position but your claim seems exaggerated. When I parachuted into Iraq our plan was to self sustain for 1 week. I was carrying a full packing list with 4 HE mortar rounds, an additional basic load of 5.56 (210 rounds), and 200 rounds of 7.62. My pack weighed out right near 83 lbs and it was the heaviest I carried in my 24 years.My first time into Iraq, my ruck weighed at least 150 pounds (that was as high as the scales went). Being an old infantryman, I can tell the authors categorically that a female in an infantry platoon who cannot carry her share of the load and makes others carry more to make up for her inability, will be the object of contempt, derision and savage verbal abuse, as would a male soldier who couldn't carry his load.
We weren't humping far, but where I was going we couldn't call back to the company trains and get resupplied. We were alone and unafraid and we were planning on being there a while. Whatever we might need, we had to carry in ourselves. That weight consisted mostly of ammo (triple basic load), water, PRC-104 radios, batteries, chow and hide site materials. That weight does not include our "go to heck" spare ruck which was also had to carry and which held a PRC-70, a five gallon water can and a case of MREs. We cached that ruck on infil.Sorry but it is hard for me to believe you "carried" a 150lbs ruck. I do not disagree with your position but your claim seems exaggerated. When I parachuted into Iraq our plan was to self sustain for 1 week. I was carrying a full packing list with 4 HE mortar rounds, an additional basic load of 5.56 (210 rounds), and 200 rounds of 7.62. My pack weighed out right near 83 lbs and it was the heaviest I carried in my 24 years.
http://news.yahoo.com/three-pioneering-women-marine-infantry-course-asked-leave-210210210.htmlJust weeks after three women passed a rigorous day-long test qualifying them to potentially lead US Marine infantrymen for the first time in history, news came that all three women have been asked to leave the course.
---
During the first march in which the three female – as well as three male – officers were issued a warning, the Marines were given about two hours and 40 minutes to move 7-1/2 miles. At the time, they were assigned to carry roughly 104 pounds each.
---
“They’ve been counseled that they have failed a hike, and we don’t tolerate more than one failure of a tactical movement.”
That’s what happened last week, this time during a nine-mile march. The students had three hours to complete it, carrying 124-pound packs.
When three men and three women fell behind for a second time, Flynn had to break the news that they were out.
The social experimenters will be along shortly to suggest that the standard is flawed and order the USMC to lower its standards for females in the interest of "social justice."As it should be.
Didn't know that, about Ranger School.Marines are less willing to waffle on standards than the Army IMO. Ranger School experimentation will be starting soon. This should be fun.
http://www.army.mil/article/133641Current Ranger course standards will remain the same for all students, said G-1 officials. Prerequisites, phase performance requirements and graduation standards would not change for the assessment.
"We will be prepared to execute the assessment professionally and objectively, if directed," said Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence and Fort Benning.
All female candidates would be required to attend the Army National Guard Ranger Training and Assessment Course, known as RTAC, conducted at Fort Benning, Georgia, prior to the assessment course.
If the standards stay the same, female candidates have effectively zero chance of making it through that course.Didn't know that.
http://www.army.mil/article/133641
No waffling. Maybe.
Which means their initial PT test looks like this:
49 push-ups in 2 minutes
59 sit-ups in 2 minutes
5-mile run in under 40 minutes
6 pull-ups (palm in)
http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/StudentInformation.html
Depends on what level. I know the average soldier does not want standards lowered, however tje average soldied does not make these decisionsMarines are less willing to waffle on standards than the Army IMO. Ranger School experimentation will be starting soon. This should be fun.
It's my clever ploy to keep myself from getting any additional messages.TW, your inbox is full.
Is your name Ray?If I were Planetary Commander, I would keep the standard APFT to qualify folks as soldiers, and include MOS-specific tests in order to qualify for the more physically demanding MOSes....
http://www.military.com/daily-news/...new-mos-specific-pt-tests.html?ESRC=army-a.nlArmy Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno is waiting on a recommendation that would create PFTs that are designed around the physical requirements of military occupational specialties such as infantry, cavalry, armor and others.
"I expect that the in the next several months Training and Doctrine Command will come forward with a recommendation," Odierno said during a Jan. 6 virtual Town Hall meeting with soldiers across the Army.
"This is maybe how I see it. I think there might still be a general PT test similar to [the current] pushups, sit-ups, two-mile run. But then there will be a functional test per by MOS that really focuses on what strengths should need to be in a certain MOS."