Changes in Army basic training

I don't know if I'd call it bold. Frankly, the Army is a little late to the game implementing task-specific exercise; sports trainers have been doing it at least a decade, and I see some sense in that aspect of it. I had one tell me nine years ago that football players were wasting their time trying to trim down their 40 times because the reality was the vast majority of them would never actually run 40 yards in a game. His focus was on short, explosive bursts that simulated, without the collisions, the kind of movements they'd be doing in the games. And he got great results.

On the other hand, TBF makes a huge point with the endurance fitness. While the core training makes sense, doing away with the longer runs in my view would be foolish. Do you really want to explain to a soldier's mother that he or she is dead because his/her buddy couldn't run a mile? The fact of the matter is there is a wide variety of physical demands on soldiers, and the training should reflect that.

 

There are some places in my town where knowing how to do a bayonet charge comes in handy.

 

The Army Physical Fitness Test includes a timed 2-mile run. Yes, you hit the nail on the head with the other standard. When you go to a school (airborne or air assault, for example), the standard PT (not APFT) pace is a 9-miler in 36 minutes.

Army physical fitness standards are spelled out in regulations, along with height/weight requirements. However, just meeting the standard isn't going to cut it in some units.

 

9-miler? That has to be a typo. No one can run 9 miles in 36 minutes.

 

Well, that's a 4-minute a mile pace, doable for top-level distance runners, but probably not for the average Joe.

 

That's an impossible pace for 99.99 percent of the population, if not more.

 

The Air Force doesn't strictly enforce its fitness regulations on the populous.
Not sure if the Army is the same way.
In the past five years, I've seen lots of overweight women and men here stateside and in Germany who don't do regular PT.
I think if you are downrange in the hot zones, you sort of live your life differently and adhere more to the set standards.
That's just a guess.

 

4 miles, 9-minute pace, 36 minutes, is what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

Yes, we do. My commander just kicked a guy out because he was a PT slacker. Didn't try. Didn't care.

 

I presume the changes would just be for basic though, so PT tests would still have timed 2-mile runs, I'd guess. Plus, when I was in, we did PT 4 days a week, and individual platoons and/or companies decided what the training consisted of. Our First Sgt. decided we'd run 5 miles every Friday. So, regardless of Basic Training changes, I would think a soldier still needs to pretty fit to make it after basic.

 

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/03/army_basic_031510w/

mentions much of the stuff already noted, but also comments on marksmanship and such.

 

http://www.johntreed.com/physicalfitness.html

This guy argues that the military overemphasizes physical fitness and that much of the time spent working out would be better spent on other activities that are more likely to help win a war.

 

Navy training for Viet Nam, if you did it in Coronado, included running up and down the beach in your combat boots until your ass was good and tired, and then you ran some more.

Later on, if you found yourself on the ground on the wrong side of the river and you needed to keep moving, you were damned glad for the training.

Three Bags is correct. It depends on the mission.