By October 2020, the United States Army plans to begin requiring all soldiers to take the new Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT)—replacing the push-ups, sit-ups, and two-mile run soldiers have taken as part of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) for nearly forty years. Since 2017, the ACFT has been rigorously tested and studied at select battalions. These battalions executed the new test and participated in extensive research designed to develop and finalize standards, assess effectiveness, and capture injury data. Despite this rigorous testing and research, though, there is still institutional resistance to the new test. Criticisms have been leveled at the technical movements of the test, the new equipment requirements, and most of all, the age- and gender-neutral standards.
What critics miss, however, is that the test is simply better at preparing the Army to achieve its mission and assessing the physical readiness of the force. Age- and gender-neutral standards are the only relevant measurement of physical readiness across the Army’s formations, because combat itself is inherently age- and gender-neutral. More broadly, the ACFT represents a cultural change the Army needs to prepare for the next fight. But it will take engaged leaders to embrace the new standards and instill the holistic lifestyle the Army so desperately needs.
The Evolution of Army Physical Fitness Training and Testing
The United States Army began to incorporate physical training as early as the mid-nineteenth century at the United States Military Academy. By 1906, the Army introduced its first physical fitness program, including twelve-mile ruck marches for infantry and horse-mounted movements for cavalry. In 1920, a manual, Mass Physical Training for Use in the Army and Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, was published, which introduced an individual efficiency test. The test was composed of a hundred-yard run, running broad jump, wall climb, hand grenade throw, and obstacle course run. Since the first publication of Field Manual 21-20, Physical Training, in 1941, the manual has undergone various revisions to update the physical focus and standards, including the introduction of minimum standards in 1969.
In 1975, President Gerald Ford signed legislation opening service academies to women, which started one of the most significant shifts in physical training and doctrine for the force. The 1980 revision of FM 21-20 represented the Army’s transition “from a Vietnam-era combat readiness focus” to one that emphasized general fitness and body composition. The paradigm shift from a combat focus to overall fitness included standardizing the three-event Army Physical Readiness Test (later renamed the Army Physical Fitness Test)—push-ups, sit-ups, and a two-mile run. The test was gender-integrated, required no specialized equipment, was easy to administer, provided standards adjusted for gender and age, and was meant to measure physical fitness rather than combat readiness. As a result, by the late 1980s, commanders were raising concerns over the APFT and the lack of combat readiness across the force.
In 2003, the US Army Physical Fitness School proposed a new six-event test. Over the subsequent years, the shape of a replacement for the APFT evolved, but research on and implementation of a new test stalled and ultimately failed in 2012. However, the physical demands of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom highlighted the large number of “marginally fit” soldiers recruited into the Army. Research found that these soldiers were more likely to experience injuries, which drove further assessment of the Army’s physical readiness and resulted in an additional revision to training guidance. In 2010, Training Circular 3-22.20, Army Physical Readiness Training was published with a focus on combat readiness, stating in its introduction that “combat readiness is the Army’s primary focus as it transitions to a more agile, versatile, lethal, and survivable force.” Despite this, the Army made no changes to the APFT as the test for physical readiness—until now, as the service transitions to the ACFT.
The history of physical training in the Army makes clear two things that are important to bear in mind as the service moves toward the new test: (1) that Army physical training and tests are continuously restructured to meet the both current and future needs; and (2) that each restructuring—including this one—is focused toward combat readiness.
A Single Standard
“Physical readiness is the ability to meet the physical demands of any combat or duty position, accomplish the mission, and continue to fight and win.”
– FM 7-22, Army Physical Readiness Training
Physical testing in the Army has historically been a way for commanders to measure and prepare the physical readiness of their formations for combat. However, the introduction of the adjustable age and gender scoring system and lack of combat-focused events hindered the APFT from being an effective measuring tool for combat readiness. Instead, the APFT provides data on general fitness, scaled by age and gender, not the combat readiness of the whole organization to deploy and fight in an age- and gender-neutral environment. This is a test that was designed in the 1970s and rolled out to the force in the 1980s—a time when jazzercise and step-aerobics were popular workouts and women had just recently been allowed to run the Boston Marathon. Fitness research has come a long way since then. Additionally, by incentivizing performance on the APFT through the use of scores for evaluations and order-of-merit lists, the APFT created a culture where the focus of fitness training is merely to perform well on the APFT. The emphasis on the APFT score has come at the expense of combat-focused physical training for many units.
The APFT does not measure combat readiness, and the very low female standard does little to assess the fitness of the Army’s very capable women. To pass the APFT, soldiers must achieve a score of sixty points in each of the three events. A passing score for a male in the 17–21 age group requires forty-two pushups in two minutes, fifty-three sit-ups in two minutes, and a two-mile run time of 15:54. The female minimum standard in the same age group requires nineteen pushups, fifty-three sit-ups, and an 18:54 two-mile run. This drastic difference in gender standards of the APFT means that a male meeting the female standard would significantly fail with a cumulative score of 107 on the APFT, and a woman meeting the men’s minimum standard would result in a total score of a 256. The sweeping difference in basic standards has lowered the bar for females and has set the precedent that women are not expected to perform to even basic minimum standards expected of men.
The introduction of women into combat arms further emphasizes the need for a single-standard test. Thirty-five women have met the gender-neutral standards to achieve the coveted Ranger tab, and six have passed the Ranger Physical Assessment Test to serve in the 75th Ranger Regiment. The APFT is the single place were soldiers are held to a lower standard based on age and gender. When soldiers complete testing for the expert field medical badge they are expected to complete all events, to a single standard—except the APFT. During courses at the Army’s John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, soldiers are required to meet gender- and age-neutral standards on the five-mile run and twelve-mile ruck march, yet continue to use the APFT despite the scaled age and gender standards. The force has repeatedly met single standards when required. The outdated APFT standards have created a culture where women and older soldiers are required to do considerably less even when they have the ability to meet other age- and gender-neutral standards.
The ACFT transitions the Army back to a combat-focused test through standardized minimum requirements on a single scale. This single standard is the most effective way to measure combat readiness and prepare formations for future ground combat. Additionally, the ACFT tests five domains of physical fitness: muscular strength, muscular endurance, cardiorespiratory endurance, explosive power, and speed/agility. This test requires a well-rounded approach to physical fitness training, including functional fitness, weight training, and building cardiovascular endurance. This is already being done at many units across the Army, but the ACFT emphasizes its necessity across the Army. Ensuring the entire formation meets the same standard, regardless of age and gender, is essential to preparing the force to shoulder the physical requirements necessary to fight and win on the modern battlefield.
Eleven select battalions are testing the ACFT and validating the scoring standards. When unofficial data from the test battalions was published on Facebook, it created an uproar online. Most complaints claim that the Army has done a poor job rolling out the new ACFT because units do not have the equipment to train. However, the unofficial data shows the leg tuck as the most failed event. This undermines the complaint that soldiers cannot train for the test due to equipment shortages. The leg tuck only requires a pullup bar, which can be found at any gym or playground, or can be easily installed on most doorframes.
Other criticisms declare that the ACFT is discriminatory against women. The unofficial data published online showed that 30 percent of men failed, while 84 percent of women did. But the leg tuck—to which most of the failures were attributed—is an abdominal exercise, and the APFT’s abdominal exercise, the sit-up, is the only event on the current test with gender-neutral scoring. More broadly, the test does not require men and women to compete head to head, but simply requires everyone to meet basic minimum standards—standards that ensure everyone can survive on a gender-neutral battlefield and physically carry their share.
Finally, the Army released ACFT information two years prior to implementation of the test and has provided the force with updates and tips on how to train without equipment through the ACFT website. Two years is more than enough time for the force to prepare for the ACFT events.
Leaders Must Lead
Leaders must inculcate a holistic, functional-fitness approach to training. The ACFT requires physical-fitness culture to change in the Army. Before, soldiers could show up for a semi-annual APFT with very little training or nutrition and often meet the minimum standards. The ACFT will require more preparation, but many of the combat-focused movements should not be new to the force. The expectation is that combat-focused physical training is included in other aspects of military training, including warrior tasks and battle drills and common soldier tasks. While this has been implemented to varying degrees across the Army, the ACFT will require leaders to reprioritize this training once again.
Implementing the new ACFT and changing the culture around physical-fitness testing will rely heavily on leaders embracing the test and preparing their formations to excel. The new ACFT will require a paradigm shift across the Army from general fitness back to combat-focused fitness. Men and women alike must be able to shoulder their share of the fight physically. Most importantly, the test cannot be seen as unfair or biased. The Army has funded years of research to develop this test to assess the minimum physical requirements expected of soldiers in combat. The test does not ask soldiers to perform at the level of professional athletes, or even put men and women against each other. Instead, it has minimum standards that must be achieved to make the force overall more combat-ready and effective. To complete the paradigm shift from measuring general fitness to meeting a combat-minimum standard, leaders must embrace the ACFT and understand the bigger picture: the test is meant to make the force ready for the next fight.
Kelly Buckner is an Active Duty Civil Affairs Major. She is currently a student at the School of Advanced Military Studies and holds a B.A. from Michigan State University and a M.S. from the University of Missouri Science and Technology.
Image credit: Airman 1st Class Monica Roybal, US Air Force
Unfortunately too many in all the services dont see fitness tests as a measure of health and fitness. They see it as bureaucratic requirement to get through or as a positive or negative mark on annual levels and fitreps. A fitness culture is essential or a annual or semiannual test wont help.
So the reason it Is seen as political bs is because it really is. Think about it for a second, women are now in combat MOS s so how does the Army respond? ACFT where they do a pilot and 84 percent of women fail. I'm not against revamping the PT test, however this idea just makes somebody s NCOER or OER look good. If the Army really wants a gender neutral test and age neutral test honestly I'll take whatever test they want and I'm 53, but seriously I'll bet zero women were on the panel for this test and I challenge anyone to find a senior officer taking this test anywhere. On another note if the Army was serious about being fair and impartial and not just political then our EO program AR 600-20 would include age as far as a distinction you can't discriminate against, but until that happens and things change with top leadership, this I just going to be seen as political.
One thing that should also make its way back- swimming. In the 1967 combat fitness manual, swimming was the first chapter, and strong swimmers are still important today. Rivers, lakes, sinking ships, and water obstacles will always be around.
The US Forest Service has a much more difficult physical fitness test for smoke jumpers, also gender and age neutral, zero complaints.
The Army has missed the boat again. We are trying to evaluate a Soldiers COMBAT physical fitness with a cookie cutter method. First, I went to master fitness course and was the master fitness trainer for all my units. The only training we do every day, but have no subject matter expert. We should train advanced physical training techniques at each leadership level NCOES. As you progress in NCOES you add to the physical training knowledge. Second, the old test was ok to give the command an assessment of their units condition. We should give the commander 10 task that they are required to use 3 as additional task based on their METL. A tanker unit should not be evaluated the same as a light infantryman. The 3 base task are score related (no need to change other things that are tied to current APFT i. e. NCOER, OER and promotion), the other 3 task are a go, no-go. lastly, the competition during APFT was awesome, we are back to every body gets a trophy. Wearing the APFT Excellence badge was a show of excellence.
Bottom line, train our trainers (NCO's) how and why to train our Soldiers. Changing the evaluation only requires our leaders to teach a test. Training for combat requires experts to conduct real world training, not teaching the test.
Kudos. Been saying it should be a collective task that is given a commanders readiness rating with a full time personal trainer for the unit on special staff, just like the Chaplain and EEO and SJA.
I just can't get it being a called a combat fitness test when it is void of participants having any combat gear while performing non combat tasks. In example what regular unit EVER ran 2 miles in combat together? How about distressed vehicle egress? Sure – a buddy drag/carry rope climb. Maybe some obstacle course in battle uniform uniform with weapon. Someone is clearly stuck on running miles in shorts.
We as an Army have had a hard time retaining and recruiting Soldiers. How is this test going to fix the already hurting service on numbers? Lets face it the military is about numbers or lack there of. On top of that the Army has implemented many new regulations and ways to chapter a Soldier such as an HQDA BAR but has not updated regulations that are imperative to physically chapter a Soldier. Let's focus on the outdated taping practices. As long as a Soldier has a big neck they will pass, even though they look obese and ruins the Army's image. Lets face it this test is to show "Publicly" the Army is strong and "Gender Neutral" to try to give the Army a better chance of recruitment. Many units do not even have the equipment to train and "PRT" is not done correctly, nor is Gym PT authorized. The idea that men and women are created equally in physical strength is a joke. I am pretty sure women who are 110 pounds and a man who is 210 pounds cannot lift the same. I get wanting a more fit Soldier and ready for combat, but being in combat and adrenaline pumping is different then standing around to throw a ball backwards. This test has had update after update, and the leaked results of what 80% of the females tested have failed? Is it really ready to launch in a year? I hope after this test launches the Army has a plan for all the Soldiers who will be getting chaptered.
Your article proposes to address the test. It doesn't. I haven't heard any professional military officer or NCO say the training regimen is wrong. First, the scale. The minimum standards are dumbed down to the point that they're irrelevant…to conflate Ranger standards to minimum ACFT Standards is a weak argument. The AOC/MOS Breakout is asinine. How does an AV officer have a different physical standard than an Aeromedical Evac Pilot? They do the same job. Second, your arguments completely omit the operational overhead, the inability of small, geographicaly remote, and USAR/ARNG Detachments to conduct the test. As a CA officer, you should know this limitation very well.
My state is evaluating building a centralized ACFT Facility at a centralized camp IOT meet the requirements. Can any USAR/ARNG soldier or leader imagine a BN or BDE consolidated MUTA 6 IOT achieve IWQ/SRP/and a ACFT? What about a Soldier who agrees to a short notice school, but needs an ACFT to attend?
Agreed
The author accurately notes that the APFT does not accurately reflect "combat focused physical fitness training." However the author fails to explain how the ACFT is "combat focused physical fitness training."
The ACFT has no data to support a lower injury rate for Solders who are training and executing the ACFT rather than the APFT. There is no hard data that a collective unit performance will be enhanced either in force on force training or combat through the ACFT.
So inquiring minds would like to know, what specific injuries is the ACFT expected to prevent? Where does this data come from? Or is the US Army investing millions upon millions of dollars in hex bars while US Army Electronic Warfare soldiers use their own paychecks to build training kit with SDR dongles and rasbperry pis?
I have asked numerous Army leaders and ACFT evangelists for the peer reviewed study showing that the new ACFT is a better measure of combat fitness than the old APFT. Despite claims that the old test was only 30 percent correlated and the new one is 70 percent, no one has produced this peer reviewed study….probably because it doesn't exist.
The autor also failed to point out that each unit needs to have a master fitness trainer along with graders that have to go to a special school to qualify as a grader. The Reserve Units are having a hard time geting SR NCO's to go to MRT and SHARP training it is hard for the the Reserve Soldiers to take time off work for all these requirements. That we have to meet. Employers can fire them for any reason as long as the employer does not say it is related to the military. We had a Sr NCO in my unit his employer told him they callled and spoke to the emplor support of reserve and guard and they told them that they only had to let him off work for the required 14 days of military duties. He had all ready completed for the year and he just requested anoty 5 days off for mor military duties. They sent him home for the day and told him to come back the next day and they would let him know what the company Lawyer said. He went home and submitted some applications for a new job. Wehn he went in the next day they let him go because som of the employer s we call them about a job reference so the offical let him go by saying he was going to quit.
People are really still hating on this test, comments here make it clear, why attack the person who wrote this article when they have nothing to do with the creation or implementation of the test. I could understand disagreeing with them as they try to show and explain the real positive effects the new test will have over the old. But seriously, the army did not spend so much time, money and research on something that was not a problem. One standard for the same job shouldn't have to be hard to understand. I look forward to how this changes the army in FY21
Hi Kelly
What is the problem the ACFT is trying to solve? The APFT was always a minimum base for all soldiers, easily administered, requiring minimal tools, and minimal training to execute. It was never the standard for soldier fitness on the top end. A good fitness culture will make the APFT easy to pass no matter what the specific training tasks are and good Army leaders built good all around programs that fit their unit's needs and capabilities. This new test smacks of trying to instill a fitness culture by force instead of building the culture through education and Chain of Command leadership. What will the costs be in terms of a higher failure rate? Are we currently getting a high enlistment rate to offset the future losses? Historically there are cases of units failing to establish a fitness program and then fudging the numbers to pass overweight and out of shape soldiers for readiness standards. Does adding events, training requirements, and specific equipment to the test make it less likely or more likely for junior leaders to be tempted to fudge the numbers? What about the unit that deploys to an austere environment, but forgot its weight bar or Skedco. Are local ad hoc creations allowed or are those events to be skipped? Is is worth shipping something High Priority for a PT test? This test smacks of a poorly thought sacrifice to the altar of Cross-Fit. Physical fitness is an Army standard- however the standard should support the need to maintain 500K soldiers from Delta Force to Reserve CW5 Maintenance tech not trying to prioritize a physical fitness over all other requirements mentality. As an interim stop- gap why not just remove the gender differences in the APFT and call it good?
If it is a combat fitness test then why are they not in combat uniform to take the test. I didn't know the Army fights in PT uniform.
The test is actually discriminatory towards Soldiers 55 or older and biased against Soldiers with permanent profiles.
Yup- I will retire before taking this test when I could stay for several more years. Luckily the Army does not have a personnel numbers problem….
"You are about to take the APFT…The results of this test will give you and your commanders an indication of your state of fitness and will act as a guide in determining your physical training needs."
Why are we obsessed with a physical combat fitness test? All of the higher echelon, specialized tests the author noted are just that- special, and outliers. Not everyone is a 19 year old Infantrymen, so if you want to keep any 35 year old logisticians, signaleers, adjutants, etc. everybody might want to wake up and chill out. A basic physical fitness test is fine. A lot of us have already been to combat and OMG we did ok!
The only big problem I see with three ACFT is that is geared toward men. Men are built for upper body strength. I noticed in videos that 98% of soldiers who tested the new ACFT were male soldiers. I am not sure why Gender and neutral make sense. I feel as a former US Army Woman Veteran that the new ACFT is geared so the US Army will be putting out a whole lot of female soldiers because they lack the upper body strength. Then I see most of the US government elected officials will be saying things like See I told u females do not belong in the US Army.
See Lynda, it isn't about getting rid of women, it is a reaction to women in combat MOS s. I have my opinion and feel free to disagree, but women in combat MOS s is Political Correctness in most cases and that is not good for the Army as a whole. I do see your point though, women are not the same as men physically, the one test that was done with 84 percent female failure and 30 percent male failure rate clearly shows this
The ACFT disenfranchises the National Guard and Reserves. We will (not maybe) have over half of our females and 25% of men on a FLAG status. That means No promotions, No military schools NO RE-ENLISTMENTS! Really! But, the Active Duty types don’t care as they will be more than happy to take our Reserve allocations and money.
Know who does care…. the Congress who come from the States that will hear of this Outrage… and, they will be more than happy to use the next NDAA to make life miserable for those trying to enact this discriminatory test. The Air Force and Navy recruiters do love the ACFT, however…..
The new test lacks consideration for previous injured Soldiers and permanent profiles. Right now Brigade medical teams are doing a massive review of profiles to adapt them to the new test. REMINDING MANY , the biggest was walk profile for the run event and situps for lower back and extremity injuries. Since the new test has severely limited alternate events, this is a way to purge mid to senior leaders in order to continue your 401k army…Good luck with it, glad inretired 2 years ago and I just get to listen to the complaints, like no one here I know of has done it to the correct time limit as well because they shrunk that window as well. Overall this was an OER,NCOER grab for someone 2 years doesnt predict injury like 40.
First… if this is what the SAMS out of FLKS is producing quality soldiers producing quality writing white paper products… well then we are screwed as a professional service. Second the only reason why this test was approved is the powers above who want great OER bullets have to have the best of the greatest of the best who want to hard charge cross fit into our service. It's purely a status of society. Thos generation has to look… or attempt to look food and since the popular fitness trail right now is cross fit, then those power above us must have a cross fit type test because its popular… unfortunately the cost will be injuries, bullying, peer out, not with the in cross fit crowd…. do we need to say more? Third…. then the army figures out this was another blunder. Like the ACU camo that didnt work and cost the Army millions
First, if you are going to critique someone else's writing, ensure your own response is not riddled with run-on sentences and grammatical errors. Second, be able to articulate what points in the article you disagree with before casting judgement of the author's professional quality – and that of SAMS students/graduates as a whole. You follow up with making several unsupported and dubious claims that the ACFT is somehow only motivated by OER bullets or status improvement. Add your attempt to connect this to the Army's ill-informed decision to switch to ACUs (despite the fact that a connection between the two decisions does not exist), and I am left thinking that you are simply complaining about change, without any informed critique on the article. There are plenty of valid concerns about ACFT to discuss – such as resource requirements, impacts on medical readiness and training availability for Reserve/National Guard units. However, by resorting to a baseless ad hominem attack on the author, you distract from the important conversation this article is intended to generate.
You know what's sad is, I couldn't lose weight, or pass 90% or above in any of the 3 events. I was always sore from company PRT and always on a temporary profile. I eventually retired from the service after 20 years. Now, I go to the gym frequently, lost a lot of weight, and I can easily pass the APFT now. My point is, not everyone is built for PRT. Some should be allowed to go to the gym, the ones that are struggling to lose the weight. The things I did for PRT did not help me, but going to the gym and using all that equipment did. Not everyone needs the exact workout as Soldier B, there should be alternatives, at least three of them. Then you'll start seeing huge results for your overweight soldiers. I got more out of the gym than I ever did running in formation, or doing push-ups next to my fellow soldiers
Also at what cost. The Military already has a retention issue, and a Fitness failure issue. Then you add the guard to the scenario, you are going to really hurt the issue even further. The Military needs to first make fitness a true priority, from nutrition to exercise. My issue with the ACFT, is implimentantion. From one to the other with very little prep overall, especially for the guard side. Then the plan is bringing implemented and they are still making changes. It was just poorly executed in my opinion.
Why are we implementing a new test When the majority of the force already struggle to pass the current one. How about we try enforcing the current standardS and following thru when they fail. Oh wait its all about numbers. Im not sure how this is all working out for the active army but for the national guard its an absolute FUBAR!!! #retentionfail!! I am a 47 year old female been in 12 years and have given all I have as an AGR . I work 14hrs a day and drive 60miles each way in traffic everyday. But you expect me to also find time to train for this. I
Already have sacrificed my Family and you also take away my weekend. I have never failed an APFT or HT-WT or ever not had a top block
NCOER, I would give my life and all I have for my country to include 2 marriages but because I cannot compete with someone half my age for an absolutely unrealistic PT test you are going to tell me I am not good enough to serve my country?? WTF!! I work as hard as I do so
My Soldiers know they are not just a pon in a political game, so they know their lives matter, that their sacrifices do not go unnoticed. I have lost 6+ fellow Soldiers to suicide and my sons 24 year old best friend he was 24. The military to some is what gives their life meaning still
A place were they feel like despite their PTSD and MST demands they fit in. All this will do
Is kill the moral of your force and increase suicide rates. you will be left with no knowledge because all those strong leaders that gave you all are broken and cannot pass your test. They may not pass your test but I guarantee if the time came they would risk everything including their last breath to Accomplish the mission. I myself have felt the anxiety of this impending doom and fear that I will lose my job And be cast aside unable to care for my Family my fellow Soldiers or our future leasers. I too have had dark thoughts of what this failure will
Do to me. You see at 47 I have severed hard, I believe never ask of my Soldiers what I myself will mot do, because of that I am broken. 2- back surgeries, 2-knee surgery's, and several
Others I will not mention. But I still get up everyday go to work a d give it All have . I fight thru the pain with everyday workouts because I want to be the reflection of what right looks like but my body is not what it used to
Be and I can not train the way that is needed for this test without as my doctor said either ending up crippled or paralyzed the rest of my life. I do nit care what anyone says you can not have one size fits all for a text because no two people will ever be the same. This test does not measure combat readiness Look
At military history how many times is the hero the one who was not the meat head but instead a resilient emotionally intelligent leader with the will to survive. #hacksawridge . A 300 or 600 score or a college education does not and never will make a Leader. This is a huge mistake that will have irreversible damage to all. I believe anyone who is willing to serve everyday, Die for this country AMD fellow Soldiers and leadership Knowing in the end that they will be cast aside Like garbage , despite your test is a hero in my book And deserves to
Be here. Shame on all You who sit up
On your political hill and have no clue or care to have a clue of the impact your make a name for your depictions have on the ones on the ground. I hope and pray everyday for the sake of our future that you wake the $$$$ up!!
How much time should soldiers have to spend training for this test? Don’t we need them to be focused on their primary missions? Sure we can all get more fit, but what is the opportunity cost to achieve marginally better results?
Women and men at WP will be held to, and graded, on the same standards, which will affect class ranks and consequently branch and post assignments. Many women are at a physiological disadvantage, so how much time will they need to spend training for this test? Their academics should be the primary focus, yet cadet companies will institute mandatory remedial PT which will limit the amount of time available for study.
WP isn’t about training platoon leaders. It’s about training high level military and even civilian leaders.
Too much focus at WP is already on sports with too many cadets coming through the Prep-School who are academically unqualified, but who enable D-1 sports’ competition. On top of that, Corps-Squad athletes don’t have to participate in the complete cadet experience. They get out of so many cadet activities that they don’t gain a full appreciation of the true mission of WP.
I do believe there needs to be a change but this one is just going to hurt the Army. Your going gut the National Guard and Reserve units or force people to lie. Your also going to lose some of your most experienced soldiers particularly in the Guard of which I am a part. The civilian job I have does not afford me the opportunity for a consistent physical fitness regimen. The last point and this is moot because the decision has been made is, the National Guard was started as a call up of ordinary citizen who voluntarily agreed to fight, they weren’t asked to take a PT test before hand you need them and they volunteered, now days the soldiers of the Guard you active duty guys look down on so much, hold down a real job, family commitments, plus have to do everything you do without all the base support you have. I wish all you active duty guys who love inventing new ways to do things would take that into consideration before you did.
luckily the Congress is shutting down the AcFT before it gets a chance to disenfranchise the National Guard and Reserves. The HASC/SASC saw through this blatant power grab by the Active Duty (who train for the AcFT 7 days a week in their free gyms and gated communities). You can bet the Active Duty was already to take the Guard/Reserve allocations and money based on probably 1/3 of the force being Flagged and then discharged the first year. Here we are now, the YEAR 2022….. and there is still no clarification of the AcFT at this time!
What is the point in this "New" standard? I understand what you are trying to accomplish, but Reserves and Older Soldiers have certain limitations, especially without a GYM or Pool, and gym equipment. Each event would take the WHOLE day to complete for a reserve unit. Soldiers don't do PT during the Weekend drill, they don't take it seriously. So these events should just be a go or no-go. You completed the event, good job! Your uniform still fits? Good job!! Will I ever RUN 2 miles in combat with all my gear?, probably not, unless am in extreme danger. I'm a truck driver, am either driving or getting blown up or shot at. The one time to change something and you don't even let the ARMY SOLDIERS tell you what should be changed!! You pay some civilian millions of dollars to tell us how we should do fitness!! ARMY OF ONE? More like ARMY OF YOUNG!!
This test will only be useful if Soldiers can do it. As a Reserve Bn CDR, I have been unable to find a way to take the ACFT for a year due to the challenges of finding a location that meets all requirements within a 100 miles of my post, and my command is not the only one in this position. What's most troubling is that I cant find an Army feedback mechanism to report this.
This article didn't age well…