Strategypage notes that the new Army fitness test is geared toward non-combat troops:
The U.S. Army, and the American military in general, have a growing problem with soldiers who are too overweight to stay in and a growing number of potential recruits (47 percent of men, 59 percent of women) who are too overweight to handle basic training and seem incapable of losing enough weight to qualify. ... The latest solution is the ACFT (Army Combat Fitness Test) which is based on combat experience since 2001 of all troops in combat zones. Most of those soldiers had support, not combat, jobs and the ACFT is mainly for them because the non-combat troops were initially the most unprepared for operating in a combat zone where ambushes, roadside bombs and mortar/rocket attacks on bases was more frequent than during earlier wars, even the 1965-72 Vietnam War.
So I reverse my opinion and will wait to see how the Army rolls it out to the troops. The issue of administering the test still exists, but any change requires adaptation and time, I admit.
It would be good if this works, of course.
In related news, the Army is looking for recruits in big cities where it traditionally hasn't gotten recruits:
For decades, Army recruiting has relied disproportionately on a crescent-shaped swath of the country stretching from Virginia through the South to Texas, where many military bases are found and many families have traditions of service. Young people there enlist at two to three times the rate of other regions.
By contrast, in the big metropolitan areas of the Northeast, Midwest and West Coast, young people are less likely to have a parent, teacher or coach who served in the military, which can be a major factor in deciding to enlist. And in those regions, many high schools openly discourage recruiters from interacting with students. ...
Army recruiting can be difficult in liberal-leaning cities in part because young adults are less likely than their red-state peers to know someone who has served in the military.
With more potential recruits too fat to enlist and succeed, the pool has to be broadened.
One problem is that the Army isn't seen as an option in the big cities, in contrast to that recruiting crescent where the Army has a presence.
To get the Army story out to potential recruits in the cities, in Army magazine I proposed a program in cities to create civilian combat lifesavers based on the Army course for soldiers.
The course would be a combination of Army history and traditions, instruction on courtesy and military bearing, and lifesaving skills that would be useful for the Army and in the civilian world even if the graduate does not enlist in the military and stays in their community. As a civilian that graduate of the course would be capable of responding to emergencies whether criminal, terrorist, or natural disaster.
And the graduate would be a source of information for peers who might be influenced by a friend who has a positive image of the Army from the course.
Some physical fitness aspect to get a potential recruit on the path to being able to pass the new physical standards would be helpful.
I know I benefited from a weekend mini-basic training course that the Michigan Army National Guard put me through before I went to actual basic. Let me tell you, I did push ups after that weekend. And in actual basic training I never experienced muscle failure when dropped. Others sure did to their regret.
So yeah, I think I was wrong to reject the new standards for physical fitness. Lord knows recruits need to be far more fit than the traditional recruiting pool is providing. And hopefully a bigger pool can provide more fit recruits. Or at least fit enough recruits.
