Fitness for Operational Requirements of CAF Employment ( FORCE )

[AmmoTech90]

The Army is very much considering insisting on operational dress for the test.

That's stupid, you are then throwing the defendable science out the window if you do not redo the entire experimentation process using operational dress.  If the experiment is not validated using operational dress then the test would probably not stand up to a Human Right's claim against the single standard.

I know the Army doesn't like science, but I'm pretty sure it likes HR challenges less.

Edit: Wrong your...

 

[McG]

We'd then have to outfit the entire of the RCN in some non-steel toed footwear just to do a test once a year. 

No.  The tests simulate tasks that RCN pers (and every other service member) are expected to be capable of doing as part of their jobs on operations without the option of changing to more comfortable footwear.  If mbrs of the RCN cannot do this in their operational footwear, that is a sign something is wrong with the footwear - it is not a sign that we should do fitness tests, simulating operational tasks, in non-operational footwear.

That's stupid, ...

You are scaremongering.  The tests simulate operational tasks, and when one makes a simulation closer to reality then one increases the accuracy and validity of the simulation (and yes, this is supported by science).  In contrast to your argument, the use of operational footwear could make the tests more defensible in an HR claim.

In any case, there is testing data on the tests which include conduct in operational footwear.  Have a look at this video that has been posted a few times in the thread:  http://vimeo.com/m/54119198
We'll have the numbers to please the statisticians. 

 

[AmmoTech90]

Not scaremongering, just incredulous at the lenghts people will go to make sure people think they are special.  What sort of leading change score does one get for changing a change that hasn't been implemented yet?

The data may be there, and the tasks are based on UoS tasks, but the timings are based on PT strip just as the weights for the drag are based on the type of floor.  So now you are going to two standards with time, and the Army one will probably allow more if they want to keep the test valid.

 

[Zoomie]

So while I'm stacking sand-bags - wearing my flight suit and steel toed boots - who holds my coffee cup?

 

[Haggis]

So while I'm stacking sand-bags - wearing my flight suit and steel toed boots - who holds my coffee cup?

No one.

You set your coffee cup on the table next to your Blackberry and Oakleys BEFORE you start the test.

Let's be realistic here. 

 

[Pat in Halifax]

So while I'm stacking sand-bags - wearing my flight suit and steel toed boots - who holds my coffee cup?

The concierge?

 

[fhg1893]

Didn't the MND and the CDS do the test in PT-strip?  Call me crazy, but wouldn't it make more sense for the upper echelons to do the test in the same clothing that will be worn for testing?  Or maybe I'm just applying logic to the government, which I know, is always a dangerous combination.  Especially when government meets the Canadian Forces...

 

[Sf2]

No one.

You set your coffee cup on the table next to your Blackberry and Oakleys BEFORE you start the test.

Let's be realistic here.

Incorrect.  Oakleys are to be affixed on the head above the hairline at a 50 degree angle that bisects a horizontal line extending from the top of the ear.  If hair is spiked, at least 20% of said spiked hair must protrude forward of the glasses.

 

[krustyrl]

Incorrect.  Oakleys are to be affixed on the head above the hairline at a 50 degree angle that bisects a horizontal line extending from the top of the ear.  If hair is spiked, at least 20% of said spiked hair must protrude forward of the glasses.

I thank you for the laugh good sir,  most excellent description.!!

 

[McG]

Not scaremongering, just incredulous at the lenghts people will go to make sure people think they are special.

Everyone should do the test in their boots.  It is not about anyone appearing special.

What sort of leading change score does one get for changing a change that hasn't been implemented yet?

Sometimes it is not about getting the leading change bullet; sometimes it is about getting things right.  Your arguments are playing at ad hominem.

So while I'm stacking sand-bags - wearing my flight suit and steel toed boots - who holds my coffee cup?

You mean that you don't know how to hold it yourself while doing two handed tasks?

 

[medicineman]

So while I'm stacking sand-bags - wearing my flight suit and steel toed boots - who holds my coffee cup?

 

You get a snap link, hook the cup onto your survival vest and push the drink hole to the closed position  ;D,.

MM

 

[AmmoTech90]

Your arguments are playing at ad hominem.

If you mean that I am criticizing the Army, then yes you may be right.  The person, in the form of the Army, may be doing something I feel is stupid.  I have made my points regarding why I think their potential decision is bad, and then expressed some opinions about why those decisions may have been made.  Seeing as every action is the result of decision I don't think you can criticize a person's decision making process without criticizing the person, so yes the argument would have to be ad hominem, it is the nature of the target.  I'm sorry if I offended you personally in my criticism of an institution's decision making process and the culture that drives it.

My points are about the fact that our leadership has publicized and promoted a carefully designed and thought out test that is scientifically and legally sound and then certain subordinates have decided it doesn't meet the requirements.

My question would be, did the Comd CA raise the point of dress at any of the (I believe) three presentations about this that were made to AFC?  Were his concerns addressed?  I cannot see this getting to point where the CDS and MND demonstrate the test for the whole CAF and world to see without the Comd CA being on board with the test.  If it did, that is bad decision on the part of the CAF and seeing as the CAF can make bad decision maybe the whole FORCE test should be tossed out as it was made by the CAF (seeing as we are tossing logical fallacies around that is an inductive fallacy btw) (and the previous comment could be considered ad hominem).

 

[McG]

My points are about the fact that our leadership has publicized and promoted a carefully designed and thought out test that is scientifically and legally sound and then certain subordinates have decided it doesn't meet the requirements.

You are assuming a chronology.  Long before the public demonstration, this thread identified that the test should be done in operational footwear.  And before the public demonstration, the Army would have known that running shoes were the wrong dress standard for the fitness evaluation we need.

It is not too late in the game to fix the test if we've got it wrong.  If some L1s don't want to go along, that puts the Army in a position of having to decide if it wants to go it alone.

Sticking to a flawed test just because we've done the photo op, that would be stupid.

 

[AmmoTech90]

Assuming it is a flawed test because it isn't is in combat boots is stupid.

 

[McG]

It is an observed flaw, not an assumed one.  The use of running shoes is a source of error in the test's model of operational tasks.

Regardless, it would seem the Army (according to some well conected posters) and I disagree with you.

 

[daftandbarmy]

 

You get a snap link, hook the cup onto your survival vest and push the drink hole to the closed position  ;D,.

MM

I think I've just found an alternate way to Expres myself during this test: ;D

 

[armyvern]

So, just how is the CA "in a position of having to decide if it wants to go it alone"  when it is NOT an Army test?

I find it very ironic that you are in this thread posting for different standards.  This test is a minimal test of UofS.  You put some troops in combat boots and some in steel toed, then they are NOT doing the testing at the same minimal standard no matter how you like to slice it.  It's a minimal UofS test for cripes sake, not the Battle for Vimy Ridge.  I heard a rumour once that when the shit hits the fan and the bullets start flying, the adrenalin starts going too ... and that is why no minimal UofS test in the world will ever actually simulate how it would go down in real life.

 

[McG]

I am suggesting what I believe to be the minimal.  The common tasks are tasks done in operational footwear.  If you cannot do the tests like that, you cannot do the real thing.  This is a minimum universality of service test, and the service is not done in sneakers.

You don't think putting on boots makes this simple test into a hard Army, Battle of Vimy test?  For years, Combat Engineers have been training building bridges, responding to attack, winning the fight, extracting casualties off the X, and continuing the build all while wearing the Army steel toed boot.  Nothing about wearing full NCD or combats brings the fitness test anywhere near a real hard charging Army task.

We will ask all service personnel to do the common tasks in full operational dress.  What is so wrong about expecting they be able to do the simulation with the boots and uniform?

So, just how is the CA "in a position of having to decide if it wants to go it alone"  when it is NOT an Army test?

The same way it was in a position to go it alone when the old CF Express was not good enough.  This is not desirable, but if only the Army is prepared to do the test in boots then the Army may again choose to do its own thing.

 

[armyvern]

I am suggesting what I believe to be the minimal.  The common tasks are tasks done in operational footwear.  If you cannot do the tests like that, you cannot do the real thing.  This is a minimum universality of service test, and the service is not done in sneakers.

You don't think putting on boots makes this simple test into a hard Army, Battle of Vimy test?  For years, Combat Engineers have been training building bridges, responding to attack, winning the fight, extracting casualties off the X, and continuing the build all while wearing the Army steel toed boot.  Nothing about wearing full NCD or combats brings the fitness test anywhere near a real hard charging Army task.

We will ask all service personnel to do the common tasks in full operational dress.  What is so wrong about expecting they be able to do the simulation with the boots and uniform?
The same way it was in a position to go it alone when the old CF Express was not good enough.  This is not desirable, but if only the Army is prepared to do the test in boots then the Army may again choose to do its own thing.

Nope; I just think it's very ironic that people who did the trials here months ago were in PT Strip for them. No one should be surprised on that front.  Some people who participated in trials posted in this thread ... and posted their dress too.

It is a minimal UofS testing that is supposed to be common to all.  Running shoes would be the one common type of footwear that we currently all have is all I'm saying.

Eerily too ... in all the years of bitching about our last UofS minimal test - the CF Expres Test - never once do I recall seeing or hearing anyone bitch about how it did not truly reflect operational tasks due to it being done in PT strip.  Every other thing you can think of, but never once did anyone infer that because it was PT Strip, it obviously failed to reflect operations.  Yet, the inference with this new thread has some pers writing it off based upon that "major" (??) failure. Given how many years the Expres lasted in PT strip, I'm inclined to believe that our institution considers PT Strip to be just fine.

My Battle of Vimy comment was directly related to your earlier statement regarding the Army giving thought to "going it alone" due to the PT Strip.  It is not an Army test; it is a CF test.  The Army may choose to still do supplemental fitness testing of whatever type, but the FORCE Test needs to CF-entire.

 

[Haggis]

I think I've just found an alternate way to Expres myself during this test: ;D

....and the MP are already aware of that ad and all over it like ugly on an ape.