Fitness for Operational Requirements of CAF Employment ( FORCE )

[McG]

I want my infantry guys to be fit but not at the expense of their mental capacities and mental fitness.

Of course, there have been links found to connect physical fitness with greater mental resilience (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a497022.pdf & http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR104.html) and preserved/enduring cognitive capacity over years of a career (http://globalnews.ca/news/1248304/fit-in-your-20s-your-brain-health-will-thank-you-later-study/).

 

[ballz]

I want my infantry guys to be fit but not at the expense of their mental capacities and mental fitness.

Indeed. I know there is a "dumb jock" stereotype but I have never actually seen any evidence of a correlation between being fit and being dumb.

I am a big believer in the relationship between the body, mind, and soul . If you don't look after one of the three, the other two will also suffer because of it. If you exercise one of them, the other two will also benefit.

 

[GnyHwy]

I agree the FORCE test is fine.  BFT or 2X10 were never enough for real operational infantry fitness.  We have always trained well beyond that.  Troops that got broken along the way found another occupation. 

Your last paragraph kills me though....yup we want a bunch of dumb fat slugs who somehow know how to do their job??? Not in the combat arms they won't.

I don't see where I said we needed a bunch of dumb fat slugs.  I merely stated that we need balance.  There are far too many people (BTW one is too many), educating and PTing themselves on an over abundance of Army time, therefore putting themselves before everyone and everything else, including job knowledge.

Actually the more i read your post the more irritated i get...

Guys I know who did that PT test (Coopers) for a living will do  more tours in 10 years than most of us will do in two careers.

We're not talking about the same guys.  I am talking about the gym rats and suntanners that do anything but operations, while they're on operations. 

 

 

[GnyHwy]

.

 

[devil39]

I don't see where I said we needed a bunch of dumb fat slugs.  I merely stated that we need balance.  There are far too many people (BTW one is too many), educating and PTing themselves on an over abundance of Army time, therefore putting themselves before everyone and everything else, including job knowledge.

We're not talking about the same guys.  I am talking about the gym rats and suntanners that do anything but operations, while they're on operations. 

In most cases, I believe in my line of work (infantry) that these three competencies (fitness, job knowledge and education), even when taken close to the extreme, are not mutually exclusive.  Some of the hardest fittest soldiers I have known, have also been the most competent and tactically astute soldiers I have known.  There is time to be both a gym rat, and a free fall pathfinder sniper etc....

Having spent time in both Mortars and Recce in my Bn time, there is a difference in the level of fitness.  However, all those plotter boards, charge tables, MFC competencies didn't get in the way of PT, and the higher level of PT in recce didn't get in the way of sniper/DZ/patrolling/jumping/etc, competencies.  Regardless of the relative levels of fitness in various infantry organizations, the tested level was always insufficient to the real job oriented requirement. 

Some of the best Officers I have known have also been extremely well educated.  An extra year or two in a 35 year career for that Masters or PhD, especially when focussed on job related studies, is probably time reasonably well spent if the time is available.  Education does not make the man, but it rarely hurts.

Now if your argument wrt education was directed towards the time we spend (often wasted) on second language training you would certainly have an ally. 

If in your experience, people's job knowledge/expertise is being ignored for the sake of physical fitness, it sounds like a leadership issue. 

And then I also wonder where you are working if you can't be both very fit and extremely competent.....this is the CAF.  Last I checked, the Manhattan Project Corps of Braniacs wasn't taking applicants so you can't be there .... It does get harder as you start to work in HQs or if you are extremely technical and busy, but still doable. 

 

[dapaterson]

Some of the best Officers I have known have also been extremely well educated.  An extra year or two in a 35 year career for that Masters or PhD, especially when focussed on job related studies, is probably time reasonably well spent if the time is available.  Education does not make the man, but it rarely hurts.

So much for a broad based liberal education; if we focus only on job related studies we're creating a small, parochial military.  (Then again, we never sent anyone on a year-long Dari or Pashto course, but kept sending people to learn Korean for two years so they could go to staff college.  Methinks our priorities are somewhat skewed...)

Now if your argument wrt education was directed towards the time we spend (often wasted) on second language training you would certainly have an ally. 

It's only wasted when people don't employ and maintain the skill they have acquired.  I do not understand why we waste money training and retraining people to the same level over and over - once you achieve a level, you should be expected to maintain it.

 

[devil39]

So much for a broad based liberal education; if we focus only on job related studies we're creating a small, parochial military.  (Then again, we never sent anyone on a year-long Dari or Pashto course, but kept sending people to learn Korean for two years so they could go to staff college.  Methinks our priorities are somewhat skewed...)

Agreed, however job related studies can be very broad arcs...

It's only wasted when people don't employ and maintain the skill they have acquired.  I do not understand why we waste money training and retraining people to the same level over and over - once you achieve a level, you should be expected to maintain it.

Depending on your geographical location and environment it is not as easy to maintain a level.  Secondly I believe our expectations at certain rank levels, CBC for instance, might possibly be more than is required to function effectively.  But that is another thread.

 

[dapaterson]

So, how are things looking now?  According to a recent CANFORGEN, the new requirement to have a valid fitness result before a file will be seen by selection boards means that 940 people who would have been competitive instead were passed over by the boards because of the lack of a valid fitness profile.

 

[GnyHwy]

The FORCE test is valid for 365 days and has nothing to do with the fiscal year.  In this case, you can't "owe" a FORCE test and do it later in the year, prior to the next fiscal year.

Essentially anybody who thinks they might be boarded, needs to do the test NLT August. 

Editted to change can to can't.

 

[caocao]

Like any other quals you should not let it expire.  There are some extraordinary circumstances (sickness/injury) but this should be the exception.  In 29 years of service i have never had  a non current pt profile.  I don't feel one bit sorry for those 940 pers.

 

[Transporter]

Essentially anybody who thinks they might be boarded, needs to do the test NLT August.

Not entirely correct (though you can't go wrong by following this advice). The bottom line is, if your FORCE test was successfully completed not more than 365 before the date of the board, it is still current and you are G2G as far as the board is concerned. So, for example, if you successfully completed the FORCE test on 1 Dec 13, you are still current for the Sep 14 boards; however, you still need to do it again on or before 1 Dec 14 to maintain your currency, and certainly before 31 Mar 15 for PER purposes.

In my opinion, the preferred habit to form is to get into the routine of doing your test as early in the FY as possible.

I have asked my chain for clarification on this specific requirement and the info I've provided above is what I received back from my J1.

 

[Julienperreault]

Hi!

Here is the new FORCE Evaluation for people who would like to join the army. https://www.cfmws.com/fr/AboutUs/PSP/DFIT/Fitness/FORCEprogram/Pages/FORCE_videos.aspx

 

[PMedMoe]

Huge thread (31 pages) right here: Fitness for Operational Requirements of CF Employment (FORCE): New PT test stds

Try reading before posting. 

 

[stellarpanther]

Has the weight of the sandbag drag changed since last Sept?  I thought the weight last year was closer to 270ILBS, however I just watched a video showing the weight to be 100kg (220LBS).

 

[Transporter]

Has the weight of the sandbag drag changed since last Sept?  I thought the weight last year was closer to 270ILBS, however I just watched a video showing the weight to be 100kg (220LBS).

It has always been 100Kg (5 x 20kg) and still is... nothing has changed.

 

[dapaterson]

[this is true]

The weight varies depending on the coefficient of friction of the floor of the room where the test is performed.

[/this is true]

 

[caocao]

I believe that the min is 5 x sand bags (100kg) and as stated above i had 1 bag added the last time i did the test to compensate for the friction (less normal) caused by the different floor surface.  Not sure if there could be cases were more then 1 bag could be added.

 

[Transporter]

Now that you mention it, I remember that last time I did it, the staff had to cover the gym floor with something so as not to damage it. This resulted in an increase in the friction so they removed one sandbag, but added a 10Kg weights plate. When dragging, the protective covering bunched-up like a bow wave in front of the sandbags, despite having two guys walk as close as they could immediately following the bags in an effort to keep the protective floor covering flat. Not sure if I dragged the target weight or not, or something equal to heavier. Either way, it wasn't good. Growing pains I guess.

 

[ballz]

It would have been just too simple to have a 220 lb mannequin with a tac-vest on that you had to drag 100m, instead we're taking the co-efficient of friction into consideration :facepalm:

 

[Biggoals2bdone]

The force test, it is supposed to represent common tasks.  The only time I lift a sand bag is on the force test.

It's a baseline, and it's easy, unless you are very short with little upper body strength, in which case I suspect there could be problems with the sandbag lifting to the line test.    That being said if I were supervising the loading of sandbags into a truck, I would not put that person at the end of the line anyway.

I know it's crazy, but there's more to the CF than Combat Arms, and those people don't need to be at the peak of physical fitness.

Your sandbag argument doesn't hold to much water...that would be like me saying about the BFT or the cooper's test, that they don't represent common tasks, because other than BFT or Coopers (and unit PT) I don't walk 13km with 50lbs on me nor do I run 2-5km...