• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Colonel: AF made a ‘fair and just’ decision (on PT)

dimsum

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
14,729
Points
1,280
Next time you think PT standards are too vague in the CAF, take a read of this latest article from the USAF.  Sure, we may need to tighten up standards, but this is a little ridiculous.

"“I closed by discussing our Air Force traditions, our core values and our standards, and that we are the greatest Air Force the world has ever seen because we have standards and we enforce those standards and we hold people accountable,” Bush told Air Force Times. “In this case, I didn’t meet it, so I need to step down as commander.”

He had failed the physical fitness test because his waist measurement was taped at 41 inches, 2 inches above the limit, he said. The Air Force responded by relieving him of command of the 319th Air Base Wing at Grand Forks Air Base, N.D."

More at link:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2013/03/air-force-pt-colonel-bush-fair-just-new-032213/#.UUyJIKL94tk.facebook
 
An example of the opposite end of the pendulum from "too much discretion" being "zero discretion/zero tolerance".
 
Sooooo.... he failed because his pant size was too large? A little arbitrary isn't it.

Wouldn't weight / BMI be a better determining factor? Especially if he passed all other parts of the test.

And shouldn't he have been put on some sort of probationary status prior to release to allow him the opportunity to drop the extra 2 inches?
 
From the USAF personnel fitness program

"12. Unit Commanders may initiate (enlisted Airmen) or recommend (officers) administrative
discharge only after the Airman has: received four Unsatisfactory FA scores in a 24-month
period; failed to demonstrate significant improvemen
t (as determined by the commander) despite
the reconditioning period; and has had his/her medical records reviewed by a military health care
provider to rule out medical conditions precluding the member from achieving a passing score
(Attachment 5). This guidance supersedes guidelines established in AFI 36-2905 (dated 1 July
2010), paragraphs 9.1.5.1, 9.1.5.1.1, 9.1.5.1.2, 9.1.5.1.3, 9.1.5.2, and 9.1.5.2.3."

ADMINISTRATIVE AND PERSONNEL ACTIONS FOR FAILING TO ATTAIN PHYSICAL FITNESS STANDARDS - Page 103
Member can potentially receive letter of reprimand for first failure and "Remove Promotion (Officer)" for the third failure. (My note)

"9.2.1. CCs must ensure members present a professional military image while in uniform. A professional military image/appearance may or may not directly relate to an individual’s fitness level or weight."

"A2.8.1. Weight and Height. Measurements of weight and weight relative to height (scale
readings, height-weight tables, BMI) do not differentiate between fat and fat-free tissue, and do
not account for fat distribution pattern."

"A2.8.2.2. Abdominal Circumference. Increased health risks associated with overfat are not only
related to total body fat, but also and more closely to fat distribution. Upper body or trunk fat,
specifically abdominal fat, presents the greatest health risk; it is highly linked to cardiovascular
diseases and metabolic disorders such as type II diabetes. Reducing abdominal girth or
circumference is more important than normalizing body weight since exercise induced increases
in muscle mass can mask reductions in girth, i.e., with proper exercise body weight may stay the
same or even increase, but “belt size” will reduce. Therefore, as abdominal fat is an independent
risk factor for disease, the evaluation of AC is used. A high risk of current and future disease
exists for males with an AC > 39 inches and for females with an AC > 35.5 inches regardless of
age or height.
The health risk is moderate for males with an AC > 35 inches and for females
with an AC > 31.5 inches."

http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI36-2905.pdf

edited for typo
 
So your telling me if I look like this ( http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/2981/markusruhl300x168.jpg ) I can't be in the U.S Air Force... what kind of shenanigans is that?
 
VancouverIslandHunter said:
So your telling me if I look like this ( http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/2981/markusruhl300x168.jpg ) I can't be in the U.S Air Force... what kind of shenanigans is that?

I don't know for sure, but I think that's what our fighter pilots think they see when looking in a mirror.

So it would be OK here........I think.

;D

BTW, I don't think your example has a 41 inch waist.....or even a 39 inch one.
 
cupper said:
Wouldn't weight / BMI be a better determining factor? Especially if he passed all other parts of the test.

BMI is a poor indicator of fitness and some studies state that waist circumference is a better measure.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/treatments/healthy_living/your_weight/whatis_bmi.shtml








 
recceguy said:
BTW, I don't think your example has a 41 inch waist.....or even a 39 inch one.

I don't know, those ab's are pretty damn big haha, I didn't feel like browsing through google looking for abs that stuck out more then that, just seeing all those six-packs makes me feel bad about myself :p
 
2010newbie said:
BMI is a poor indicator of fitness and some studies state that waist circumference is a better measure.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/treatments/healthy_living/your_weight/whatis_bmi.shtml

I think both are a crappy way and showing someone's fitness, you can still be in decent shape but have a big frame, and BMI is bullshit because it doesn't account for how dense your bones and muscle's are.
 
VancouverIslandHunter said:
I don't know, those ab's are pretty damn big haha, I didn't feel like browsing through google looking for abs that stuck out more then that, just seeing all those six-packs makes me feel bad about myself :p

I have a six pack........





but it's heavily insulated against outside damage or temperature fluctuations 8)
 
recceguy said:
I have a six pack........





but it's heavily insulated against outside damage or temperature fluctuations 8)

Too bad it's Bud Light  ;D
 
cupper said:
Sooooo.... he failed because his pant size was too large? A little arbitrary isn't it.

Wouldn't weight / BMI be a better determining factor? Especially if he passed all other parts of the test.

And shouldn't he have been put on some sort of probationary status prior to release to allow him the opportunity to drop the extra 2 inches?

In the US System they have to pass a height and weight test.  You first are weighed and measured (height) and if based on your age and height you are over their weight limits then you get taped.

The tape is a comparison between the circumference of your neck and the circumference of your waist.  Gives a rough body fat percentage that you have to be within 2% of.

They are cutting down the size of their force and literally one of the ways to down-size is to get rid of those who dont make weight.

Ask a US Officer sometime about the importance that they put on the photos attached to their ORB (think MPRR/490A)

Were I am, when doing up awards packets we have to include a copy of the current PT test and height and weight.  Saw a retirement award downgraded once for an NCO who had 32 years in based solely on his height/weight.
 
little jim said:
In the US System they have to pass a height and weight test.  You first are weighed and measured (height) and if based on your age and height you are over their weight limits then you get taped.

The tape is a comparison between the circumference of your neck and the circumference of your waist.  Gives a rough body fat percentage that you have to be within 2% of.

They are cutting down the size of their force and literally one of the ways to down-size is to get rid of those who dont make weight.

Ask a US Officer sometime about the importance that they put on the photos attached to their ORB (think MPRR/490A)

Were I am, when doing up awards packets we have to include a copy of the current PT test and height and weight.  Saw a retirement award downgraded once for an NCO who had 32 years in based solely on his height/weight.

The USAF fitness manual, which I posted a link to above, states otherwise. It specifically states that 39 inches is the maximum abdominal circumference for a male of any age, height or weight.

Perhaps you are getting your information from another US service?
 
If they went by BMI, Georges St-Pierre would be overweight (almost obese) and considered not "fit" enough for military service.

I don't know why they complicate everything. Have a results-based test. The new FORCE PT test is the right idea, unfortunately they botched it by making it even easier than the EXPRES test.

 
BMI say's I'm Obese.

I don't know why you guys even still mention BMI, you're keeping it alive.
 
BMI is a joke. I'm 6'1" and 165lbs. That puts me in the normal range. If I work out and gain muscle mass and get up to my target weight of 185, I'm borderline obese even though I still look like an olympic marathoner.
 
The problem with BMI, waist line and similar measurements is that they are used as an indicator of current health state, and not what they were originally meant for, an assessment tool for potential problems in the future. And it's based on an average population, which we all know there is no such thing as average people.

If one is capable of performing the various other assessments which more accurately reflect ones ability to do the job, why punish them for what could happen years down the road?
 
I just want to serve with folks who can get the job done.  I will seek substance over appearance any day.
 
winnipegoo7 said:
The USAF fitness manual, which I posted a link to above, states otherwise. It specifically states that 39 inches is the maximum abdominal circumference for a male of any age, height or weight.

Perhaps you are getting your information from another US service?

Me bad.  I am referring to Army rules not AF.

I will go to the penalty box for two minutes and feel shame.
 
Back
Top