OFT - Failure to complete will result in X-Factor removed!

[Could be the last?]

I was informed today that the X-Factor will be removed for those who fail to pass their OFT. Obviously there will be caveats but essentially a good incentive. I'm sick and tired of seeing wasters getting away without deploying due to LMF or a poor personal standard of fitness.:D

But I'm sure there will be someone who comes up with a reason why they can't do it.

Better still, why not increase the benefits for those who deploy at a greater frequency. That will get the chunkies running round the block.........:ok:

[topgas]

Unlikely, I'd have thought. X Factor is set by AFPRB as an integral part of service pay and is meant to compensate for all the emb:mad:erances of service life, not just the dangerous bits.

[snowball1]

Who told you that, the cleaner?

[LFFC]

Nah - he just made it up when he was posting on the other thread about fitness. Food For Thought For The Old And Bold (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2800064&postcount=57)

He seems to have missed the point about fitness, which is - you don't have to be fully physically fit to be operationally effective! You just need to be motivated. Here's an example of what I mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Bader).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/43/Douglas_Bader.jpg/180px-Douglas_Bader.jpg

[WPH]

If this is true there are plenty of wasters who will happily take a 10-15% (can't remember what xfactor is) pay cut with the guarantee of never being deployed!

[PPRuNeUser0172]

You are a funny guy

Next you will be telling me that my flying pay is gonna be stopped if I stop flying.....................:D

[Could be the last?]

LFFC

Not quite, this has been rumbling around the PEd world for some time. Also, the required pass/fail will be the same regardless of being Male/Female, which would seem sensible!

And I haven't missed the point! When I am re-deploying guys the back to the sand pit 4 weeks after they have returned because another chimp can't be bothered to pass his fitness test, why should he be paid the same? In fact, if his motivation is that poor why should he wear a uniform at all? :ugh:

[Antique Driver]

At a secret Wiltshire Air Base last year we all turned up over a few days to trial the wonderful new OFT which was full of irrevelant and quite pointless exercises.

None of the females in my group achieved a pass, there were several injuries and the level of supervision and knowledge was appalling.

Now I have nothing against the requirement for fitness but:-

Can we have relevant tests - how about the BFT/CFT??

How about some time programmed into the working week for supervised physical training - not during lunchtimes or at 7am!!

I for one was medically exempt the RAFFT for 18 months with a leq injury but that didn't stop me doing 189 days deployed during that period - would have been pi:mad: ed off if I'd been doing that with less pay.:*

[Biggus]

As topgas pointed out:

"The pay allowances and pensions of the Armed Forces are reviewed regularly.

Pay
Rates of salary are reviewed annually by the independent Armed Forces Pay Review Body and are generally related to the wages paid in civilian life, with an addition known as the 'X' Factor to compensate for the special circumstances found in the Services. With effect from 1st April 2001Pay for airmen was reviewed and a new pay structure "Pay 2000" was introduced. Pay 2000 depends on the airman's, trade, rank, time in rank (if promoted after 1 April 2001) and commitment - the period of engagement. For officers, pay is based on their branch and length of service in their rank."

The X factor is not just for deploying to nasty places, we received it well before life in the sandpit came along!

What hacks me off is the females who get cushy postings to the sim/ops because they have 'sprogs' and therefore 'can't' deploy because of childcare issues, etc. Or the guys who always seem to have 'domestic' problems which mean they can't deploy either (or are recalled whilst away requiring someone to replace them at short notice). I would have thought the divorce rates show that most of us who do go away regualrly have domestic problems of our own!

[c17age]

From a good source this week-"OFT will be withdrawn until incentives/ punishment can be ironed out"
If you fail OFT do they then not let you deploy
I DON'T THINK SO!

We'll have to wait and see what the NFWs come up with

[NoseGunner]

There seems to be plenty of confusion here between the OFT (which I personally think is a poor idea executed appallingly) and the RAFFT.

Also standards will never be the same for male and female because that would be sexual discrimination. If you dont get that then go on another equal ops course!!

[Roguedent]

Does this mean that you will now do 3 fitness tests a year?? :confused: The one on your birthday, the one at the start of the financial year and now this new one. I preferred the one on your birthday only. I was Exempt for 2 1/2 years from the test, passed first time on my return,:ok: but out of 30, 20 - 30 year olds 10 passed.:ugh: That included me as a cripple and 4 girls. If you think adding a bit of sand bag filling etc is going to make people pass you are wrong. Also take away the X-Factor and you can't be deployed.!! := Hang on!! That means I don't have to go to the desert or other nasty places around the world, and I get weekends off. Can I also have a personnel chauffeur called Les!! Get a grip. If you can't pass, you should be beasted :{ ( OH my god I used that non PC word) until you can. If you are massively overweight, then a regime of diet :yuk: and exercise should be enforced. My god, you're in the military, have a bit of pride. I for one am no lean mean fighting machine, but I can out pace some of the younger generation we have joining up.

Welcome to the Dictatorship of ROGUEDENT:D :D

Edited : If people struggle with the test here, the 5 runs of 1 1/2 miles in the heat to acclimatise (SP) will be impossible!!

[Could be the last?]

There are obviously big differences around the Service with regard to the RAFFT. We currently do one each year; still doing mine around my birthday. Then 6-weeks prior to deployment we are supposed to do a max effort, with advice given to improve your scores, then you do another a week before you leave. Most of the guys are doing at least 3....:confused:

Also, to take admin action against an individual who fails his FT, that individual has to fail a further 4 times........... Surely it should be 3 strikes and your out?

[sonicstomp]

What does the new OFT involve, and when is it being implemented?

[pigsinspace]

From a good source this week-"OFT will be withdrawn until incentives/ punishment can be ironed out"

Big Oxfordshire base,After sending Everyone an email telling them that the OFT will take place after annual CCS it now appears that the Flt Sgt rock ape told everyone on an arrivals brief that the OFT "attempt" will be voluntry.

Personally I know one guy with 18 months left who will not voluneteer to put his back out carrying sandbags and leopard crawling under wire!!

[ZH875]

FI should also have a 2 can rule and this must be vigorously enforced. Good idea, force them that don't drink, to drink:eek:

[FFP]

Its not as though there is a real job to do down there anyway

Oooh !!! Wash your mouth out ! I'll have you know I've spent many a night down there doing eff all waiting for the Argies to attack . . . . . :ok:

[pigsinspace]

Anyone who fails the fitness test should be deployed to the Falklands for a period of not less than 6 months and put on remedial PT in the fantastic Gym. FI should also have a 2 can rule and this must be vigorously enforced. That way we should then at least get them back fitter than when they went. Its not as though there is a real job to do down there anyway, the army dont even class it as an operational tour anymore.

So we send all the FT failures to the Falklands Plus all the guys to do the normal jobs there,Plus all the guys in Iraq, Afghanistan,Al Udied, Plus who will do all the "failures" jobs here at home? how many people do you think are in the RAF?

[pigsinspace]

I actively engage their Desky to get them moved up the list to go OOA or have them posted somewhere else, they are regularly volunteered for UK exercises on the plain, Cornwall or scotland living in tents,

I bet you are a great person to work for!!! Do you have any mates or are you just bitter and twisted?

[LFFC]

... I actively engage their Desky to get them moved up the list to go OOA or have them posted somewhere else, they are regularly volunteered for UK exercises ....

Or, to put it another way, you bully them!

[pigsinspace]

Hes probably all talk, In this day and age all guys and girls down to the newest Sac Know where they are on the OOA list.

Imho a keyboard terrorist and a bully to anyone who has the misfortune to work under him/her! (Slc)

[vascodegama]

Nose Gunner

You are right about the fitness tests standards but not OFT. The fitness test is a lifestyle test and therefore gender fair, the OFT is (allegedly) a test to determine suitability for duties (agreed it is hard to see how) and therefore must be gender neutral ie the same for all. If there were different standards in the OFT then we chaps (esp the old ones) could claim sex discrimination. If you dont believe me look up the case of Alcock vs the Chief Constable of Hampshire!

[NoseGunner]

Vasco got a link?

Thanks

[movadinkampa747]

It would appear that Discrimination is divided into two main categories, direct and indirect discrimination. Broadly, direct discrimination occurs where a person is treated differently on the grounds of their gender. Indirect discrimination is where an employer applies a requirement or policy, which though on the face of it has nothing to do with gender, in practice tends to effect one sex rather than another.

[NoseGunner]

Movin

Happy with all that and the way it is normally applied ie standards should be set where the pass/fail rate is the same for both sexes.

For example fast jets should be designed so that the cockpit fits (as an example) 85% of all people - 85% of males and 85% of females, otherwise it is discrimination. Exceptions can be made for health and safety reasons ie you have to be able to lift 50kg 1.5m in the air to safely do a job - but employers have to prove this, they cant just make rules up such as this which are discriminatory.

So if I understand correctly the RAFFT cannot discriminate so pass rates are the same for male/female but the OFT is, I guess, operational so standards are the same for all.

Anyone know if this is correct??

Interestingly, and I dont know if this is the reason for the recent change, exactly the same rules will very soon (couple of months?) apply to age, so pass rates should be very similar no matter your age/sex (for the RAFFT).

[vascodegama]

My understanding is that an employer can set a standard for specific tasks/equipment providing it is justifiable. That aspect is not considered discrimination. Therefore if more women fail the OFT, provided the service can prove the OFT was justified then they have no come back. The same would go I dare say for FJ design; we are not required to compromise ac design for PC reasons yet. I am not sure that the fitness test is due to go totaly gender/age neutral but as an oldie I for one am quite happy to give up my "advantage" provided all the girls do.

Sorry NG I do not have a link but the basics are that Alcock failed selection as a dog handler on a multi terrain walk which women were allowed more time to complete. The tribunal ruled that if a woman who completed the walk in that time was fit to do the job then a man who did the same time must be as well. It upheld DIRECT sex discrimination against Hampshire Police. The clear read across is that provided the OFT is justifiable (granted a big IF) then different standards for men and women would discriminate against men.

The RAFFT which is a life style test would result in INDIRECT discrimination against women if there were not different standards.

[SaddamsLoveChild]

LFFC/Piginspace. I merely place those that are unable to operationally deploy in a position to support UK and other european exercises where their lack of fitness will not be a danger to them or those who rely on them. I am purely taklking about those whose lifestyle choice (diet. laziness) is incompatible with an expeditionary Air Force. Interestingly enough they spend roughly the same amount of time away and the others do not feel agrieved towards them; everyone gets their full leave entitlement in and hasn't lost a day in the 2 yrs of my tenure.

I take it the next time you have a short notice deployment for 4 months you wont whinge about those that dont deploy because they are too 'fat to fight' and are deemed an operational liability.:= Or may I hesitate to ask are either of you in this class. Medical downgrades are another matter.


Do not confuse bullying with forthright military man management. Its purely a case of using what you have for the best means and if someone cant pass the OFT/RAFFT then they have a military duty to support where they can, not languish in the UK with their families whilst others deploy sausage side. Work on Ops is the same whether you are male or female, the heat and the insurgents dont descriminate and nor should we.:ugh:

I totally agree with 'Could be the Last' man management is hard enough without people shimfing their responsibility and making others lives harder 4 strikes is 2 too many.

[Guernsey Girl II]

Could be the Last I think that you misheard the punishment for failing the OFT. It’s not being able to watch The X Factor and have all your PS2 games taken away. Well I think that is just as likely.

Which idiot of a PTI thinks you fill sandbags full of pea shale at chest height with an entrenching tool? :rolleyes:

[Maple 01]

Jockstrappers having far to much input in how the RAF is run, we all managed during the Cold War without BFT/CFT/Bleep tests or whatever else came along subsequently to save PTI jobs. During that time we also fulfilled all the little add-ons that the politicians got us invited us to. Strangely enough the time I got jiffed with a 'short notice' was when a ‘racing snake’ had managed to injure himself just before a Falklands det

I'd like to see an analysis of hours lost/dets missed by Gym Queens perusing their hobby

[LFFC]

I take it the next time you have a short notice deployment for 4 months you wont whinge about those that dont deploy because they are too 'fat to fight' and are deemed an operational liability.:= Or may I hesitate to ask are either of you in this class. Medical downgrades are another matter.


Fortunately, I enjoy keeping myself fit, so I don't fall into "that class". What annoys me is this (litigation driven) obsession with testing that we seem to have fallen into. Service men and women know the risks that they run by being members of the Armed Forces, so as long as they are operationally effective, I have no problem with them deploying.

My gripe is that I'm not convinced that these fitness tests are a true measure of operational effectiveness for all trades/ranks and I don't believe that you should be having to find replacements for deployment based on their results.

[pigsinspace]

I take it the next time you have a short notice deployment for 4 months you wont whinge about those that dont deploy because they are too 'fat to fight' and are deemed an operational liability. Or may I hesitate to ask are either of you in this class. Medical downgrades are another matter.


I do not deploy for 4 months at at time, I am part of 216 Sqn and so deploy whenever I leave the UK.
I can say without any hessitation that I spend more time "deployed" per year than those on 4 month tours, in fact our deployment is on going not limited to a few months every few years.

[musclemech]

SaddamsLoveChild:

Why o why o why aren't there more bosses like you! :D The poor attitude to fitness in general, and the fitness tests in particular, comes from the top. I often see a positive change in attitudes to fitness and testing when a new boss is posted in, and how that changes negatively when that boss leaves. Coincidentally, morale normally improves with the improved attitude...

Antique Driver:

The CFT/ BFT is no more relavant a fitness test for RAF personnel (Regt excepted) than the shuttle run test. The advantage of the shuttle run test is that is conducted inside, and so is not subject to vagaries of the weather.
The OFT is based on 16 real operational tasks, so it is relevant to set a standard and expect people who might have to carry out those tasks to meet that standard (There is a quote from a senior officer in the new conditioning booklet in which he describes how EVERYONE including the top man had to get involved in filling sandbags when in Basra).

Guersnsey Girl II

I am not sure of the relevance of filling sandbags at chest height but I am guessing that it might have something to do with you being in the hole you are digging, and the bag being at ground level next to the hole.

Maple 01

The role of the RAF during the Cold War was very different to now. Therefore we have to train personnel differently. We have to leave the dinosaurs to their fate and move with the changes!:ugh:

At the end of the day, fitness is not a dirty word. A great deal of research supports the fact that those who exercise regularly are more productive and efficient at work, less likely to go sick, less likely to die early from a heart attack, less likely to develop obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, and some forms of cancer. More importantly, they are more likely to convey the exercise ethos to their children and and ensure that they receive those benefits as well. That's not a bad return for 2 -3 hours exercise a week.

MM

ps SaddamsLoveChild for CAS!!!

[ZH875]

I am not sure of the relevance of filling sandbags at chest height but I am guessing that it might have something to do with you being in the hole you are digging, and the bag being at ground level next to the hole.But the RAF being that bit cleverer than the Army, would chuck the sandbags into the hole, fill them there, and chuck them out again.:ok:

So no need to fill them at chest height.:ugh:

[musclemech]

Like I said, it is only a guess:( . You would need to have a big hole to get you, the digger, and someone else to hold the sandbag open for you in it... Mind you, if 'chucking' sandbags around is so easy maybe we should include that as a test too! ;)

MM

[LFFC]

Musclemech,

I agree with you that it's good to be physically fit and it does help you to perform well.

But I know a few, seemingly unfit, aircrew that I'd be happy to go to war with any day. I've also known a couple of, apparently physically fit, aircrew that I'd be much more worried about trusting with my life.

In my personal opinion, to suggest that the former shouldn't deploy on operations because they might have trouble rushing to fill a few sandbags is complete madness! I'm all for motivating people to stay physically fit, but I suspect that an OFT is not the answer.

If we're really determined to increase the availability of people to deploy, perhaps we should start by looking at improving our secondary health care. These days I see servicemen/women waiting for months for NHS treatment. Not so many years ago a service person used to be treated in military hospitals without any waiting time. How things have changed!

[South Bound]

The interesting thing that comes out of this thread to me is the number of people effectively saying ' I haven't needed to be fit in the past, and that was OK, so why do I need to be fit now?'.

This is not the cold war anymore. We are not going to park ourselves at an MOB and wait for the big bombs to come and wipe us out, for which of course no special level of fitness was required.

Those that are deploying now are (in the main) going to pokey dusty holes in the middle of nowhere, surrounding by all sorts of potentially unfriendly types. There is lots of opportunity to get caught out and have to escape or fight and there MUST be a fitness standard associated with being able to pull your weight as a team. I do not buy into the rubbish spouted on here implying that people only have to look after themselves, just as they always have done (in all their Cold War experience).

If by chance we are transitting on the same Herc/wokka/Landrover/whatever and we come into contact/crash, you better be able to keep up with me and do your bit. Another thread on here already talked about the Bluntie Army Offr that fought in a Platoon House for a week. Anyone that might have to leave the wire at any of our deployed locations MUST be able to do the same and pull their weight.

This does not mean that I agree with the content of the OFT, I think it is inflexible and likely to ask more questions than it answers. I wholeheartedly agree with a gender-neutral test, but it should be realistic and based on the people we have allowed to join. How many 5 ft ladies will be able to lift the ammo box up to the required level? Do we stop recruiting them? It is barking...

[The Helpful Stacker]

I fully agree with the concept of being 'fit to fight', being ex-Infantry myself it was always drummed into us and its a belief I've carried over into the RAF. What I don't agree with though is the RAF's half-arsed and certain trade group justifying approach.

I've filled my fair share of sandbags over the years (although I probably filled more during my 6 years on TSW than in the RGJ's) but in all this time I've never, ever filled one at chest height. Was this particular part of the 'test' designed by someone who had only ever seen a sandbag filled in 'All Quiet On The Western Front'?

OFT aside, I was informed what seems like many moons ago during my first LEAN event that all RAF personnel are supposed to get 3 hours of on-duty time a week in order to carry out fitness training. Do any units (except formed units such as TSW etc) actually achieve this?

Is it any wonder that when placed alongside the Army we (as a force) look so tubby when Wednesday sports afternoons disappeared sometime in the early 90's? Yes personnel should and do go down the gym during their own time but considering many folk bleat on about individual fitness being important overall operational effectiveness shouldn't the RAF stop expecting folk to use their own, often too brief free time to do this? Would we expect personnel to take leave to go on a trade related course?

In my opinion if the RAF wants a fit force it should bin this RAFFT/OFT crap, bring back Wednesday afternoon section fitness sessions, introduce the same BFT/CFT that the Army has and create a Q annotated course for all-trades that will put a degree of PTIness into all sections rather than relying solely on the over-tanned, quasi-military folk who inhabit the gym.

[musclemech]

In my experience, the poor attitude to fitness has, IMHO, more to do with the poor leadership from the top of sections than the PEd Branch. Good bosses manage to find the time for their people to go to the gym/ play sports on Wed pm. Those who aren't good bosses invariably don't.

There will be a reason that the hole is a chest height (I am lve at the mo so can't find out) as the whole thing has been extensively researched. Perhaps when I am back, I will be able to enlighten you.

The fitness test is designed to encourage everyone to take up some form of exercise, so that they are fit enough to pass it you will be fit enough to be able to cope with OOA deployments. If it wasn't there, the majority of RAF people wouldn't do any exercise.

As I said I am on lve now (dodging hurricane Ernesto in Florida), so probably won't be able to stand up against any more derogatory comments aimed at my Branch, which, coming from a Stacker, are actually somewhat galling....

MM

[movadinkampa747]

you better be able to keep up with me and do your bit.



Or what? Come on, what are you going to do? Jump up and down and get annoyed?:rolleyes:

[Pontius Navigator]

[QUOTE Yes personnel should and do go down the gym during their own time but considering many folk bleat on about individual fitness being important overall operational effectiveness shouldn't the RAF stop expecting folk to use their own, often too brief free time to do this?[/QUOTE]

'individual fitness' and 'often too brief free time' are often mentally challenging and the latter perhaps overrides the former. OTOH if the sports were programmed and mandatory, and applied to everyone it would be seen as part of the job and probably become just another part of the job.

There should be no excuse by some that it was vital to do their paperwork.

How about an extended lunch break on 2-3 days per week? Sport would be properly monitored and could take a variety of forms - volleyball for 30 minutes, or 5-a-side, or for those who are at a loss a 20 minute run over a designated course.

Timing is important as an end-of-shift sport would be seen as an infringement. OTOH that vital paperwork could be done at the end of the day.

[movadinkampa747]

There should be no excuse by some that it was vital to do their paperwork.
How about an extended lunch break on 2-3 days per week? Sport would be properly monitored and could take a variety of forms - volleyball for 30 minutes, or 5-a-side, or for those who are at a loss a 20 minute run over a designated course.
Timing is important as an end-of-shift sport would be seen as an infringement. OTOH that vital paperwork could be done at the end of the day.

So how about all those non blunties that are doing a real job in theatre already? Do they just land their Chinook/Puma/Merlin/Hercules and have an extended lunch break to do phys? Or do engineers, already in theatre, stop servicing those vital aircraft so that they can have an extended lunch break to do phys? It is funny how after being in Iraq for a few years now some blunty in shorts from the gym thinks it is a good idea if we suddenly start being able to lift sandbags into a four tonner. You never know there might be a war in the desert.
You lot at places like Cranwell will be able to put your vital paperwork down and nip to the gym for an extended lunch break to do the oh so important phys. But then again it wont affect you will it...............:ok:

[Pontius Navigator]

Don't be so *****y obtuse. The purpose of the fitness training is to get fit to deploy and not a ******y marathon for the people in theatre. In theatre the fit, by definition, might do sport for recreation if it is possible.

So how about all those non blunties that are doing a real job in theatre already? Do they just land their Chinook/Puma/Merlin/Hercules and have an extended lunch break to do phys? Or do engineers, already in theatre, stop servicing those vital aircraft so that they can have an extended lunch break to do phys? It is funny how after being in Iraq for a few years now some blunty in shorts from the gym thinks it is a good idea if we suddenly start being able to lift sandbags into a four tonner. You never know there might be a war in the desert.
You lot at places like Cranwell will be able to put your vital paperwork down and nip to the gym for an extended lunch break to do the oh so important phys. But then again it wont affect you will it...............:ok:

[movadinkampa747]

So why have the people at the top, who it wont affect either, suddenly decided after alll this time the RAF needs another physical test? The OFT will do more damage than good. You cant make it gender or height specific because that is sex discrimination. As I said above it wont affect you so you shouldn't be worrying about it.

[Pontius Navigator]

. As I said above it wont affect you so you shouldn't be worrying about it.

You know me?

You know my responsibilities?

I care and I care for my men.

[movadinkampa747]

You are just after a longer lunch.................. ;)
You didnt answer my question,why have the people at the top suddenly decided after all this time the RAF needs another physical test?

[Pontius Navigator]

You are just after a longer lunch.................. ;)
You didnt answer my question,why have the people at the top suddenly decided after all this time the RAF needs another physical test?

At Waddo, a few years ago, we were actually given an optional longer lunch break to go the the gym. It worked.

And why have their airships suddenly decided that we need to get fit? No idea except the man at the top has changed. Did is kick off with Brian Burridge in the chair or after he left?

There is absolutely nothing wrong in 'fit to fight' and, as I said earlier, it has been kicking around since the 60s but never had consistent support from the top. As soon as Charles Maughan departed as STC COS the whole thing died. Same with no flying suits off the flight line. Same with QFE/QNH. Total lack of consistency.

Now we have a new system and a legacy fitness regime. We have unfit personnel and we have no scheduled time for them to get fit.

The new regime, for whatever reason it has been introduced, must have credibility, consistency and be applied with continuity - just like the CCS which has been running more than 20 years.

[Pontius Navigator]

You are just after a longer lunch.................. ;)

And I have quite enough time for my lunch thank you, and my own gym too.

[movadinkampa747]

must have credibility, consistency and be applied with continuity - just like the CCS which has been running more than 20 years.

That will be the CCS that the airships do aswell...........................:hmm:
You say we have unfit personel. Unfit to do what exactly? Sit in an aircraft? fix said aircraft? Sit in an office in a HQ somehwere in theatre? Why are they stalling now about the OFT? Scared because they will be sued?

I bet you would love a longer lunch..............Just like the poor buggers in theatre...................:hmm:

[Pontius Navigator]

That will be the CCS that the airships do aswell...........................:hmm:
You say we have unfit personel. Unfit to do what exactly? Sit in an aircraft? fix said aircraft? Sit in an office in a HQ somehwere in theatre? Why are they stalling now about the OFT? Scared because they will be sued?
I bet you would love a longer lunch..............Just like the poor buggers in theatre...................:hmm:

Mova, if I got the X-factor, oh if . . .

As for fit to do what? Fit to survive the heat perhaps? Fit to lift a holdall or rucksack. Yup THAT fit.

Sued? My rumour mill suggested that you needed a medic on hand to deal with cuts, bruises, cuts and sprains. You also need a manual handling course with proper instruction on how to fill, lift, and stack a sandbag.

Is the love affair with the OFT simply a love affair with the TLA - BFT, CFT, OFT? They are latched on firmly to the T-word. It was mentioned somewhere earlier that CCS was originally instruction and not simply a TEST.

My suggestion was more related to the training bit. Any sort of regular mandatory fitness training and not mission specific. That would satisfy your question - fit for what? Remember I also mentioned 'fit to survive'.

So, fit to survive the heat, fit to carry (luggage), fit to walk, fit to embus and debus, fit to move from aircon to oven heat.

Been there, done that - fit to get out of an aircraft at 140 deg and survive the cold at 95 deg. The Tiger beer was welcome too.

[South Bound]

You didnt answer my question,why have the people at the top suddenly decided after all this time the RAF needs another physical test?

As people keep saying, because the general standard of fitness is poor and there are genuine concerns over people's abilities to do their jobs. To know where to focus the effort of getting people fit requires some sort of test of their fitness, some goal for them to achieve - voila, the OFT.

There is no reasoned argument against a fitness test of some sort (we have all despaired at the 25 year olds that can't pass the RAFFT), so stop whining about it. Perhaps you would care to suggest an alternative.

Personally, I believe the test needs to demonstrate strength and endurance above all else - the CFT gets my vote anyday, but we MUST allow our people the time to train...

[Pontius Navigator]

, but we MUST allow our people the time to train...

and, as I stressed this must not be an end of day 'easy' option. It must be made easy to do not easy to miss.

Mind you, our whole gymnasium infrastructure needs an overhaul.

The AE House at Keflavik, 30 years ago, was a multi-hall, hangar sized facility with raquet courts, ball courts, weight rooms, pool etc. Residents would pay and hire a locker so no dragging kit around. It was easy to use and invariably a hive of activity.

What does an RAF gym offer? A small changing room open to all and about large enough to accommodate a small section. Showers? Joke. Facilities? Gym hall large enough for a single ball game. Weight room big enough for half a dozen or so.

[South Bound]

Agreed, there needs to be a fundamental review of our fitness policy, rather than just how we test it. I work at a joint Unit where I regularly see the green element CFT'ing, doing morning section runs etc as a group. Somehow we must build this kind of structured activity into our working week - if that means we don't start flying until 1100 twice a week, then so be it, but we have to stop paying lip-service to getting our guys fit. At the moment the message is very mixed - yes we want you to be fit, but we also want you to concentrate on your primary role and you will have to work on fitness yourself....

[SaddamsLoveChild]

The fact that we need 'a standard' is beyond discussion for those who apply common sense to todays expeditionary manning challenges. No one test will appease the masses and leadership is not a popularity contest, if the OFT is non descriminatory and sets a common standard then I am all for it. If a 5ft 2 male or female cannot lift a sandbag to chest height and is fit in all other respects then a view has to be taken. If they are so short that they cannot see over a parapet to fire their weapon that is another problem. With the shortage of personnel that we are currently facing people are being taken out of trade to do jobs like driver escort etc and if an ambush takes place then trust me, adrenalin, although a great motivator will not help an individual sustain him/herself in combat. That is why the Army have CO's runs and mandatory phys.

I introduced longer lunch hours and massaged shift handover times for my staff in an effort to give them time in their normal day to attend circuit training and have time for lunch (1 1/2 hrs) not one of them took up the offer and believe me when I say one of the females hasnt seen her feet whilst standing up for a long time. They can now do it in their own time as far as I am concerned.

We need a test, it needs to be non descriminatory and if people hurt themsellves doing it then (in reality) they had failed to prepare - its time they learnt to wipe their own arse not ask the military to do it for them. :ok:

Movadinkampa - It is the very attitude that you spout which fuels the lame and lazy not to bother with their physical ability to conduct arduous duties outside the office for the benefit of all those deployed as a whole. We (The services) dont have to reflect the society that we protect, we have to be better than that. If you can be arsed,why not come into theatre and go on convoy in an unarmoured vehicle and no aircon with 25lb of bodyarmour, Weapons, ammo, Ops vest and helmet, then dismount and stag on waiting for EOD to pitch up for 4 hrs - I am light blue and have an office job out here but was caught out. Some people even fail the predeployment OPTAG cos they arent even fit enough to do the training and that means someone else has to pick up their place in theatre or someone has to remain longer in post. Stop bleating about decisions taken at the top and be a team player.:=

[pigsinspace]

In my experience, the poor attitude to fitness has, IMHO, more to do with the poor leadership from the top of sections than the PEd Branch. Good bosses manage to find the time for their people to go to the gym/ play sports on Wed pm. Those who aren't good bosses invariably don't.

I do not think many people here have worked a 12 hour shift with very few breaks for lunch let alone an extended lunch break for the Gym,
Squadrons do not stop just to go to the Gym, I would invite any of you to do a 12 hour shift on any flying Squadron, with maybe 3 aircraft inbound, 2-3 outbound and then throw in MCT, IRT oh and of course servicing and rectification.

Extended lunch breaks? A lunch break would be nice some days.


I introduced longer lunch hours and massaged shift handover times for my staff in an effort to give them time in their normal day to attend circuit training and have time for lunch (1 1/2 hrs) not one of them took up the offer and believe me when I say one of the females hasnt seen her feet whilst standing up for a long time. They can now do it in their own time as far as I am concerned.
Saddamslove child I guess you work in a Bay or hanger enviroment with no deadlines?

I say one of the females hasnt seen her feet whilst standing up for a long time.

Psycolical bullying now???
Phoned any deskys about her recently? I hope she dont read this forum.

[South Bound]

Piggy, relax - SLC is just saying that we must make time for compulsory Phys to get certain people up to an acceptable level. The problems of sqns working around a flying programme are clearly covered above - that will require a commitment of 'downtime' at Unit or Group level. Perhaps we could all do phys one afternoon a week, I wonder why noone has thought of that before....

[Maple 01]

Ahhh, it's nice to be dismissive of the 'Cold War mob' - during the time when Ivan was expected over the hedge at any time most RAF units did maxivals etc - I could run (and did) around all day with an LMG (which by no stretch of the imagination was light) My oppo could hardly drag her SMG out of the armoury without breaking into a sweat. Who was the fittest?

Fast forward 15 years, said oppo could walk (literally) the beep test, Maple was a dismal failure, but was now capable of lugging a GPMG around like a good'un. Who was the fittest?

So what does the fitness test actually test?

I missed the joy of the OFT or whatever it's called but I expect it will also produce similar iffy results - still, gives the mirror techs something to feel important about. Do those that fail the test not go on deployment?

[South Bound]

Mapes

you have hit the nail on the head, old boy. The problem with any generic test is that it is fairly unrepresentative of likely tasks for the majority of personnel. Hence a lot of frustration about relevance etc.

If one's job is to load 4-tonners or fill sand-bags, cool, test those skills. If it is to run away bravely after ditching behind Taleban lines, perhaps a 10K cross-country would be better. It is just a shame that we don't have (and never will) the flexibility to tailor fitness and testing according to a person's war role with some basic levels of strength/general fitness thrown in. Any test will always be a compromise.

I just think that we have plenty of seriously unhealthy (let alone unfit) people in the RAF at the moment and we must get serious about sorting out their fitness...

[movadinkampa747]

SLC is just saying that we must make time for compulsory Phys to get certain people up to an acceptable level. The problems of sqns working around a flying programme are clearly covered above - that will require a commitment of 'downtime' at Unit or Group level. Perhaps we could all do phys one afternoon a week, I wonder why noone has thought of that before....
Mapes


If one's job is to load 4-tonners or fill sand-bags, cool, test those skills. If it is to run away bravely after ditching behind Taleban lines, perhaps a 10K cross-country would be better.


So now you are saying only certain people need to be brought upto an acceptable level, who exactly do you mean. Before you start going off on one just remember, its what you wrote. As for working around a flying programme, well thats great at a fast jet base but what about AT Bases where the majority of the tasking is ops related. Do you honestly think that a Tristar crew would need to be able run 10k to escape the Taliban?
Maybe Benson, Odiham, Brize and Lyneham could ask Group if the tasking could be cancelled once a week so everybody could do phys. Please come back into the real world.

[Pontius Navigator]

mova please see PM

[It's Not Working]

Sorry, can’t resist climbing on my particular soap box and at the risk of repeating myself...

Age and expanding waist line necessitates spending longer in the gym than used to be necessary. The inevitable happens and I hurt myself (doing something I’ve done many times before including at the particular National Championships). Nothing life threatening but it requires hospitalisation and surgery to repair. Report sick in February and the earliest the local NHS hospital will operate is the coming November. Now surely if I am required to maintain a level of fitness the military also have a similar responsibility to keep me there and that includes fixing me when I am broken. Currently I am in constant discomfort, out of fitness test and CCS and am consequently not deployable – where’s the sense in that?

<RANT OFF> but still bloody pi$$ed off!

[South Bound]

Too true INW - you are a taxpayers' asset that is broken and hence your wages each month are a waste because we can't use you properly. Surely a small investment to send you to a private hospital has to make sense???

Kampa boy - Read the post again and try and understand. I said that not everyone needs to be bought up to a level because most of us are already there!

Do I honestly think that any RAF aircrew need to be able to run 10K to avoid the Taleban? - bloody right I do. My last invovement with those guys saw them doing some pretty hairy tanking over somewhere they would have preferred not to land. Anyway, what happens if they get posted to Hercs - do we give them a year out to lose the 2 stone and get fit for their job??? Same if they get DWR'd for any other job in theatre - they need to be fit - what is so hard about this concept???????

I think we are losing the plot here if we think it is OK for ANY of our staff to get unfit because of the job they are presently in.

Nobody is talking about cancelling tasking, rather moving it when it can be moved or local management coming up with some imaginative way of providing time for training. In the real World we have to do something - what do you suggest, wait till all our people are too fat to move and then post them to the AT fleet? I think you are doing the AT guys a great dis-service with your attitude as I know that most of them take their fitness very seriously for all the reasons discussed above.

[Mr Blake]

OTOH if the sports were programmed and mandatory, and applied to everyone it would be seen as part of the job and probably become just another part of the job.

How about an extended lunch break on 2-3 days per week? Sport would be properly monitored and could take a variety of forms - volleyball for 30 minutes, or 5-a-side, or for those who are at a loss a 20 minute run over a designated course.

:ok: What is really important here is are we as an organisation fit for purpose?

I visit the gym every lunchtime. Not because it's emphasised as being part of the job, and the importance of being active and reasonably fit to do it well, but from purely selfish reasons, as my waist rapidly catches up with my age.

Under the "Aircrew Training Package" Typhoon aircrew are given 4 hours per week of structured and supervised physical education. This ensures they can be fit enough to get the maximum possible out of a demanding platform, and is therefore completely necessary, but do we give our engineers etc... the same support? No, and this is despite having to do more and more with less resources. Something has to give.

I don't agree wholly with the concept of "testing". It provides at best a snapshot of a person's ability to do certain physical things on one particular day of the year. I've even had guys train specifically for the fitness test a fortnight or so prior: surely this can't be what it should be about?

What is needed is a joined up policy that improves our people's fitness, and ultimately their health in the longterm. Why not use the system in place in most gyms, where you log in and it monitors exactly what you do? It would be relatively easy to then set standards to be achieve over the calendar year, and chaps could choose what to do off the list, perhaps during a regular sports afternoon? Radical thinking I know. (The Falklands do a similiar thing based on an honesty system, rewarded by coloured t-shirts).

As I said if we are to become a highly deployable EAW based Air Force, we need fit and active personnel, and I'm afraid that we are carrying too many passengers to achieve this. People will fail the new tests, whatever they are. The system needs changing with strong leadership to enforce it.

[LFFC]

As I said if we are to become a highly deployable EAW based Air Force, we need fit and active personnel, and I'm afraid that we are carrying too many passengers to achieve this. People will fail the new tests, whatever they are. The system needs changing with strong leadership to enforce it.
I can't totally disagree with you, but as you say, if we introduce a new OFT at short notice that prohibits deployment on failure, we must accept that we may loose a wedge of our capability overnight. We must therefore prepare for this over an extended period of time and integrate this strategy into every level of our training and management. For example, why spend millions pushing a Tornado pilot through an expensive weapons training phase only to see him become ineffective the next day when he fails his OFT?

With the best will in the world, it's going to take lots of money and 2 or 3 years to get this up and running.

[South Bound]

LFFC

good example, but one could twist it around and say 'Why let a pilot start a very expensive course until he has proven he can meet the required fitness standard?'....

If fitness is a pre-requisite then let it be just that - something that MUST be achieved before joining. Will the OFT be introduced at Cranditz/Halton? I do hope so. Even more, I hope that students of both schools will have to pass it before they can graduate, although I am not confident in that.

[Mr Blake]

Yes it will I agree, but we need a strategy change that must come from the very top. Let's make it part of the job, and not just rely on a physical "MOT" once a year to pick up the pieces.:D

[LFFC]

LFFC

good example, but one could twist it around and say 'Why let a pilot start a very expensive course until he has proven he can meet the required fitness standard?'....

If fitness is a pre-requisite then let it be just that - something that MUST be achieved before joining. Will the OFT be introduced at Cranditz/Halton? I do hope so. Even more, I hope that students of both schools will have to pass it before they can graduate, although I am not confident in that.

Exactly! And that's why it will take several years to implement. A knee-jerk OFT introduced overnight would only end in tears!

[LFFC]

Yes it will I agree, but we need a strategy change that must come from the very top. Let's make it part of the job, and not just rely on a physical "MOT" once a year to pick up the pieces.:D

I couldn't agree more. But let's have a joined up strategy that encompasses investment in secondary medical care as well.

[South Bound]

Agreed. Just still trying to work out how they are going to get the shorter people to grow so they can reach the box (was going to say 'girls' but I would just get accused of being sexist).

[Mr Blake]

Obviously jet-packs or the tried and tested "buddy-buddy" system.:bored:

[Chainkicker]

LFFC

good example, but one could twist it around and say 'Why let a pilot start a very expensive course until he has proven he can meet the required fitness standard?'....

If fitness is a pre-requisite then let it be just that - something that MUST be achieved before joining. Will the OFT be introduced at Cranditz/Halton? I do hope so. Even more, I hope that students of both schools will have to pass it before they can graduate, although I am not confident in that.

Hells teeth!! I did have an SAC working for me (briefly) who had never passed an AFT. How on earth people are permitted to pass out from basic training without passing it i just do not know :*

[South Bound]

I know - hugely frustrating when they (and we I suppose) are trying to get people to take fitness seriously when the kids are not required to pass the namby-pamby RAFFT at some pathetic pass mark.

[movadinkampa747]

What is going to happen to all those people who are permenantly unfit the Fitness test? I suppose they will all have to be medically discharged.

[Could be the last?]

Unfortunately, If they can't deploy..........

[movadinkampa747]

Unfortunately, If they can't deploy..........

Now thats very interesting because we have people who are fit enough to deploy but are permenantly unfit the present fitness test. So should theybe discharged because they are not fit enough to do the OFT? I feel some good dismissal cases coming on. What is your soulution to that?

[Pontius Navigator]

Now thats very interesting because we have people who are fit enough to deploy but are permenantly unfit the present fitness test. So should theybe discharged because they are not fit enough to do the OFT? I feel some good dismissal cases coming on. What is your soulution to that?

We cannot afford discharge as we are short of people.

We cannot afford discharge as they could claim disability etc. Painful I know but AFAIK they could possible claim unfair dismissal as their TOS could be deemed to have changed without their agreement.

This returns to the point above that you should be FIT when you finish Basic Training. If you need a higher standard of fitness in future training then you should show your ability to meet that requirement before you start even if you only reach it at the end of training. SAS selection is a case in point. Typhoon could be another.

Round the buoy once again - train properly in the first place and then provide facilities and time to maintain that fitness. A 2 or 3 year timescale is totally unrealistic for many of today's generation of airmen. More like 10-15 years.:uhoh:

[Tourist]

Give everybody 3 months to get fit, and fire everybody who fails on the spot.
And don't give me this "I haven't got the time in my day to get fit" rubbish. Try spending a little less time eating, and use the time to do phys lardy. Have some personal pride, and stop being a fecking embarassment to your uniform.
Everybody needs to be fit, and the only people with an excuse are those injured. Overweight is easy to fix with no extra time required.
Simple law of the Universe. Less calories going in than being burnt means lose weight.
Aint no obese Ethiopians.

[Could be the last?]

We are that small now, a case by case study or a change to the rules and regs would suffice. It's not difficult.

The trend with many of the replies is the need to address the fundamental issues which effect the deployment of personnel: Fitness, health and LMF. A pragmatic approach which covers all the bases, reduces the frequency and length of deployments would be the answer.

Remember, unless an individual is made non-productive he/she remains in a unit pic. Therefore, there will be no reduction in the commitment because your manned to establishment, trust me I've explored the situation.

Ultimately, the majority who get on with it can no longer afford to carry those who can't or won't deploy.

[Pontius Navigator]

Most can probably get fit enough in 3 months but not FIT if you see what I mean. Remember the remedial timescale for the new hard rules for the BFT is somewhere around 18-24 months.

The rules simply require attendance at remedial training and marks for effort. If someone fails to attend the retest or remedial training then the dismissal process starts and that can take months too, forget exactly how long, and resettlement and terminal leave remain an entitlement.

This means that someone who wants to avoid the sandpit and who does not mind an unfit, medical discharge, can still count on a couple of years pay cheques and pensions increments.

As far as TOS go this is one area where we are over a barrel,

well thats what I understand anyway.

[movadinkampa747]

We cannot afford discharge as we are short of people.
We cannot afford discharge as they could claim disability etc. Painful I know but AFAIK they could possible claim unfair dismissal as their TOS could be deemed to have changed without their agreement.
This returns to the point above that you should be FIT when you finish Basic Training. If you need a higher standard of fitness in future training then you should show your ability to meet that requirement before you start even if you only reach it at the end of training.

Sense prevails at last. We are not necessarily talking about obese people but people who are fit enough to deploy but are unfit the fitness test due to a previous injury. If you dismiss someone who is injured during the OFT then it opens up a whole world of litigation problems.

"A pragmatic approach which covers all the bases, reduces the frequency and length of deployments would be the answer."

You mean employ more people so it reduces the frequency of detachments to Afg and BAS? Great idea. I agree with Pontius all RAF personell should have to pass a fitness test to proceed from basic training. Until you start with this policy you will not be able to dismiss others who subsequently fail the OFT. Why are the people at the top stalling on the introduction of this test?

[Pontius Navigator]

Given the propensity for TLAs, how about having 5 fitness tests?

AFT - Acceptance
BFT - Basic
CFT - Combat
DFT - Deployable
EFT - Easy

Only those passing the DFT would be on the list for the good deployments, like Cyprus. The BFT failures could do a double tour in FI until fit.:}

[Maple 01]

Give everybody 3 months to get fit, and fire everybody who fails on the spot.

Nice one Tourist - how long does it take to train aircrew? How long for Techs? In the jockstrapper's world we bin all of those, regardless of expensive training and the fact that they are meeting deployment criteria for failing to meet up to some made-up mythical physical training 'standard' - and who pray tell will fix the aircraft and fly them? The new breed of 'supermen?' - might take a while to replace the fat wheezy boys!

Don't worry that your pilot or techy has bugger-all experience or knowledge and is thicker than mince, he can do the beep test up to level 15! - I'm feeling safer already

Now if you were going to bin people for coming up with badly thought-out half-arsed job creation schemes thinly disguised as fitness/operational training programs in a desperate attempt to get promoted I’d be right behind you

[movadinkampa747]

Aint no obese Ethiopians.

Now if you were going to bin people for coming up with badly thought-out half-arsed job creation schemes thinly disguised as fitness/operational training programs in a desperate attempt to get promoted I’d be right behind you
:eek: :eek: :eek: Naughty naughty Maple you just cant say things like that. As someone once said
cant think who though................:confused:
"Try spending a little less time eating, and use the time to do phys lardy. Have some personal pride, and stop being a fecking embarassment to your uniform.
Aint no obese Ethiopians? I cant quite see the connection between the RAF and some ethiopians. Maybe they are trialling the OFT for us.....
This woman is doing the 25kg box carry. She looks happy enough I guess but if she carries on like that she will damage her neck. She aint fat though.:ok:
http://212.227.92.102/img/5171/pd736543_s.jpg

[The Helpful Stacker]

....I agree with Pontius all RAF personell should have to pass a fitness test to proceed from basic training...

I'm sure this used to be policy.
:confused:

[Mr Blake]

The Police force do, but it's pitifully low. Surely BT is the time to enforce a fitness mentality in our juniors that they will hopefully take forward throughout the career. Educate them young and give them the time once they're fully indoctrinated into the Borg.:hmm: