PDA

View Full Version : "General Two Dinners" - CGS


The B Word
19th Sep 2010, 20:02
[QUOTE]
He cuts an imposing figure at 6ft 2in and nearly 20 stone.

But ­Britain's new Army chief – who ordered a tougher training regime for troops – has had to buy a bigger uniform because his old one is too tight.

General Sir Peter Wall, 55, who took over as Chief of the General Staff this week and is known as a 'big eater', was measured up for a new Service Dress uniform at a cost of £1,000, which he paid for himself.

A military source said: 'A tailor had to come into the office because the jacket and trousers on the old one were too small for him.

'The general is a very big, imposing man, but you would never tell him that.'

A keen rugby player in his youth, the burly ex-Paratrooper, nicknamed 'the Bear', is known to enjoy his food and likes a drink with dinner. His favourite tipples are whisky, wine and port
One colleague recalled last night how ten years ago, while visiting Scotland as commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, Sir Peter ordered a young major to get him two portions of fish and chips.

The major returned with only one portion. When the general asked where the second portion was, the hapless major admitted he had eaten it, believing he was being treated to a fish and chip supper by his boss.

But Sir Peter barked out: 'Go and get me the other portion. I'm hungry.'

In his previous role as Commander in Chief of Land Forces, General Wall ordered a review of physical training of troops to prepare them for combat in Afghanistan.


The popular £165,000-a-year ­general is regarded as one of the military's best brains and served as the head of operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. All officers and soldiers are ­supposed to pass an annual battle fitness test but Sir Peter has not had one for ten years.


He has never been turned away from action. When he was pictured at an Airborne Forces parade in Colchester, Essex, in July, his uniform certainly appeared close fitting.


An Army source said: 'Sir Peter used to be super-fit when he played rugby, but his job now is as a commander and strategist rather than serving in a more active operational role. 'His size certainly has no effect on his abilities to carry out his duties.'


An Army spokeswoman said: 'The Army takes fitness very seriously. It is vital to ensure our soldiers have the strength and stamina to cope with physical challenges of operations as tough as any we have had to cope with in several decades.'


Read more: General Two Dinners forks out £1,000 for XXL uniform... Embarrassment for 20-stone Army chief who ordered tough new fitness tests for troops | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313246/General-Two-Dinners-forks-1-000-XXL-uniform--Embarrassment-20-stone-Army-chief-ordered-tough-new-fitness-tests-troops.html#ixzz100WYY47O)

Read more: General Two Dinners forks out £1,000 for XXL uniform... Embarrassment for 20-stone Army chief who ordered tough new fitness tests for troops | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313246/General-Two-Dinners-forks-1-000-XXL-uniform--Embarrassment-20-stone-Army-chief-ordered-tough-new-fitness-tests-troops.html#ixzz100VyEHWq[/QUOTE)]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/18/article-0-0B36DD28000005DC-568_233x568.jpg

I guess this opens the door to all the people that have been dismissed for not doing their fitness tests then? :ugh:

The B Word

Finningley Boy
19th Sep 2010, 20:22
Mind you, its his big brain not his anaconda like intestines that he's been elected CGS for.:ok:

FB

sitigeltfel
19th Sep 2010, 20:25
I notice the photo is attributed to a Corporal Rupert Frere. I bet he gets some stick over that!

Runaway Gun
19th Sep 2010, 20:25
Maybe the General has a valid medical reason. The article did not go into depth.

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 20:33
The guy looks like he's in his late 50's, and is a former para. Who gives a rats ass, if he is good at his job.

Sir Jock Stirrup is built like a twiglet, but has repeatedly been found wanting as CDS.

Make up your minds what you want.

Seldomfitforpurpose
19th Sep 2010, 20:43
So he's over weight but it's OK because he's good at his job, I would suggest that excuse is not playing very well for a few folk across the 3 services at the mo :=

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 20:52
I would suggest that most of the people 'that's not playing well for' at the moment are in their early 20's and unlikely to have achieved the level of fitness required to join the airborne forces. When they have, and they are in their late 50's, maybe they can take issue with the gentleman then.

Let's not have another bleep test p1ssing match, although it has been a month or so since the last one.

The B Word
19th Sep 2010, 21:06
MGD

He's 55yrs old and he hasn't done a fitness test in 10 years - does that mean that everyone over 45yrs old need not bother? What about Staff Officers? We can't have one rule for one and one for another can we?

Runaway Gun

"Maybe the General has a valid medical reason". What about these people? Supposedly, they're being asked to leave because they're injured...

Veterans criticise leaked 'plan' to rid Army of injured soldiers (From Herald Series) (http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/8382849.Veterans_criticise_leaked__plan__to_rid_Army_of_inju red_soldiers/)

I know it's all a bit "Devil's Advocate", but I think this stinks! He should get his 3 warnings like everyone else, if he fails the 3rd then "out!". It might open up the promotion quotas again then!?

The B Word

VinRouge
19th Sep 2010, 21:11
To be honest, I would prefer not to have another valuable senior officer phys obsessed to the extent that he drops down dead, with all the disruption to command that must cause.

But then again, thats not the message seniority are pushing out is it?

Perhaps a more pragmatic approach wrt to the fitness test would be better?

You know, like we had before the phys wallahs got all "administrative action" wrt to the fitness test, a system that didnt stop us winning the battle of Britain, the Falklands, the first gulf war and all the other minor ops the RAF was involved in?

You are either fit to do your job, or you are not. Its as simple as that really, isnt it. You arent fit, you get 1021'd, lose your pay until you are fit or choose to leave. Its that simple.

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 21:13
Wonder how many of 'the few' had to can flying for the morning to get down the gym and run 20m shuttles before their boss lost all ability to run a Sqn due to all the paperwork from the mat stackers.

VinRouge
19th Sep 2010, 21:18
Really, thats the way it should work. Sengo to chief - chief, you need to get down the gym and cut back on the pies. you have till your next ojar to get this sorted.

Ie, management, Vs the complete and utter job justifying bollox we currently have, generated by, guess what, 2 trades that could very easily be contractorised in SDSR, admin and PEd.

The B Word
19th Sep 2010, 21:19
Vin Rouge

I agree with you. Maybe the new CGS will attack the new muscle-mechanic built empire with a dose of common sense? Somehow, though I suspect not, that is, until someone sues the Services for more money that we do not have. :(

The B Word

The B Word
19th Sep 2010, 21:33
Here is his US cousin...
http://www.thelmagazine.com/images/blogimages/2010/04/21/1271861004-fat_soldier.jpg

:E:E:E

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 22:02
What a stupid statement to make......


Not at all; it's entirely logical and reasoned.

I have been doing the fitness test since it was introduced in 1993. That's quite a few. Of those Ive watched wait behind as I left, most seemed to be in their 20's.

Your experience may be different, but I assure you from discussions in the crewroom, many seem to have shared my experience of watching a fairish percentage of 20 somethings fail.

Of those, many are unlikely to have passed Sandhurst, pre-para and P Coy as the CDS will have done in his youth.

So which bit of the statement is stupid?

VinRouge
19th Sep 2010, 22:12
The bit that assumes said youth would ever consider applying for sandhurst, p cy etc and instead settle in a service that uses brains rather than brawn. Using someone past track record to justify later Ills is like saying shipman is still a good doctor because he passed med school. And that's not how the regs currently read.

VinRouge
19th Sep 2010, 22:22
Or one of those ct's that can run amarathon but are **** at their job.

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 22:26
Hmmm, no actually I disagree with your Shipman analogy.

That would suggest that the CDS was mad, or his judgement was in question. Neither of these seem to be the case, he is just a little portly.

Torpy was always very keen with regards to the RAFFT, but was probably the poorest CAS in a generation. Are we saying that Torpy was a good leader because he was up to date RAFFT?

I am not disagreeing with you, just merely pointing out that there is more to running a branch of the armed forces than just the ability to trot up and down a gym, especially when you reach CGS and are of advancing years.

The Chief Tech analogy works no better. One would hope that the General was unlikely to be supervising an engine change in the desert.

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 22:29
I bet you are one of these old Chief Techs built like a whippet and is good at running


I'd think of a witty comeback but Im too busy laughing. You are very wide of the mark me old.

minigundiplomat
19th Sep 2010, 22:59
Whatever................

Clockwork Mouse
19th Sep 2010, 23:06
What a load of ill-informed garbage. The man is over 55 years of age. The Army annual fitness tests are not compulsary for anyone over 50. He is a brave and decorated para who was super fit and tough as nails when it was required. The prats who condemn him for lack of leadership should grow up. They would probably not recognise leadership if it bit them on the arse.

Lima Juliet
19th Sep 2010, 23:50
The RAF fitness test is compulsary over 50 and if you continue to serve over 55 years of age - so why the Delta between the Army and RAF regulations?

LJ

Clockwork Mouse
19th Sep 2010, 23:56
Practical common sense?

the_boy_syrup
20th Sep 2010, 05:22
The RAF fitness test is compulsary over 50 and if you continue to serve over 55 years of age - so why the Delta between the Army and RAF regulations?


The RAF has more other ranks serving to 60 than the Army?
I assume only officers in the Army can serve past 40?

KKoran
20th Sep 2010, 05:34
Maybe the General has a valid medical reason. The article did not go into depth.
I bet the medical reason for his condition is that he eats too much and exercises too little.

Seldomfitforpurpose
20th Sep 2010, 05:41
I bet the medical reason for his condition is that he eats too much and exercises too little.

You are probably right but thankfully because he is quite a clever chap failing to take his annual fitness test from the age of 45/46 appears to have done him no harm at all, apart from the clinical obesity of course :=

Runaway Gun
20th Sep 2010, 05:55
I'm suggesting that a medical condition might not allow him to run to the levels required, and he may have a exemption. For example, a knee problem. As typical on here, the guy is being pre-judged when we don't know all of the facts.

thunderbird7
20th Sep 2010, 06:23
Its just his glands...

Whenurhappy
20th Sep 2010, 06:45
Most of the posters here are talking through their, well, let's no go there!

I have seen Sir Glen 'in action' on the 5th floor defending air power (for that it what it is about) and I was mightily impressed. I have seen Sir Jock weighed down by all of Defence's problems (most notably when that errant ANP killed 5 UK personnel) and looking like death. But both of them took time to rejuvenate in the fitness centre/cellar or out in the park, ready to fight another day. Walking through the General Staff before 1000 is akin to walking through a locker room - most guys in phys gear and towels hanging over the 1.6m linear space partitions. The Air Staff just arrive late, claiming to have been, err, in the gym!

However, we cannot compare Sir Peter with some overweight crab who spent the better part of 20 years shuttling between porky postings in Germany and dull as f#ck jobs in Swaffam Mortuary or Abbey Wood or wherever lazy fatties are sent these days. Sir Richard Dannett was no racing snake, either...but there are few (at least in the Army) who did not think the world of him.

Al R
20th Sep 2010, 06:51
The ice cap melts, Sangin gets handed over to the Americans and Continental Drift creeps ever onwards. But its good to see some things don't change on Prune.

Polarised (Racing snakes but crap coal face workers Vs the Slobs but gusty, hardy grafters) knock for knock blows aside, and whatever the General is allowed to do and whatever he is like at his job, what about what he should do as an example to the troops?

A positive attitude towards personal fitness reflects an attitude towards the job and there is little point in the Nation being reminded of the 'Covenant' and being asked to go the extra mile for the troops, if he can't even be arsed to go the extra mile on the running machine.

cornish-stormrider
20th Sep 2010, 10:36
Oh god, (sorry Lord) here it comes again - the fitness std is a minimum. I failed it once - the shame of it. Had to execute an emergency less pizza and beer regieme combined with upping the evils of running and cycling.

A bit later - one retest satis and end of sarky comments from crewroom.

I swore never again, and kept it up till I PVR'd.

You need a certain amount of fitness - while I vehemently disagree about it it is the one you do - man up and do the bloody thing.

it's not that hard and if you are so arrogant that no-one else can do your job you are about to eat some humble pie.


A bit of phys never hurt anyone - too much running hurts me, so I cycle and swim instead.

fly safe, fix safe and don't let the bull**** admin grind you down.

CS

Daf Hucker
20th Sep 2010, 10:45
A bit of phys never hurt anyone

Actually it quite frequently does - lots of people get hurt in the gym and on the very odd occasion die. Can't remember the last time I heard of a guy dropping dead at his desk though :}

airborne_artist
20th Sep 2010, 11:08
I take it none of the knockers has served/worked with 9 Sqn RE, his first posting, and his first command? They are some of the fiercest, most capable guys you will ever meet, who would give any infantry soldier a nasty shock, and then get on with their combat engineering task. No surprise that many find their way to Hereford.

Q-RTF-X
20th Sep 2010, 12:05
It is with some distress I note the ramblings of a bunch of brain dead loonies with little better to do than rant about the appointment of a slightly portly gentleman who, in his later years is about to step into a highly critical and demanding position. That the individual has had a distinguished career to date, acquitted himself well so far, has by all accounts an above average brain and is highly regarded by those who have served with him seems to be of no account. There are far too many people venting their spleens who need to get a life. We need leaders with a proven track record, let’s cut the BS and get on with some good management

andyy
20th Sep 2010, 13:23
There is no doubt that good leadership should extend to setting an example on the Phys front but I have worked for Gen Wall & he is outstanding. On the other hand I have worked for plenty of people who could probably run 4 min miles who were to55ers.

Being able to run is not the defining capability.

gijoe
20th Sep 2010, 14:05
The usual Pprune shi*e spouts forth...Like Andyy, I have worked with General in question - he is a top bloke, came through the rather hard route to where he is and is a mountain-bear of a man. There is no hiding with him.

As said above, 9(Para)Sqn RE was never an easy walk to P Coy - people were broken before even getting to Depot Para - he passed. I winced at the state of some of the Sappers on my visit to Depot Para for the extra sessions of PT with boots on.

So...give it a rest about 'Wrong example, one rule for one etc' He is a General, there to do General stuff, to lead (and he can, very well).

Maybe the RAF could do with some like him?

:ok:

BEagle
20th Sep 2010, 14:14
Maybe the RAF could do with some like him?

Undoubtedly - but they'd never rise to General as they probably wouldn't fit in a Harrier cockpit....:rolleyes:

The Helpful Stacker
20th Sep 2010, 15:12
Undoubtedly - but they'd never rise to General as they probably wouldn't fit in a Harrier cockpit..

Which is almost a comment I could see our green breathen making were this an appointment of a slightly rotund RAF senior officer.

"How the hell does/did he fit into an ejector seat" etc, etc.

Of course should those nasty crabs make observations about one of their own it all turns into "well he's being employed for whats in his head" etc.

"Standards, standards, get your double standards here, get them while they're 'ot, lovely..."

:rolleyes:

And yes, having worked with 9 Sqn RE I know just what a double hard b****** lot they are and some cracking lads to boot, but does serving on a very physical task early in your life mean you get away with twisted sock chit for latter in life and an "its alright, he knows a lot"?

airborne_artist
20th Sep 2010, 15:20
but does serving on a very physical task early in your life mean you get away with twisted sock chit for latter in life and an "its alright, he knows a lot"?

If that was all he's done, perhaps, but his CV has rather more to it, not surprisingly after such a promising start.

PARALLEL TRACK
20th Sep 2010, 15:24
Grow up the lot of you! Let him do his job irrespective of the size of his uniform. Just like CAS is doing, oh no maybe not!

reallydeskbound
20th Sep 2010, 15:55
Having served on operations with the General those who are casting aspertions on his fitness to carryout the task required of him have no measure of the man.

Peter Wall is one of the most impressive officers I met during my RAF Service. A true warrior he has held some of the most demanding operational command appointments in recent years. He is an asset to the Army as CGS, not only as great leader, but tireless in his support of his troops (whatever uniform they are wearing). We also have officers of this stature and if they have similar qualities they will rise to a similar level..

Peter may be overweight from his RE Para days but I would hesitate to mention it to him - I am a devout coward and hate the sight of my own blood

Airborne Aircrew
20th Sep 2010, 16:12
The thing that impressed me the most in the whole story was the fact that he paid for the new suit himself. :D

advocatusDIABOLI
20th Sep 2010, 17:01
Just my 2 pence worth:

1. Fitness is important.
2. Self Motivation is important.
3. Fitness is an indicator of Self Motivation.
4. Inteligence is important.
5. Effective Avoidance of Sh*te, Admin Triv', is an example of inteligence.
6. The Motivation, to consistently and effectively avoid Sh*te admin Triv', displays 2 and 4.
7. Sh*te Admin 'Triv-ites' display typically neither 2 or 4 but might be able to run up and down a gym.
8. Treat people as Monkeys- They act like Monkeys.
9. Treat people as Adults, they 'usually' act like adults.
10. See 1.
(11. Treat the whole Armed forces as a Super Cost Cutting Exercise, while we are in or about to be in a whole bunch of pooh, and see 1-9)


Advo

BEagle
20th Sep 2010, 17:12
Inteligence is important.
:oh:

General Wall is indeed an imposing figure. Just as Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf was in GW1. No-one told him he was perhaps a bit on the chubby side. Well, if they did then they probably didn't do so twice....

My Harrier comment was a snipe at the RAF's fast jet-centricity, not at the General's avoirdupois!

Gen Wall sounds like the sort of leader who is revered by all ranks - a rare attribute indeed these days, it seems.

VinRouge
20th Sep 2010, 17:12
bravo av!

and if those rules apply to the ivory towers, they apply to podgy lineys imho!

4everAD
20th Sep 2010, 17:44
It is with some distress I note the ramblings of a bunch of brain dead loonies with little better to do than rant about the appointment of a slightly portly gentleman who, in his later years is about to step into a highly critical and demanding position. That the individual has had a distinguished career to date, acquitted himself well so far, has by all accounts an above average brain and is highly regarded by those who have served with him seems to be of no account. There are far too many people venting their spleens who need to get a life. We need leaders with a proven track record, let’s cut the BS and get on with some good management

Just like an individual I have worked with, he has all of the qualities you have described but because he's only a Cpl he is getting the boot for failing his fitness test a test this General hasn't taken for 10 years. Now I know you'll come back with it's his own fault etc and to be fair maybe it is but he hasn't/can't hide behind his rank and use the qualities you mention as an excuse.

BEagle
20th Sep 2010, 17:58
A 55-year old corporal? I thought that the only one of those was a certain Cpl A. Hitler....:\

Although the phrase 'Fit for purpose' would seem perhaps relevant?

Neptunus Rex
20th Sep 2010, 18:05
As I recall, in the winter months when colds and 'flu were rife, it was the 'Jock Strappers' who spent most time off sick, not the more portly amongst us.

endplay
20th Sep 2010, 19:19
Nep Rex, I have to agree with you. I was averagely fit in my time in the mob (wimps with the occasional beasties in FI and never failed a fitness test) but I worked with some incredibly fit guys and, to a man, they struggled on any Exercise of more than 3-4 days (Whirlygig et al) when they couldn't do their 10m daily run. Something to do with endorphins I believe. No thoroughbreds please just fit plodders for me.

Torque Tonight
20th Sep 2010, 19:49
Stop press. Hold the front page:

Man buys some clothes with his own money!

It's not exactly earth-shattering is it. Typical gutter-rag space filling crap. What is the point of this article?

hello1
20th Sep 2010, 20:09
Peter Wall is an exceptional officer and leader. I doubt whether you will find much disagreement amongst people who have worked for him.

He absolutely wipes the floor with our current crop of senior officers. End of story.

Seldomfitforpurpose
20th Sep 2010, 20:11
Stop press. Hold the front page:

Man buys some clothes with his own money!

It's not exactly earth-shattering is it. Typical gutter-rag space filling crap. What is the point of this article?

I think the article is trying to highlight the disparity between the serial deep fried cod muncher keeping his job whilst plenty of others of a similar disposition are losing theirs :(

Pontius Navigator
20th Sep 2010, 21:40
Codswallop.

Anyway, all officers have to buy their own replacement uniforms. What they didn't mention in the article is that he would also get £400 tax relief on his purchase.

cornish-stormrider
20th Sep 2010, 22:12
Gents do you not think there is a bit of a difference between a racing snake jockstrapper who always has time off for sport but comes down with sports related injurys when the going gets tough etc etc and yon fat liney who can fix umpty billion jets in minus 300C but carries some freight?

There is a bit of middle ground - the average guy who does the average phys and keeps it together..

Just bloody do it - exercise makes you fell good.

parabellum
21st Sep 2010, 00:34
As an ex Sapper myself I can vouch for the fact that anyone volunteering for Para first had to pass the 9 Sqn pre-para, which was daunting.

Not just anyone got to command 9 Sqn, it could be a career breaker. The Sapper para sqn would lead the entire Airborne Brigade into battle, no room for any kind of screw ups, only the very best leaders will do.

The kind of determination and qualities of endurance that it takes to get through para training would probably get an overweight fifty five year old through the annual test and leave some people half his age looking a bit sick.

Dan Winterland
21st Sep 2010, 02:22
I think his parachuting days are over though.

Like This - Do That
21st Sep 2010, 02:37
A 55-year old corporal?

Beags, for what it's worth, one of my CPLs is in his fifties, passes his BFA every time, and in fact did his basic para course - barrier test and all - aged 52.

They don't all end up invading Poland .... :}

kweelo
21st Sep 2010, 03:17
One rule for one, one rule for another - no one that I can see if disagreeing about his man's abilities ( they are truly amazing!). However, you cannot have from the top - in this and age say: "do as I say, not as I do!"

Surely, regardless of rank, or service if you don't cut the mark, you face the consequences! How can this man, look his troops in the eyes and say; yes your getting kicked out because you can't pass the fitness test, but it's Ok I'm different, I'm better, I don't have to pass it!!

finestkind
21st Sep 2010, 06:13
Verrry interesting.

Shouldn't the debate be more on the recognition of the medical standards?
Shouldn't a 55 y.o General be able to do what 55 yo Generals do, or for interest how many 35 yo Generals are there. Shouldn't a CPL be able to do what CPL need to do irrelevant of age ?

Isn't this along the lines of requirements for the job. If I want to keep flying I have to pass the required fitness test, irrelevant of age. Mind you there is a different standard for us youngsters.

When was the last time a General led the lads over the top?

NUFC1892
21st Sep 2010, 07:49
Having met and spent some time with the guy I will lay odds on that there are pictures in "Soldier" magazine of him completing his BFT within the next couple of months.

Clockwork Mouse
21st Sep 2010, 09:06
I say again, in the Army there are no fitness tests for the over 50s. I remember with pleasure completing my own last one successfully may moons ago and breathing a sigh of relief.
The General is not saying one thing and doing another. Why can't you crabs get it? Lack of physical fitness at his age is not something you can accuse this man of. I bet he could still run most of you off your feet.

Seldomfitforpurpose
21st Sep 2010, 09:26
I say again, in the Army there are no fitness tests for the over 50s.

If he is 55 and the article is to be believed he has not done an annual fitness test for 10 years that means from age 45 he was some how "exempt"

Why can't you crabs get it?

Not quite sure what you line of defence is here CM :confused:

Clockwork Mouse
21st Sep 2010, 09:32
"If the article is to be believed" says it all. You are publicly criticising the moral integrity of an outstanding military leader with a service record that is second to none on the spurious reporting of the Daily Mail. Says a lot for your own integrity.

Seldomfitforpurpose
21st Sep 2010, 09:44
"If the article is to be believed" says it all. You are publicly criticising the moral integrity of an outstanding military leader with a service record that is second to none on the spurious reporting of the Daily Mail. Says a lot for your own integrity.

And if it's not spurious your defense is :confused:

Neptunus Rex
21st Sep 2010, 16:23
The General would seem to be a breath of fresh air in the upper echelons of Whitehall. What about the other multi-starred officers? When did they do their last fitness test?

I think we should be told!

Two's in
21st Sep 2010, 17:04
And if it's not spurious your defense is

How to tell if a Daily Mail story is spurious:

1. It's in the Daily Mail.
2. Er, that's it....

PS. A better question is what journo Christopher Leake and editor Paul Dacre have to gain by printing this "article", other than yet another Daily Mail tin foil hat wearing scoop.

VinRouge
21st Sep 2010, 17:07
Whilst I completely agree with the comments that this officer shouldnt be graded wrt to the fitness test, to the same vein, I cannot agree with turfing out highly experienced, highly trained personnel who quite simply do not require the fitness strandard required to do their day to day job in and out of an operatioinal theatre.

If it was a porky para I was talking about, someone who relies on their fitness to operate, it would be a different matter. But to sack someone who is quite literally the best at their trade on a Sqn because they cant satisfy a bunch of premadonna mirror lovers is a bit dumb.

Neptunus Rex
21st Sep 2010, 17:20
prima donna mirror loversPriceless! That really sums them up.

Seldomfitforpurpose
21st Sep 2010, 19:13
How to tell if a Daily Mail story is spurious:

1. It's in the Daily Mail.
2. Er, that's it....

PS. A better question is what journo Christopher Leake and editor Paul Dacre have to gain by printing this "article", other than yet another Daily Mail tin foil hat wearing scoop.

Ah of course should of spotted that, well I look forward with bated breath for the forthcoming libel case :rolleyes:

Pontius Navigator
21st Sep 2010, 20:26
I cannot agree with turfing out highly experienced, highly trained personnel who quite simply do not require the fitness strandard required to do their day to day job in and out of an operational theatre.

This is a difficult problem. While it is true as said earlier that no one is indispensible there are jobs where an individual may be peculiarly suited, a computer programmer spings to mind, or posses such skills that their dismissal would reduce a capability for a significant period.

However while they may be highly effective in their current jobs they may not be postable to other jobs and hence block the normal movement of posts. This could mean that the brown end of the stick is held by some people more than it should be.

Failure of the fitness test should lead to a reduced MES and a reduction in X-factor similar to the abatement in different FTRS commitment contracts.

minigundiplomat
21st Sep 2010, 22:15
There has been thread after thread on here for the last couple of years condemning our military leaders for lack of vision, lack of leadership etc etc etc.

Along comes someone who seems to know what he's doing, and is universally respected by all those who have worked with/for him and guess what..........

.........................he's villified and pilloried for not having done a fitness test recently, even though there is no fitness test for Army personnel of his vintage.

Make up your minds, or better still, fire up the outrage bus for the bi-weekly fatties v gym queens away fixture.

Q-RTF-X
22nd Sep 2010, 02:51
Well put minigundiplomat (http://www.pprune.org/members/206521-minigundiplomat) :D:D:D:D:D

FFP
22nd Sep 2010, 03:09
The X-Factor also considers some of the advantages of being in the Army, such as travel, adventure, the chance to learn a trade, variety, leave and job security

And of course the opportunity to visit far off places, meet the local population and then kill them (Taken from a bumper sticker I might add !)

If I can't take my leave or do AT, worry that I might not have a job after SDSR and do the same job day in, can I get an X factor increase ?!?! ;)

X factor for the deployers I say. All in favour ?

Oh, and to stay on topic, he doesn't need a fitness test to do his job. Actually, I'm not sure any of us do. The PT test came in during my time in the RAF and I seem to remember that it (i.e the RAF) did it's job ok before that.......

(And I passed mine last month. So no chip here.....:E)

Jig Peter
22nd Sep 2010, 15:16
Back in the late '50S there was also a sudden urge from the Airships' Hangar involving compulsory Physical Training, specially for aircrew. 'Twas said that the then captain of the RAF Rugby team had been approached to support the campaign, but that he answered "I keep fit to play rugby, and not the other way round".
Also, at about the same time a USAF study was circulated which had "found" that the best training for aircrew (specially LR bomber and transport types) was standing round for hours listening to other guys' lines in a room full of smoke and with beer on tap.
The campaign seemed to wilt rather a lot after that.
Meanwhile, I wish you people now subjected to this recurrent "body thingy" all the best - "they" don't seem to realise that people old enough to be in the Service have left Prep school ... (even those who never went to one); the "eyes of steel and jaw of granite" image still seems to be much loved in the Airships' hangar ...:D:D:D

Shack37
22nd Sep 2010, 15:53
the "eyes of steel and jaw of granite" image still seems to be much loved in the Airships' hangar ...:D:D:D


Not to mention the "knob of butter"

Do RAF stations no longer have football and rugby teams etc who play in their local league? In the early sixties at St. Mawgan we had two football teams playing in different divisions of the local league. This was just after we had lost some National Service guys who were professionals....... and how the local teams enjoyed some revenge. Ah, the joys of a match against a Cornwall Constabulary team of six foot twelves for a five foot two left winger.

Jayand
22nd Sep 2010, 17:18
"premadonna mirror lovers"
We are meant to be in a fighting, military service are we not? whilst I understand not everyone loves phys as much me, surely we all have an obligation to maintain a minimum fitness standard, regardless of any testing levels (which in my opinion are too low!)
The state that some service men and women are in is disgusting and as a Senior officer in charge of fitness standards he should be setting an exemplary standard himself, irrespective of his age.

You wouldn't want Dr Shipman as head of aviation medicine so why should we accept this fatty!

rmac
22nd Sep 2010, 17:27
Oh **** off Jayand......whats your problem man...

I have no idea what shape you are in, but even if it is then best shape ever, I think that I will have to put my money on the general if you had a bit of hand to hand with bayonets together.

Start by defining fit to fight ? lot of definitions depending on your job, but I am sure that if you were to surprise the good general at his map table, or steal his place in the cookhouse queue, he would be delighted to give you a good kicking.......Definately fit to fight in that scenario :E

As far as I can see he has done nothing more, all of his career, but set standards for fitness, when his age related role demanded it. And as for your Shipman comment, are you suggesting that if your aviation medic is a bit porky, that he's more likely to mickey finn you with some dangerous drugs ? :ugh::ugh:

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Sep 2010, 18:58
mac,

Top quality bolleaux, well done Sir :D

If jayand is half as fit as he states then lets change the contest to both of them in trainers and running kit with jayand holding that very tempting second portion of cod and chips, who is your money on now :p

A few folk on here need to take a step and look at what the original poster was drawing attention to.

The General has not done a fitness test in 10 years yet gets to keep his £160k a year job whilst others on a fraction of that are losing theirs.

There is no hidden agenda, there is no questioning of anyones capability or integrity, not even the usual light blue/dark blue/green thing.

It's simply a question of whether folk think it fair that some will lose their livelihoods because they cannot trog up and down a gym whilst others simply declare themselves exempt.

The question that should be being asked is just how many other senior officers are adopting the same stance whilst their subordinates are losing their jobs :=

hello1
22nd Sep 2010, 20:38
why should we accept this fatty

Jay-prat,

You claim to be 37 years old and from the real world but your little post suggests otherwise. Unless you are a member of the British Army then you don't need to accept Peter Wall. If you are a member of the British Army then crack on down to Whitehall and tell him to his face.....or is your claimed prowess in the gym not matched by the size of your balls?

As for Harold Shipman, wtf has that got to do with anything.

Jayand
22nd Sep 2010, 20:39
The point it's all about is credibility, if you are the man deciding the limits/levels of fitness testing it's not unreasonable for your subordinates to expect you to be in decent shape.
As many good leaders like to say "I wouldn't expect you to do anything I wouldn't do myself"
Everybody in the Services is expected to be of a certain standard of fitness, nobody no matter what age/rank should be exempt.
This ain't fecking Butlins!

cornish-stormrider
22nd Sep 2010, 21:15
And that sadly is that - no leader should enforce rules on their subordinates that they don't do - so find me a fat useless grunt squaddie to deal with.

in the mean time Crab Air plays in light blue, Torpy the (insert adjective of choice here) did his. I'm sure his replacement is current.

it might be a gang ****, it might be pointless and achieve bugger all, its the rules...... BEEP BO BEEP.

You remember the rules don't you? Stop bitching about it and either do it or tactically evade it....

Biggus
22nd Sep 2010, 21:25
There are more questions than answers, and what this article/thread raises are further questions......

Why has he not completed a fitness test (BFT?) in the last 10 years (45-50) when he should have completed one up until the age of 50? A medical reason is one possibility.

If the Army stop fitness tests at 50, why do the RAF (and RN?) continue testing until 55? Perhaps because the RAF has a higher percentage of 50+ year olds?

No one appears to be doubting the generals ability, indeed everyone seems to praise it. However, as has already been stated, one of the basic principles of sound leadership is setting a good example.

It would appear, and I stress the word appear, that on the few (insufficient?) facts available the general is not setting a good example.

As has also been pointed out, this is in an area where the RAF is dismissing people for failing to meet an apparently arbitary level of fitness, so making the apparent double standard in this case seem even more outrageous.

For everyone saying he is good at his job, and doesn't need to be uberfit to be a general, someone else will say that he knows a mate who is good at their job, and doesn't need to be uberfit to do it, that is about to be thrown out of the RAF for failing a fitness test that the general has apparently avoided.

That is the heart of the problem.....

Lima Juliet
22nd Sep 2010, 21:59
Here's a sad fact about physical exercise in the RAF. This year at HQ Air Command we have lost a 4* Air Chief Marshal and in the past week a Senior Aircraftsman that died whilst doing phys - how's that for a tragic Rank range? I think the mirror loving muscle mechanics have a lot to answer for - they're kiling more of our people than Terry Taliban!

(alright the last comment was a bit tongue in cheek but there is a strong message in there).

This must be a trigger to revisit the PTI madness and go back to a more realistic system. Surely the annual visit to the SMO declares your fitness? After all the CAA don't make me run around for 10 minutes, they get a medical professional to assess and declare my fitness to fly (as they do for all fixed wing and rotary aircraft).

LJ

Hedgeporker
22nd Sep 2010, 23:48
A fitness test is mandatory for promotion.

Somehow I do not find myself all that ready to take the word of a Daily Wail journo (with his numerous un-named 'sources') over the evident fact that the General has been promoted to CGS.

finestkind
23rd Sep 2010, 01:13
Ohh really lets put credibility with logic and reason shall we and just say that you should be fit for your role. No doubt Genghis Khan was a fit %&^$er but he lead from the front and was probably a decade or two younger. Different times. If you have to go out and walk 20klm in full kit then you had better be fit enough to do it. If you have to go out hack rack and zoom then you had better be fit enough to do it.

rmac
23rd Sep 2010, 01:30
Exactly finest kind, I agree entirely. :D

The General is operating within the rules, set by someone else and not him, and is probably "fit to fight " in his current role (though unfortunately unlikely to catch up Jayand and recover his second fish and chips, Seldom ;))

Seems that the modern disease of style over substance is involved in this somewhere, Airships feeling ego damage when someone compares muscly pongo's to wobbly linies. The only way that I could see fat affecting your performance to fix a jet, would be if it stopped you getting at what you needed to fix.

Just imagine what the headlines would be though if the good General took it on himself to redress the obvious flaws in the system.....he can't win either way

Jayand
23rd Sep 2010, 15:23
Spot on Deliverance,
Nobody would take seriously a SWO if he was a sack of **** with long sideburns and scuffed shoes would they? so what's the difference?
Some people need to change their mindset about fitness in the armed forces, many are only too happy to boast of their secondary duties as the chair of the some obscure station club or as a helper at the Village scout troop and love to mention them in their ACR comments.
Many get promoted on the back of these "duties" whilst at the same time moaning about having to do what is part of every serviceman and womans Primary duty (keeping fit)
Unless my memory serves me wrong fitness isn't a newly introduced concept in the forces so it shouldn't come as a shock that perhaps you should keep it up throughout your career and not just during training!
The argument about "being fit for your job" holds no water, yes the infantry need to be fitter than the adjutant corps but they all need a reasonable minimum standard, if you can't meet that standard then the rules should apply equally irrespective of age/rank/service/trade or talent.
It's not just a once a year inconvienience it's part of our job and always has been.

VinRouge
23rd Sep 2010, 18:08
Some people need to spend more time doing their primary job instead of worrying about the rest of us. I would prefer to serve under a well respected but slightly portly general that gets the job done than some racing snake tw@ that chiselled his way to the top.

If you want to be surrounded by like minded mirror lovers, leave the forces and join fitness first.

minigundiplomat
23rd Sep 2010, 18:14
Really getting boring now gents. Some of you seriously need to get another life and move away from this thread now.


Agreed. Just one final point.....

whilst at the same time moaning about having to do what is part of every serviceman and womans Primary duty (keeping fit)

If you are in the RAF Jayand, your primary duty is the same as everyone elses - that is, putting aircraft in the sky.

Keeping fit is an enabler for that, as you point out, but it is not the primary aim. CCS, trade knowledge, ability, integrity, ability to lead & motivate, work within a team etc are all as crucial as personal fitness.

Yes, fitness is important but it is one singular skill amongst many that are needed. I'd rather have a fat, but knowledgable engineer fixing my aircraft than a fit but useless one. In the same vein, I'd rather have a fit rockape with half a gcse in woodwork guarding me than a lardy one with a PHD.


Can we argue about something else now?

Jayand
23rd Sep 2010, 18:28
Absolutely, but if you are going to pick me up on my posts then please read them properly, "having to do what is part of every serviceman and womans Primary duty (keeping fit)" I simply said part of your primary duty.
Moving on.
To the gym!!!!

Neptunus Rex
23rd Sep 2010, 18:28
MGD

I think you have, very succinctly, said it all.

Endat!

barnstormer1968
23rd Sep 2010, 20:04
MGD

I think you have, very succinctly, said it all.

Endat!

I couldn't agree more. The RAF as a whole, don't feel the need to be fit enough to protect themselves when the s**t hits the fan (judging by this thread), and bearing in mind that is when they would be most needed, they are happy to be unfit for purpose, so may as well give up right now!

Just as a fat lardy rock is useless, a whole gang of fat lardies helping him guard the station will very quickly be overrun!

Sorry to live in the real world, but if there was a 'real' full on conflict, there would be plenty of hairy arsed baddies swarming over the fence to get you (in the UK), and it would look a bit like a lardy turkey shoot!

Of course, once all the nice fit rocks are dead, you could all shout "don't shoot me, I only need to be able to generate aircraft, I don't need to be fit enough to defend myself":E

Pretty sad last words really.

(retreats to safety, and understands that those who wished to be fit to fight, and be part of a deadly military force, would have joined another service:})

Shack37
23rd Sep 2010, 22:14
Just as a fat lardy rock is useless, a whole gang of fat lardies helping him guard the station will very quickly be overrun!

Sorry to live in the real world, but if there was a 'real' full on conflict, there would be plenty of hairy arsed baddies swarming over the fence to get you (in the UK), and it would look a bit like a lardy turkey shoot!

Of course, once all the nice fit rocks are dead, you could all shout "don't shoot me, I only need to be able to generate aircraft, I don't need to be fit enough to defend myself"http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

Pretty sad last words really.

OK, lets disband the rocks, army and marines and give the engineers regular intensive infantry courses. Ground crew dayshift can be on guard while nightshift service the aircraft and after twelve hours they can relieve each other. I think I've just saved MoD a fortune.

Two's in
23rd Sep 2010, 22:19
I'd rather have a fat, but knowledgable engineer fixing my aircraft than a fit but useless one.

MGD, is a fat useless one also an option? :rolleyes:

minigundiplomat
23rd Sep 2010, 22:24
MGD, is a fat useless one also an option?


Ha, I've never come across one to be honest. Fit and useful, fat and useful, fit and useless possibly, but maybe it's the Chinook fleet? Ive never come across a fat and useless engineer.

I'll tell you another thing though.... when the IRT shout comes in, Ive never seen any engineer dawdle to the cab. Doesn't matter if they are 3 stone or 23 stone they all cover the length of the pan in nanoseconds.

barnstormer1968
24th Sep 2010, 10:43
MGD

Surely a 3 stone serviceman/woman would be very undernourished, and maybe a bit lacking in muscle strength/volume to cross the pan in nanoseconds:E

Gnd
24th Sep 2010, 14:30
What I want to know is how he got fat on only 2 dinners?

Maybe it was all the beer he drunk while being an Army and CS rugby player that did it - not sure if he had to be fit to do that but think he might.

By the way, met him and I'm not going to tell him he is larger than his uniform!!!!

Pontius Navigator
24th Sep 2010, 14:57
At least it explains why my Colonel was fat; he was obviously exempt and had outgrown his No 1s too. Even his CS95 was a tight fit. Now his FTRS RSM was as fit as a fiddle and smart as any SWO.

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th Sep 2010, 15:46
At least it explains why my Colonel was fat; he was obviously exempt and had outgrown his No 1s too. Even his CS95 was a tight fit. Now his FTRS RSM was as fit as a fiddle and smart as any SWO.

Imagine that, the OR's doing what needs doing while the Royals do as they like, never catch on :p

Shack37
24th Sep 2010, 17:09
I'll tell you another thing though.... when the IRT shout comes in, Ive never seen any engineer dawdle to the cab. Doesn't matter if they are 3 stone or 23 stone they all cover the length of the pan in nanoseconds.


This speed is also attainable when a 1000 pounder falls out of the bomb rack, way before fitness tests. When you see an armourer running without his tea mug..............

Faithless
25th Sep 2010, 08:21
The RAF fitness test is compulsary over 50 and if you continue to serve over 55 years of age - so why the Delta between the Army and RAF regulations?

LJ


To be honest many Airmen need to continue at Phys.....they don't do alot of it do they?.....RAF Regt excepted! The Army on the other hand are burnt out at 50...and if still serving after 50 then that is a reward in it's own right.:ok:

If it still bugs you then please feel free to address the matter to the CGS. I'm sure he'll listen to you and be gentle :E