RAF to encourage Fat WAAFs
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Shefford, Beds, UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not everyone can live in the gym
Lots of stuff on here - good and bad and the usual knife-fight in a 'phone box between the fittys and the fattys over RAF fitness standards.
However, I strongly believe that if the RAF is serious over fitness levels it has to support the policies with resources. When the OFT was first brought up I was on a tactical, deployable unit and therefore felt that it was something that we should do, and do well. To that end we requested assistance from the gym in organising PT sessions for the squadron 3 times a week (1 hr each). What we really needed was assistance in setting up a proper training schedule/regime that wouldn't degenerate into a game of football 3 times a week once the initial flush of enthusiasm had died out.
What we got was a blank look followed by a sucking of teeth and a sorry tale that they didn't have enough PTIs (6 on a station of 3600, including the PEdO)
. The result was that we 'organised' the runs, cross-country and weights, but had little idea whether we were achieving anything (constructive towards the OFT), or leaving ourselves wide open to claims should someone keel over clutching their chest 
Personnel have a responsibility for their fitness, true, but so too do the 'management’. The gyms are there, sometimes with staff, but the opportunity to get to it is often limited and where personnel have the choice between being with family or in the gym don't be surprised when the former takes precedence.
As for the 3 strikes and you're out - I totally agree and tried to dispose of 2 such individuals. Unfortunately, whilst the spin sounded tough it folded like a paper tent in a rainstorm when the 'test' button was pressed. To the best of my knowledge both individuals remain in the RAF, unfit, and with little likelihood of being thrown out. Top-tip, don't make sweeping announcements unless you've sorted out the paperwork beforehand - it totally undermines your command chain and inculcates contempt for military discipline.
However, I strongly believe that if the RAF is serious over fitness levels it has to support the policies with resources. When the OFT was first brought up I was on a tactical, deployable unit and therefore felt that it was something that we should do, and do well. To that end we requested assistance from the gym in organising PT sessions for the squadron 3 times a week (1 hr each). What we really needed was assistance in setting up a proper training schedule/regime that wouldn't degenerate into a game of football 3 times a week once the initial flush of enthusiasm had died out.
What we got was a blank look followed by a sucking of teeth and a sorry tale that they didn't have enough PTIs (6 on a station of 3600, including the PEdO)
. The result was that we 'organised' the runs, cross-country and weights, but had little idea whether we were achieving anything (constructive towards the OFT), or leaving ourselves wide open to claims should someone keel over clutching their chest Personnel have a responsibility for their fitness, true, but so too do the 'management’. The gyms are there, sometimes with staff, but the opportunity to get to it is often limited and where personnel have the choice between being with family or in the gym don't be surprised when the former takes precedence.
As for the 3 strikes and you're out - I totally agree and tried to dispose of 2 such individuals. Unfortunately, whilst the spin sounded tough it folded like a paper tent in a rainstorm when the 'test' button was pressed. To the best of my knowledge both individuals remain in the RAF, unfit, and with little likelihood of being thrown out. Top-tip, don't make sweeping announcements unless you've sorted out the paperwork beforehand - it totally undermines your command chain and inculcates contempt for military discipline.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The RAF Stations I have served on or visited had significantly better fitness facilities than most Army barracks. It always smacked of "more money to spend" to me. However, if the troops get no time to use the gym in their weekly programme, then why expend the money? Barking.
RAF Upavon, in its day, had an aircraft hangar as a gym. As there were no aircraft to speak of, and it was on the "wrong side of the road", why not? However, we Army chaps used it to death, and the airforce chaps paid it lipservice. Of course, there was always the airfield and the Plain to keep fit for the diehards.
A previous post indicated 6 PTIs for 3600 blokes, including the boss. That's a sad indictment of the view from the top. I've never seen PT as anything more than a necessary evil, I'm 6'2 and 200lbs. I hate running with a passion. But even a weekly kickabout, or basketball gets the heart pumping.
In the military, as in all walks of life, there is a skills mix required. The "small-man-syndrome" PTI who can't spell PTI, but is fit as a butcher's dog is as needed as the 300lb techie who fathered a radio set, thus knows exactly whats wrong with it. As long as the PTI lets the radio tech get on with it, and the techie lets the PTI get on with it, we can all go to war and win.
There are no fat WAAFs anyway. They all wear stockings, and as such are forgiven weight sins
RAF Upavon, in its day, had an aircraft hangar as a gym. As there were no aircraft to speak of, and it was on the "wrong side of the road", why not? However, we Army chaps used it to death, and the airforce chaps paid it lipservice. Of course, there was always the airfield and the Plain to keep fit for the diehards.
A previous post indicated 6 PTIs for 3600 blokes, including the boss. That's a sad indictment of the view from the top. I've never seen PT as anything more than a necessary evil, I'm 6'2 and 200lbs. I hate running with a passion. But even a weekly kickabout, or basketball gets the heart pumping.
In the military, as in all walks of life, there is a skills mix required. The "small-man-syndrome" PTI who can't spell PTI, but is fit as a butcher's dog is as needed as the 300lb techie who fathered a radio set, thus knows exactly whats wrong with it. As long as the PTI lets the radio tech get on with it, and the techie lets the PTI get on with it, we can all go to war and win.
There are no fat WAAFs anyway. They all wear stockings, and as such are forgiven weight sins
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At St Athan (School of PT) in the early 60's I was told the measure of fitness was recovery rate - if you run 100 yds your heart rate should reach about 124 BPM (once a day, this is beneficial according to the experts) - however, the time taken to stabilise back to 60-72 BPM is more important, and is a true measure of your fitness - the lower the better!
Stamina is very different - it's the ability and will to keep going when you feel shagged, and is developed by lifestyle - diet, exercise, determination and aspirations, plus the need to win and succeed
Ranulph Fiennes had a couple of failures in the Antarctic - but later, went on to run 7 marathons in 7 countries in 7 days after a major heart operation
He was lucky though - he didn't have a PTI with a bleep meter shouting "Go for it, give it 10"
Merry Christmas
B15
Stamina is very different - it's the ability and will to keep going when you feel shagged, and is developed by lifestyle - diet, exercise, determination and aspirations, plus the need to win and succeed
Ranulph Fiennes had a couple of failures in the Antarctic - but later, went on to run 7 marathons in 7 countries in 7 days after a major heart operation
He was lucky though - he didn't have a PTI with a bleep meter shouting "Go for it, give it 10"
Merry Christmas
B15
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: the gym
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of stuff on here - good and bad and the usual knife-fight in a 'phone box between the fittys and the fattys over RAF fitness standards.
However, I strongly believe that if the RAF is serious over fitness levels it has to support the policies with resources. When the OFT was first brought up I was on a tactical, deployable unit and therefore felt that it was something that we should do, and do well. To that end we requested assistance from the gym in organising PT sessions for the squadron 3 times a week (1 hr each). What we really needed was assistance in setting up a proper training schedule/regime that wouldn't degenerate into a game of football 3 times a week once the initial flush of enthusiasm had died out.
What we got was a blank look followed by a sucking of teeth and a sorry tale that they didn't have enough PTIs (6 on a station of 3600, including the PEdO) . The result was that we 'organised' the runs, cross-country and weights, but had little idea whether we were achieving anything (constructive towards the OFT), or leaving ourselves wide open to claims should someone keel over clutching their chest
Personnel have a responsibility for their fitness, true, but so too do the 'management’. The gyms are there, sometimes with staff, but the opportunity to get to it is often limited and where personnel have the choice between being with family or in the gym don't be surprised when the former takes precedence.
As for the 3 strikes and you're out - I totally agree and tried to dispose of 2 such individuals. Unfortunately, whilst the spin sounded tough it folded like a paper tent in a rainstorm when the 'test' button was pressed. To the best of my knowledge both individuals remain in the RAF, unfit, and with little likelihood of being thrown out. Top-tip, don't make sweeping announcements unless you've sorted out the paperwork beforehand - it totally undermines your command chain and inculcates contempt for military discipline.
However, I strongly believe that if the RAF is serious over fitness levels it has to support the policies with resources. When the OFT was first brought up I was on a tactical, deployable unit and therefore felt that it was something that we should do, and do well. To that end we requested assistance from the gym in organising PT sessions for the squadron 3 times a week (1 hr each). What we really needed was assistance in setting up a proper training schedule/regime that wouldn't degenerate into a game of football 3 times a week once the initial flush of enthusiasm had died out.
What we got was a blank look followed by a sucking of teeth and a sorry tale that they didn't have enough PTIs (6 on a station of 3600, including the PEdO)
. The result was that we 'organised' the runs, cross-country and weights, but had little idea whether we were achieving anything (constructive towards the OFT), or leaving ourselves wide open to claims should someone keel over clutching their chest Personnel have a responsibility for their fitness, true, but so too do the 'management’. The gyms are there, sometimes with staff, but the opportunity to get to it is often limited and where personnel have the choice between being with family or in the gym don't be surprised when the former takes precedence.
As for the 3 strikes and you're out - I totally agree and tried to dispose of 2 such individuals. Unfortunately, whilst the spin sounded tough it folded like a paper tent in a rainstorm when the 'test' button was pressed. To the best of my knowledge both individuals remain in the RAF, unfit, and with little likelihood of being thrown out. Top-tip, don't make sweeping announcements unless you've sorted out the paperwork beforehand - it totally undermines your command chain and inculcates contempt for military discipline.
. What was interesting was that the flt cdrs and senior SNCOs were often those who had pressing engangements elsewhere. It didn't take the rest long to work that out, and before you knew it, it was all over... So I don't think that it is necessarily the resources that is at fault; rather, the responsibility lies with the hierarchy of each section/ sqn/ wg etc. And with the individuals themselves. I don't see huge demands for time in lieu of beer calls which often run after hours!!!
It will be interesting to see whether there there is a change with the advent of the PTL where individuals from your section can take the PT, and not the w*nker PTI. At least it will make the fatties have to come up with another excuse as the 'I hate PTIs' one won't be valid anymore'
MM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eyes Open MM
Whilst I can probably imagine some of the referred too SNCO's and Management were utilising excuses available, you should also consider that maybe some did have other places to be. Flying Squadrons do require a certain level of senior presence in order to function legally. (EG More supervision than a medicine ball needs!!)
I suggest you spend some time, following around engineers on a busy squadron and view for yourself, the work required to make even the most modern of airships airworthy. Then, from behind your blinkered veil there maybe a glimmer of knowledge about what the F*ck you preach.
As for the comment about beer calls.... yes people do need time to socialise and unwind; it is essential. Are you saying you want us to hold beer calls in the gym? Get a life.... The beer call is invariably in our own time anyway but that’s fair enough as we are not formally required to drink to specific levels. We are required to have fitness at specific levels and so should be given time, 'with or without the 21yr old Cpl attempting humour' to train and maintain our levels.
I suggest you spend some time, following around engineers on a busy squadron and view for yourself, the work required to make even the most modern of airships airworthy. Then, from behind your blinkered veil there maybe a glimmer of knowledge about what the F*ck you preach.
As for the comment about beer calls.... yes people do need time to socialise and unwind; it is essential. Are you saying you want us to hold beer calls in the gym? Get a life.... The beer call is invariably in our own time anyway but that’s fair enough as we are not formally required to drink to specific levels. We are required to have fitness at specific levels and so should be given time, 'with or without the 21yr old Cpl attempting humour' to train and maintain our levels.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: EU Region 9 - apparently
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correction
Allegedly the test is 'gender fair neutral' Corrected late in the day ... sorry peeps.. The physiology of blokes is designed to hunt, chase, catch and kill. The phyiology for blokesses is to bear children - they don't need to run, chase hunt etc as the blokes do that bit. Until the human race evolves a bit more thats how it is. Those who have completed gender re-assignment treatment will have either an advantage or disadvantage depending which operation they had.
Not only that its unbalanced but its going to be twice a year - no train and forget it in the future.
Not only that its unbalanced but its going to be twice a year - no train and forget it in the future.
Maybe we could have 'down days' for fitness - but the SEngOs would want all the jets S before releasing engineers for fitness.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
googling for something else I found this link; well worth a read:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...63/63we148.htm
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...63/63we148.htm
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know a couple of RAF sqns that have compulsory PT and while a lot of people bitch like mad, there is often no better motivation than to look a complete wheezemeister in front of your mates.
Like a lot of things (including the introduction of the RAFFT itself), group PT would take a culture change across the station in order to be accepted, but accepted it would be. If a percentage of the unit were to partake first thing in the morning, after a while the station would adapt. It's very easy to say "it won't work", but everyone would have to MAKE it work. The Army manages it (even those based on an RAF unit such as Odiham), so why couldn't we?
Like a lot of things (including the introduction of the RAFFT itself), group PT would take a culture change across the station in order to be accepted, but accepted it would be. If a percentage of the unit were to partake first thing in the morning, after a while the station would adapt. It's very easy to say "it won't work", but everyone would have to MAKE it work. The Army manages it (even those based on an RAF unit such as Odiham), so why couldn't we?
Those'll be the 9-to-5 sqns, I suppose?
Personally, I thought that the biggest danger to one's well-being in the ME world came from sleep pattern disturbance and long hours with multiple time zone changes causing cumulative fatigue..... Going from working to 2300 report time, fly through the night to Gander and/or Dulles, min ground time, then back again was a lot more knackering than being chased around the gym by some whistle blowing kid in a tracksuit.
Same went for night tanker QRA; pager goes at 0-dark-00, check with Ops, in to work asap then up to 12 hours of Bear chasing.
It was a much happier place back when no-one bothered with the levels of niff-naff and triv which existed when I pulled the B&Y!
Personally, I thought that the biggest danger to one's well-being in the ME world came from sleep pattern disturbance and long hours with multiple time zone changes causing cumulative fatigue..... Going from working to 2300 report time, fly through the night to Gander and/or Dulles, min ground time, then back again was a lot more knackering than being chased around the gym by some whistle blowing kid in a tracksuit.
Same went for night tanker QRA; pager goes at 0-dark-00, check with Ops, in to work asap then up to 12 hours of Bear chasing.
It was a much happier place back when no-one bothered with the levels of niff-naff and triv which existed when I pulled the B&Y!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEags
The vast majority of staff at the vast majority of bases are 8-ish to 5-ish, so why not? Those sqns/sections on base that did not fit into this "majority" would then be able to fulfil their commitments at times to suit them. The FJ/RW crews (and just a few of the ME types) should find the thought of being captured and having their nuts put through a mangle sufficient motivation to keep fit (with respect, a large ME accident would have few survivors...?).
Even when I joined a mere 14 years ago, complulsory PT would have been anathema to us RAF types, but I think that even in that short time the fitness levels of entrees into the RAF have been slipping iaw the proliferation of modern games consoles and the anti-competitive nature of sport in schools. Add to that the fact that there is less opportunity for those already serving to take part in recreational sporting activities due to operational pressures and we end up as a fat and wheezy service. On joint operations, I have been staggered by the marked difference in attitude towards exercise taken by the Army and the Navy compared to the RAF. In the RAF there still seems to be more people willing to sneer at a "jock-strapper" than someone who does not frequent the gym.
We are a nation of steadily increasing girth and that is reflected in the services. I have seen personnel unable to carry their deployment kit any distance due to being unfit and/or having a LMF. I am not a weights monkey, a muscle technician or a gym queen. I'm just a normal bloke (and not all that fit) who despairs at the state of some of the people that wear the same uniform as me and go to war with me. Being fat and unfit just isn't bloody military.
The vast majority of staff at the vast majority of bases are 8-ish to 5-ish, so why not? Those sqns/sections on base that did not fit into this "majority" would then be able to fulfil their commitments at times to suit them. The FJ/RW crews (and just a few of the ME types) should find the thought of being captured and having their nuts put through a mangle sufficient motivation to keep fit (with respect, a large ME accident would have few survivors...?).
Even when I joined a mere 14 years ago, complulsory PT would have been anathema to us RAF types, but I think that even in that short time the fitness levels of entrees into the RAF have been slipping iaw the proliferation of modern games consoles and the anti-competitive nature of sport in schools. Add to that the fact that there is less opportunity for those already serving to take part in recreational sporting activities due to operational pressures and we end up as a fat and wheezy service. On joint operations, I have been staggered by the marked difference in attitude towards exercise taken by the Army and the Navy compared to the RAF. In the RAF there still seems to be more people willing to sneer at a "jock-strapper" than someone who does not frequent the gym.
We are a nation of steadily increasing girth and that is reflected in the services. I have seen personnel unable to carry their deployment kit any distance due to being unfit and/or having a LMF. I am not a weights monkey, a muscle technician or a gym queen. I'm just a normal bloke (and not all that fit) who despairs at the state of some of the people that wear the same uniform as me and go to war with me. Being fat and unfit just isn't bloody military.
A new OC Eng Wg at Gutersloh decided that all Eng Wing personnel would turn up on the taxi way once a week (might have been month, senile moment) to run up and down for exercise. On the day he and his faithfull followers turned up and waited, the aircraft flew, got serviced and they decided that it might be a good idea to get out of the way, the idea was never raised again. Just prior to going to the 91 gulf war we had an ex Army officer posted in as our JENGO his words were 'I joined the Army to go to war, never did, moved to the RAF and now I am. He also said that a Sqd that trained together would fight together, so he arranged weekly PT sessions, the PTI was actually very good and made the sessions 'user friendly' the culmination of this was the mile run and if you failed it you continued the gym rouitnes untill you did. Funny though the only people that went during the lunch break were Sgts and below, the rest had to much work. But it was fun watching them fail the run, unfortunately they did not have to re-train and re-do the run.
Musclemech posted: "What was interesting was that the flt cdrs and senior SNCOs were often those who had pressing engangements elsewhere."
Given the amount of meetings that my lot seem to have to go to these days, I can actually understand that, but I catch your insinuation....
In my recent experience, the Heat Acclim Trg was a washout for the sqn guys, I recall us all being yanked out of the gym on 2 occasions due to there not being enough greens on the board. Chap doing the yanking was the Wg Cdr, by way of the Rects Controller. The other sqns in our glorious new Wing had similar experiences, and non of them did more than 2 weeks. This is the type of thing we're up against MM.
Plenty of people I know are up for 3-times-a-week PT. What we're not up for is the inevitable extra time on the night shift to make up for what wasn't done, or what can't be done in the morning, by the day shift.
In short, the ethos of the entire RAF, not just stations, is going to have to change if we want to get the masses fitter. As the ethos is NOT going to change, we'll just drift along and argue about the same things year in year out.
Meanwhile I'll just carry on playing football until I'm past it.
Jobza
Given the amount of meetings that my lot seem to have to go to these days, I can actually understand that, but I catch your insinuation....
In my recent experience, the Heat Acclim Trg was a washout for the sqn guys, I recall us all being yanked out of the gym on 2 occasions due to there not being enough greens on the board. Chap doing the yanking was the Wg Cdr, by way of the Rects Controller. The other sqns in our glorious new Wing had similar experiences, and non of them did more than 2 weeks. This is the type of thing we're up against MM.
Plenty of people I know are up for 3-times-a-week PT. What we're not up for is the inevitable extra time on the night shift to make up for what wasn't done, or what can't be done in the morning, by the day shift.
In short, the ethos of the entire RAF, not just stations, is going to have to change if we want to get the masses fitter. As the ethos is NOT going to change, we'll just drift along and argue about the same things year in year out.
Meanwhile I'll just carry on playing football until I'm past it.
Jobza
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who has been out of the RAF for quite a while now this fitness training does not affect me but it seems to me that the lessons learnt during the Falklands War in 1982 have long been forgotten. Read any book written about the war and you will find that the first people to fail were the super slim fit ones. They had insufficient reserves of body fat to cope with the cold and long hours without food. Not being around for either of the Gulf Wars but having served in the Middle and Far East when we had Overseas Tours it was always the slim fit ones that started to suffer with heat exhaustion first. Lets see how the PTIs cope with jacking up a Vulcan or Victor for a wheel change at Dubai at midday. On a detachment all mucked in including the overwieght unfit SNCOs(Sorry you dont have such big aircraft nowadays) Try them on a Herc in the desert
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: the gym
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I can probably imagine some of the referred too SNCO's and Management were utilising excuses available, you should also consider that maybe some did have other places to be. Flying Squadrons do require a certain level of senior presence in order to function legally. (EG More supervision than a medicine ball needs!!)
I suggest you spend some time, following around engineers on a busy squadron and view for yourself, the work required to make even the most modern of airships airworthy. Then, from behind your blinkered veil there maybe a glimmer of knowledge about what the F*ck you preach.
As for the comment about beer calls.... yes people do need time to socialise and unwind; it is essential. Are you saying you want us to hold beer calls in the gym? Get a life.... The beer call is invariably in our own time anyway but that’s fair enough as we are not formally required to drink to specific levels. We are required to have fitness at specific levels and so should be given time, 'with or without the 21yr old Cpl attempting humour' to train and maintain our levels.
I suggest you spend some time, following around engineers on a busy squadron and view for yourself, the work required to make even the most modern of airships airworthy. Then, from behind your blinkered veil there maybe a glimmer of knowledge about what the F*ck you preach.
As for the comment about beer calls.... yes people do need time to socialise and unwind; it is essential. Are you saying you want us to hold beer calls in the gym? Get a life.... The beer call is invariably in our own time anyway but that’s fair enough as we are not formally required to drink to specific levels. We are required to have fitness at specific levels and so should be given time, 'with or without the 21yr old Cpl attempting humour' to train and maintain our levels.
Like I said earlier, I have been around long enough to know many engineers on busy squadrons, and some of my family are engineers. And I have found over many years that those who want to, of all ranks, seem to be able to find the time to keep themselves fit, even if it means sometimes doing it outside of normal working hours. Several others have added their comments to this thread as well. And still those who can't be bothered or are too lazy to keep themselves fit keep on coming out with the same old excuses....
Oh yeah, of course I meant come and have your beer calls in the gym. What great idea that would be :
ugh: The fact that beer calls are invariably in your own time was exactly my point: you don't seem to be complaining about doing that use of your own time.... Instead of everything revolving round getting p*ssed, why not 'socialise and unwind' with a game of football or volleyball? At least that has the added benefit of being good for the health.My eyes are well and truly open: you're not going to change your mind, and I'm not going to change mine. The only sad thing is that I suspect that your attitude will percolate down to your staff and will then be perpetuated for another generation....
MM
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fitness or Fatness
Whilst some time within work and some dedication of personal time would be a happy medium for a balanced fitness level that IMHO shoul;d be gender neutral. I MUST say that all the FIT chap/chapesses seemed to be the ones Dying/breaking legs going sick with stress fractures and otherwise being off. The fat knackers always seemed to be the ones pitching up on time and doing the 24 hr shifts. That involved working the full time not as inferred by MM.
As an ex member of the RAF I was able to pass the bleep test but unable to pass the bike test as my slightly high blood pressure (not deemed to need treatment by the Doc's) left me a failure as deemed by the PTI.
As an ex member of the RAF I was able to pass the bleep test but unable to pass the bike test as my slightly high blood pressure (not deemed to need treatment by the Doc's) left me a failure as deemed by the PTI.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying don't keep fit - we all should. However, and it's a big however, why is there a difference in requirement between men and women?
I use a local gym as I live miles away from the Station, the Instructors there say that, apart from fat distribution, there is little difference between male and female if they both train and eat the same. As we all have to do the same job, it is not acceptable that a woman has to prove a lower level of fitness than a man to get the same job. My advice to any male recruit that failed his selection on fitness would be to sue on the gounds of discrimination.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: the gym
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.......and that's the problem with the whole situation, policy is made by people who think we are still a stay-at-home RAF. We are not.
I'm not saying don't keep fit - we all should. However, and it's a big however, why is there a difference in requirement between men and women?
I use a local gym as I live miles away from the Station, the Instructors there say that, apart from fat distribution, there is little difference between male and female if they both train and eat the same. As we all have to do the same job, it is not acceptable that a woman has to prove a lower level of fitness than a man to get the same job. My advice to any male recruit that failed his selection on fitness would be to sue on the gounds of discrimination.
I'm not saying don't keep fit - we all should. However, and it's a big however, why is there a difference in requirement between men and women?
I use a local gym as I live miles away from the Station, the Instructors there say that, apart from fat distribution, there is little difference between male and female if they both train and eat the same. As we all have to do the same job, it is not acceptable that a woman has to prove a lower level of fitness than a man to get the same job. My advice to any male recruit that failed his selection on fitness would be to sue on the gounds of discrimination.
Aerobic capacity is a measure of how well you can extract oxygen from the inspired air, transport it to the working muscles, and then use it in the working muscles. Obviously this only works if you compare like for like ie unfit man cw unfit woman/ fit man cw fit woman, but:
Women have smaller lungs so they will inspire less, and extract less oxygen from it. [Probably] Because they don't have as much testosterone as men, they have lower levels of haemoglobin (which is what transports most of the oxygen in the blood). [Again, possibly because of lower testosterone and higher oestrogen levels] women have smaller muscle mass to use the oxygen and perform the work, and higher fat levels which increases weight without giving any benefit to aerobic capacity. Their smaller muscle mass will also make it more difficult to actually move their body through the air. Plus when you are talking about a running test to measure aerobic capacity, women's bodies are evolved for childbirth in that they have wider hips which leads to knock-knees and flatter feet, all of which just aren't biomechanically suited to running. So they just don't have the machinery to be as fit as men.
You should also consider the socialisation of females (tree hugging alert) in that boys are encouraged from an early age to go out and run around and be active. Girls are not. In adolescence the differences are even more marked. Only about 20% of the general population exercise regularly: in women this is reported to be around 5% This is just a very short summary of this. I could go on... but in essence girls are not encouraged to build up their fitness in the same way boys are.
The RAFFT is designed to encourage individuals to exercise regularly and reach a certain level of fitness in relation to their capacity (if you like, a percentage of their potential maximum). As women have a lower maximum potential, it makes sense that women have to achieve lower scores than males. For example, 60% of 40 is lower tha 60% of 50 (average figures for females and males respectively from my textbook). Because it does so, the test is known as a gender fair test.
If the test were designed to ensure that everyone could carry out a certain task (I believe that the Fire Service use some of these, such as rolling up hoses, and lifting ladders onto vehicles and carrying dummy's up ladders, but I'm not certain), then the test can insist that everyone, regardless of gender and/ or age, has to reach the samme standard. But the RAFFT isn't designed to test your fitness to undertake a task. Rather, it is designed to encourage you to exercise regularly, and in doing so reach a certain percetage of your potential aerobic capacity.
Hope that explains (what was actually the original question!!!)
MM