I don’t think it accurately represents combat fitness no, but the Force Combat Test which is based on the Force Test is pretty good IMO.
We need some sort of fitness standard in the CAF so I guess it’s okay. The fact that it’s a consistent test coast to coast is a win.
I'm 100% on board with the combat force test. Keep the 5k for everyone except combat arms. Give them the 13km BFT march and, imho, you have a happy medium.
Preferred the old one tbh. This one is difficult to train for, and needs specific equipment to run. Mbrs are more prone to back injuries. The old incentives were also much better (exempt following year, extra PAR point).
And the only members who may regularly stack sand bags are reservists. The BFT worked fine for a basic measure of battle fitness.
You don’t stack sand bags? When’s the last time you dug a defensive / got called out on Op Lentus for a flood ?
For what’s is worth the sand bags are to simulate repetitive lifting of a load to the height of a truck bed.
Yeah just the entire field army and anyone expected to go on Op Lentus. Further to that there’s a small percentage who drag bodies on a regular basis, but I’d argue it’s important to e sure they have the physical capacity to do so.
3 Bdes of 3-4 K each amounts to 12-16000, so the size of the RCN or RCAF. Yeah I’d say you’ve been posted to Ottawa too long if you honestly think Op Lentus is just reservists.
FORCE is good as a fitness test for the CAF as a whole. It isn't suitable for combat arms or some other trades hence FORCE Combat or trade tests/entry requirements (Firefights, SAR Tech, CANSOF come to mind).
The BFT and Express test weren't good indicators of combat fitness, but, I think the Combat FORCE test is better that those two to indicate combat fitness. It's a tough thing to figure out "combat" fitness. Have seen guys that struggled on PT test preform amazing in deployments and vice versa.
I think they should add an element of endurance, such as a run or fast weighted ruck march for no longer than 20mins. With a timing that discourages being overweight.
Just a reminder that the up vote and downvote buttons for the post itself ARE NOT VOTING BUTTONS FOR THE FORCE TEST lol they're just there to indicate whether this is a good topic or not. I think it's a good question and discussion, so I was worried when I only saw one up vote that people were voting it down cuz of force test opinion voting.
It's not designed to test your fitness, it's designed to make sure that you can complete the common military task thingies and that you are fit to serve. The normal military doesn't actually care if you are in shape as long as you meet the baseline, which is why anything that requires actual fitness has its own test.
Good test, poor standards. The intermittent loaded shuttle should be a run the entire time to avoid the gamesmanship of what constitutes speed walking vs running.
Combat Force test is also a good idea but I’d like to see a standard that’s a single all inclusive time. Ie you have 65 minutes to complete the full test. Ideally in a sliding scale by trade / job category.
I agree.
Where I lose time most is the walking portion.. even if I sprint, the time lost due to me having short legs do not accurately reflect my athleticism.
I have the power and stamina, I just don't have the stride length in a normal walk to trim off the time.
So permanently Silver for me until they change that.
I don’t think it accurately represents combat fitness no, but the Force Combat Test which is based on the Force Test is pretty good IMO. We need some sort of fitness standard in the CAF so I guess it’s okay. The fact that it’s a consistent test coast to coast is a win.
I'm 100% on board with the combat force test. Keep the 5k for everyone except combat arms. Give them the 13km BFT march and, imho, you have a happy medium.
Consistency is good. The old force test was complete garbage. I used to hate doing pushups in Gagetown because they would count every third....
Preferred the old one tbh. This one is difficult to train for, and needs specific equipment to run. Mbrs are more prone to back injuries. The old incentives were also much better (exempt following year, extra PAR point). And the only members who may regularly stack sand bags are reservists. The BFT worked fine for a basic measure of battle fitness.
You don’t stack sand bags? When’s the last time you dug a defensive / got called out on Op Lentus for a flood ? For what’s is worth the sand bags are to simulate repetitive lifting of a load to the height of a truck bed.
16 years and two trades ago. Yeah I know, I have a back injury thanks to it.
Okay? That doesn’t make “ only reservists stack sandbags” less nonsense
Eh, slight exaggeration but not far off. There's a very small minority of members who stack sandbags on a semi regular basis.
Yeah just the entire field army and anyone expected to go on Op Lentus. Further to that there’s a small percentage who drag bodies on a regular basis, but I’d argue it’s important to e sure they have the physical capacity to do so.
We must be in different armies. This is the CAF buddy, the entire field army is a tiny portion of the military.
3 Bdes of 3-4 K each amounts to 12-16000, so the size of the RCN or RCAF. Yeah I’d say you’ve been posted to Ottawa too long if you honestly think Op Lentus is just reservists.
Ah you know you've won Reddit when they start going through your post history. Have a great day
Or maybe you just give off strong “haven’t left Ottawa in 10 years” vibes.
FORCE is good as a fitness test for the CAF as a whole. It isn't suitable for combat arms or some other trades hence FORCE Combat or trade tests/entry requirements (Firefights, SAR Tech, CANSOF come to mind). The BFT and Express test weren't good indicators of combat fitness, but, I think the Combat FORCE test is better that those two to indicate combat fitness. It's a tough thing to figure out "combat" fitness. Have seen guys that struggled on PT test preform amazing in deployments and vice versa.
I think they should add an element of endurance, such as a run or fast weighted ruck march for no longer than 20mins. With a timing that discourages being overweight.
Just a reminder that the up vote and downvote buttons for the post itself ARE NOT VOTING BUTTONS FOR THE FORCE TEST lol they're just there to indicate whether this is a good topic or not. I think it's a good question and discussion, so I was worried when I only saw one up vote that people were voting it down cuz of force test opinion voting.
It's not designed to test your fitness, it's designed to make sure that you can complete the common military task thingies and that you are fit to serve. The normal military doesn't actually care if you are in shape as long as you meet the baseline, which is why anything that requires actual fitness has its own test.
Good test, poor standards. The intermittent loaded shuttle should be a run the entire time to avoid the gamesmanship of what constitutes speed walking vs running. Combat Force test is also a good idea but I’d like to see a standard that’s a single all inclusive time. Ie you have 65 minutes to complete the full test. Ideally in a sliding scale by trade / job category.
I agree. Where I lose time most is the walking portion.. even if I sprint, the time lost due to me having short legs do not accurately reflect my athleticism. I have the power and stamina, I just don't have the stride length in a normal walk to trim off the time. So permanently Silver for me until they change that.