RNFT

beer_bosun

Lantern Swinger
Lingyai said:
The trouble being all the w#nkers that run a mile when action is mentioned, puts the willing bunch in a bad light. Op Granby for instance, yeah the reserves have been called up but legged it..... hmmm

Speaking of running a mile, passed my RNFT the other week - best time ever since joining. Had been passing bricks because I thought I would fail - no sweat!!

Time to say goodbye to the lardies perhaps?!!
 

WarMonger

War Hero
beer_bosun said:
Time to say goodbye to the lardies perhaps?!!

Hmm....can see a big gap opening at CPO and Lt Cdr/Cdr level....lol!!!

I think I might get those CW papers together again might be my chance!!

:lol:
 

Dangermouse

Badgeman
Congrats on the Fitness Test B-B. :)
If I as a slightly over-the-hill 41 year old can pass at a level required of a person half my age, it can't be that bad, can it?
What's holding up the rest of you? :wink:
 

Uncle_Albert

War Hero
I note that as of next year officers will no longer be allowed to fail the 1.5 miles run during their time at BRNC. In my day the lardarses who staggered in after 15 minutes got a "never mind, eh?", but it seems they're now going to get an instant RTU with a very strongly worded letter to their unit.

You know what? About ******* time.
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
What a totally pointless idea to FAIL them.

Its not like RNR can just go home and then back to work - many people have taken annual leave to do courses and to then RTU them is causing a lot more hassle - especially when blogs then asks to go again later in the year. While I agree they should pass it, what would be better would be for failed RNFT's to be told that they cant do fleet board till they've done it. Motivation and training at the same time.

Was this a BRNC idea or a COMMARRES idea?
 

Uncle_Albert

War Hero
I've got the dit somewhere. I'll check.

I disagree with your assessment. Six months is plenty of warning of the new system, and these are going to be brand new officers fresh out of AIB. If they can't demonstrate the commitment necessary to ensure they can run 1.5 miles in a reasonable time, particularly since they're given BRNC dates six months plus in advance, we're better off without them.

Currently, officers failing their two weeks at BRNC are told to repeat the course. Perhaps failing the run should simply count as a failed course.
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
Uncle_Albert said:
I've got the dit somewhere. I'll check.

I disagree with your assessment. Six months is plenty of warning of the new system, and these are going to be brand new officers fresh out of AIB. If they can't demonstrate the commitment necessary to ensure they can run 1.5 miles in a reasonable time, particularly since they're given BRNC dates six months plus in advance, we're better off without them.

Currently, officers failing their two weeks at BRNC are told to repeat the course. Perhaps failing the run should simply count as a failed course.
I agree with you entirely, i know of three LH that have been RTU'd from LRCC for failing runs, either 1.5 or 3k, and if i as a slightly overweight forty yo can get all my sh1t in one sock and pass, why cant everyone else? and no i didn't even consider the rockport walk to be an option for me, before anyone asks. In a nutshell, if mere mortal senior and junior rates can be RTU'd for failing a run why should the officer corp be treated any differently?.
 

bunnyjumper

Lantern Swinger
I hear what your all saying guys, but personally I don't see being able to run 1.5 miles in 11 or 12 minutes is the only measure of personal fitness. Some people, no matter how fit they are, are no good at endurance running - me included. I passed the run by the skin of a gnats todger at Raleigh 10 years ago. Not because I was unfit though. I passed the shuttle run by about 5 or 10 seconds, and pushed out about 100 sit-ups, passed the swimming test. It was just the 1.5 that gave me trouble. :oops:

I was in my school athletics team and had some school records for 100, 200 hurdles etc, and even got close to county level, but put me on the cross country and I'd be shagged if I tried to go too fast. :?

Even now, I ride a 10 mile journey (each way) to work on a bike in less than 40 minutes (including some b*****d hills, but I still cannot run the mile and a half in less than 12 minutes. Don't tell me I'm unfit - I'm just not a runner. Doesn't make me a lardarse. I can still get from the mess to my stand to point quicker than most of my younger oppos!! :twisted:

Don't get me wrong - I can run 1.5 miles - probably twice that. Just not in the required time.

Take an example. A forty year fat bloke, with high BP, heavy drinker, smokes like a chimney. Does the 1.5, passes it, but red in the face, sweating like a pig, can't breathe, and falls flat on his face for the next couple of hours, takes the rest of the day for his pulse to drop below 100 - gnats off a coronary. (Don't laugh - I've seen it)

Then you get a 30 something, healthy BP, slimmish, doesn't smoke, low resting pulse, does the 1.5 - fails by 10 seconds, but can still run another mile at the end, and his pulse recovers to resting in about 20 minutes.

I know which one I'd prefer on my SPO team!
 

Uncle_Albert

War Hero
bunnyjumper said:
Then you get a 30 something, healthy BP, slimmish, doesn't smoke, low resting pulse, does the 1.5 - fails by 10 seconds, but can still run another mile at the end, and his pulse recovers to resting in about 20 minutes.

I know which one I'd prefer on my SPO team!

I don't think I'd want this guy; he clearly isn't prepared to push himself beyond his comfort zone.
 

dubaipusser

Lantern Swinger
bunnyjumper said:
I hear what your all saying guys, but personally I don't see being able to run 1.5 miles in 11 or 12 minutes is the only measure of personal fitness. Some people, no matter how fit they are, are no good at endurance running - me included. I passed the run by the skin of a gnats todger at Raleigh 10 years ago. Not because I was unfit though. I passed the shuttle run by about 5 or 10 seconds, and pushed out about 100 sit-ups, passed the swimming test. It was just the 1.5 that gave me trouble. :oops:

I sympathise - honestly I do, but the RN/RNR has set standards and that should be the end of it - if you pass you pass; if you fail you fail!

I quite agree with the earlier sentiment that if LHs get RTU'd for failing the fitness test then so should officers.
 

bunnyjumper

Lantern Swinger
Fair enough - appreciate RN and RNR have standards and rightly so. But I ain't gonna lose any sleep if my services are no longer required just because I fail a poxy run by a few seconds. :wink: However as I understand it, the bleep test is going to be an option, which I don't have too much of a problem with.

And by the way - personally at Raleigh I pushed it like F**k, still only passed by a second or 2 though. Not saying I'll fail it now, but even though I spent 2 years as a gym member going 3 or 4 times a week, and getting ticked off by my personal trainer for pushing myself too hard, I still rarely got my 1.5 cracked off in less than 12 minutes - his comment "some people can't run no matter how fit they are" :cry:

But another thing - it does seem like double standards when over 40's who are gonna do the same job, get to do the "rockport walk" if they so choose. How's that fit in with the fitness philosophy then :?
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
Fully agree the RN/RNR has high standards. I also fully agree that any YO going to BRNC should be medically fit to pass the run. What I don't agree with is the notion of RTUing someone who fails a run as this messes up their real life and would be a retention issue. Far better to conditionally fail them - ie pass the RNFT or no promotion than waste time and taxpayers money on redoing BRNC for the sake of it and delaying their more significant training.

As for the RNRFT, are we going to get an RNRTM that is properly written rather than the RNTM with "Reserve" added in. The current one is totally divorced from the reality of RNR training.
 
Top