Royal Navy Fitness Test Changes

#3
I'm all for this, I just have one observation.

Why the **** do we need branded, presumably quite expensive, weight bags to simulate 20kg drums of AFFF? Seriously it's not like there is a massive shortage of AFFF drums dotted around the bizzares.

Surely actual 20kg drums of AFFF* is gonna be shitloads cheaper, more realistic for the training scenario in question and just as readily available?

Or am I missing something here?






*For exercise AFFF in the form of OG1 November maybe used.
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#5
presumably quite expensive, weight bags

What do you mean expensive. A quick search shows they're a snip at only £40-70 each. What defence cuts? We'll only need a few sets at each site that does RNFTs. Probably a few hundred total? Maybe that's why we only got 1% pay rise this year.




Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 
#6
Surely actual 20kg drums of AFFF* is gonna be shitloads cheaper, more realistic for the training scenario in question and just as readily available?

Or am I missing something here?






*For exercise AFFF in the form of OG1 November maybe used.
Just a thought but if the PTi is on the jetty doing a fitness test perhaps the fire fighting equipment should stay where it is?
Also all the gyms already have these power bags, you know being gyms.....
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#8
I have no problem with the RNFT as a whole or this particular extension of it. I do however have a problem with the half hearted mealy mouthed way the whole thing was implemented. We have a number of tests now supposedly meant to test your fitness to serve at sea but failing doesn't stop you serving at sea. What we are effectively saying is "well done. You failed the test and are a danger as you can't be relied on to carry out firefighting and DC tasks at sea but carry on serving there and hopefully in 3-12 months you'll meet these requirements". Either do it and have consequences or lets not bother at all.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 
G

guestm

Guest
#9
I have no problem with the RNFT as a whole or this particular extension of it. I do however have a problem with the half hearted mealy mouthed way the whole thing was implemented. We have a number of tests now supposedly meant to test your fitness to serve at sea but failing doesn't stop you serving at sea. What we are effectively saying is "well done. You failed the test and are a danger as you can't be relied on to carry out firefighting and DC tasks at sea but carry on serving there and hopefully in 3-12 months you'll meet these requirements". Either do it and have consequences or lets not bother at all.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
Agreed.

I also think RNFT failures should have to walk around in a neon T-shirt that says "I am a lazy, fat, pathetic waste of blubbery skin and an embarrassment to myself and everything around me. Mock me at your leisure."
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#10
Here's a thought - why not incorporate the physical tests as an integral part of the sea survival course?

The course could then be an outright pass/fail well before the individual serves afloat with time for remedial actions and providing a replacement if necessary.
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#11
Here's a thought - why not incorporate the physical tests as an integral part of the sea survival course?

The course could then be an outright pass/fail well before the individual serves afloat with time for remedial actions and providing a replacement if necessary.
Good idea. While we're at it the rest of ISSC could be made pass/fail cos I've seen some people cruise through the course, cocking up at half the stuff and still get packed off to sea. Seems like more and more we go on 'tick box' courses which are passed simply by attending.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#12
Well that my friend is the million dollar question isn't it. And I think, on reflection, I'll leave that to folks on a much higher pay grade than I currently draw. I'd simply observe that having a test or course with no or limited consequences of failure is a waste of everyone's time. What is the point in me proving I'm fit for safe service at sea if I then find myself serving with those supposedly dangerously unfit for service at sea.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 
#14
Well that my friend is the million dollar question isn't it. And I think, on reflection, I'll leave that to folks on a much higher pay grade than I currently draw.

Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
Why do you think they'd have any different ideas than you. I'd be interesting in hearing your solution(s), as well as the drawbacks of your solutions (and the solutions to your drawbacks).

Pressing the "all to difficult button" is far to easy.
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#15
Why do you think they'd have any different ideas than you. I'd be interesting in hearing your solution(s), as well as the drawbacks of your solutions (and the solutions to your drawbacks).

Pressing the "all to difficult button" is far to easy.
Because they are our great and powerful leaders and seem to come up with new concepts at the drop of a hat (mostly to justify that next stripe).

One solution would be to realise that for many people in a sea job there just ain't enough hours in the day for the job never mind phys. So, stop reducing manpower on ships so people can have time to train for RNFT (in fact increase manpower). Then once people can actually do phys (maybe departmental in the programme) have what N_S said and get rid of people who can't pass and not just ashore but outside. Or just give it all up as a bad idea and not bother at all.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#16
Playing devil's advocate, in the real world, when you have to move loads of foam drums for a re-entry after a major fire, you use the principle "many hands make light work" as there's seldom a rush to re-enter once you lose the compartment.

As a firefighting instructor over many years both at the fireschools & as a FOST "wrecker" I can never recall a requirement for people to run whilst carrying two drums of AFFF. I do remember having to hurriedly float-test oxyacetylene bottles during a rather large fire during the Falklands malarkey but with flames licking your arse, you tend to move swiftly no matter how fit you are, in my experience.

Likewise does the new load-carrying test apply to equally to diminutive males of small stature and limited strength and muscularly-built, ripped, statuesque females?
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#17
Playing devil's advocate, in the real world, when you have to move loads of foam drums for a re-entry after a major fire, you use the principle "many hands make light work" as there's seldom a rush to re-enter once you lose the compartment.

As a firefighting instructor over many years both at the fireschools & as a FOST "wrecker" I can never recall a requirement for people to run whilst carrying two drums of AFFF. I do remember having to hurriedly float-test oxyacetylene bottles during a rather large fire during the Falklands malarkey but with flames licking your arse, you tend to move swiftly no matter how fit you are, in my experience.

Likewise does the new load-carrying test apply to equally to diminutive males of small stature and limited strength and muscularly-built, ripped, statuesque females?
We may drift into dangerous territory if we start looking at the applicability of tests (how often to we run 1.5 miles or shuttle back and forth 20 yards(?) repeatedly on any of our ships?). Lets just applaud the fact that the PTIs managed to find a real world scenario this test fitted, however tenuously.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#18
That's not what the tests are designed for, they VO2 Maximal tests designed to test an individual's fitness levels. These tests are used by many sports organisations around the world, so can't be all wrong.
I really must work out how to make it more obvious that I'm taking the mick on here. How does one do those smiley thingys? The one that's winking might have been useful.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 
#19
If someone could be kind enough to explain why we do the MSFT over 20 metres, and then have the clubswinger reset for the 20kg test of 4x15m shuttles, does 3x20m shuttles not achieve the same aim?
 

cjg375

Lantern Swinger
#20
If someone could be kind enough to explain why we do the MSFT over 20 metres, and then have the clubswinger reset for the 20kg test of 4x15m shuttles, does 3x20m shuttles not achieve the same aim?
I may be remembering incorrectly but I think I recall that 15m was selected as it closely matches the distance between watertight doors in ships, so the shuttle drop shuttle drop etc is like going down a passageway. The MSFT is a generic test the pusser has adopted so its 20m.


Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top