Author Topic: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]  (Read 31889 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,067
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,976
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #25 on: November 15, 2017, 05:31:32 »
From what I have read in the original document it supposed to be the March, followed by dropping the small pack, 5 min rest and then right into the FORCE test with no breaks in between. All with weapon and gear.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,028
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,875
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #26 on: November 15, 2017, 06:49:52 »
Current force is, honestly, fairly relevent. Seeking cover, moving a load, pulling a casualty, all are tasks that can reasonable to expected to be preformed. Even air crew can get hit with mortars and rockets, or in a conventional sense enemy air. Easily justified for Navy too.

We cant march anywhere, we very rarely lift sand bags, we cant pepper pod on a ship, the cas drag perhaps but doing it in buker gear would be more realistic.

Not to mention we arent issued field kit...

Tell me how this relates to naval deployments again ? 
« Last Edit: November 15, 2017, 06:53:12 by Halifax Tar »
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 171,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,046
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #27 on: November 15, 2017, 07:02:07 »
I have a sneaking suspicion that this will end up being just for Army-centric deployments.  It's not super-relevant for, say, a fast-jet deployment or the majority of Aurora deployments where we aren't issued helmets or weapons.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,742
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #28 on: November 15, 2017, 07:39:54 »
Once again the Canadian Media continues the idea that the CAF is Army only.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #29 on: November 15, 2017, 07:54:46 »
What does your navy deployment pt test look like?

Unless things have changed, the navy doesn't do that silly stuff.  If the ship's going, you go with it.  We practice the battle/damage control drills that we would be doing on a regular basis and would do a good deal of it in workups for a mission anyhow.  Why do a test to do what you're already doing to begin with?

When I was going into the sandbox with Roto 7, that was a different matter.  While in Rome...  we may be in the same CAF but we're different animals with different needs.

Offline SupersonicMax

    is back home.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 82,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,809
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #30 on: November 15, 2017, 08:07:56 »
Not sure how this will make sure I can do my job properly, which is stay to focused for up to 10 hours straight sitting in place...

If I have to get out, you can be sure I'll carry a lot less than 35kg and I won't have to drag anybody around.

From my perspective, a waste of time rather than something meaningful.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,067
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,976
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #31 on: November 15, 2017, 08:38:54 »
Maybe I'm reading it wrong but to me it looks like he's singling out Navy cooks?But isn't this a common enough practice already?  If someones skills are deemed essential then we deploy them anyways.

I'd say there needs to be some kind of common test or baseline.

I thought the FORCE was the baseline with the other operational tests for the various elements. Wasn't FORCE developed by taking into account what happened on a ship as well as other activities. I honestly don't see the need for another test for a ship deploying as our job at sea doesn't really change.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 448,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,439
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #32 on: November 15, 2017, 09:01:43 »
I thought the FORCE was the baseline with the other operational tests for the various elements. Wasn't FORCE developed by taking into account what happened on a ship as well as other activities. I honestly don't see the need for another test for a ship deploying as our job at sea doesn't really change.

My understanding is that ST(A) and ST(P) are the "test" for ships deploying, ensuring their readiness.  (Although, to be fair, it's a collective and not an individual validation).


I believe the confusion here is that the Army is recycling the FORCE name for a different test - an Individual Battle Task Standard (IBTS), not a fitness test.

Or, in other words, FORCE remains the CAF fitness test.  FORCE Combat is now an Army IBTS.  But the IBTS does not replace the fitness test. 
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 741,067
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,976
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #33 on: November 15, 2017, 09:05:16 »
My understanding is that ST(A) and ST(P) are the "test" for ships deploying, ensuring their readiness.  (Although, to be fair, it's a collective and not an individual validation).


I believe the confusion here is that the Army is recycling the FORCE name for a different test - an Individual Battle Task Standard (IBTS), not a fitness test.

Or, in other words, FORCE remains the CAF fitness test.  FORCE Combat is now an Army IBTS.  But the IBTS does not replace the fitness test.

Thanks I suspected so much.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,290
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,294
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #34 on: November 15, 2017, 09:20:52 »
My understanding is that ST(A) and ST(P) are the "test" for ships deploying, ensuring their readiness.  (Although, to be fair, it's a collective and not an individual validation).


I believe the confusion here is that the Army is recycling the FORCE name for a different test - an Individual Battle Task Standard (IBTS), not a fitness test.

Or, in other words, FORCE remains the CAF fitness test.  FORCE Combat is now an Army IBTS.  But the IBTS does not replace the fitness test.

Work ups (WUPS) for a ship is the deployment readiness training/test. It is difficult and physically demanding on everyone.

It is not the same as an individual physical fitness test. Which the FORCE test already seems to do a pretty good job of testing what I have to do on a ship. The sandbags could be firehose or AFFF cans, for all I care. The up/down part of the rush actually simulates utility work in the aft cabin of the of the helicopter remarkably well.

It is a good test.

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 448,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,439
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #35 on: November 15, 2017, 09:24:48 »
Work ups (WUPS) for a ship is the deployment readiness training/test. It is difficult and physically demanding on everyone.

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote
It is not the same as an individual physical fitness test. Which the FORCE test already seems to do a pretty good job of testing what I have to do on a ship. The sandbags could be firehose or AFFF cans, for all I care. The up/down part of the rush actually simulates utility work in the aft cabin of the of the helicopter remarkably well.

It is a good test.

Indeed.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 283,211
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,050
  • CFSME STAFF
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2017, 09:40:34 »
My understanding is that ST(A) and ST(P) are the "test" for ships deploying, ensuring their readiness.  (Although, to be fair, it's a collective and not an individual validation).


I believe the confusion here is that the Army is recycling the FORCE name for a different test - an Individual Battle Task Standard (IBTS), not a fitness test.

Or, in other words, FORCE remains the CAF fitness test.  FORCE Combat is now an Army IBTS.  But the IBTS does not replace the fitness test.

The LBM - Load Bearing March (13km) is the Army IBTS standard... Force Combat is for deployable and CADTC Units IIRC....
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 448,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,439
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2017, 09:44:14 »
The LBM - Load Bearing March (13km) is the Army IBTS standard... Force Combat is for deployable and CADTC Units IIRC....

No.  LBM has been replaced by FORCE Combat.

https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/PSP/DFIT/Fitness/Pages/Frequently-Asked-Questions.aspx

This is not an employment standard, FORCE remains the CAF physical employment Standard. FORCE Combat will replace the 13km march (BFT) as the physical fitness check in Individual Battle Tasks Standards (IBTS).
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 283,211
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,050
  • CFSME STAFF
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2017, 09:45:28 »
How about they first give us all the kit needed to do this stupid test... ;D
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline Eagle Eye View

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 17,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 358
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #39 on: November 15, 2017, 10:08:44 »
Quote
This is not an employment standard, FORCE remains the CAF physical employment Standard. FORCE Combat will replace the 13km march (BFT) as the physical fitness check in Individual Battle Tasks Standards (IBTS).

Hence the reason why they can waive it if someone doesn't meet the test requirement. The Force test remains the one that goes on your MPRR and PER.
Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

John F. Kennedy

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,376
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,718
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #40 on: November 15, 2017, 12:12:45 »
I thought the FORCE was the baseline with the other operational tests for the various elements.
Absolutely right,my mistake.  I was mixing up FORCE test with FORCE Combat.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 170,625
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,409
  • It's all good
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #41 on: November 15, 2017, 19:34:32 »
To confuse things further, the deployment fitness test will either be the LBM (13 km BFT) for non-Army, or the FORCE Combat test for Army types
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 235,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,410
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #42 on: November 15, 2017, 20:39:18 »
To confuse things further, the deployment fitness test will either be the LBM (13 km BFT) for non-Army, or the FORCE Combat test for Army types

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 448,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,439
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #43 on: November 15, 2017, 20:58:01 »
Clearly, CJOC needs another GOFO to sort this out - call him DCOS Fitness or something...
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 207,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,756
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #44 on: November 15, 2017, 23:09:48 »
... wait ... so the IBTS  requirement to deploy on an operation is decided by colour of uniform and not by the environment of the operation? A green cook will have to to Force Combat to deploy on a ship, and a blue clerk will do the old LBM to deploy on a Land Op?

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,290
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,294
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #45 on: November 16, 2017, 01:43:09 »
To confuse things further, the deployment fitness test will either be the LBM (13 km BFT) for non-Army, or the FORCE Combat test for Army types

So where do I get issued my gear to actually do the LBM?

And then I turn it right back in again to...hop on a ship for 6 months?  :orly:

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,028
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,875
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #46 on: November 16, 2017, 04:58:17 »
So where do I get issued my gear to actually do the LBM?

And then I turn it right back in again to...hop on a ship for 6 months?  :orly:

You make is sound like its nonsensical.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 112,179
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,011
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #47 on: November 16, 2017, 07:21:36 »
The article is wrong.  This test replaces the Army IBTS requirement to do a LBM.

Offline Strike

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,071
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,454
  • Welcome to the Dead Parrot's Society.
Re: FORCE Combat standard [Merged]
« Reply #48 on: November 16, 2017, 08:24:29 »
To confuse things further, the deployment fitness test will either be the LBM (13 km BFT) for non-Army, or the FORCE Combat test for Army types

So how do the purples fit in?
Stop assuming I'm a man!

Don't know how long I want to keep playing this game...