My BBDU experiment: after two years, I be done with this nonsense

[a2capt]

...though if you poop in the sandbox you'll probably get a ticket...

Now I've got to go read it too, I don't recall anything about latrines, holes, and pooping.

[RiverAux]

Yeah, I suppose you could do your GT training in a city park's soccer fields, but you're supposed to be doing at least some of the tasks in "wooded" areas, moving over routes at least 400 meters long (seem to recall one task was over 500m but can't remember which one). 

And if you're training in city parks where you can see the entire search area because its well-mowed, you're certainly cheating your members of adequate training. 

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I don't think anyone should train on a golf course either. A big open space is good for working on spotting clues. My GT / GTL instructor used an abandoned and somewhat overgrown Navy runway and nailed 1 inch squares of caution tape in the ground. Not easy to get them all.

If GT required working on elevation changes over 1000', we'd be SOL in RI. Low is the coast and high is 812' We train to a standard for the country. That does not mean that person should be searching Pike's Peak if they are not physically up to the task. That does not mean a New Hampshire GTL/GBD/IC should allow me to work GT in the White Mountains (except to drive the GT to its walk-in site ). I know it's rare enough to be a super power but we are all supposed to apply a bit of common sense (aka ORM, IMSAFE, etc.) in participating in or managing our ES missions.

[vento]

I'm curious what you both mean by "obese".
Are we talking BMI chart definition or visual, "DAAAAANG!!!!" scale?

At 5'11" im technically obese by BMI scale standards yet just barely within CAP H/W standards to wear the AF uniforms (unless I had a big breakfast... then I'm over)

[Luis R. Ramos]

It is not good to generalize. 

In New York city, most missions appear to be the UDF type. Go to JFK DHL terminal (or UPS or Fed Ex) where a shipment of disaster beacons are going off. Or some marina for EPIRBS. Or Long Island. where there are no mountains taller than a termite's mound. The lower part of Westchester County, and Rockland County. 

Most mountains in NY are upstate. In the Catskill Mountain Group. North Westchester. Bear Mountain and the Allegheny mountains. North of Orange County which is north of Rockland County. 

The only search that can be said it is worthy of a wildland search would be on state parks and wetlands. We had one, count it one such search about a year ago. 

And the role that NY SEMO seems to want CAP to do is... help manage the Emergency Operations Center.

Overweight? Obese??? Not an impediment in the New York City Metro area...

Flyer

[cap235629]

...though if you poop in the sandbox you'll probably get a ticket...

Now I've got to go read it too, I don't recall anything about latrines, holes, and pooping.

Complete Task O-0103 Conduct Field Sanitation and Hygiene

3. Waste Disposal. One of the quickest ways to make you and your team sick is to improperly dispose of
garbage or human waste. If this material ends up in someone's food or water, in can incapacitate everyone who
ingests it. In addition, waste can draw disease carrying insects and wild animals.
a. Human Waste. Whenever possible, use bathrooms/latrines. If none are available, then dig a "cat
hole" at least one foot deep. Make sure the hole is at least 100 yards down wind from any bivouac site. Also
make sure your hole is not uphill from the bivouac to avoid drainage problems. After use, fill the hole back in.



READ THE MANUAL NOT JUST THE SQTR!!!!!

[Mela_007]

I agree our GTM missions and exercises require the needed fitness level to accomplish the task.  I am also one to admit that I am not currently very fit and would never attempt to do GT work in the more elevated areas that have been discussed here.  Living in a flat coastal area limits the elevation change here too.  However, as a new member (1.5 months active) I am excited to be training for the various missions of the CAP (I prefer ES). 

At this time I am particularly training for GT because of my fitness level/weight.  I agree my weight would be an issue in a plane that the pilots would have to compensate for.  With all of this in mind, if some of the opinions here were to require only GTMs who met the AF uniform standards...then that would leave me with little to do.  I did not join this organization just to do more paperwork (I get enough of that in my regular work).  I don't mind the required paperwork and regulations, but I don't want that to be my only duties in CAP.  I am fully willing to be a MSA and I am almost qualified, but to completely limit all participation by heavier members would be tough.  I would think the GTL needs to assess the mission needs and choose his GTMs based on that need. 

My goal is to "earn my blues" by the time I renew my membership next year...meaning that I want to be within the weight/height standards to wear the AF-style uniforms by then.  However, I would be extremely disappointed if I were not allowed to participate in any kind of GT or aircrew work until I reached that goal.  I know reaching that goal and getting fit will make me a much better GTM and make aircrew participation more viable, but I do not wish to be excluded just because I haven't gotten there yet. 

I personally wish there was PT and fitness tests that the Senior members could participate in.  It would be a turn off for some members, but I would like to participate.  It would help me get more fit and help keep me there.  I just wouldn't want it to keep me from all ES participation besides paperwork.

Just an opinion from a new member...

[Eclipse]

I agree our GTM missions and exercises require the needed fitness level to accomplish the task.

Agreed.  We have that today.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I personally wish there was PT and fitness tests that the Senior members could participate in.  It would be a turn off for some members, but I would like to participate.  It would help me get more fit and help keep me there.  I just wouldn't want it to keep me from all ES participation besides paperwork.

Just an opinion from a new member...

Here you go: CAPP52-18 CADET PHYSICAL FITNESS PROGRAM

On the last page, this is what we expect of cadets to make them able to participate in ES. I'd say it's quite reasonable for SMs as well then:

[RogueLeader]

...though if you poop in the sandbox you'll probably get a ticket...

Now I've got to go read it too, I don't recall anything about latrines, holes, and pooping.

Field sanitation O-0103:

O-0103 31-JAN-01
Evaluation Preparation
Setup:
This task is tested over the course of an overnight field exercise. The exercise should include at least
two miles of dismounted movement. You should observe the students over the course of the exercise and
evaluate them at the conclusion of the exercise. Anything not directly observed (such as the use of a cathole)
should be evaluated through oral questioning.
Brief Student:
Inform the individuals to be tested that they will be evaluated over the course of the next 24
hours on their ability to conduct field sanitation and hygi

[Ned]

I'm curious what you both mean by "obese".
Are we talking BMI chart definition or visual, "DAAAAANG!!!!" scale?

At 5'11" im technically obese by BMI scale standards yet just barely within CAP H/W standards to wear the AF uniforms (unless I had a big breakfast... then I'm over)

There are a number of methods used by health professionals and other scientists to define and measure obesity, but the most common method is BMI.

As defined by the CDC and the World Health Organization, the BMI definitions are:

Below 18.5 is defined as "underweight"
18.5 to 24.9 is defined as "normal weight"
25 to 29.9 is defined as "overweight"
30 or higher is defined as "obese."

Here is the link to the CDC Page Discussing BMI for Adults .

Since you mentioned it, when I ran the CAP Weight Standards for males from the 39-1 through a BMI calculator, for each height on the table, the corresponding maximum allowable weight yielded a BMI or 30 or above. 


On a related note, whenever I have looked at designing a physical conditioning test for senior members, I have found it to be a fairly complex task for two primary reasons.

First, there is common agreement that if we have a required test, that fairness and efficiency suggest that the test should be related to the actual tasks the member may be reasonably expected to perform as part of their duties.  IOW, we should not expect Admin or Professional Development Officers to have to run two miles in 16 minutes or less, or be required to drag a 150 pound dummy 100 yards.  Such a test would appear to be unrelated to their duties and might deprive a significant percentage of otherwise qulaified officers an opportunity to serve, thus actually impairing our ability to accomplish our missions.

On the other hand, there is no consensus on what the minimum required physical performance levels must be to perform GTM duties.  Others have pointed out in this thread that the terrain varies widely from wing to wing.  Many GTMs may never see mountains in their careers, while others may have a great deal of strenuos hiking that may be required.

And there is an unpredictable "wild card" aspect to GTM standards.  In DR situations, they may be asked to do things like lift and move heavy objects like bottled water or even sandbags.  Does that suggest that a GTM PT test should include strength testing?

I could never really resolve these issues, perhaps someone smarter can.

But the other issue associated with PT testing was even more sobering:  if we have any sort of vigorous PT test - whether it involves running or lifting or not - it seems inevitable that at least some senior members will be injured each year by the test itself. 

As an Army guy, I saw countless relatively minor injuries like sprains and the occasional broken bone from a fall during our PT tests. But I also know that the Army also experiences more serious injuries and even a few deaths each year from previously undiagnosed cardiac issues.

(To minimize these risks Army requires every soldier over 40 to take an "Over 40 medical exam" (including an EKG) before they allow a 40+ soldier to even take the APFT.  I can't imagine how CAP could implement such a requirement.)

It seems obvious (to me, anyway) that before implementing a senior member PT test, we should be able to say with some certainty that the benefits exceed the cost.  The costs seem fairly predictable  -- injuries and reduced staffing in at least some specialties like GTM.  The benefits of a PT test seem harder to quantify.  Until I can come up with a way to quantify the benefits, it is hard for me to recommend any changes.

Some have suggested that we simply use our own Cadet PFT for the seniors.  This is problematic because the cadet data is based on hard numbers researched by the President's Council on Physical Fitness.  There is simply no corresponding data set for adults in the range of our typical senior member.  To hold someone like me -- a nearly 60 year old senior -- to the same standards as a high school student would seem to ignore the reality of the aging process.

So while I generally support the notion of having some sort of PT test for seniors whose duties involve anything much more than sedentary work, I have come no where near being able to solve the problems associated with designing and implementing such a test.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Ned, great post. As I've stated in mine above, we currently allow cadets to participate in ES if they have their Curry achievement. While not perfect, it at least gives an idea of what is currently allowed. That said, at 18 I experienced carpal tunnel-like symptoms. There would be periods of up to 6 weeks where I couldn't bend my left wrist past maybe 30degrees. Forget getting to a 90 to do pushups. Yet with a bad wrist I could still do GTM tasks.

[RogueLeader]

The first thing I do with any GT trainee's or GTM that I do not know (after a gear check) is a 2 mile hike with 24 hr gear over mostly level terrain in under 30 min.  If they have issues, they will be counseled that GT may not be the best fit for them.  I will still train them if they so choose, however, they will not be be called by me for an actual mission due to the risk of the mission.  I do not care if they are in BDU's, BBDU's, flight suit, polo, etc.

So far, the only people complaining are the ones that seem to not be able to actually complete that.

[Mela_007]

RogueLeader, I understand that you would not want to call that person who failed the test for actual missions...since those are your standards, however, would you continue using them in SAREX to continue their training?  Also, if that person still wants to train for GT, why not let them re-test at a later date if they are working towards that goal?  It sounds like you would write them off forever, if they did not pass it.  Perhaps I mis-read your meaning.  If they pass it for a re-test, would you then start calling them?

[RogueLeader]

RogueLeader, I understand that you would not want to call that person who failed the test for actual missions...since those are your standards, however, would you continue using them in SAREX to continue their training?  Also, if that person still wants to train for GT, why not let them re-test at a later date if they are working towards that goal?  It sounds like you would write them off forever, if they did not pass it.  Perhaps I mis-read your meaning.  If they pass it for a re-test, would you then start calling them?

Absolutely I would train them on SAREXes, and yes, if they were to retake the Hike, and pass; I would certainly take them on actual missions.  It also depends on the type of mission, and where its located.

Sarexes are for training and honing of skills.  I want to encourage that as much as possible.  I also make sure that they know what they need to work on.  Missions are the real deal where ORM becomes that much more critical (Don't read this as me saying that ORM on Sarexes isn't critical.)  On real missions, I may only be able to get 4-5 members, together to go- it's the realities of my world here.  If one person gets hurt to the point of Not Mission Capable (IE ambulance, I have to halt my entire team to get them to an extraction point, or to the hospital, and depending on how many are available, that may end the sortie.

No one is forever written off for me due to physical capabilities.  If there are other issues (insubordination, just can't work together, etc,) that may be cause for non-calls.

[Mitchell 1969]

The first thing I do with any GT trainee's or GTM that I do not know (after a gear check) is a 2 mile hike with 24 hr gear over mostly level terrain in under 30 min.  If they have issues, they will be counseled that GT may not be the best fit for them.  I will still train them if they so choose, however, they will not be be called by me for an actual mission due to the risk of the mission.  I do not care if they are in BDU's, BBDU's, flight suit, polo, etc.

So far, the only people complaining are the ones that seem to not be able to actually complete that.

But....who validated those standards?  And will anyone stand behind them other than yourself?

If those standards are self-generated, what's stopping the next guy from saying "3.25 miles with 24 hour gear?"

[Eclipse]

No one, which is why you can't apply them.

A unit CC is free to set any standards they want for members within their AOR, however
if you were an SET in my wing and were trying to add "extra", you wouldn't be an SET anymore
since that isn't cricket.

Qualified is qualified, Rascal scooter or not.  NHQ sets the standards, not local SETs.

[Panache]

Personally speaking, I would rather have an obese person on my team who knows the terrain than a skinny-fit person who's not familiar with the area and who'll fall off the side of a mountain.

[MacGruff]

It is not good to generalize. 

Most mountains in NY are upstate. In the Catskill Mountain Group. North Westchester. Bear Mountain and the Allegheny mountains. North of Orange County which is north of Rockland County. 

The only search that can be said it is worthy of a wildland search would be on state parks and wetlands. We had one, count it one such search about a year ago. 

Umm... remember that the Adirondacks happen to be in New York State? I know the folks in NYC always think that the world ends where Westchester County starts, but New York is a BIG state with lots of places that require some vertical motion.

[RiverAux]

I don't think we need a run, but a rather simple timed hike with field gear would do the trick.  I think thats still what is used for wildland firefighting and if its good enough for them, its good enough for me.