New ROFA

[cockneyrock]

what would the Advanced ROFA be used for? Up to the unit commander.

Would that be for pre-deployment training? Could be, or just to guage the overall fitness of the Sqn.

Do 2 Squadron have the same tests/standards as the rest of the Regiment? Yes

Or do they do their own version of the ROFA? No

Cheers You're welcome
T_T

For what it is worth, I think the AROFA is a waste of time and is just a case of us bringing ourselves closer in line with the Army.

 

[rockape]

To be honest Tommo I would hazard a guess the regiment has never had to tab 20k in its history. Never has most of the army mind you apart from the Falklands. I stand to be corrected on this.

Having said that though, the old CFT ( 10k 65-70mins if memory serves) was fairly easy and in no way a good combat fitness indicator. I've done a few of them half p1ssed from the bop the night before and sailed round.

My Bold...

IMHO we are setting ourselves up for a fall here... the current ROFA is based on clear and realistic requirements, namely:

The depth of a nominal GDA/AO - normally somewhere c.10km from the edge of the base. That gives you a reason for a 10 km tab - from the base to a patrol base is a good scenario.

The weight you carry currently is based on AP3 and the CEMO all up weight quoted in there - that gives you 37.5kg (inc weapon). That gives you the weight requirement. If that has changed we have grounds to increase the weight demands of the assessment.

The speed at which you advance is taken from the TAM and is the speed planners will use during an advance to contact / march. So that gives you 4km/hr. No point ragging yourself to finish the advance to end up puking on the line of departure. We need to learn at all ranks how to move at a reasonable speed over distances related to our role, so that we can do 'a job' at the end of the march...

Setting the bar higher than the current distance, speed or wight means we are simply 'making things up'. Unless we can back it up...

Imagine the nightmare scenario - someone fails the test. We take administrative action that affects promotion. The counter claim of unfair treatment would stack up nicely... I can hear the lawyer now... "...and why, exactly, was xxxx required to meet those standards..." We wouldn't have a bl@@dy leg to stand on.

This proposal needs more work it would seem. And it does not need to be hijacked by the phys nazis amongst our ranks. It must be a test of comabat effectiveness and not simply a 'test of man'.

 

[Bitburger]

My Bold...

IMHO we are setting ourselves up for a fall here... the current ROFA is based on clear and realistic requirements, namely:

The depth of a nominal GDA/AO - normally somewhere c.10km from the edge of the base. That gives you a reason for a 10 km tab - from the base to a patrol base is a good scenario.

The weight you carry currently is based on AP3 and the CEMO all up weight quoted in there - that gives you 37.5kg (inc weapon). That gives you the weight requirement. If that has changed we have grounds to increase the weight demands of the assessment.

The speed at which you advance is taken from the TAM and is the speed planners will use during an advance to contact / march. So that gives you 4km/hr. No point ragging yourself to finish the advance to end up puking on the line of departure. We need to learn at all ranks how to move at a reasonable speed over distances related to our role, so that we can do 'a job' at the end of the march...

Setting the bar higher than the current distance, speed or wight means we are simply 'making things up'. Unless we can back it up...

Imagine the nightmare scenario - someone fails the test. We take administrative action that affects promotion. The counter claim of unfair treatment would stack up nicely... I can hear the lawyer now... "...and why, exactly, was xxxx required to meet those standards..." We wouldn't have a bl@@dy leg to stand on.

This proposal needs more work it would seem. And it does not need to be hijacked by the phys nazis amongst our ranks. It must be a test of comabat effectiveness and not simply a 'test of man'.

What happened to train hard, fight easy?

 

[rockape]

What happened to train hard, fight easy?

I dont suggest we train easy but that we train realistically...

 

[fiveonerock]

I've got to be honest, I was a little bit ashamed when I read some of the posts on here, this new proposed ROFA whilst it will be more difficult, will do the corps good. I cannot bang out 6 pullups at the minute I'm ashamed to say, my fitness is not th best on the squadron, but I work at it in my own time and am always striving to improve. But a higher standard of ROFA should thin out some of the chaff that I am disgraced to see wearing mudguards. The present ROFA is a joke, the 10k yomp is easy, the only thing that aches at the end is your shoulders and your mind from how boring it is, our friday tabs are each and every one harder than the 10k. The speed march is pathetic with a ridiculousy generous time limit, we were cracking it in 20 mins in training, that was hard work, but achievable and that should be the time limit. There has been a lot of moaning on this board about what should simply serve as another challenge to step up to, you can phys whilst on ops no matter ho busy, so I don't buy that excuse. The train realistically thing is drivvel, a higher level of fitness helps you be a better soldier, fact. You cannot say oh, we don't do that on ops, that's unrealistic, how do you know what is going to happen, we had all sorts of taskings in Afghan that were not part of our regular business, that is what makes us a great little corps, adaptability, and like it or not, fitness provides part of that adaptability. I'm off to get ready for a run.

 

[Mohammed The Bear]

To be honest Tommo I would hazard a guess the regiment has never had to tab 20k in its history. Never has most of the army mind you apart from the Falklands. I stand to be corrected on this.

Having said that though, the old CFT ( 10k 65-70mins if memory serves) was fairly easy and in no way a good combat fitness indicator. I've done a few of them half p1ssed from the bop the night before and sailed round.

I can honestly say that operationally I've completed double that more often than I care to remember but that was in a rather different Army unit than most would have served with or alongside. DT_Xtremez_06:

I'm not and have never been RAF Regt but it does seem a tad excessive for your usual exploits lads, perhaps someone needs to drag the policy makers along with them on one of these happy jauntsDT_Xtremez_14:

 

[Red-Rock]

I've got to be honest, I was a little bit ashamed when I read some of the posts on here, this new proposed ROFA whilst it will be more difficult, will do the corps good. I cannot bang out 6 pullups at the minute I'm ashamed to say, my fitness is not th best on the squadron, but I work at it in my own time and am always striving to improve. But a higher standard of ROFA should thin out some of the chaff that I am disgraced to see wearing mudguards. The present ROFA is a joke, the 10k yomp is easy, the only thing that aches at the end is your shoulders and your mind from how boring it is, our friday tabs are each and every one harder than the 10k. The speed march is pathetic with a ridiculousy generous time limit, we were cracking it in 20 mins in training, that was hard work, but achievable and that should be the time limit. There has been a lot of moaning on this board about what should simply serve as another challenge to step up to, you can phys whilst on ops no matter ho busy, so I don't buy that excuse. The train realistically thing is drivvel, a higher level of fitness helps you be a better soldier, fact. You cannot say oh, we don't do that on ops, that's unrealistic, how do you know what is going to happen, we had all sorts of taskings in Afghan that were not part of our regular business, that is what makes us a great little corps, adaptability, and like it or not, fitness provides part of that adaptability. I'm off to get ready for a run.

I agree with a lot of what you have to say there 51rock especially about the higher fitness level making it easier to do your job. Another advantage in bringing the standards up will be that we will be on a par with the standard levels of an Army infantry unit. We get enough sh1te off them, slagging us off saying we are not proper infantry cos we don't do the CIC and we don't do proper OOA tours, bimbling round in WMIKs around BAS and KAF. Fitness is fundamental to being an infanteer. Doing the job is easier if you are fitter. It allows you to cope with both the physical and mental demands of the job aswell. Higher fitness levels make you more alert to what is around you aswell which also has an impact on the job we do.

The nature of the job is such that you can be thrown into all sorts of situation, whether you are working independantly or working as part of a joint op. As I said earlier, higher fitness standards are fundamental to the job we do. As Rocks we should embrace this and look at it as a way of improving ourselves for the better.

PER ARDUADT_Xtremez_14:

 

[Cooheed]

I agree with a lot of what you have to say there 51rock especially about the higher fitness level making it easier to do your job. Another advantage in bringing the standards up will be that we will be on a par with the standard levels of an Army infantry unit. We get enough sh1te off them, slagging us off saying we are not proper infantry cos we don't do the CIC and we don't do proper OOA tours, bimbling round in WMIKs around BAS and KAF. Fitness is fundamental to being an infanteer. Doing the job is easier if you are fitter. It allows you to cope with both the physical and mental demands of the job aswell. Higher fitness levels make you more alert to what is around you aswell which also has an impact on the job we do.

The nature of the job is such that you can be thrown into all sorts of situation, whether you are working independantly or working as part of a joint op. As I said earlier, higher fitness standards are fundamental to the job we do. As Rocks we should embrace this and look at it as a way of improving ourselves for the better.

PER ARDUADT_Xtremez_14:

I'm not even going to bother with fiveonerock's pontificating but I thought you would be a little more informed mate. I have no dramas with anything in the new (proposed) ROFA apart from the 20km tab and agree with a lot of what fiveone says. I would have no probs, even as an oldie, with any of the new stuff and agree that higher fitness levels will bring in benefits all round. However, he is obviously a young guy who has yet to develop the Service related 'wear and tear' injuries on the old skeletal system as many of us have over years of Service. The 10km is not that hard, just painful but doubling it is asking for trouble when there really is no justification for it. As a previous poster mentioned, it would seem that it has been thought of as a test of machismo ran than one of operational necessity. I can only see lots of 'pings' and 'twangs' coming out of a 20km tab.

 

[Red-Rock]

I'm not even going to bother with fiveonerock's pontificating but I thought you would be a little more informed mate. I have no dramas with anything in the new (proposed) ROFA apart from the 20km tab and agree with a lot of what fiveone says. I would have no probs, even as an oldie, with any of the new stuff and agree that higher fitness levels will bring in benefits all round. However, he is obviously a young guy who has yet to develop the Service related 'wear and tear' injuries on the old skeletal system as many of us have over years of Service. The 10km is not that hard, just painful but doubling it is asking for trouble when there really is no justification for it. As a previous poster mentioned, it would seem that it has been thought of as a test of machismo ran than one of operational necessity. I can only see lots of 'pings' and 'twangs' coming out of a 20km tab.

I do see where you are coming from mate with regards to 'wear and tear' but as I can see it the only real issue with the 20km tab is the weight aspect. Take me for example, I am 37 years old and weigh 95kg. That equates to a tab weight of just over 80lbs. Now as a weight on its own that is pretty hefty and I understand perfectly well about the effects on the skeletal system and having to cover 20kms with it would be a fair effort in 3.5 hrs but isn't that part of the challenge of the job. If we want to think of ourselves as the 'elite' in our field then we have to do the things that set us apart from the rest. If this means that we get rid of some of the wasters then so be it. I'm sure you can remember back to a certain geordie wnaker we labelled LMF when we went on Native Trail in 95. The lazy tw@t made the sqn a laughing stock to II Sqn and III Sqn(well him and the lazy fat cnut of a CO) cos of the fact he couldn't even manage the tab into the exercise let alone the exercise itself.

Yes the new ROFA may seem a tad unrealistic in relation to the role we undertake but in certain circumstances you have to push the boundaries to get the cream to rise to the top. All in all 20km in 3.5 hours doesn't seem that bad other than the fact that the bigger lads will have a hell of a weight on their backs, how I am potentially looking forward to it. Bring it on I say, bring it on.DT_Xtremez_30: DT_Xtremez_14:

 

[Cooheed]

I do see where you are coming from mate with regards to 'wear and tear' but as I can see it the only real issue with the 20km tab is the weight aspect. Take me for example, I am 37 years old and weigh 95kg. That equates to a tab weight of just over 80lbs. Now as a weight on its own that is pretty hefty and I understand perfectly well about the effects on the skeletal system and having to cover 20kms with it would be a fair effort in 3.5 hrs but isn't that part of the challenge of the job. If we want to think of ourselves as the 'elite' in our field then we have to do the things that set us apart from the rest. If this means that we get rid of some of the wasters then so be it. I'm sure you can remember back to a certain geordie wnaker we labelled LMF when we went on Native Trail in 95. The lazy tw@t made the sqn a laughing stock to II Sqn and III Sqn(well him and the lazy fat cnut of a CO) cos of the fact he couldn't even manage the tab into the exercise let alone the exercise itself.

Yes the new ROFA may seem a tad unrealistic in relation to the role we undertake but in certain circumstances you have to push the boundaries to get the cream to rise to the top. All in all 20km in 3.5 hours doesn't seem that bad other than the fact that the bigger lads will have a hell of a weight on their backs, how I am potentially looking forward to it. Bring it on I say, bring it on.DT_Xtremez_30: DT_Xtremez_14:

Aye well RR, you can tell me how you got on when you do it. (And the spineless LMF wasn't the only one who couldn't even make it into the J if you remember..)

 

[Vagabond]

On a more flippant note. They should look at what the Army do then add 10% on so we can fcuk them off when they start blah blahing on.

 

[Red-Rock]

Aye well RR, you can tell me how you got on when you do it. (And the spineless LMF wasn't the only one who couldn't even make it into the J if you remember..)

I hope you ain't pointing the finger in my direction mate. I was there with whistles and bells on mate as you well know. But yes there were quite a few who didn't even make it into the J. (mainly those lazy gets on HQ flt who got their pics in the RAF News.......they know who they are)DT_Xtremez_09:

And yes mate I will let you know how I get on DT_Xtremez_30:

 

[fiveonerock]

This will put us above the army's annual fitness tests and will in fact put us in line with the royal marine's annual standards I have found last week.

 

[rockape]

This will put us above the army's annual fitness tests and will in fact put us in line with the royal marine's annual standards I have found last week.

Why? DT_Xtremez_21: