TSAC Report 33 | Page 14

JASON BARBER, CSCS, TSAC-F, RSCC*D, AND LISA MAEZ, CSCS BRANCH-SPECIFIC PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE PROGRAMS The Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) consists of three events designed to evaluate cardiorespiratory endurance (2-mi run), muscular endurance of the abdominal and hip flexor muscles (2 min of sit-ups), and muscular endurance of the chest muscles (2 min of push-ups). The score of this test is taken very seriously for all military personnel. A pass or fail can determine completion of basic training, promotions, placement in a remedial fitness program, or worst case, separation from the United States Army if unable to successfully pass. The APFT requirements are calculated based on age and gender, and scored through the number of repetitions performed for both sit-ups and push-ups, and completed run time. While the U.S. Army has developed a program that creates a good base of fitness and has published a helpful educational manual, it is important to note that the APFT should not be the sole guide through which to base unit physical readiness programs, but rather should be used as an assessment of health and fitness (1). The fitness or performance needs of soldiers must be defined in order to develop and implement training that will best prepare them for their job tasks. What are the physical demands of a U.S. Army soldier? As simple as this question may seem, the physical requirements vary greatly depending on the soldier’s branch and Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). A soldier’s MOS defines the duties and responsibilities of each soldier. There are over 22 separate branches or corps within the U.S. Army, including Armor, Aviation, Air Defense Artillery, Field Artillery, Engineers, Infantry, Finance, Administration, and Special Forces to name a few. Each branch is staffed by soldiers trained in at least one of the more than 260 MOSs (2). The infantry is the largest branch in the U.S. Army and is America’s primary ground combat force. Infantry soldiers specialize in capturing, destroying, and repelling enemy ground forces during combat, whereas engineers build structures, develop civil works programs, work with natural resources, and provide combat support on the battlefield. An infantry soldier must carry loads for hours, sprint to contact or cover, drag or carry injured comrades to safety, and even engage in hand-tohand combat, whereas, an engineer must operate hand tools and heavy equipment and may engage in repetitive lifting and loading movements. The U.S. Army has historically made physical fitness and combat readiness a priority for all military personnel. This is seen through mandatory participation in early morning Physical Training (PT) three to five times a week. Unfortunately, it is seen more often than not that soldiers are training to improve their score on the APFT. It makes sense for the soldiers; why would soldiers train any other way, when a passing score of running, sit-ups, and push- 14 ups determines everything? Does this make sense to the sports coach that is concerned with making the athlete better at their sport? Could you argue that if the tactical athlete is fit enough for performance on the battlefield then they should be able to pass the APFT at any time? In order for the training to become more branch-specific, the program needs to be specific to the desired outcome, not just the test scores. Branch-specific programs may decrease training time, needed equipment, and injury rates, and increase combat readiness and soldier interest. By using an already established morning PT period, branches should make the most of this training time to get physically fit, but also to enhance branch-specific skills and movements. Soldiers are required to respond quickly and effectively on the battlefield and that same training should be replicated in morning PT. Units and soldiers should have in-depth planning of their tactical performance program. They should know what they are doing several weeks in advance with the mindset of increasing performance, rather than the mindset of getting soldiers to “pass” the APFT. By utilizing an efficient workout protocol, sold iers gain more time to train the physical aspect of their jobs. For example, an armor or field artillery soldier may want to work on absolute strength as their job requires them to have much higher levels of strength to lift the munitions required in their job description. Branch-specific training might incorporate sandbags, weighted vests, hill sprints, and barbell deadlifts during morning workouts to mimic tasks performed during deployments, while also adding an element of novelty to the training. In turn, this type of training can be sustained during deployments, when soldiers may not have access to conventional weights and weight rooms for extended periods of time. A viable option for strength training and injury prevention is suspension training. A suspension trainer is a small and lightweight piece of equipment that a soldier can shove in a rucksack and tie to any tree, pole, or tank. It is the responsibility of morning PT time to keep soldiers combat ready. Programming during this allotted time can be as simple as using block periodization which would allow the PT leader to only need to develop a 4 – 5 week plan that is repeated throughout the fiscal year. Additionally, this would allow for times at the range, field problems, etc. High-intensity evaluations can be used by units as a group to see where the unit’s performance level stands as a group. Other programming considerations might include circuits aimed at paralleling soldiers’ MOS duties or coordinating with brigade physical therapists to design injured soldier programs that might be implemented while simultaneously conducting PT. These programs could be based around suspension training systems. NSCA’S TSAC REPORT | ISSUE 33