You sound fat

Are you talking enlisted leaders?

Officers are not promoted or assigned to command based on pt, excerpt they have to pass. Exception for elite infantry for obvious reasons. Way more factors involved than that...

Typical response to those who have no counter argument to this issue. I regularly scored in the low 90s out of 100 on my PT tests.

The issue was on both sides and is geared more towards the mid and senior grades. The issue came into effect during the racking and stacking for DPs and # out of ## bullet statements.



I don't want to derail the whole thread on this issue. I just found it amusing that somebody posted that PT scores were an indication of a good leader.

In a military that ACCIDENTALLY loads and flies six nukes from Minot to Barkesdake hanging on the wing of an aircraft and leaves them unguarded on both ramps, I would say that PT scores are the least of their worries:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...30047820071019

At the USAFA cemetary they must call Curtis LeMay “old whirligig’.

That's exactly my point. For some reason the Air Force had this ultra focus on PT scores while the mission slipped elsewhere. I am by no means saying PT is not important, but those who have been in since the mid 00s know what I am talking about.

I actually never indicated that a good PT score was an indication of a good leader.

I know and experienced that.

I was simply paraphrasing the article for those who didn’t read it. My point was just to not accept the bare minimum effort. How many times have you heard people saying anything greater than a 70% on a written is “x% working too hard”? I know it’s a joke, but still. Would you want a 70% pilot on your next deadhead? He can only keep the needle 70% centered on an approach down to minimums? He only has 70% of his memory items and limitations down?

As one of my military instructors said, “attention to detail, kicks de-tail”. I still say that to this day, and get quite a few crazy looks when I do. My examples above are pedantic. But humor me. What margin of error becomes acceptable? For me, it’s honestly just an internal struggle of constsntly trying to improve, and never accepting less than what I believe is my best. I’m not perfect. I mess up. I don’t sweat 0.02 or 0.03 X track. I’m not going to fish tail myself all over the sky just trying to get 0.00. But I STRIVE to be as CLOSE to perfect as possible. For me, I just enjoy the challenge. I enjoy maintaining my skills and trying to improve upon them. And my personal opinion is that that’s what separates amateurs from true professionals. Our companies and passengers expect professionals. And I have to agree with the statement that people with that mentality, either consciously or subliminally, portray themselves as such, and interviewers at the next level can pick up on that. But I could still be young, naive, and bright eyed and bushy tailed, so 🤷🏻*♂️

Bwahahahahaa

I always said 70% was basically a D+.

I worked for a commander who prioritized PT and appearance for a very simple reason: It was easiest for him. He was not smart and he knew it.

Evaluating decision-making, technical skills, team-building and other critical aspects of leadership is hard. It takes work and actual analysis. Counting pushups and picking the starchiest fatigues or shiniest boots is easy.

It is comforting to know those leaders usually hit their ceiling, typically at the O4 level, when the need for actual thinking trumps the fascination with shiny things and buff bodies.

Then again, there are other fields for such individuals to advance. We’ve all worked for or seen the boss fixated on “always wearing a sharp suit” or the like. I wear a uniform and it always looks sharp; but I’ve found that leaders for whom that’s their main focus almost always lack needed critical basic leadership skills that are much more important than looks.