Register

Welcome to the E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Somewhere between Iraq and a hard place
    Posts
    11,682

    Half of 17-35 year-olds not fit enough to pass initial Army selection

    Half of the UK population are now so unhealthy they are unable to pass initial Army selection, the chief of defence staff has said.

    Giving evidence to MPs at the Commons Defence Committee, General Sir Nick Carter said Army recruiters are facing “a very difficult market” in recruiting people healthy enough to enlist.

    His comments come after the committee was told in October that the Army currently has 77,000 fully trained troops compared with a target of 82,500.

    Gen Carter, who took up the post of chief of the defence staff six months ago, told the committee that “50 per cent of 17-35 year olds are not healthy enough to get through the selection process.”

    He also admitted that the British Army shares a large part of the blame for its recruitment failings alongside outsourcing giant Capita and that some "appalling lessons" have been learned.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...rmy-selection/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    On my own little planet
    Posts
    1,546
    It's good to see that someone so near the top has identified that they've royally fecked up, but I don't think that's their primary concern. There's certainly an argument for allowing entry to people who aren't physically fit or healthy enough and then training them up to the standard (like we used to before phys became such a high priority).

    But I think they also need to recognise that there just isn't enough drive in most 18-35 year olds to push them toward military service. They've not been exposed to major global conflict like previous generations, where WW2 and the Cold War were relatively fresh in our history. In context, their exposure has been to our conflicts in distant dusty places that seemed to fill no defensive purpose. The 'war on terror' is completely different, in that it's been brought home on more than one occasion, but there's a definitive disconnect between the military and home grown terrorism - we've not deployed to sort that out, it's the job of the police or MI5.

    Combine this with our current crop of oh-so-easily-offendable-snowflakes, and there's not many left who could be deemed as 'soldier material'. I think that (regardless of physical gender), soldiering has always required a certain element of masculinity - and we've managed to breed that out of our newest generations, in favour of a more metrosexual / hormone-neutral approach. I'm not trying to be sexist, I'm talking more of a psychological masculine / femenine rather than physical gender.

    the MOD has spent the last decade chopping off any perks associated to military service, and cutting manpower because it 'wasn't needed'. All of this has been clearly visible to the public, so what's the incentive to join (or more specifically, to join and stay)?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Living by the C
    Posts
    5,351
    Bit of a cop out if you ask me, I would have thought that at least half the people would always fail the test, not much point in having a test if nobody fails it.


    Sent from my Mind using The inter web
    Life begins at 40, with a nice payout and job to find

    E-Goat totally unofficial for about 10 Years




  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    On my own little planet
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by busby1971 View Post
    ...not much point in having a test if nobody fails it.
    True. Won't be long before that changes though. Not moving the goalposts as such, just making the goal area a bit bigger....won't be the first time that the rules have been changed in order to let more applicants get through the gates...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Living by the C
    Posts
    5,351
    Quote Originally Posted by Witty_Banter View Post
    True. Won't be long before that changes though. Not moving the goalposts as such, just making the goal area a bit bigger....won't be the first time that the rules have been changed in order to let more applicants get through the gates...
    Yep see it so many times, tests should produce what you need, however, if you lower your input standard you can increase the passes, although if you don’t change your training regime you also need to lower your output standard.


    Sent from my Mind using The inter web
    Life begins at 40, with a nice payout and job to find

    E-Goat totally unofficial for about 10 Years




  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Far away from London control in Manchester
    Posts
    310
    As this is a sad reflection of YUFF today capabilities in even being employable, why not the military follow the CBI line of hiring from abroad.. In light of the good news of government uselessness and with EU willing now to take us back with open arms with caveats no doubt The Army should seek fresh field in Poland and other Eastern Bloc sorry former countries. No need to worry about language issues as they can have their own drill instructor brought with them on the flight here. Most public sectors issue pamphlets catering for various languages.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Somewhere between Iraq and a hard place
    Posts
    11,682
    The army is already doing that...

    Ghurka's anyone?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Exactly where I want to be
    Posts
    1,832
    My vote is we disband the Armed Forces and contract the whole thing out to G4S. What could possibly go wrong?
    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is; it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong', Richard Feynman.

    'Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason', Mark Twain.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Somewhere between Iraq and a hard place
    Posts
    11,682
    Quote Originally Posted by ninjarabbi View Post
    My vote is we disband the Armed Forces and contract the whole thing out to G4S. What could possibly go wrong?
    Careful now..... ludicrous ideas like have a tendency to become Government policy nowadays.....

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    On my own little planet
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by ninjarabbi View Post
    My vote is we disband the Armed Forces and contract the whole thing out to G4S. What could possibly go wrong?
    Quote Originally Posted by FOMz View Post
    Careful now..... ludicrous ideas like have a tendency to become Government policy nowadays.
    Too late lads, they've been doing that for years - may I present....the MPGS...the Armed Forces version of G4S (who are equally, if not even more useless)

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Should 16/17 year olds get the vote?
    By FOMz in forum General Chit Chat
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 21:54
  2. Emmerdale confuses 7 year-olds
    By Ex-Bay in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28-07-2010, 11:28
  3. Half Man, Half Tree.
    By Talk Wrench in forum General Chit Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14-11-2007, 17:03
  4. 9% of Army below the standard of an 8 year old
    By TrenchardsLoveSock in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-03-2007, 01:14

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to Top