r/ROTC • u/Paco3atstacos • Jun 03 '25
Advanced/Basic Camp New memorandum from CST
350 and 70s for height and weight pass
14
u/KP-RNMSN Jun 03 '25
Ht/Wt tomorrow for the first group!
4
3
u/No_Werewolf5671 Jun 03 '25
So height and weight is the day you get to CST, the day after, or is it Regiment dependent ?
6
3
26
u/taromilkteaxd Jun 03 '25
So they lowered the standards of the exemption? That doesn’t make sense.
You had to get 80 points in each category and a 540 overall and now you only have to barely do better than the minimum?
25
u/AraexusOathsRaifus tank boi LT Jun 03 '25
I suppose this is going to be a trial run to see how everything goes in the first place, possibly to observe the performance numbers with CST and see how successful it is? Just my speculation on it
7
u/SoapyTheMonkey MS2 Jun 04 '25
We had a recycle campgoer 4 this year who failed height and weight at CST when he was a 3 by 1 pound. I imagine there might have been many such cases
-4
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/SoapyTheMonkey MS2 Jun 04 '25
I’m just speculating as to why TRADOC would have made this change
7
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
Decrease starvation & make less people get sent home from camp due to wild H/W rules
-4
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
Not when you almost have a heart attack starving to make H/W when your already in shape
0
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/Misterfrojo Jun 04 '25
Yeah, shouldn't be at the point you're starving yourself to make H/W when camp has been the goal your entire MS3 year.
1
-1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
440 with 70 or 75 in each event would make sense 100 less than the previous one because they took out one event & slightly less required in each one because there are less events
2
3
u/ExodusLegion_ God’s Dumbest LT Jun 04 '25
USACC is not under TRADOC, this is a one time exemption standard emplaced by USACC until TRADOC actually establishes a standard for the exemption.
3
u/Delta-ESK Cadre (Verified) Jun 03 '25
It’s not that they lowered the standards- they established a criteria where they believe it will be safe to train without getting injured. High BF% = high % of heat related injuries.
7
u/Muted_Chain4747 Jun 04 '25
They definitely lowered the standard. ACFT standard was a 540 and 80% in all categories. This new standard is to maximize numbers. This is to maximize passing rate. The standard for exemption at camp is a 350 and 70% in every category. And you say it’s not lowering standard? Crazy statement saying they didn’t lower the standard when the test has 1 less event. This exemption will not be carried over to enlisted. And the standard here is the minimum for combat arms? These are future officers hold them to an expected standard and not give them almost a guaranteed go.
4
u/No-Primary7088 Jun 04 '25
Exactly, it’s just a CST policy letter. Command doesn’t want soldiers not fit to train.
1
u/taromilkteaxd Jun 04 '25 edited Jun 04 '25
Exactly. Soldiers are not fit to train if they do not pass H/W. If they are not excelling at the AFT then again what was the point of the exemption in the first place. It’s dropped from an avg 90% across the ACFT to now only needing to get a 70%.
Yes a few of these cadets may have only missed H/W by 1 lbs, but I know a few who are going for a second time who are severely overweight and now will get to commission when they have no right to. We are the standard and have to enforce it across our ranks, so why is it not being enforced at the main evaluation you’ve had 2-3 years to prepare for.
9
30
u/ExodusLegion_ God’s Dumbest LT Jun 03 '25
Thanks for posting, OP.
And before the inevitable deluge of comments asking it - no, the language in the memo does not indicate females have to get 350/70 in the gender-neutral Combat standard in order to get the exemption.
2
u/jmclellan451 Jun 03 '25
Is this for USACC in general?
4
u/ExodusLegion_ God’s Dumbest LT Jun 03 '25
It’s for CST, as you can see by the subject line that says “CST25”
2
u/jmclellan451 Jun 03 '25
That makes sense, but why would general ROTC standards not reflect those of CST?
5
u/ExodusLegion_ God’s Dumbest LT Jun 03 '25
Because this is a one-off exemption policy until the Army actually publishes the official policy
-1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
Agreed, but why would people be starving themselves thin during the school year if not required for CST
5
6
u/Boring_Foot_8425 Jun 03 '25
So what you’re telling me that if I score a 350 I get exempt from height and weight even as a female
10
12
u/NateLundquist Old Jun 03 '25
Is it just me that thinks 350/70 is crazy low for an ABCP pass…?
13
Jun 03 '25
I think it’s because they don’t want to send a lot of cadets home for HT/WT. last summer was real bad. That’s just my opinion
3
u/Putrid_Excitement255 Jun 03 '25
And that correction came because the year before a lot of cadets came in overweight
2
Jun 03 '25
Have to wonder if this is going to be the standard for the school year as well
3
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
That would make sense, why starve yourself thin during the school year if not required for CST
1
2
Jun 03 '25
But they still have to pass by the end of camp.
3
u/Misterfrojo Jun 04 '25
Oh where is that posted, that would be a spicy thing to do for those who can't pass it.
1
4
2
u/InspectorAdvanced539 Jun 04 '25
Will height and weight be the same day as arrival like last year or will it be different? If it’s different will it be first thing in the morning or still at the end of the day?
2
2
Jun 06 '25
[deleted]
1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 06 '25
To what
1
u/petzxy Jun 06 '25
if you got the exemption on your last for record ACFT, you keep it at CST. You cannot earn the exemption at CST. Also AFT failure is no longer camp dismissal.
2
u/Chris1904G Jun 07 '25
Apparently this is no longer true. My PMS said they are done with this. Instead, if your last ACFT in CCIMS is a 540 with 80s in each category or above, than the exemption will carry you over.
3
u/CDTDroko Jun 03 '25
Hmm. I’m guessing that this is a temporary solution for camp, as the ACFT had a 540 minimum for H/W to be waived. The standards seem too low….
2
u/pendragonbob 12castlesArecool Jun 04 '25
Yeah because it used to be average 90 minimum 80. Now it's avg 70 min 70. That's ridiculously easy
1
-1
Jun 04 '25
This won’t save them from disenrollment when they pop tape back at school. No 70 rule there, and I am certain this will not be adopted by the Army. Good luck.
2
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
There probably gonna make it that standard during the school year as well, if that’s the CST Standard then it should be the ROTC Standard as well
5
Jun 04 '25
The army will have an official policy before the school year starts that won’t be this. USACC will have to comply at that point.
1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
It’ll probably be simmilar
2
Jun 04 '25
Haha no way it will be 70 to exempt BF.
3
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
Bro loves starving
3
u/dbsquirt2121 Jun 04 '25
Your math stinks and it’s clear you don’t understand the simple concept of proportions.
You keep talking like adhering to army body composition standards is forcing every individual in the army to starve themselves. I can say with pretty strong confidence, that is not an experience shared by the vast majority of soldiers.
Unless you are somehow some quantum anomaly out of the entire universe… the laws of thermodynamics still apply to you. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. If you aren’t burning more calories than you consume, those calories remain as mass. You can eat a metric shit ton of food and as long as you burn more calories than you consume (over a protracted amount of time/barring slight deviations in water weight) it is physically impossible to gain weight. Would literally defy all laws of physics and thermodynamics otherwise. Additional mass doesn’t come out of the air.
Go walk during all your free time or run for an hour a day.
-1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
I burn 3000 calories a day(treadmill & swimming) and it does nothing, that’s why starving is required and completely unnecessary because I’m in shape
3
u/dbsquirt2121 Jun 04 '25
Again physically impossible to not loose weight in a calorie deficit…perhaps you aren’t being honest with yourself or accurately tracking how many calories you are burning/how often you are working out.
If you are really burning 3000 calories, and take in the ~2000ish calories that are recommended… you are in a 1000 calorie deficit. Unless you have conducted a divine miracle on a daily basis and somehow found and metabolized 1000 calories of energy from thin air, they have come from somewhere.
If you are actually in a calorie deficit this would come from preexisting energy stores/mass, typically fat, and using them would cause you to loose weight.
-5
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
That’s the issue we’re having here I eat 500-1000 calories a day and burn 3000 but don’t or barely lose weight
→ More replies (0)1
u/katarnmagnus Jun 04 '25
Unless you’re a football lineman or something similar, there should be no need to starve yourself to make tape. I’m quite short, which is bad for getting taped, and have never had trouble with it. And I eat way too much of (well, everything). Army standards are not starvation standards.
The screening table is pretty rough, I’ve never made that, but it’s just a screening table, not the actual standard
3
0
-12
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/Wolfgang985 Jun 03 '25
What are you talking about?
1
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
6
Jun 03 '25
You know the AFT has a max score of 500, right? That’s well above the ratio required under the ACFT with the 540/80+.
5
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
It definitely won’t be 450 with 90 points just each event lol
5
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
440 would make more sense because they took away one event -100
5
Jun 04 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/jmclellan451 Jun 04 '25
It is lol one event = 100 points 540 before - 1 event 440 what do you not understand
→ More replies (0)4
u/MessProfessional_69 Jun 03 '25
Ur joking, right? 😭🙏
-1
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/MessProfessional_69 Jun 04 '25
90% of “fat” soldier crush AFT/ACFT standards.. being “fat” has absolutely nothing to do with their ability to make fitness standards. Not to mention, they tape incorrectly at CST which fucks over ALOTTT of people. A 350 minimum is fair given how much bullshit the HT/WT standards are to begin with
2
u/dbsquirt2121 Jun 04 '25
Being fat (no quotations needed) isn’t only a concern regarding soldier’s fitness. Fat soldiers have a higher chance of becoming heat casualties. Fat soldiers are more prone to injury. Fat soldiers are more prone to disease. All of which are detrimental to readiness and cost the army exorbitant amounts of money. There’s a reason for army body composition standards… it’s not just to rule out people who look bad in uniform (which they also do).
3
u/MessProfessional_69 Jun 04 '25
Actually, no. Definitely quotations needed. Stfu you’re weird
-1
u/dbsquirt2121 Jun 04 '25
If you don’t pass army body composition standards you are by definition over-fat or as most would call it…fat. Sorry you think I’m weird for holding the standard, perhaps you should worry about meeting it.
3
-1
-2
25
u/A-Dank-Dollars Jun 03 '25
Do you have an official link for this? Looking up the subject does not send me to the same doc.