Reserve PAST suspended?
- Thread starter Theirb123
- Start date
It is Suspended for both Active and Reserve right now. Recruiters can not administer PAST. Recruiters are saying as of today if you get a slot you will do PAST at BMT. Right now you go to MEPS take TAPAS ASVAB, medical. If you pass medical and score above 50 on ASVAB you will be shown a list of jobs you qualify for. That is when you will find out how TAPAS went. My son (in DEP Sr. in HS) had PJ and TACP on list but not CCT. He can not take PAST so is waiting now to see what comes. I have called a buddy who is a recruiter and they walked across the hall talked to AF recruiter and heard the same thing. Said a new PAST may come out in April. The process has definitely changed. Hopefully he is squared away soon as I am deploying.
Hope this info helps I will update if any changes.
This is what I have learned, of course I am not a recruiter ..............
Chris16
Member
This topic is also discussed here https://shadowspear.com/vb/threads/new-p-a-s-t-standards.22537/
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,587
Appreciate the input, but if you intend to regularly post on this, or other SOF threads, do take the time to get vetted. With vetting, your posts will have credability. Be sure you include the required documents with your vetting appliction.
Chris; your interest in this thread is commendable, but you are a student in high school. I hope you can see that posting on this, or any SOF thread, is a bit out of your lane.
Last edited:
Units cannot run them either. The issue is the liability of having civilians running the PAST. Supposedly someone was hurt recently, but that's just RUMINT. So, like in our case, a dude who wants to be TACP enlists directly into the squadron if he passes the PAST. The issue now is that if we let a guy enlist and he shows up and fails his initial PAST, we have to go through the dance to get him out of the unit and enlisted somewhere else.
It is RUMINT. This disruption is not result of somebody being injured or PAST change in the works or liability issues other than idiots training stupidly in the pool drowning themselves is resulting in pools going risk avoidance overboard in implementing policies of --"No prolonged underwater swimming for time and/or distance. Competitive or repetitive breath holding can be deadly and not permitted. Hyperventilation is absolutely not permitted."
Example: Lifeguard in critical, swimmer drowned in breath-holding exercise gone wrong at Staten Island pool and there are examples in military base pools of such active duty enlisted and officer idiots, drowning deaths, mostly officers, go figure that statistic out since the officers are supposed to be smarter.
However the current disruption has recruiter causals of being pissed they got caught fudging PAST results again and also the recruiters got a hair up their butt on the TAPAS tests as they haven't found a way yet to fudge the test scores or a way to help recruits game the test for a better score.
Any PAST changes as far as entry enlisting with a GTEP for a Battlefield Airman AFSC is less connected to any changes that might happen as result of women integration into the last closed to women AFSCs nlt January 2016. These changes do not cause before chance or anticipated change testing stoppage.
I was under the impression that a BA PAST required a current BA representative present to administer the test. The recruiter is always present at ours, but strictly as an observer. We administer, count, and fill out the worksheet to hand in.
The current AF/Recruiting Service policy pertinent to PAST has been around for decades. The policy is: A certified Flight Chief, SORL, or a certified administrator at or above Flight Chief level designated by the CC may administer the PAST. A Group SORL must certify all test administrators. Flight Chiefs must receive training at the Initial Flight Chief Course or by the Group special tactics liaison. There has never been enough Special Operations Recruiting Liaisons available to test all recruits attempting to be PJ or Combat Control and certainly not enough SORLs to administer PAST to all attempting to enlist to be PJ, Combat Control, Special Operations Weather, SERE, TACP, and AF EOD.
The problem is complicated as the original two AFSCs requiring PAST in 1996 (PJ, Combat Control) for entry has expanded to five (SERE, SOW, TACP, EOD). Further SERE and EOD are not Battlefield Airman AFSCs, these two AFSCs are combat support). The problem is some of them are just course entry and exit PAST standards (TACP/EOD) with no connection to being occupational fitness standards. Some such as SERE and SOW never actually connected occupational performance standards to actual performance in the operational or any work environment. TACP is currently stuck with course entry and entry exit performance standards for the reason it cannot sufficiently explain what has changed since WWII in the performing of TACP duties as there were TACP (officers) controlling CAS during WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, etc. SERE made the leap in 1993 and never got to scrutinized as giving SERE training at local base was primarily done by the Life Support and during the 1980s when putting pilots on the ground to be in the SERE environment it was found quite a few of the Survival Instructors (now SERE) and Life Support folks were having difficulties when put in the field.
In 1993 the National Defense Act put into place two critical public laws pertinent to physical performance standards pertinent to Women in the Service. They are : (1) Sec. 542. Notice to Congress of proposed changes in combat assignments to which female members may be assigned. And, (2) Sec. 543. Gender-neutral occupational performance standards. Pertinent to this discussion SERE and AF EOD are combat support occupations and duties, not combat. Both were also open to women years before 1993 and neither had any occupational or duty physical performance standards in 1993. SERE-1996 and both EOD and TACP subsequently only put in place a course entry and exit physical performance standard.
The development origins for the GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS is 1988 when U.S. Coast Guard was in process of determining what the performance standards should be for females performing Helicopter Rescue Swimmer duties. Pararescue (HQ MAC staff action officers-all enlisted at that time) was involved with working group and lobbied that all who perform helicopter rescue duties should be held to the same performance standard. At this time, 1988, as Combat Control had adopted Pararescue Occupational Fitness Standards (combined Pararescue & Combat Control Indoctrination Course, OL:-H, December 1988- ca. 2008) both AFSCs had validated GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. When Public Law implemented the must be GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS requirement in 1993 both Pararescue and Combat Control were again verified and validated as having GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS in compliance with Public Law.
The operational heritage of the Pararescue Indoctrination Course with focus on shifts in student attrition, approaches to fitness training, and student demographics gives a comprehensive history of the how and why origins of Pararescue's gender-neutral occupational performance standards. BTW, the individuals involved with developing Paraescue's gender-neutral performance standards wanted and attempted to do same for the screening and selection of the original astronauts but were told only male combat fighter pilots will be screened and selected to be astronauts.
The problem is complicated as the original two AFSCs requiring PAST in 1996 (PJ, Combat Control) for entry has expanded to five (SERE, SOW, TACP, EOD). Further SERE and EOD are not Battlefield Airman AFSCs, these two AFSCs are combat support). The problem is some of them are just course entry and exit PAST standards (TACP/EOD) with no connection to being occupational fitness standards. Some such as SERE and SOW never actually connected occupational performance standards to actual performance in the operational or any work environment. TACP is currently stuck with course entry and entry exit performance standards for the reason it cannot sufficiently explain what has changed since WWII in the performing of TACP duties as there were TACP (officers) controlling CAS during WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, etc. SERE made the leap in 1993 and never got to scrutinized as giving SERE training at local base was primarily done by the Life Support and during the 1980s when putting pilots on the ground to be in the SERE environment it was found quite a few of the Survival Instructors (now SERE) and Life Support folks were having difficulties when put in the field.
In 1993 the National Defense Act put into place two critical public laws pertinent to physical performance standards pertinent to Women in the Service. They are : (1) Sec. 542. Notice to Congress of proposed changes in combat assignments to which female members may be assigned. And, (2) Sec. 543. Gender-neutral occupational performance standards. Pertinent to this discussion SERE and AF EOD are combat support occupations and duties, not combat. Both were also open to women years before 1993 and neither had any occupational or duty physical performance standards in 1993. SERE-1996 and both EOD and TACP subsequently only put in place a course entry and exit physical performance standard.
The development origins for the GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS is 1988 when U.S. Coast Guard was in process of determining what the performance standards should be for females performing Helicopter Rescue Swimmer duties. Pararescue (HQ MAC staff action officers-all enlisted at that time) was involved with working group and lobbied that all who perform helicopter rescue duties should be held to the same performance standard. At this time, 1988, as Combat Control had adopted Pararescue Occupational Fitness Standards (combined Pararescue & Combat Control Indoctrination Course, OL:-H, December 1988- ca. 2008) both AFSCs had validated GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. When Public Law implemented the must be GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS requirement in 1993 both Pararescue and Combat Control were again verified and validated as having GENDER-NEUTRAL OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS in compliance with Public Law.
The operational heritage of the Pararescue Indoctrination Course with focus on shifts in student attrition, approaches to fitness training, and student demographics gives a comprehensive history of the how and why origins of Pararescue's gender-neutral occupational performance standards. BTW, the individuals involved with developing Paraescue's gender-neutral performance standards wanted and attempted to do same for the screening and selection of the original astronauts but were told only male combat fighter pilots will be screened and selected to be astronauts.
damnmemoriae
Unverified
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 4
heres what i was able to find regarding the PAST and TAPAS for BA/CS accession and selection...
Given that you aren't in the career field or a recruiter, you need to post a link to your information. We tend to frown upon wannabes coaching or informing other wannabes, so if you have a reputable link you'll need to post that.
Thank you.
damnmemoriae
Unverified
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 4
understood. thanks...
Was probably found on Specialtactics.com forums. http://specialtactics.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/998/Re:_TAPAS_required?.html#Post998
I had no reason to question it on the Special Tactics forums as I was informed the Recruiters were no longer willing to deal with the attitudes applicants wanting to enlist in the Air Force to be BAs only and expecting recruiters to help them by-pass standards and their enlistment obligation if they didn't meet standards. The Air Force Recruiting Service in one perspective has pursued a solution of putting the Air Force in an embarrassing position of demanding the Air Force lower occupational entry classification standards for the BA AFSCs. In another perspective, the Air Force is unable to implement clear policy as the demand by the Air Force Recruiting service to lower standards came at the same time the Air Force is determining what the standards should be to integrate woman into the PJ, CCT, SOW, TACP AFSCs.
The liability issues connect to Air Force recruiters not being Personal Physical Fitness Trainers or AFI 36-2905 Physical Trainer Leader-Basis/AFI 36-2905 Physical Trainer Leader-Advanced trained, qualified, and certified (requires maintaining a minimum satisfactory score on the annual Air Force fitness assessment (FA).
Also the PAST origins involving only two AFSCs in 1996 (PJ & CCT) has expanded since 2000 to involve six AFSCs (PJ, CCT, SOW, SERE, TACP and EOD).
The integration of women into PJ, CCT, SOW, TACP (SERE and EOD has been woman integrated for several decades) increases recruiters risk further, particularly if a PAST is administered unknowingly by a recruiter to a pregnant female (the gal gets pregnant once in DEP). Pregnancy is a medical condition, that upon confirmation, exempts women from all fitness assessments, PAST, and many other physically demanding activities until the pregnancy come to term (baby is delivered) or pregnancy is terminated and a medical evaluation by a health care provider determines the appropriate time fitness assessments and PAST can be administered.
Context being is the Recruiting Service never had purpose to be fitness testing those attempting to enlist and as the demand to test increased so did the liability risks or rather work load of dealing with people who believe they deserve opportunity to enlist only for one job and if they don't get it they (the want to be) shouldn't be expected to enlist.
Last edited:
Do you have a source or link you can quote?
My son and two other wannabes in DEP just received a date and location for the PAS T. They received a form with the date time and location along with the names of the administrators.
Thank you.
