Forum Home
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (taykuhls), 11 guests, and 6 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
330RCSBFACS, thereddoctor, AustinD, oterorphase, doit456789
3098 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums23
Topics949
Posts3,057
Members3,099
Most Online952
Dec 16th, 2016
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
#248 - 01/03/15 06:30 PM Re: Age and going for SF [Re: ]  
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Yukon Offline
Operator
Yukon  Offline
Operator

Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Anchorage AK
Obtaining any age waiver for a course such as the Army's Basic Airborne Course is dependent on meeting all the fitness and physical (medical) examination prerequisites.

The older applicants having age concerns will better serve themselves by reading the enlisted or officer classification description for the AFSC or AFSC of interest. It does not matter if going the Air National Guard, AF Reserves, or Regular (active duty) Air Force route as the entry classification requirements are the same for all and more importantly the duties and responsibilities info informs what is expected once trained and qualified regardless of component and unit of assignment. The AFSC classification descriptions are found here http://specialtactics.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/forums/6/1/Enlisted_and_Officer_Classific.html

I suggest also reading the initial physiology training info found at http://specialtactics.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/forums/53/1/Initial_Physiological_Training.html

The three posts (High Altitude Mountaineering physiology, Diving physiology, MFF (high Altitude) Parachutist physiology) give insight as to why functional wellbeing of body organs, muscles, and bones is as important as fitness ability to run, swim, and do calisthenics. The context being exercising, fitness tests (PAST) are not doing core skills to accomplish or do something in the operational environment.

The disconnect of physical fitness standards (PAST) of being reliable indicator of being able to do is the complete lack of the testing criteria being connected to adapting or coping quickly to do in a physiological and psychologically stressing environment.

A young inexperienced rookie has better adaptability than the older than 30 years old inexperienced rookie. Older age gives an edge only if it's connected to years of operational experience. A person "entry" classifying into one of the Battlefield Airman AFSCs has no experience. This to a lesser degree applies to prior service too as no Army or Marine MOS or Navy NEC converts as being equivalent with needed experience and training.

The Air Force's perspective of providing AFSC awarding training is the completion of such training is expected to put a trained and qualified person into a line unit as an "available" and "reliable" operational capability to be utilized to accomplish missions.

Another perspective:

A trained and qualified battlefield airman in being an operational capability has no shelf-life (can remain not used in storage) but rather has a service life (the acceptable period of use in-service). Such attributes are more appropriately defined as individual readiness and unit readiness to do at a moment’s notice.

The human performance acceptable period of being in-service to be doing something is broken down in terms of period of entry enlistment and career airman enlistments. Regardless both have ready to deploy/employ availability, reliability, dependability, and survivability expectations pertinent to service-life. When the Air Force entry classifies an individual into an AFSC the expectation is the individual will be assigned to a unit to do what it spent all the time and money on the individual to be there doing what the individual was trained and qualified to do. This is where and why age for entry classification purposes becomes a waiver concern.

#1315 - 06/01/15 04:25 PM Re: Age and going for SF [Re: ]  
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Yukon Offline
Operator
Yukon  Offline
Operator

Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Anchorage AK
The BAC age policy is set to accommodate training individuals for both war fighting combat necessities and support troop necessities. This must be considered when reading policies such as “be less than 36 years of age on ATRRS report date, unless you have an approved age waiver.” The demarcation of less than age 36 years exists because increased effort must be made by even the past 35 years old individual who is physically fit to maintain a high level physical fitness.

By age 35 too many individuals, including military service members, have avoided extending themselves in strenuous physical activities necessary to obtain and maintain a high level of physical fitness. This unfortunately puts them into higher injury and death risks when participating in doing the strenuous activities encountered going through the BAC.

Although generally 40 years and younger is the age demarcation for individuals considered to be fit to be combat warfighters, the reality is 30 years of age has been the consistently encountered demarcation of when it becomes increasingly difficult, although it can be done, for individuals to reach and maintain a high level physical fitness necessary for ground combat war fighting.

If I were a betting man, I would wager money there will be no more age adjusted occupation-specific fitness test standards in future because the enemy, his weapons, the terrain, the environment and the mission requirements do not change based upon any individual’s age or gender. Thus human performance standards of certain military occupations will likely reflect this more precisely in the future than has been the case in the past.

#2053 - 02/18/16 12:57 PM Re: Age and going for SF [Re: ]  
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1
learning Offline
FNG
learning  Offline
FNG

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1
Indiana
I am in the middle of the process of joining the AF to go PJ and my age is not an issue. 32 years old. Past the test and get in.

#3100 - 10/19/17 01:49 AM Re: Age and going for SF [Re: ]  
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 3
heavyrain Offline
FNG
heavyrain  Offline
FNG

Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 3
Colorado
As your age, I would try FBI HRT or regular local police SWAT, since most of the time are easy peasy jobs compared to STO alike 1500m swimming.


250yds=3'19"
500yds=7'26"
1000yds=15'45"
1500m=?
#3105 - 10/19/17 10:03 AM Re: Age and going for SF [Re: ]  
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Yukon Offline
Operator
Yukon  Offline
Operator

Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
Anchorage AK
Try or try not. If you don't try you will always be second guessing decision not to try. If you are eligible as far as age is concerned to enlist you as far are eligible to try for a BA AFSC as age by itself is not a screening factor.

Pertinent to recommendation to try BI HRT or regular local police SWAT it must be considered these are duty assignments within law enforcement agencies more so that a career occupation. In this regard getting into such duty assignments is a screening and selection process in the same way a military commission must be obtained prior to being screened and selected to be put into training to become a STO or CRO.

A no-prior service civilian desiring to enlist for a BA AFSC are the only persons eligible for a GTEP enlistment contract where passing PAST and meeting other entry qualification requirements for the AFSC allows recruiters to guarantee enlistment for a specific BA AFSC.

Several years ago I could without reservation say you are to old as there were clear and concise age restrictions connected to initial qualification training (Dive, parachutist) training. These age restriction/limitations have some what been replaced by physical fitness and medical fitness (Blood pressure and mostly other cardiovascular standards).

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Popular Topics(Views)