New Weight Standards
The Navy is changing its standards again, this time from the old height and weight tables to a simple ratio of waist circumference to overall body height. The Marines will follow, expect the Army and Air Force to do so soon.
For decades, each branch of the U.S. military used height and weight screening followed by an abdominal circumference “tape test” when individuals exceeded weight limits. That two-step approach frequently drew criticism because it often failed to distinguish between lean muscle and excess body fat, creating situations in which physically fit servicemembers were flagged simply because of their size.
Knew a guy flagged for being fat who explained to the doc that he was simply a bodybuilder. When the doc challenged that, he casually flexed his biceps and split the sleeve on his khakis. The doc passed him.
Rather than comparing a servicemember’s weight to a height-based chart, the new method divides waist circumference by height, using the same unit of measurement for both. DoD policy permits multiple body-composition methods, including waist-to-height ratio, but the services implement their own standards; the Navy’s newly released guidance sets a 0.55 WHtR screening cutoff, while the Marine Corps has announced a shift to WHtR and says it will publish its numeric thresholds after additional higher-level guidance.
Like the older standards, this isn’t kind to some of the endomorphs who tend to gain around the midsection. I recall a platoon sergeant I had once who couldn’t do a good Ranger pushup – his chest hit the ground before he broke the plane with his elbows. But he could do over 100 of them inside the 2 minutes and his two miles runs times were in the 11 minute range – the man was fit, he just didn’t look like it.
Under the previous system, failing height-and-weight screening could trigger multiple follow-on steps, including taping, administrative flags, and potential impacts on promotion, reenlistment, or assignment eligibility. Measurement disputes were common, and outcomes often depended on who conducted the taping and how it was performed.
The updated guidance simplifies enforcement by establishing a single pass-fail metric. The waist-to-height ratio now serves as the controlling standard, reducing subjectivity and administrative friction. Military.com
A single pass-fail metric? Some otherwise good folks may going to get hurt on that. There are too many body types, and not everyone looks like a greyhound. But IN GENERAL a non-subjective standard should be a good thing, and running a few numbers of what that 55% number works out to, only the short stocky folks may have to sweat it a bit.
Category: Military issues
I am still at 0.468 one and a half years after retirement. I nominate that as the new Army standard.
And then there are those who would fail regardless of the standard used. I’m reminded of a certain Master Chief in one of the squadrons I flew with, who was magically and mysteriously “exempt” from physical readiness standards, since he would’ve failed them miserably.
In my company in Germany we had an E7 Platoon sergeant who could not fit in the hatches of an M113; they had to lower the ramp to get him on board. Another Plat. Sgt. was only slightly less obese, and was blind in one eye.
But we were combat ready! Prepared to go out and defend NATO and Western Civilization at a moment’s notice.
One would think standards were higher in RVN, but we lost an E7 Plat. Sgt. to heat stroke on his first day in the field. It took a good part of his platoon to carry him to the Medevac chopper. He was a rarity, though. Most of the heavyweights (and E7s) got rear area jobs. Saw one who managed an EM club at An Khe who took up three bar stools.
What a clusterfuck of a war. I blame it on the Democrats.
I saw today that the Air Force was tweaking the Sept 2025 announced new requirements that included a 2 mile run.
I was never and still ain’t a poster child for PT but I took it seriously and put in the effort. In the early 90s the Air Force dropped the 1-1/2 mile run for a bicycle test. I was on the Staff at Langley at the time. After failing the new test for like the third time I got called in to discuss this.
I brought a copy of the previous weeks Virginia Pilot that had the results of the Armed Forces Staff College sponsored 10Km race in it. I had finished in 48:20. Nothing earth shattering I think the winner was 15 minutes faster than that. But combined with the fact I was 40 pounds under my max allowable weight they decided that I was probably fit.
Alas, I ain’t below my max weight 20+ years after retiring even though I lost hair.
There was a fat-ass blubber boy, E-6, at Walter Reed who couldn’t quite manage to get within the “parameters” so someone managed to have him transferred to armor school at Ft. Knox.
There was no way in the world that fat bastard was getting through a tank hatch when he left Walter Reed! Maybe they put him through a retraining program first 🙂
He must have required grease and a toilet plunger to get into the hatch
The Army has been using the One Site Circumference for three years now, which replaced the waist and neck tape.
In principle, sounds good.
Some discretion for non-standard body types needs to be allowed, but how do you write that so Sgt. Fattus Slobbivus doesn’t get a pass?
I would have to lose 1.5″ on the waist to be in the acceptable category. Even though I would pass under the old tape test.
Interesting.
I was always within 5 lbs of my maximum weight and I never had a problem passing the running and “bicycle” tests. I was in shape as demonstrated by the sports teams I played on.
I took seriously my God given right to complain about the pencil neck orderly room NCO’s who had the authority to order me to report to the orderly room to weigh in. I was on a “special” list that allowed the Shirts to weight me whenever they pleased (with no notice). The nerve of people whose shiniest parts of their uniforms were the back sides, polished from so many years of sitting at their desks, telling me they were helping we get in shape would set me off. I loved it when the thin as a rail CMSgt had to report for mandatory PT because he failed the “bicycle” test. The Chief stopped making comments about my weight after that.
In Class A school about 300 years ago, I had a buddy who was a competitive power lifter. he was built like a fireplug and could bench press a Volvo.
He was always on “Mandatory PT” because by Navy standards of the time he was overweight for his height.
He laughed about it because he considered the hour of Navy PT his warmup and then stayed at the gym for his actual workout after.
Generalizing works, in general…but there are always outliers who break the mold. Some of them are quality people who’d be a shame to lose from the military.
We had an MP at Walter Reed who was power lifter, built like tractor, and obviously VERY strong but they did not allow him to reenlist.
He had his shirts tailored to fit. Curiously, he was built like that when he joined the Army and they didn’t seem to have a problem with it.
I suspect recruiters are a little more motivated and less picky than the rest of the military.
It doesn’t give me a great deal of confidence in our military “leadership” when they can’t even decide on a measure of physical fitness standards after (at least) several decades of trying.