ImprovingPerformanceof Heavy Load Carriage … Heavy Load Carriage During High-Intensity ... may be instances where explosive ... calisthenics and cardiovascular training

Improving Performance ofHeavy Load CarriageDuring High-IntensityCombat-Related TasksJesse Mala, MS,1 Tunde K. Szivak, MA, CSCS,2 and William J. Kraemer, PhD, CSCS*D, FNSCA2

1Department of Educational Leadership, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut; and 2Department of HumanSciences, College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

A B S T R A C T

THE MODERN BATTLEFIELD IS ONE

OF AN ANAEROBIC NATURE WITH

ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY AND

TROOP MOVEMENTS. CONDITION-

ING PROGRAMS MUST ADDRESS

FUNDAMENTAL STRENGTH AND

POWER CAPABILITIES WITH OPTI-

MALLY DESIGNED PERIODIZED

HEAVY RESISTANCE TRAINING PRO-

GRAMS. IN ADDITION, RECOVERY

MUST BE CAREFULLY MONITORED

WHEN PERFORMING ANY DEMAND-

ING WORKOUT. CONCURRENT

TRAINING WITH CARDIOVASCULAR

ENDURANCE PROGRAMS MUST BE

CAREFULLY PRESCRIBED TO MINI-

MIZE NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON THE

WARFIGHTER’S STRENGTH AND

POWER CAPABILITIES. A WELL-DE-

SIGNED TRAINING PROGRAM WITH

SENSITIVITY TO RECOVERY NEEDS

AND EMPHASIS ON THE DEVELOP-

MENT/MAINTENANCE OF STRENGTH

ANDPOWER ISVITAL TOOPTIMIZING

PHYSICAL READINESS FOR THE

MODERN WARFIGHTER.

INTRODUCTION

Throughout history, load carriagehas been shown to be an essen-tial aspect of soldiering during

military operations. During trainingand on the battlefield, soldiers are

required to carry various loads, on theirperson or in a pack (4,6,20,21). Whilecarrying loads, soldiers must navigatevarious terrains and are expected to per-form all occupational duties at a highstandard. Knapik et al. (22) displayedthe various loads that have been carriedby different soldiers throughout history,showing a progressive increase in loadscarried onmarches.Much of the externalload can be attributed to technologicaladvances in weaponry and armor, whichaim to improve combat effectiveness andsurvivability. The increase in weight hasnegative implications onmobility, endur-ance, and combat effectiveness, with sys-tematic increases in load producingsystematic decreases in performance(5,30,31,33,40). Efforts have been madeto reduce the absolute loads carried bythe soldier because heavier loads area factor that contribute to decreasedcombat performance (4). In addition, toameliorate the performance decrementthat occurs from heavy load carriage incombat tasks, multiple investigationshave been conducted. Studies haveexamined training programs that opti-mally develop the physical capacities ofthe soldier to bear heavy loads duringmedium-to-long distance marching op-erations (14,22,28).

Considerable attention in the literatureof military load carriage has emphasizedthe development of the ability to cover

medium to long distances with variousloads (7,22,23). Also, this emphasis onlong-distance (3.2–20 km) marching isseen within current U.S. Army infantrybasic training (11). Road march trainingbegins with shorter marches and lighterloads and culminates in a 15–25-milemarch before course completion.Within the U.S. military, long roadmarches are often used as a graduationrequirement for many leadershipschools and entry into certain SpecialOperations units. Marching with heavyloads over long distances has tradition-ally been a defining characteristic of aninfantryman. It is a primary componentof military training, which can be attrib-uted to battlefield experience in previ-ous wars. History has shown thatduring various wars, soldiers wouldhave to march long distances into battlecarrying their supplies.

However, combat operations and tac-tics have evolved with each war. Withthe varying terrain and the volatiletactics of the enemy, the battlefieldhas called for more than long patrolson foot. Airborne operations andarmored vehicles have been usedmore frequently to transport troopsdirectly onto an objective, instead of

KEY WORDS :

load carriage; concurrent training;power; strength

Copyright � National Strength and Conditioning Association Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 43

https://www.nsca.com/Certification/Continuing-Education/Quizzes-and-Assessments/CEU-Quizzes/Journals/Improving-Performance-of-Heavy-Load-Carriage-During-High-Intensity-Combat-Related-Tasks---Aug-2015-(37-4)/

requiring long marches to an objec-tive. This shift in battlefield tacticscan be seen with the recent wars insupport of Operation Enduring Free-dom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.Due to differing terrain and in order tomaintain combat effectiveness through-out an operation, direct action raidswere often used (8,15,34). During directaction raids, soldiers are transportednear to, or directly onto an objectiveand must then quickly traverse theobjective. Once an objective, troopsmust perform anaerobic tasks, such assprinting, lifting, pulling, crawling, andclimbing, while still carrying significantloads. Current training methodologieswithin the military do not fully address

and optimally prepare the soldier forthe anaerobic demands required on anobjective (19,39).

THE ANAEROBIC BATTLEFIELD

The landscape of the battlefield haschanged from being primarily aerobicto a predominately anaerobic battle-field characterized by quick and explo-sive movements on the objective.Field Manual (FM) 7-22 identifiedthe physical requirements necessaryfor the successful performance of vari-ous combat-relevant warrior tasks anddrills. FM 7-22 acknowledges muscu-lar strength and anaerobic enduranceas fitness components essential to theperformance of these various tasks and

drills (13). In addition, the ability to runfast under load was categorized asa physical requirement necessary forthe successful performance of offensiveand defensive maneuvers (Tables 1 and2) (13). Several investigations have alsoshown the importance of upper- andlower-body strength and power duringthe performance of field infantrytasks, including ambushes, offensiveand defensive maneuvers, and casualtyrescues (3,18).

During combat operations, soldierscarry equipment that is essential tothe completion of the mission, includ-ing body armor, weapons, ammunition,food, and water. Depending on the

Table 1Warrior tasks and battle drills, physical requirements for performance

Physical requirements

Shoot

Use hand grenades Run under load, jump, bound, high/low crawl, climb, push, pull, squat, lunge, roll, stop,start, change direction, get up/down, and throw

Move

Perform individual movementtechniques

March/run under load, jump, bound, high/low crawl, climb, push, pull, squat, lunge, roll,stop, start, change direction, and get up/down

Navigate from one point toanother

March/run under load, jump, bound, high/low crawl, climb, push, pull, squat, lunge, roll,stop, start, change direction, and get up/down

Move under fire Run fast under load, jump, bound, crawl, push, pull, squat, roll, stop, start, changedirection, and get up/down

Survive

Perform combatives React to man-to-man contact: push, pull, run, roll, throw, land, manipulate body weight,squat, lunge, rotate, bend, block, strike, kick, stop, start, change direction, and getup/down

Adapt

Assess and respond to threats(escalation of force)

React to man-to-man contact: push, pull, run, roll, throw, land, manipulate body weight,squat, lunge, rotate, bend, block, strike, kick, stop, start, change direction, and getup/down. Run under load, jump, bound, high/low crawl, climb, push, pull squat, lunge,roll, stop, start, change direction, get up/down, and throw

Battle drills

React to contact Run fast under load, jump, bound, crawl, push, pull, squat, roll, stop, start, changedirection, and get up/down

Evacuate a casualty Squat, lunge, flex/extend/rotate trunk, walk/run, lift, and carry

The warrior tasks of shooting, moving, adapting, and conducting battle drills highlight running fast under a load as a physical requirementnecessary for performance.

Source: Field Manual 7-22, Headquarters, Department of the Army, 2012.

Performance of Heavy Load Carriage

VOLUME 37 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 201544

Table

2Warriortasksandbattle

drillsto

components

matrix

PRTco

mponents

Warriortasks

Battle

drills

Use

hand

grenades

Perform

individual

movementtech

niques

Navigate

from

onepointto

another

Move

underfire

Perform

combatives

Assess

andresp

ond

tothreats

(escalation

offorce)

React

toco

ntact

Evacu

ate

acasu

alty

Strength

Muscularstrength

XX

XX

XX

XX

Muscularendurance

XX

XX

XX

X

Endurance

Anaerobic

endurance

XX

XX

XX

XX

Aerobic

endurance

XX

XX

Mobility

Agility

XX

XX

XX

XX

Balan

ceX

XX

XX

XX

X

Coordination

XX

XX

XX

XX

Flexibility

XX

XX

XX

XX

Posture

XX

XX

XX

XX

Stab

ility

XX

XX

XX

XX

Speed

XX

XX

XX

XX

Power

XX

XX

XX

XX

Muscle

strength

andpowerareidentifiedas

fitness

components

necessaryfortheperform

ance

ofallWarriorTasksan

dBattleDrills,highlig

htingtheim

portan

ceofan

aerobicphysical

trainingforbasic

infantrytasks.

Source:Field

Man

ual

7-22,Head

quarters,Departm

entoftheArm

y,2012.

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 45

military occupation and the mission,approach march loads can range from42 to 75 kg and fighting loads rangefrom 26 to 37 kg (4,6). Soldiers mustbe able to effectively perform combat-related tasks, including reacting to con-tact, pushing and pulling objects, andmaneuvering quickly around, over, andunder obstacles. These combativemovements are typically conductedunder a fighting load, although theremay be instances where explosivemovement is required with approachmarch loads. Because the anaerobic bat-tlefield requires rapid and explosivemovement under heavy loads, develop-ing upper- and lower body strength andpower is warranted.

Several investigations have examinedhigh-intensity combat-related tasksusing obstacle courses as a performancemeasure. These investigations haveidentified upper- and lower body mus-cular strength and power to be signifi-cantly correlated to obstacle courseperformance (2,17,31). Faster performershad greater upper body strength andpower than slower performers, andabsolute strength measures were predic-tive of criterion military task perfor-mance (2,17,35). Greater upper- andlower body strength and power haveshown to be beneficial for the optimalperformance of high-intensity combattasks. Therefore, it would be advanta-geous for the soldier to increase musclemass, with greater muscle cross-sectional area being related to its maxi-mal force potential (37). Studies haveshown that greater fat-free mass trans-lates to faster performance times underthe heaviest loads during a combat-related course (29,33,35). The morelean body mass a soldier possesses, thegreater the capacity to perform high-intensity combat activities while carry-ing significant loads.

MAJOR CONCERNS OFTRADITIONAL MILITARY TRAINING

Because the anaerobic battlefield re-quires a significant amount of muscu-lar strength and power, anaerobiccapacities must be cultivated to opti-mize combat effectiveness. Neverthe-less, physical training within the

majority of the U.S. Army populationstill emphasizes the development ofaerobic and muscular endurance overstrength and power development. Sol-diers may be prone to this mode oftraining because the Army Physical Fit-ness Test (APFT) is still used to evaluatethe physical fitness of soldiers (12). Ashift is currently underway in the U.S.Army with the development of theArmy Physical Readiness Training(APRT) program (13). The APRT in-cludes elements of strength and powertraining and focuses on optimal physicalreadiness for mission requirements,which goes beyond APFT preparation(13). Yet, at the squad and team levelwhere physical training takes place,strength and power training are rarelyimplemented because of a lack ofresources.

According to the size principle, (1,27)training with the traditional U.S. Armyphilosophy does not optimally recruitthe high force type 2 motor units. Aero-bic endurance training and calisthenicsleave the more powerful motor unitsuntrained, which are the motor unitsused during high-intensity combatactivities (18,27). Also, the physiologicaladaptations that ensue after a primarilyaerobic or muscular endurance-basedtraining program do not contribute tothe optimal development of strength,power, and hypertrophy. Instead, localmuscular endurance training stimulatestype 1 motor units to increase oxidativecapacity by reducing the cross-sectionalarea of themuscle (1,27,36). Furthermore,performing high repetitions solely withbody weight during exercise does notstimulate hypertrophy of even the type1 muscle fibers that are recruited. Theelectrical impulses dischargedwhile usingbody weight as a resistance do not reachthe threshold required to stimulatehypertrophy (27). Training using solelycalisthenics and cardiovascular trainingactually elicits the opposite physiologicaladaptations than those required to opti-mally perform high-intensity combattasks (1,14,27,36).

Another concern for the military pop-ulation is the pervading thought ofa “good workout” having to consist of

soldiers being sweaty, feeling nauseated,and exhausted. With this mindset, manyjunior leaders at the platoon, squad, andteam levels leading physical trainingincrease the metabolic intensity of everyphysical training day. This mindset isnot only fostered within the militarybut also by alternative fitness programsthat foment the “tough guy” mentality.Rather than training for combat, physi-cal training becomes a “survival of thefittest” competition, where toleration ofextreme stress supersedes the develop-ment of physical capacities. This erro-neous paradigm leads to physicaltraining serving a dual purpose, withthe primary goal of physical trainingbeing to develop the fortitude of sol-diers, and secondly to improve the phys-ical capacity of soldiers. Training in thisway can be physically tolerated toa degree, but training continually at highintensities (.8 weeks) without any peri-odization of stressors can lead to non-functional overreaching and overtrainingsyndrome (9,10,28). This may result insuboptimal performance on the battle-field and loss of duty time. Proper educa-tion and training using the principles ofprogression, overload, and specificitymust be used, if optimal strength, power,and hypertrophy are desired.

OPTIMIZING TRAINING TOIMPROVE PERFORMANCE OFHIGH-INTENSITY MILITARY TASKSUNDER LOAD CARRIAGE

Before implementing a training programto improve battlefield performance, it isimportant to conduct a needs analysis ofthe current battlefield and of the individ-ual soldier (27). This involves an evalua-tion of the characteristics and physicaldemands of combat activities and thestrengths and weaknesses of the soldier,thus providing an individualized programto meet the needs of the battlefield (1,9).The current battlefield can be consideredan “anaerobic battlefield” requiring mus-cle size, strength, and power, with onlyneeded cardiovascular support (8,34,38).Physiologically, high-intensity combatactivities, such asmoving under fire, evac-uating a casualty, and reacting to contactreveal the necessity of total body strengthand power; however, the development of



a soldier’s aerobic capacity cannot beignored. Because of the mercurial natureof the modern battlefield, tactical opera-tors require a wide spectrum of physicalcapacities (strength, power, and endur-ance). If training strongly emphasizesonly one end of the spectrum (aerobicor strength), the physical component atthe opposite end will suffer. This is highlycharacteristic of the majority of U.S.Army physical training today, with theemphasis on aerobic and muscularendurance, while strength and powerare neglected (12). Neither resistancetraining alone nor high-intensity endur-ance training alone have been shown tobe effective in improving load carriageperformance (24,28). Although strengthand power are essential to combat tasks,studies have also shown that havinga high aerobic capacity can be beneficialduring the performance of combat tasks(16,17).Therefore,whendesigninga train-ing program, an optimal balance betweena resistance training program and an aer-obic training program must be struck.A carefully designed program shoulddevelop strength, power, and aerobiccapacity concurrently, without inhibitinggains from either training regimen.

CONCURRENT STRENGTH ANDAEROBIC TRAINING PROGRAM

Soldiers must prepare for any physicaldemand presented on the battlefield,whether it may be a highly aerobictask or a highly anaerobic task. Hereinlies the challenge for the strength andconditioning professional workingwith the military population: designinga program that enhances hypertrophy,strength, power, and aerobic endur-ance concurrently. It is crucial to real-ize that aerobic endurance training andheavy resistance training have oppos-ing stimuli. Aerobic endurance trainingstimulates exercise-induced atrophy,but increases aerobic capacity, whereasheavy resistance training results in cel-lular signaling to increase hypertrophyand to produce more force (1,27).

Concurrent resistance and aerobictraining programs have been shown toimprove performance in all tacticaloccupational tasks, more than resistancetraining alone or aerobic training alone

(10,14,24,25). Concurrent training pro-grams have been shown to elicit signif-icant changes in total body maximal andexplosive strength, when comparedwith a normal basic training regimen(36). Studies examining the compatibil-ity of strength and aerobic endurancetraining have reported significant in-creases in type 2a muscle fiber area yetno changes in type 1 muscle fiber areaswith a concurrent training group. Aero-bic training alone causes a decrease intype 1 muscle fibers and this is accom-panied by a loss in power (26). Aerobicendurance was not affected whenstrength training was added to an aero-bic program, yet strength and powerwere reduced in magnitude comparedwith strength training alone (14,26,28).Therefore, it is critical to design a con-current resistance and aerobic trainingprogram that does not compromiseanaerobic capabilities and does notneglect the aerobic component of train-ing. A training regimen that developsboth of these components may contrib-ute to the optimal performance of high-intensity combat tasks under load.

Designing a concurrent training pro-gram requires the careful pairing ofeach individual aerobic workout withthe appropriate resistance training day.This helps to ensure that on each train-ing day, only one of the exercise proto-cols will produce high levels of bloodlactate (.10 mmol/L). Designing pro-grams under this view helps to preventnonfunctional overreaching and over-training (27). Low-volume sprint intervaltraining is a viable option for improvingmaximal oxygen consumption while lim-iting effects on anaerobic capabilities(14,27). A study using a program thattrains aerobically 3 times a week, in con-junction with a resistance training pro-gram, has shown promising results (13).Two days were designated for steady-state running (75–85% HRmax), andthe other day was designated for intervaltraining at various distances (200, 400 m,etc.) (13). Results from this training pro-gram yielded improvements of occupa-tional tasks and did not interfere withgains in strength, power, and endurancemeasures (14).

SPECIFICITY

In addition to a concurrent training pro-gram, improving military task perfor-mance under heavy loads requires therepeated performance of the tasks rou-tinely experienced in combat. This is inaccordance with the principles of speci-ficity and the specific adaptation toimposed demands (1). FM 7-22 statesin one of its principles of training to “Trainas you will fight,” making the trainingemphasis less fitness testing-oriented, butmore combat-oriented (11). Holding tothe principle of “Train as you will fight”helps to ensure optimal physical readinessto meet mission requirements (13). Sol-diers should progressively train offensiveand defensive maneuvers most frequentlyexperienced in combat. Time should beallocated to train for various scenariossuch as sprinting on an objective or ina building and simulating casualty carrieswhile carrying combat loads (16,18,32,40).

Properly training soldiers to carryheavy loads during the performanceof high-intensity tasks requires loads tobe progressively increased during thecombat activities. Loads can be progres-sively added until the desired weight car-ried is achieved, and the performance ofthe tasks is up to standard. For an exam-ple, at the onset of training, combat taskscan be performed wearing minimal tono weight, performing the tasks ata low intensity. As a training programadvances, the intensity of the tasksshould be increased by incorporatingmission essential equipment during theperformance of the task (body armor,load bearing vest, ruck sack, helmet,weapon, etc.). Performing high-intensitycombat activities under heavy loads mustbe included within the overall trainingprogram to optimize performance ofcombat-specific activities.

OPTIMIZING BATTLEFIELDREADINESS WITH PERIODIZATION

With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,many units within the U.S. militaryhave a deployment and readiness train-ing rotation (Figure). Rotations includea specified amount of time deployed(4–15 months), and time spent statesideto train and prepare for the next deploy-ment (6–12 months). As units are


preparing for the upcoming deploy-ment, the strength and conditioningprofessional should periodize a programto have soldiers peak at the beginning orduring the deployment (1,9). Just as pro-fessional athletes train rigorously lead-ing up to a season and are at their peakduring competition, soldiers also musttaper into combat. This requires properperiodization, which can be applied tothe deployment schedule of a unit (1,9).This can be likened to sport seasons,that is, when units are 6 to 9 monthsaway from deploying, this can be con-sidered an off-season.When the deploy-ment is 3 months away, this can belikened to a preseason. The deploymentof a unit into combat can be consideredin-season, with the return of the unitfrom deployment as a postseason (1,9).

Using a linear periodization model, the-off-season can be used to develop opti-mal hypertrophy and basic strength.Loads of 67–85% of 1 repetition maxi-mum and a repetition range of 6–12repetitions should be used for each exer-cise (1,9). In the off-season, aerobictraining can be incorporated at a lowerfrequency (2 times a week) and atlower intensities (75% heart rate maxi-mum, 20–30 minutes). Also in theoff-season, combat-specific activitiescan be performed, with lower intensitiesand minimal loads, at a low frequency(one time a week). As the off-seasonprogresses, combat activities willbecome more specific to the high-intensity combat tasks, with the equip-ment and load progressively increasing.In the preseason, strength and power

should be emphasized in the trainingprogram, using loads $85% and repeti-tion ranges from 3 to 6 repetitions (1,9).Aerobic training can increase in inten-sity and include sprint and interval train-ing. The frequency of combat activitiesshould also increase as the deploymentnears (3 times a week). The activitiescan be performed at near-maximalspeeds, with near-maximal combatloads and can be incorporated as partof the aerobic training component. Abalance between resistance training,high-intensity aerobic training, andhigh-intensity combat-specific trainingmust be implemented to prevent over-training. Volume should decreasein resistance training, and the volumeof combat-specific training shouldincrease as the preseason progresses.

The in-season period is the deploymentof the unit, which can last for anextended period of time (3–15 months)depending on the units deployed and theoverall mission. The goal of training dur-ing the in-season should be to preservestrength, power, and performance levelsusing moderate intensities and volumes.Depending on the overall length of timespent on a deployment, units can repeatspecific mesocycles (hypertrophy,strength, etc.) or use a flexible nonlinearprogram. Within a flexible nonlinear pro-gram, eachworkout can be adapted basedon the soldier’s readiness to perform theworkout, which may be altered by oper-ational demands. Based on the individualneeds, as long as the overall goal withinthe mesocycle (6–12 weeks) is addressed,

individual workouts can be performedelsewhere within the mesocycle.

Using a flexible nonlinear program maybe the best option during deployments,providing the needed adaptability foroptimal performance during trainingand on the battlefield. As a unit returnsfrom deployment, the postseason begins,which is characterized by active rest, con-sisting of non–combat-related activitiesperformed at low intensities and volumes(1). This prepares soldiers for the nextphase of the off-season by allowing signif-icant time to recover and rest, thus pre-venting overtraining syndrome and loss ofduty time (1,9) (see sample workout).

CONCLUSIONS

Under the direction of a CertifiedStrength and Conditioning Specialist(CSCS) or a Tactical Strength andConditioning Facilitator (TSAC-F),training programs can be designed tooptimally develop a soldier’s physicalcapacity. A program that is designedto optimize muscle hypertrophy,strength, and power, while also devel-oping aerobic endurance, may helpmeet the demands of the “anaerobicbattlefield.” Improving performance ofcombat tasks under heavy loads re-quires conducting these tasks withina training cycle. Performance of tasksshould become more frequent andcombat specific as the deploymentdraws near. Progression must be used,increasing the intensity and loads wornduring the tasks, until the optimal loadand performance is achieved (Table 3).

Training under this guideline enhancesthe physical training of the soldier toconfidently face the enemy and themany obstacles on the battlefield. Thishelps fulfill a stanza in the U.S. ArmyRanger Creed to “move further, faster,and fight harder than any other Soldier.”Although it may be a logistical and finan-cial burden to have CSCS- or TSAC-F–trained personnel and training facilitiesfor every unit, it is worthwhile to pursue.In professional sports, the time and finan-ces are invested into developing thecapacity of an athlete, just to play a gamefor mere entertainment. Yet, the majorityof soldiers remain inadequately trained

Figure. Combat operations in Afghanistan.



Table

3Sample

trainingprogram

Sunday

Monday

Tuesd

ay

Wednesd

ay

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Off-season

Resistan

cetraining

Rest

Hyp

ertrophy:

lower

body;allmajor

exercises:4sets

of

8–10repetitionsat

75%

1RM;p

erform

atleast5exercises;rest

periodlengths:

1–2min

betw

een

eachset

Strength:upperbody;

allmajorexercises:4

setsof4–6repetitions

at85%

1RM;perform

atleast4exercises;

rest

periodlength:

3–5min

betw

een

eachset;ab

dominal

exercises

Rest

Strength:lowerbody;all

majorexercises:4sets

of4–6repetitionsat

85%

1RM;perform


periodlength:3–5

min

betweeneach

set;

abdominalexercises

Hyp

ertrophy:

upper

body;

allmajor

exercises:4sets

of

8–10repetitionsat

75%

1RM;perform


periodlengths:

1–2min

betw

een

each

set

Rest

Aerobic

training

Rest

Rest

Interval

training

Rest

Rest

30-m

instead

y-state

runningat

80%

HRmax

Rest

Combat

relevant

training

Rest

Rest

Rest

Offensive

anddefensive

man

euvers

withminim

alload

s(uniform

,boots)

Rest

Rest

Rest

Predeploym

ent

Resistan

cetraining

Rest

Power

exercises;all



85%

5RM;perform


periodlengths:

3–5min

between

each

set

Rest

Strength:totalbody;

all



85%

1RM;perform

atleast3exercisesfor

upperan

dlower

body;rest

period

length:3–5min

betw

eeneachset;

abdominal

exercises

Rest

Powerexercises;allm

ajor

exercises:5setsof1–2

repetitionsat

90%

3RM;perform

atleast

5exercises;restperiod

lengths:3–5min

betweeneach

set

Rest

Aerobic

training

Rest

Rest

Interval

training

Rest

30-m

instead

y-state

runningat

85%

HRmax

Rest

Rest

(continued)


Table

3(continued)

Combat

relevant

training

Rest

Offensive

anddefensive

man

euvers

withlow

load

s(uniform

,boots,bodyarmor,

helm

et,rifle)

Rest

Offensive

anddefensive

man

euvers

with

interm

ediate

load

s(uniform

,boots,body

armor,helm

et,rifle,

LBV,assaultpack)

Rest

Offensive

anddefensive

man

euvers

withfull

combat

load

s(uniform

,boots,b

ody

armor,helm

et,LB

V,

rucksack/assau

ltpack,

rifle,

etc.)

Rest

Deploym

ent

Resistan

cetraining

Rest

Power

exercises;all



.90%

1RM;perform

atleast3exercises;

rest

periodlengths:

3–-5

min

between

each

set

Rest

Strength:totalbody;all



80–85%

1RM;perform

atleast2exercisesfor

upper

andlower

body;

rest

periodlength:

3–5minbetweeneach

set;ab

dominal

exercises

Rest

Powerexercises;all


of1–2

repetitionsat

.90%

3RM;perform

atleast3exercises;

rest

periodlengths:

3–5

min

betw

een

each

set

Rest

Aerobic

training

Rest

Rest

30-m

instead

y-state

runningat

75%

HRmax

Rest

30-m

instead

y-state

runningat

85%

HRmax

Rest

Rest

Combat

relevant

training

Rest

Rest

Rest

Offensive

anddefensive

man

euvers

with

interm

ediate

load

s(uniform

,boots,body

armor,helm

et,rifle,

LBV,assaultpack)

Rest

Rest

Rest

Postdeploym

ent

Resistan

cetraining

Rest

Activerest:low

intensity,low

volume

totalbodytraining

Rest

Rest

Rest

Activerest:low

intensity,low

volume

totalbodytraining

Rest

Aerobic

training

Rest

Rest

20-m

instead

y-state

runningat

75%

HRmax

Rest

20-m

instead

y-state

runningat

65%

HRmax

Rest

Rest

Combat

relevant

training

Rest

Retrainfundam

entals

ofindividual

and

squad

movements

Rest

Rest

Rest

Retrainfundam

entalsof

individual

andsquad

movements

Rest

LBV5

load

-bearingvest;RM

5repetitionmaxim

um.



to defend their countries, with a lackof access to adequate facilities anda reliance on traditional philosophies.Military leadership must come torealize the relationship between opti-mal physical training and improvedcombat effectiveness. When this isaccomplished, the necessary overhaulin U.S. military physical training canoccur, resulting in optimal combatreadiness and mission success.

Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:The authors report no conflicts of interestand no source of funding.

Jesse Mala isa Doctoral Fellowin the Departmentof EducationalLeadership at theUniversity ofConnecticut. Hewas a juniorNoncommissionedOfficer with thethird RangerBattalion, 75th

Ranger Regiment.

Tunde K.

Szivak is a Doc-toral Fellow inthe Departmentof Human Scien-ces at The OhioState University.She is a graduateof the UnitedStates Military

Academy and former active duty Officer.

William J.

Kraemer isa Professor in theDepartment ofHuman Sciencesat The Ohio StateUniversity. He isa former activeduty U.S. ArmyOfficer (ResearchPhysiologist) in

the Medical Service Corps.

REFERENCES1. Baechle TR and Earle RW. Essentials of

Strength Training and Conditioning.

Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2008.

2. Bishop PA, Fielitz LR, Crowder TA,

Anderson CL, Smith JH, and Derrick KR.

Physiological determinants of performance

on an indoor military obstacle course test.

Mil Med 164: 891–896, 1999.

3. Daniels WL, Vogel JA, and Jones BH.

Comparison of Aerobic Power and

Dynamic Lift Capacity With Performance

During a 5-Day Sustained Combat

Scenario. Natick, MA: US Army Research

Institute of Environmental Medicine, 1984.

4. Dean CE. The Modern Warrior’s Combat

Load. Dismounted Operations in

Afghanistan, April–May 2003. Fort

Leavenworth, Kansas: Army Center for

Lessons Learned, 2004.

5. Derrick LG, Henn HR, and Malone GH. The

Influence of Body Armor Coverage and

Weight on the Performance of the Marine

While Performing Certain Simulated

Combat-Type Tasks. Bureau of Medicine

and Surgery, Navy Department XIII, 1963.

6. Dubik JM, Fullerton TD, and Terrance D.

Soldier overloading in Grenada. Mil Rev

67: 38–47, 1987.

7. Dziados JE, Damokosh AI, Mello RP,

Vogel JA, and Farmer KL. Physiological

Determinants of Load Bearing Capacity.

Natick, MA: US Army Research Institute of

Environmental Medicine, 1987.

8. Feickert A. U.S. Special Operations Forces

(SOF): Background and Issues for

Congress. Congressional Research

Service, The Library of Congress, 2003.

9. Fleck SJ and Kraemer WJ. Designing

Resistance Training Programs.

Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004.

10. Harman EA, Frykman P, Palmer C, Lammi E,

Reynolds K, and Backus V. Effects of

a Specifically Designed Physical Conditioning

Program on the Load Carriage and Lifting

Performance of Female Soldiers. Natick, MA:

US Army Research Institute of Environmental

Medicine, 1997.

11. Headquarters Department of the Army.

Field Manual 21–18. Washington, DC:

Foot Marches, 1990.



Physical Fitness Training, 1998.



Army Physical Readiness Training, 2012.

14. Hendrickson NR, Sharp MA, Alemany JA,

Walker LA, Harman EA, Spiering BA,

Hatfield DL, Yamamoto LM, Maresh CM,

Kraemer WJ, and Nindl BC. Combined

resistance and endurance training

improves physical capacity and

performance on tactical occupational

tasks. Eur J Appl Physiol 109: 1197–

1208, 2010.

15. Howell J. Precision Targeting: Filling the

Gap: Naval War College, 2013.

16. Jette M and Kimick A. Evaluating the

occupational physical fitness of Canadian

forces infantry personnel. Mil Med 154:

318–321, 1989.

17. Jette M, Kimick A, and Sidney K. Evaluation

of an indoor standardized obstacle course

for Canadian infantry personnel. Can J

Sport Sci 15: 59–64, 1990.

18. Knapik J, Daniels W, Murphy M,

Fitzgerald P, Drews F, and Vogel J.

Physiological factors in infantry operations.

Eur J Appl Physiol 60: 233–238, 1990.

19. Knapik J, Darakjy S, Scott SJ, Hauret KG,

Canada S, Marin R, Rieger W, and

Jones BH. Evaluation of a standardized

physical training program for basic combat

training. J Strength Cond Res 19: 246–

253, 2005.

20. Knapik J, Harman EA, Steelman RA, and

Graham BS. A systematic review of the

effects of physical training on load carriage

performance. J Strength Cond Res 26:

585–597, 2012.

21. Knapik J and Reynolds K. Load Carriage in

Military Operations: A Review of Historical,

Physiological, Biomechanical, and Medical

Aspects. Borden Institute, 2012:303–337.

22. Knapik JJ, Reynolds KL, and Harman E.

Soldier load carriage: Historical,

physiological, biomechanical, and medical

aspects. Mil Med 169: 45, 2004.

23. Knapik J, Staab J, Bahrke M, O’Connor J,

Sharp M, Frykman P, Mello R, Reynolds K,

and Vogel J. Relationship of Soldier Load

Carriage to Physiological Factors, Military

Experience and Mood States. Natick, MA:

US Army Research Institute of

Environmental Medicine, 1990.

24. Kraemer WJ, Mazzetti SA, Nindl BC,

Gotshalk LA, Volek JS, Bush JA, Marx JO,

Dohi K, Gomez AL, Miles M, Fleck SJ,

Newton RU, and Hakkinen K. Effect of

resistance training on women’s strength/

power and occupational performances. Med

Sci Sports Exerc 33: 1011–1025, 2001.

25. Kraemer WJ, Vogel JA, Patton JF,

Dziados JE, and Reynolds KL. The Effects

of Various Physical Training Programs on

Short Duration, High Intensity Load

Bearing Performance and the Army

Physical Fitness Test. Natick, MA: US


Army Research Institute of Environmental

Medicine, 1987.

26. Kraemer WJ, Patton JF, Gordon SE,

Harman EA, Deschenes MR,

Reynolds K, Newton RU, Triplett NT, and

Dziados JE. Compatibility of high-

intensity strength and endurance

training on hormonal and skeletal muscle

adaptations. J Appl Physiol (1985) 78:

976–989, 1995.

27. Kraemer WJ and Szivak TK. Strength

training for the warfighter. J Strength Cond

Res 26(Suppl 2): S107–S118, 2012.

28. Kraemer WJ, Vecovi JD, Volek JS,

Nindl BC, Newton RU, Patton JF,

Dziados JE, French DN, and Hakkinen K.

Effects of concurrent resistance and

aerobic training on load-bearing

performance and the army physical fitness

test. Mil Med 169: 994, 2004.

29. Kusano MA, Vanderburgh PM, and

Bishop P. Impact of body size on

women’s military obstacle course

performance. Biomed Sci Instrum 34:

357–362, 1997.

30. Larsen B, Netto K, and Aisbett B. The

effect of body armor on performance,

thermal stress, and exertion: A critical

review. Mil Med 176: 1265–1273, 2011.

31. Martin PE and Nelson RC. The effect of

carried loads on the combative movement

performance of men and women. Mil Med

150: 357–362, 1985.

32. National Defence Headquarters. Canadian

Forces Manual of Other Ranks’ Trade

Structure: Trade Specifications 2, 1983.

33. Pandorf CE, Harman EA, Frykman PN,

Patton JF, Mello RP, and Nindl BC.

Correlates of load carriage and obstacle

course performance among women. Work

18: 179–189, 2002.

34. Ramirez A. From Bosnia to Baghdad: The

Evolution of U.S. Army Special Forces from

1995–2004: Naval Post Graduate School,

2004.

35. Rayson MP, Holliman D, and Belyavin A.

Development of physical selection

procedures for the British army. Phase 2:

Relationship between physical

performance tests and criterion tasks.

Ergonomics 43: 73–105, 2000.

36. Santtila M, Hakkinen K, Kraemer WJ, and

KyrolainenH. Effects of basic training on acute

physiological responses to a combat loaded

run test. Mil Med 175: 273–279, 2010.

37. Schantz P, Randall-Fox E, Hutchison W,

Tyden A, and Astrand PO. Muscle fibre

type distribution, muscle cross-sectional

area and maximal voluntary strength

in humans. Acta Physiol Scand 117:

219–226, 1983.

38. Shumate A. Employing U.S. Army Special

Forces toDefeat America’s Emerging Threats:

United States Army War College, 2013.

39. Simpson KRJ, Cohen BS, Hendrickson NR,

Spiering BA, Steelman R, Knapik JJ, and

Sharp MA. Quantification of physical activity

performed during U.S. army basic combat

training. US Army Med Dep J: 55–66, 2013.

40. Treloar AK and Billing DC. Effect of load

carriage on performance of an explosive,

anaerobic military task. Mil Med 176:

1027–1031, 2011.



Documents

ImprovingPerformanceof Heavy Load Carriage … Heavy Load Carriage During High-Intensity ... may be instances where explosive ... calisthenics and cardiovascular training