Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Gregory Aharonian]

    Well yet another Ada fiasco has been flushed down the toilet.  To quote
from an article on RCAS in the latest Government Computer News:

	"Even when software must be developed from scratch, the
        Army will use Ada only if it is the most cost-effective
        language for the job, [Col. Sammy] Cowden [RCAS program
        manager] said.  He said the million-plus lines of Ada
        code for personnel applications that Boeing had developed
        over the last five years have been archived and all
        software development work has been halted.

What the hell is going on?  For years, we have had to put up with endless
pablum about the great Ada showcase project RCAS, a vindication of DoD Ada
policies, only to have the DoD flush down the toilet one-million plus lines
(costing over $600 million) of Ada code.  The number of DoD Ada management
statements that now become lies are probably one-million plus.  And if they
couldn't develop cost-effective code the first time around with Ada for RCAS,
I doubt highly any of the new code will be in Ada.

How many boring and unsubstantiated talks have we had to suffer at Tri-Ada,
STSC, WAdaS about the late and great Ada RCAS effort?  All bull, thanks to
this decision.  And if Boeing developed a million lines of Ada code that now
is being scrapped, what kind of code are they developing as part of the STARS
effort?  Is that stuff just as bad as their RCAS code?  Besides, given all of
the other Ada efforts cancelled, why is the DoD still wasting money on the
porky STARS effort?  IBM's contribution was a joke, Boeing's contribution
probably is a joke given RCAS, who cares about Unisys, all topped off with the
rampant waste and fraud at ASSET.

And where was AJPO all this time?  What are we paying these guys for if not
to monitor these showcase Ada efforts to help make sure they don't get
scrapped.  Is anyone paying attention down there?  (Obviously not - the DoD
SBIR solicitations are still pretty much Ada free, thanks to the lie of
former AJPO director Don Reifer who promised to do something about this
at the first Ada Dual Use Summit, and AJPO still hasn't acted.)

And speaking of waste, fraud and hypocrisy, as well as another blow to Ada's
reputation, the April 1996 issue of Scientific American, page 34 has an
article about the Army's SBIS fiasco (yes the article appears above another
article written by the last honest person in the Ada community :-).

Apparently after spending $158 million, the Army has yet to receive a single
replacement system for the business applications supposedly being developed
under SBIS.  Let me quote some of the more juicy passages:

	"Parts of the SBIS proposal should have raised questions,
        however.  To back up claims that it could reuse more than
        70 percent of existing code (about three times the
        industry average), IBM cited its work for the Federal
        Aviation Administration and Westpac Bank of Australia.
        But the FAA was forced to abandon much of IBM's work, at
        a loss of $1 billion.  Westpac was likewise left with
	little to show for its nearly $150 million investment
        and dropped IBM, with some critics accusing IBM of
        promising technology it could not deliver."

Only fools in the DoD believed the crap IBM was slinging about Ada and
reuse back at that time, because only fools refused to ask why IBM kept
on telling the DoD how great Ada was while telling all of its commercial
customers how great C++ and Smalltalk were.  I blame some of this on prior
AJPO and STARS program managers, who were informed of this double standard,
yet did nothing.   Had the DoD directed those Ada monies to companies that
actually believed in Ada, Ada would be in a much more healthier state than
it is now.  But hundreds of millions of dollars later, we have an Ada on
her deathbed.

To continue in Scientific American,

         "Last December, [Russell] Varnado [a former Army program
         manager] and a small software firm called Pentagen
         Technology filed a federal whistle-blower suit against
         IBM, Loral and the Army officials who manage SBIS.  The
         action accuses IBM and Loral of contracting to perform
         tasks that they knew were beyond their abilities; it also
         accuses Army officials of failing to enforce the
         contract.  IBM and Loral are fighting the suit.

Gee, I can't remember seeing on any Tri-Ada agenda in the past few years
any session questioning the statements being made about SBIS, RCAS, etc.
Why the silence?  I wonder if a suit can be filed against STARS (well at
least ASSET, if nothing more).

         The charges are based in part on a report filed by Charlotte
         Lakey, who managed the SBIS program from its inception until
         April 1994.  The report describes how the project slipped
         behind schedule from the outset.  "[Loral] missed most of
         their deliverables", Lakey recalled in an interview, including
         "their system design plan, software development plan,
         communicatinos plans - basic things like that.

         Annoyed by the delays and alarmed when Loral proposed a
         software price that was "a lot higher" than expected, Lakey
         decided that the Army should threaten to terminate the
         contract.

Wise management move by a customer demanding satisfaction.  I bet Lakey
was given a commendation or promotion for acting tough with a DoD contractor.

         But her superior overruled her, and several months later Lakey
         was removed from her post.  In her final report, she suggested
         that "there needs to be a better contract mechanism - than 
         hoping you get an honorable contractor".

I lose the bet.  The taxpayers are losing a billion dollars on SBIS.  This
and other fiascos all because the DoD has refused to implement an honest
Ada management policy. Too many people, even today, spent too much time
passing the buck - "Enforce Ada? - My office doesn't have that power - look
at how complicated the DoD organizational chart is and look at where my
little box is".  Lies, lies, lies.

A million lines of Ada RCAS flushed down the toilet.  A billion dollar overrun
on SBIS.  FAA trashed.  WWMCCS a memory.  STARS a joke.  And much of this
could have been avoided had the DoD had a much more open and honest attitude
towards Ada management.

Greg Aharonian

Re: Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Robert Munck]

On Thu, 21 Mar 1996 03:23:52 GMT, srctran@world.std.com (Gregory
Aharonian) wrote:

>... STARS (this) ... STARS (that) ... STARS (shown to be the anti-Christ) ...

I'm really quite bemused by Greg's obsession with the STARS program,
about which he is massively ignorant and ill-informed.  This despite
many attempts over the years to explain the program to him, all
apparently forgotten.  Was he perchance one of the losing bidders,
having invested his own money in the proposal effort?

On the other hand, I really enjoy the contrast between CJIII and Greg.
They're both complete fruit loops, but in such widely different ways.

Bob Munck@acm.org

Re: Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Bob Crispen]

srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) wrote:

>And if Boeing developed a million lines of Ada code that now
>is being scrapped, what kind of code are they developing as part of the STARS
>effort?  Is that stuff just as bad as their RCAS code?

Well, as an author of the virtual net part of that STARS code, along
with the executive, the utilities, the framework that allowed
individual lines of code to be included or excluded, and (with others)
the DARTS architecture which was chosen as the domain architecture, I
can say without prejudice of any kind that it's just wonderful!  And
as a good friend of the other folks who did Ada code for the
Boeing/Navy STARS project, I have to say, again completely
objectively, that their code was pretty good, too ;-)

>Besides, given all of
>the other Ada efforts cancelled, why is the DoD still wasting money on the
>porky STARS effort?

Well, perhaps because process-driven reuse and domain engineering are
pretty darn good ideas.  I keep trying to explain to you, Greg, just
what those words mean, but I see I'm having the same problems as
always in getting through.

> IBM's contribution was a joke, Boeing's contribution
>probably is a joke given RCAS, who cares about Unisys, all topped off with the
>rampant waste and fraud at ASSET.

[Quite a bit snipped].

Now, Greg, my newsreader has been acting up, so I'm sure that it
simply inadvertently deleted the place where, in the interest of
intellectual honesty and integrity you mentioned that:

(a) RCAS was killed for political reasons, pure and simple, and before
they pulled the plug, it worked.  Worked good, from all I've heard.

(b) You were the proprietor of a commercial reuse repository business
that STARS and ASSET (you neglected the PAL this time, Greg) put quite
a cramp in.  I mean, if I'm gonna say DC-9s have lousy environmental
control systems, I ought to at least say that I work for a competitor,
shouldn't I?  (Actually, fwiw, they do, but the MD-80s that succeeded
them have perfectly wonderful ECS's -- all in my ignorant opinion, of
course).

Like I said, I'm sure my newsreader just ate those lines.  In case
others' newsreaders misbehave similarly, I'm taking the liberty of
supplying them for you.

All the above my personal opionion, not speaking for my company, and
posted from my home address.
Bob Crispen
crispen@hiwaay.net

Re: Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Norman L. Reitzel]

Greg,

Surely you do not think that this alters ADA's position as a language.

DOD is perhaps -the- most incompetent organization on the planet.  If 
they had been writing in C++, or in Pascal, or in GW Basic, the end would 
have been the same.  All this drivel about "cooperative code" and 
"reusability" is just that:  drivel.  

Truth is, an application to control vernier thrusters simply cannot be 
created out of an application to handle parking lot gates.  Why this 
surprizes anyone is a mystery to me.  Why top DOD management thinks that 
this is possible is no mystery at all - they are MBA types, totally 
clueless about the technology that they are supposed to be "manageing".

Buck Up!  The failure of RSAC is no reflection on ADA at all.



-- 
   Norman L. Reitzel, Jr.       |    "When you live beside the graveyard,
   nreitzel@lonestar.utsa.edu   |     you can't cry for every funeral."
   Blue Water Ventures, dba.    |                     Russian Proverb

Re: Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Robert Dewar]

"...  mumble ... ADA about Democrats...?  I think that remark dates you.
...  er, dates -us-.  ... grumble ...  <pulling gray hairs>"

Probably so, not many of *those* ADA fans around these days :-)

Re: Ada RCAS code thrown away; IBM/Loral/SBIS under indictment

[Norman L. Reitzel]

On Mon, 25 Mar 1996, Robert Dewar wrote:

>> "Surely you do not think that this alters ADA's position as a language."
> 
> ADA is about dentists or democrats or a couple of other things, but not
> about the language Ada, which is named after a women whose name was not
> an acronym :-) :-)
> 
Sheesh!  I'm toast.

I'll remember in the future to specify "-pedantic" when talking Ada.

...  mumble ... ADA about Democrats...?  I think that remark dates you.
...  er, dates -us-.  ... grumble ...  <pulling gray hairs>