From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,eac8d804189288a7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-11 21:58:28 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!wn2feed!worldnet.att.net!135.173.83.71!wnfilter1!worldnet-localpost!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C68AF0B.6030903@worldnet.att.net> From: Jim Rogers User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Silicon Valley techies suit up Army with sleeker gear References: <3C67C694.4090200@worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 05:58:27 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.86.32.181 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1013493507 12.86.32.181 (Tue, 12 Feb 2002 05:58:27 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 05:58:27 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19905 Date: 2002-02-12T05:58:27+00:00 List-Id: Ken Garlington wrote: > > You may want to read the full article: > > http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/02/07/tech-military.htm I did. I find some of the conclusions of the article a bit shaky. It is clear that the systems built by Raytheon met the contract specifications and failed the needs of the soldiers. This appears to be a failure of the Army Project Office in charge of the Raytheon contract. The soldiers using the equipment do not write the contracts and requirements. They specify their needs to the Procject Office, which then produces requirements documents and awards / manages the contracts. It appears that the system broke down in the middle. Raytheon performed according to its contract. To do otherwise would have been illegal. The Silicon Valley teams were allowed to interact directly with the end users of the products and produce a prototype based upon those interactions. They were not burdened with a previous set of requirements stated by the Project Office. In classical Army development arrangements the Project Office becomes the purchasing agent. It acts as an intermediary between the end user and the contractor. This is supposed to provide improved communication and contract control for the Army. In this case it appears that the Project Office did not accurately communicate the customer requirements to the contractor. The project office then developed and managed a contract based upon its faulty requirements. It will be interesting to see how well the COTS approach works in severe environments. I remember one project using a COTS liquid crystal display that completely froze up during a Bosnian Winter. The Army did not test for that problem before deploying the system. The solution was the addition of a heater system for the liquid crystal display. This small addition had a major impact on system electrical requirements, system start up time, and overall weight. It could be that the Project Office had designed requirements with such problems in mind. The resulting system was very heavy and consumed too much power. Anyone can build a system that works well through California Summers and Winters. How well will the same system work at 14000 foot (4000 meter) altitudes at -40 degrees? Jim Rogers