* How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
@ 1996-03-22 0:00 William S Marshall IV
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: William S Marshall IV @ 1996-03-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
The Department of Defense is strongly promoting COTS-based streamlined
acquisition to reduce the cost of weapon system development and
procurement (COTS => commercial off the shelf). A central facet of
these cost reduction efforts is the deletion of MIL-SPECS and other
burdensome Government requirements from some procurement packages.
Does anyone have any insights or experience as to how this affects the
mandate to use Ada in DOD systems?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Marshall, Research Engineer Georgia Tech Research Institute
Internet: bill.marshall@gtri.gatech.edu
Phone: (770) 528-7718, FAX: (770) 528-7728
Address: GTRI/SEAL/RSD-0856 (CCRF)
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332-0800
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
1996-03-22 0:00 How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement? William S Marshall IV
@ 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ted Dennison @ 1996-03-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
William S Marshall IV wrote:
>
> The Department of Defense is strongly promoting COTS-based streamlined
> acquisition to reduce the cost of weapon system development and
> procurement (COTS => commercial off the shelf). A central facet of
> these cost reduction efforts is the deletion of MIL-SPECS and other
> burdensome Government requirements from some procurement packages.
> Does anyone have any insights or experience as to how this affects the
> mandate to use Ada in DOD systems?
Yes, it changes it immensly. Instead of using MIL-STD-1815A-1983 Ada,
programs are now mandated to use ANSI-STD-1815A-1983 Ada. This ANSI
standard is specified in the document labeled ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A-1983.
(For the sarcasm impared: yes, they are the SAME standard).
--
T.E.D.
| Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com |
| Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net |
| URL - http://www.iag.net/~dennison |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
1996-03-22 0:00 How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement? William S Marshall IV
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
@ 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-23 0:00 ` Jordan Kayloe
1996-03-25 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1996-03-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
"The Department of Defense is strongly promoting COTS-based streamlined
acquisition to reduce the cost of weapon system development and
procurement (COTS => commercial off the shelf). A central facet of
these cost reduction efforts is the deletion of MIL-SPECS and other
burdensome Government requirements from some procurement packages.
Does anyone have any insights or experience as to how this affects the
mandate to use Ada in DOD systems?"
Hello, is that Software Etc.? I was wondering if you were expecting any
useful new intercontinental missile system software to be soon, because
I searched your shelves and could not find any. I would also be interested
in any Jet fighter avionics you have ........ No, Nintendo games are
not suitable for our purposes
:-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
1996-03-22 0:00 How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement? William S Marshall IV
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
@ 1996-03-23 0:00 ` Jordan Kayloe
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-25 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jordan Kayloe @ 1996-03-23 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Bill Marshall asks:
> The Department of Defense is strongly promoting COTS-based streamlined
> acquisition to reduce the cost of weapon system development and
> procurement (COTS => commercial off the shelf). A central facet of
> these cost reduction efforts is the deletion of MIL-SPECS and other
> burdensome Government requirements from some procurement packages.
> Does anyone have any insights or experience as to how this affects the
> mandate to use Ada in DOD systems?
>
---------------------------------------
Ted Dennison writes:
> Yes, it changes it immensly. Instead of using MIL-STD-1815A-1983 Ada,
> programs are now mandated to use ANSI-STD-1815A-1983 Ada. This ANSI
> standard is specified in the document labeled ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A-1983.
>
> (For the sarcasm impared: yes, they are the SAME standard).
---------------------------------------
Robert Dewar says:
> Hello, is that Software Etc.? I was wondering if you were expecting any
> useful new intercontinental missile system software to be soon, because
> I searched your shelves and could not find any. I would also be interested
> in any Jet fighter avionics you have ........ No, Nintendo games are
> not suitable for our purposes :-)
---------------------------------------
Regarding Mr Marshall's inquiry, the excerpt below comes from
page 2 of Request for Proposal Annex B, System Requirements
Document for the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS) Block
IIF System. This is a 33 satellite procurement covering many
years and many billion dollars. Award is scheduled for 23 April.
You can see only two Mil-Stds are included, and the Ada standard
keeps some pretty serious company. (Apologies for any format
problems.)
Mr Dennison's sarcasm is right on.
Dr Dewar might be surprised to know that the GPS Operational Control
System is being replaced with a system that is 80% COTS. There
are at least four COTS products currently available to command and
control military satellites. Air Force Space Command has selected
one of these to replace the basis of every one of their satellite
control segments. Soon is rapidly approaching...
--
JORDAN R. KAYLOE, Captain, USAF e-mail: kayloe@cs.stanford.edu
NAVSTAR GPS Joint Program Office kayloejr@gps1.laafb.af.mil
--------------------------------------------------------
2.0 DOCUMENTS
The following documents describe the GPS sustainment baseline and
establish the basis for the Block IIF interoperability
requirements. First tier documents directly referenced in this
SRD are applicable to the extent specifically stated.
2.1 Compliance Specifications
Interface Requirements Specifications (IRSs) for the NAVSTAR
Global Positioning System:
IRS-GPS-SS/NU-01 Space-to-Nav User (IRS-01)
IRS-GPS-SS/OU-02 Space-to-NDS User (IRS-02)
IRS-GPS-SS/CS-03 Space-to-Control (IRS-03)
IRS-GPS-CS/OI-04 Control-to-Other (IRS-04)
IRS-GPS-SV/SV-05 Space Vehicle-to-Space Vehicle (IRS-05)
IRS-GPS-SV/NDS-06 Space Vehicle-to-NDS Payload (IRS-06)
IRS-GPS-SV/LV-07 Space Vehicle to Launch Vehicle (IRS-07)
IRS-GPS-SV/RAP-08 Space Vehicle-to-RAP (IRS-08)
IRS-GPS-SS/RU-09 Space-to-RAP User (IRS-09)
IRS-GPS-SS/AFSCN-10 Space-to-AFSCN (IRS-10)
2.2 Compliance Military Standards
MIL-STD-461D Electromagnetic Emission Susceptibility
Requirements for the Control of
Electromagnetic Interference (As Tailored)
MIL-STD-462D Measurement of Electromagnetic Interference
Characteristics (As Tailored)
2.3 Other Compliance Documents
AFR 122-16 Nuclear Safety Review Procedures for Space or Missile Use of Radioactive Sources
KAG-30A/TSEC Compromising Emanations Standard for Cryptographic Equipment (U)
ISO 8652-95 Ada Programming Language
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
1996-03-23 0:00 ` Jordan Kayloe
@ 1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1996-03-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Dr Dewar might be surprised to know that the GPS Operational Control
System is being replaced with a system that is 80% COTS. There
are at least four COTS products currently available to command and
control military satellites. Air Force Space Command has selected
one of these to replace the basis of every one of their satellite
control segments. Soon is rapidly approaching...
"
On the contrary, I am very aware of the satellite COTS software, very nice!
I saw an impressive demonstration of one package on one of the new
Indigo-2 machines (Maximum Impact) at Sandia Labs. This indeed is a good
example of legitimate and appropriate use of COTS (if indeed this sofware
is of appropriate quality). However, I still think it will be a while before
all of DoD's software nees will be able to met off the shelf :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement?
1996-03-22 0:00 How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement? William S Marshall IV
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
1996-03-23 0:00 ` Jordan Kayloe
@ 1996-03-25 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ken Garlington @ 1996-03-25 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
William S Marshall IV wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any insights or experience as to how this affects the
> mandate to use Ada in DOD systems?
I do know that in one of the test case procurements for minimizing MIL-SPECs,
only two MIL-STDs were levied. One of them was Ada.
As to whether this experience will be the common implementation, I'm not sure
anyone knows yet...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1996-03-25 0:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1996-03-22 0:00 How Strict is DOD Ada Requirement? William S Marshall IV
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-23 0:00 ` Jordan Kayloe
1996-03-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-25 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox