RE: Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water

["Tom Kaighin" <tkaighin@interlog.com>]

Having spent 6 years in the U.S. Navy, I can answer that one.  The Military,
in general, is as rife with political maneuvering and infighting as any
Government office (or Corporate office, for that matter).  Just as a private
company may get a V.P or other such executive, with a pea-brain and a
penchant for following the media hype, to "decide" that Microsoft is the
best way to go, some Flag officer (lower case 'o' on officer is
intentional), with no understanding of the technical problems associated
with NT, decided and implemented the decision.  Now that the money is spent,
and the officer's competence is in question, he will defend it to the bitter
end because not to do so would end his chance of promotion.

The Military doesn't allow you to admit that you made a mistake of such a
scale.  It is a management philosophy  that stems from battlefield command
called 'Crisis Management'.  In a combat situation, you make a decision with
the information you have at hand.  You don't have time for in-depth analysis
so you do the best with what you have available.  If it isn't working, you
modify it as best you can and move on.  This works well in a combat dynamic,
but the military has opted to continue using this system in it's everyday
operations ostensibly, to prepare it's combat officers and senior enlisted
to be able to operate, should a crisis situation occur, with very little
change in basic procedure.

The problem occurs when the decisions are made, are wrong, and there was no
crisis.  In peace-time, a wrong decision can cost you your career, and your
decisions now fall under the scrutiny of the bean-counters.  You can't back
off from a bad decision because of the costs associated with it, even if you
now realize that there is a problem.

The Military, like it or not, is a huge public utility, with it's own set of
rule and regulations.  Most of which make very little sense.  As for who is
pushing this; whom ever made the decision in the first place, and any of
their pet political allies.  It's face-saving time and they will fight to
the bitter end.

Just a thought from one who's been there :)




-----Original Message-----
From:	am-info@essential.org [mailto:am-info@essential.org] On Behalf Of Norm
Sent:	Wednesday, July 22, 1998 5:56 AM
To:	Multiple recipients of list AM-INFO
Subject:	Re: Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water

On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 21:15:07 -0400 (EDT), Mitch Stone wrote:

>Bringing new meaning to the "blue screen of death."
>=========
>http://www.gcn.com/gcn/1998/July13/cov2.htm
>
>GOVERNMENT NEWS
>
>GCN July 13, 1998
>
>Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water
>
>By Gregory Slabodkin GCN Staff
>
>The Navys Smart Ship technology may not be as smart as the service
>contends.
>
>Although PCs have reduced workloads for sailors aboard the Aegis missile
>cruiser USS Yorktown, software glitches resulted in system failures and
>crippled ship operations, according to Navy officials.
>
>Navy brass have called the Yorktown Smart Ship pilot a success in
>reducing manpower, maintenance and costs. The Navy began running
>shipboard applications under Microsoft Windows NT so that fewer sailors
>would be needed to control key ship functions.

 [Snip]


     I read that article the other day, and needless to say I find the
implications rather sobering.  What I'm most curious about though (and
what's usually never mentioned) is who's pushing this.  When the vast
majority of the people working with this stuff *know* it's inferior
technology who is making the decisions to push it, and even more
importantly *WHY* are they pushing it???  Is it just a case of clueless
administrators or is something else at work here??

--
 ...Cheers,

 ...Norm

***********************************************
* Brought to you by OS/2 Warp v4.0 and PMMail *
* For a copy of my PGP key send me a message  *
* with "send pub_key" in the subject          *
***********************************************