Thread: BOWMAN - BCIP 5 Upgrade Confirmed

I taught BOWMAN in 2005. I was considered a 'Guru', but then in the Kingdom of the blind...
I despaired of it so much I re-traded to avoid it and have used much better, simpler, smaller, cheaper, efficient COTS kit to communicate since.

BOWMAN has proved incredibly unpopular and with good reason. It is still unable to meet Comms requirements above Coy level in Helmand where the US PRC-117 is the radio of choice. If anyone wants to split hairs over RF propagation in an arid environment consider that with the right antenna and frequency you can talk around the world on 5W or less so surely the PRC 325 (HF) should be 'the radio' in Helmand.

I've seen BOWMAN HF (Groundwave) on 20W struggle over 2km out there. The power readings were high at the received end but due to the *** overhead and inability to maintain sync the result would be whats known in the trade as 'Donald duck underwater.'
Meanwhile, any enemy EW unit (standfast Terry), would be rubbing their hands together at these enormous 20W power spikes. Who cares if it's secure, if the lads are cranking the power up to the max to achieve comms (when infact the problems are more complex) then it's making the enemies job of locating them easier.

IMO the single worst piece of procurement in recent history.

Originally Posted by meridian

Thanks DG, always interesting to to get a balanced view

2 sugars

On its way mate!

20W for 2km, bloody hell

Whats the data rate, no, hang on, don't tell me

But I assume were not passing real time video :D

Originally Posted by meridian

20W for 2km, bloody hell

Whats the data rate, no, hang on, don't tell me

But I assume were not passing real time video :D

They are not playing with data much out there.

No need or can't ?

(Removed)

No need, they have a plethora of server based, (which BOWMAN is not BTW), applications out there which do the job just as well if not better.

Originally Posted by duplex

DG. I'd like to qualify why, OPSEC permitting, I think BOWMAN is SHYTE.

Sect level/VHF:
1) Large, heavy batteries with short lifespans.
2) Large bulky radio with poorly designed connections and switches.
3) Fragile GPS cable, regularly breaks.
4) Loose GPS component, regularly falls off.
5) Poor range. 5W = 5km (GSM 900 by contrast: 250mW = 30km)

HF:
1) Electric shocks
2) High 'message failure' rate resulting in messages getting silently dropped
3) Sync errors resulting in garbled digital speech
4) Complex menu tree.

Data:
1) Complex initialisation procedure takes inordinate length of time to set up a detachment.
2) Several 'old school' network security holes created through poor design.
3) (There's more but I won't for OPSEC.)

COMBAT:
1)This software is so bad it hurts. It is simply too complicated for the Battlefield.

Duplex - I agree with you there are issues, and you have highlighted them perfectly. Most of these issues have been around since 2005, and have been flagged up again and again. It IS getting better though.

At least I hope it gets better or I will be an old(er) man by the time they sort it!

DG

Originally Posted by DigitalGeek

Originally Posted by meridian

20W for 2km, bloody hell

Whats the data rate, no, hang on, don't tell me

But I assume were not passing real time video :D

They are not playing with data much out there.

I think you mean BOWMAN data? In that case you are correct.

Every Mil SATCOM data channel is choka, so much so PJHQ are renting Civvie ones and scrounging Bandwidth from the Yanks (no change there). There's more data systems in use than ever but none of them are BOWMAN...
The unofficial standard is Civvie SATCOM with Military Secure (Data capable) Telephony. Quitre simply because it works.

Originally Posted by DigitalGeek

No need, they have a plethora of server based, (which BOWMAN is not BTW), applications out there which do the job just as well if not better.

The P2P design seems the natural choice but I've yet to see BOWMAN do it's 'self healing' thing when a node disappears. Typically I've found on Regimental exercises that there will be one Det who've got their poo in a sock who spend all their time helping out everyone else who are in despair. Forget the RRB, that's the target if you want to take out a Regiment's Data Comms, the det that's working properly.

Originally Posted by duplex

Originally Posted by DigitalGeek

Originally Posted by meridian

20W for 2km, bloody hell

Whats the data rate, no, hang on, don't tell me

But I assume were not passing real time video :D

They are not playing with data much out there.

I think you mean BOWMAN data? In that case you are correct.

Every Mil SATCOM data channel is choka, so much so PJHQ are renting Civvie ones and scrounging Bandwidth from the Yanks (no change there). There's more data systems in use than ever but none of them are BOWMAN...
The unofficial standard is Civvie SATCOM with Military Secure (Data capable) Telephony. Quitre simply because it works.

Yes but can you shove it in a Warrior or CR2 and charge around the battlefield? No. you can't. Why, because all the satcom and bandwidth in the world wont keep a decent signal to a moving platform. Nor will the network heal itself. Plus the systems you are used to out there are predominantly server based which in itself leads to a degree of inflexibility.

There are pros and cons on both sides. I'm glad. It keeps me busy.

Originally Posted by duplex

Originally Posted by DigitalGeek

No need, they have a plethora of server based, (which BOWMAN is not BTW), applications out there which do the job just as well if not better.

The P2P design seems the natural choice but I've yet to see BOWMAN do it's 'self healing' thing when a node disappears. Typically I've found on Regimental exercises that there will be one Det who've got their poo in a sock who spend all their time helping out everyone else who are in despair. Forget the RRB, that's the target if you want to take out a Regiment's Data Comms, the det that's working properly.

You wouldn't have seen the "self healing" bit because Dynamic DNS (DDNS) has only recently been introduced.

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

[snips]
On a separate subject, hopefully the wide scale use of PRINCE2 across the MOD now will make this sort of co-ck-up impossible.

I'm having to bite my tongue and resist the temptation to comment on this thread (it shouldn't take the brains of an Archbishop to work out who my employers are).

However, I do feel free to ask why, in the name of Dagon the mighty fish-god of the Phillistines, you imagine that PRINCE2 will help one iota. It is essentially a project management method developed by British central government. There can hardly be any organization on the face of the planet with a more persistent, disgraceful and incorrigible record of calamitous project failure than British central government. Large government IT projects fail massively, spectactularly and predictably year after year, none of the managers who presided over the horlicks ever suffers the slightest damage to his career, and the companies that munged it up are invited to bid for the follow-on system. Are none of these projects done under PRINCE or PRINCE2? I beg leave to doubt it.

Incidentally, over the next few years, watch for MODAF pulling the same trick of making wildly optimistic claims, being mandated by central authority, making work for drones and consultants, and failing to offer the slightest benefit to the few remaining poor fools who actually make systems instead of "managing" or "architecting" them.

It really isn't going to get any better until there is an algedonic feedback loop in place to reward success and punish failure. MoD procurement has never had such a thing in my memory.

All the best,

John.

DG. I'd like to qualify why, OPSEC permitting, I think BOWMAN is SHYTE.

Sect level/VHF:
1) Large, heavy batteries with short lifespans.
2) Large bulky radio with poorly designed connections and switches.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't the radio the VHF set is built on, is a COTS set?

5) Poor range. 5W = 5km (GSM 900 by contrast: 250mW = 30km)
VHF and GSM are in two different frequency ranges. You might as well complain that your PRR doesn't have the same range as a cellphone - it doesn't for a very good reason!


HF:
2) High 'message failure' rate resulting in messages getting silently dropped
3) Sync errors resulting in garbled digital speech
The problems of using a digital signal over HF - How lossy can you be? With a bigger faster processor, and more system space you can afford to have a more lossy signal...at a cost of bucks.

4) Complex menu tree.
COMBAT:
1)This software is so bad it hurts. It is simply too complicated for the Battlefield.

Shoving too many features with too basic an interface maybe. Maybe some kind of PDA would make it more user friendly... but would it survive in the field?

Originally Posted by omegahunter

5) Poor range. 5W = 5km (GSM 900 by contrast: 250mW = 30km)
VHF and GSM are in two different frequency ranges. You might as well complain that your PRR doesn't have the same range as a cellphone - it doesn't for a very good reason!

On Frequencies: The VHF CNR band (30-75) we've used for so long is a poor choice. It has none of the beneficial propagation characteristics of HF or V/UHF. It's got a high MEH so you need to erect a mast if you want any decent range, and a very high attenuation for a groundwave signal meaning if you don't bother erecting a mast then your signal is going south fast and you're only getting 5km tops out of 5 Watts! Rubbish.

It's not as if the MOD are forced to use the 30-75 band. They pay for it, just as they could pay for a UHF band and sell this to the science museum to teach kids about attenuation and how not to design a radio system.

Re PRRs: My PRR has a waterproof bag over my microphone otherwise it shorts out when wet. Another great bit of design.