ArmyNet Award Nomination?

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Plant-Pilot, Oct 7, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It looks like ArmyNET portal has been nominated for the 'Public Sector Project of the Year' section in the Computing Awards for Excellence 2005, to be held on 16 November 2005 in London.

    Congratulations and all that, but it does smell a little fishy. It's a portal that you'd only really know or care about if you were in the army, and most of the people who want to find things out and have a chat about things to do with the army, do it on here. Even more to the point, it's a portal that you could only go to and have a look round if you were in the army. Are a load of the members of the Computing Awards for Excellence members of the TA, just by chance? Or is it a case that the silly security questions that you have to answer to get in aren't that secure? I mean, if you know anyone in the army it doesn't take the brains of the QM General to work out his log in name which just leaves the password. Are there loads of London buisiness types on ArmyNET laughing at our pay statements?

    Well good luck in the awards ArmyNET, but I do think questions need to be asked.
     
  2. Armynet is a good bit of kit, i use it mainly for promotion boards and checking my pay statement, my only criticism is it would be better if they could get the paystaement online earlier in the month as aren't they produced mid month??

    Anyone from Armynet that reads this, i would be intrested to know why this can't be done, either on here or by PM, don't worry i will keep your identity secret.

    regards

    Sparky
     
  3. Drip about it all you want but at least you've got something to look at. The navy haven't got anything! And no, www.rncom.mod.uk doesn't count-that's aimed at the spouses and is a load of sh1te.
     
  4. Not dripping about it, like i said a good bit of kit.

    You could staff it up the chain of command as a suggestion to have NavyNet.

    Sparky
     
  5. My comments weren't complaining about the site either, just questioning how a supposed secure site would be viewed by the IT community as being worthy of being put up for an award, without a little help that's all.
     
  6. Not a chance of that happening. Its been requested before. The best we can hope for is to be able to access JPA if/when if comes online from the internet. So that'll happen in 2012 probably......
     
  7. P_P - The Armynet team have struggled from the start to get any funding to make the site a workable reality. If I was them I would sure as eggs have sent a CD copy of the site in for consideration for entry into the competition, knowing full well that even a nomination for a major external award would raise their profile internally. It is quite easy to create a sanitised CD copy and put together a 15 minute powerpoint presentation to give to the assessment panel without having to give anyone access to the site itself. I don't think you need to worry.
     
  8. Sparky - A lot of the data on the site is provided by other MOD agencies, it isn't like the Armynet team have a direct link into servers full of data about everything and anything. I know the last team boss put in a hell of a lot of work to get things like the pay statement functionality set up, knowing full well if it worked it would be a major selling point. When what is essentially just raw data is transferred on a regular basis it is normally done by email or CD, and most easily done in comma separated variable format (.csv). This data would then be loaded into a database on the Armynet system which is what you access to see your statements. The system 'knows' which person's records to show you because it 'knows' who you are based on your login information, because when you first tried to login it associated you with a line of data in another database set up using data from the pay & records people (AFPAA?).

    The team would be entirely reliant on the other organisation sending them the records on time, and sending them the complete records. The data that they send would have to be copied out of their database using some sort of hand-made computer script. The problem with these is that any time they make any changes to the actual structure of the database (which would normally be very rarely but bear in mind all the work which is being done in readiness for JPA, and which is still ongoing after Pay 2000 :evil: ), the scripts themselves would also have to be checked and possibly re-written.

    In short, the Armynet team are reliant on another organisation. If your pay statements are showing or are late, it most likely isn't the Armynet team's fault.

    Blame the pay people. That's what I always do! :D
     
  9. Reason behind pay statement problems answered in ArmyNET forums.

    I regularly criticise ArmyNEt for its lack of development but I hope no-one thinks that is a reflection on the team working on it. They are a cracking bunch and gave me loads of help 18 months or so ago (in my pre-arrse days). And recent developments on ArmyNET have been fantastic - especially the Electronic Library. But they are ludicrously under-resourced in terms of funding, equipment and manpower.
     
  10. I've had a look at the computing magazine site (www.computing.co.uk) to see what the score is and it looks as though the various organisations (in and out of the public sector) put forward their nominations and they are then judged by a panel as to the suitability of the system for an award. I cannot believe for one minute that they would have access to the system unless it was demonstrated to them. Looking at the requirement for a winner in the Public sector the system needs to "deliver improvements in public services or new ways of working that allow greater efficiency or cost-effectiveness in the organisation".

    Reading that, Armynet is looking at winning on the grounds that (if it was properly supported!!) it could allow greater efficiency or cost-effectiveness in the organisation. Lets face it there is nothing else out there worth shouting about. If Armynet was a RN or RAF site then I have no doubt that it would be properly resourced. Typically the Army is coming up with a good solution and not using it. Reminds me of the 1930's when we were leading the way in mechanised warfare and then failed to take it forward. The Germans were not so stupid!

    Good luck to the team in Blandford.