Digitisation...The way backwards?

#1
Wish list for Digitisation Stage 1 Staff:

a.  A job.
b.  An office.
c.  A computer.
d.  A career.
e.  An AFB203.
f.   DS2 application form.
g.  AF 363
h.  Cancellation of Request to transfer.
i.   Free stable belt
j.   XXL T Shirt.
k.  Definately more PT
l.   Moral injections
m. 'Rolls Royce' (not Skoda) positive and effective career management.
n.  Staff Officer lie detector (will accept MCM Div lie detector)
o.  Hair
p.  Free mess dress (Corps of your choice)
q.  Explanation as to what 'Ringfenced' actually means.
r.  Senior DBA democratic election process.
 
#2
an addition to the above....

No questions asked sports afternoons for WO2's when on cse at Jav Hse ::)
 
#3
Reference your last, it's a long time since I've had to ask permission to skive off for a day to play golf!

From the reaction to my request you'd have thought that I'd missed a dental inspection!
 
#4
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

Wanted, one GP3 App Op/Instructor required to join well rehearsed professional training team....Must have good communication skills and be willing to change your lessons plans with little or no notice.
 
#5
Sounds like a job for a NATO officer (apart from the bit about good comms skills!) ;D
 
#6
Perhaps the officer in question would consider an ideal short term contract employment opportunity as a bitch.. then he would know how it feels when someone f&#ks him ;D
 
#8
...and a big fat ooooooooops to OC webpages  ;D
 
#9
rofl.... ;D absolutely brilliant and rather typical link. There lies a comprehensive summary of what the British Army knows about Digitisation :-[
 
M

Mohammed

Guest
#10
MSR,

Point well made, how often do we hear about digitisation from people who know nothing about it?
 
#11
Digitization appears in the dictionary between dick & dildo - kinda sums up the Army's approach to it! ;D
 
#12
well what do you expect?
i mean any one who buys Apache and then finds out that Bowman will not work in it has to be a bit mad
at least we fitted decent engines to our helicopters, so good the Yanks want to fit our engines to theirs now
great heli, shame it won't be able to communicate with any of our troops!!
 
#13
What do you want Bowman in the AH for???....Dont you need some sort of pilot to fly the damn thing first ;D
 
#14
I wish I could work for a TNC give up my main employment - make the guys I work into the ground canel their leave spend time from their families at weekends in work for not even a small thanks - it must be great to be a Father That Relashies Seeing his kids (FTRS) :p

At least there is one consolation  - Not
 
#15
erm.....Subtitles please???  ;D
 
#16
well what do you expect?
i mean any one who buys Apache and then finds out that Bowman will not work in it has to be a bit mad
at least we fitted decent engines to our helicopters, so good the Yanks want to fit our engines to theirs now
great heli, shame it won't be able to communicate with any of our troops!!
I thought we bought Apache before we bought Bowman?  It would have been pretty hard to buy Apache with Bowman in it if we didn't actually know what radio was going to be used wouldn't it?  As I understand it, Bowman will work in Apache, its just that the cost of integrating it would cost more than we are prepared to pay at the moment.  I am sure I read on here something about an interim solution though allowing some connectivity (voice and data I think) to Bowman.  As I understand it, it does work well with clansman though!!
 
#17
well as Bowman was supposed to be in service in the late 80s early 90s and Apache has been around all that time you would think that some body would be able to have worked out if the systems in Apache were compatible with what was proposed for Bowman?
how come they now realise that what they think Bowman will do will not integrate with the existing Apache sytems?
project managers not talking to each other?

its a bit like the builders making the hangers big enough to fit the Apache, BUT NOT big enough to fit the Longbow (taller) version!
just how stupid are these people?
 
#18
As I understand it, Bowman will work in Apache, its just that the cost of integrating it would cost more than we are prepared to pay at the moment.
Bowman is right. It is a cost time issue. The programme costs x and if we add Apache with full data capability, the programme is x + a very big y. Achieving full data for Apache is considerably more difficult than ground vehicles and therefore rather than delay the programme or indeed add significant cost, the decision was taken to include Apache towards the end of the BOWMAN programme.

There is more capability/£ with BOWMAN in other parts of the Army, for example secure speech and position location /reporting (some of which is already included in Apache). These two aspects for the teeth Arms will significantly increase tempo and capability. We need these items ASAP as other serving users of this board know only too well.
 
#19
well as Bowman was supposed to be in service in the late 80s early 90s and Apache has been around all that time you would think that some body would be able to have worked out if the systems in Apache were compatible with what was proposed for Bowman?

how come they now realise that what they think Bowman will do will not integrate with the existing Apache sytems?
project managers not talking to each other?
749 you do live in some sort of dream world.  Whilst the idea of Bowman may have been around since the late 80s, the actual contract was not let until (I think) Sep 2000.  British Apaches were being flown at that point during trials!!  How can project managers talk about systems that are almost 10 years apart in terms of start point?

Bowman like any comms system will work on Apache but the same rules apply if you want to integrate both the comms and data onto the digital platform.  As a class 1 tech you should be aware of the (danger techy bit) ISO 7 layer model?  Well what application (layer 7) does apache have that will run Bowman on it?  I can tell you what application we have to run Bowman on CR2 and Warrior ... they are called Platform BISA, but as Ramillies has said whilst the provision of platform BISA into CR2 was no easy task, to provide a similar BISA into apache would surely have massive implications for both the Apache delivery program (ie all aircraft delivered to date would have to be retrofitted) and for training (which is a problem already).  The platform BISA for both Warrior and CR2 have already taken two years to be developed to their current state (and I don't know what state that is), how long would it take to develop one for a digital aircraft and would that aircraft have the data capacity to cope with it or would a major overhaul of the aircraft be required?  Add the costs for any additional infrastructure on aircraft and for the training world, development costs for both the software and to ensure that aircraft is safe to fly, and you are looking at big bucks.  The Army wants to see a return on the investment already made not a delay to the programme which could significantly delay operational capability.  

A CISM student did something about this as his dissertation on the course check out the tech library for more information.  (My point about the application layer was stolen from him and therefore all credit to him!!)
 
#20
oh no they mentioned the 7 layer model!  ???
good points Mr Bow_Man but it still seems odd that we can't get a COTS system that will do this
if we are talking digital radios there are loads around, or is the hold up with all the other stuff we now want to bung on top?

ever see a film called Pentagon Wars ??
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
GP3_Bunny Royal Signals 16
L Officers 1
L Royal Signals 6

Similar threads

New Posts

Top