Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by g2_loony_bin, Apr 3, 2006.

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. Yes

    0 vote(s)
  2. No

    0 vote(s)
  3. Maybe

    0 vote(s)
  4. Don't know

    0 vote(s)
  5. What are you on about?

    0 vote(s)
  6. What is the thing with the lights playing before my eyes? Take it away!!!

    0 vote(s)
  1. Is it just me or is JAMES utterly sh1t?

    It has appalled me so much that's about as constructive a criticism I can produce...

  2. It's the new MT vehicle booking system that's meant to be replacing the paper work ticket system but at the moment is used in conjunction WITH it!

    It's arrse that's for sure...
  3. Maybe they are doing something called parallel running to ensure the system works correctly before switching over for good.
  4. Thats exactly what's happening and its a bloody good job as JAMES is w@nk so best keep hold of all the 1000 series p/work for a while yet..............
  5. JAMES = Joint asset management system???? or am i thinking of something else/ talking bollox??
  6. no, that's the badger, and it's utter shite
  7. Heard it was shite!!! lots of whinging about having to do the paperwork still anyway
  8. The only reasons why it is sh1t is because people are using it for white/whole fleet when it was designed for use with green fleet (ie. occasional details, ops and exercises) and because until all your drivers are on the system and it's kept up to date, it's too inflexible.

    Problems include not being able to print out a detail sheet until the vehicle is back from it's present detail (making pre-planning and planning for weekends a nightmare) and not being able to allocate a driver unless he/she is on your system (More admin for attached personnel, new arrivals).
  9. bang on PP, which begs the question, why bother? surely it would be easier to account for white fleet on normal works tickets.

    maybe i'm getting cynical in my young age
  10. You are supposed to account for whole/white fleet on normal works tickets. But MTWOs and MTOs get JAMES, think of it as a new toy and think it'll be good for ALL their vehicles, not just green fleet. It is of course them who dictate the local policy and leave the rest to try and implement it.

    So if JAMES is only used for what it's supposed to be used for it's not sh1t. It's not though, so it could be.

  11. It's just you. Or rather, it's the fact that most units don't have enough DII terminals in the right places.

    JAMES 1 is a good system, and has a lot of potential for improvement. Most units that are having problems can lay the blame on the lack of Intranet connectivity in the unit. The JAMES implementation team are at this moment trying to get DII put in where it's needed, God knows how successful they'll be. In the mean time, carry on with the double book-keeping...
  12. We have fine DII connection, it's the process and inflexibility that is donkey dick.

  13. Got to agree there - its not just the lack of terminals that make it **** its stupid stuff like having to lie to it to get it to release vehicles for details - i.e. every 3 months it VORs all our DROPs as they are o/due 3 monthly service, which as we all know is rat-carp as that went out yers ago or the DAF winch truck you own that needs its OOP maint doing as its winch oil needs replacing... "Hang on, we haven't got any winch trucks" ah, yes correct, but JAMES thinks you have as it thinks ALL DAFs are winch trucks... REME VOR'd your truck cos its a death-trap?.. dont worry, if you have JAMES acess, just put it back on the road ypurself and as theres no link to FEMIS, no-one will ever know......... Little niggles like that only add up to undermine user confidence and once a system has a bad rep, it sticks......

    Me, I'm old fashioned and I like 1002's and work-tickets, but hey, I've already been called a dinosaur once this week, still, at least I can get out of the front gate in less than 2 hours and legally too........................
  14. Sorry, not a clue what JAMES is, never heard of it, but I like the fact that the JAMES team are going to put DII where it's needed. I heard the other day that the JPA team were doing that. Perhaps they could meet somewhere and compare notes!!
  15. Right. If it was just the lack of appropriate DII access which is the problem (and as you have seen from the comments, it's not) wouldn't it have been better to have made the terminals available where required BEFORE implementing the system? It's no good putting a system in place that causes problems above and beyond the normal teething problems of any new system.

    If it needs DII to function properly and it's implemented before the access is available, it's not a working system is it? It gets a bad (worse?) rep, people loose faith and it gets ignored/mistreated/abused.