Wired: Navy Held Hostage By HP

[Antonov]

Is it honestly this bad? It's depressing to think so:

http://gizmodo.com/5626970/hp-holds-navy-n...-for-33-billion

[vince14]

I've worked closely with HP here in the UK, and I can honestly say they they are an awful company. All the senior management cared about was getting in the cash and avoiding any penalties for delivering late, to the extent of complete and utter bare-faced lies to the client - subsequently the new IT system they were delivering began to be rolled out before it was ready, missing such minor details as the ability to print....

Vince

[Jinxter13]

Ridiculous!!!...They put Bill Gates thru a wringer for something that didn't interfere with Day to Day ops AFAIK, and the Navy has it's hands on HP apron strings, and it's business as usual..YGBSM!!. This wreaks of something I won't mention because it might be political. Hope to 'ell the don't use Dell.

Edited September 1, 2010 by Angels49

[Fishwelding]

Fascinating problem. As crazy as it sounds, this is the kind of thing I like to study, actually. There isn't an easy answer here; large bureaucracies suffer these chronic problems all the time, and they are not easily solved. As the article indicates, the Navy might be in a poor position to do this sort of thing itself. To shout "competition!" is quaintly naiveté, because you need to find a set of contractors who can do the job, you need to find people within the Navy or who can be contracted to renegotiate the terms of the IT contract periodically, and you need to be able to manage a change of contractors if it comes. All this is possible, but extraordinary, and a bureaucracy that accomplishes it with smooth, easy operation is above-par. And even if you say something like "But the Air Force..." or "But such-and-such corporation does this well," you immediately then have to establish that the successful bureaucracy in question is equivalent with the Navy in terms of roles, missions, organization, etc.

That said, even the article's author, or the cited sources, display what I think is a want of historical perspective. The Navy has previously pioneered information technology by cultivating very, very bright people. Their cryptology history, a proto-IT business involving big-league computation, has some impressive characters. And of course, there's Grace Hopper, the Navy's Heroic-Age-of-Computing machine-mage who's innovations technical and organization are partly the reason we're able to discuss this on the web right now. Further, I kind of don't like this statement right here: "The Navy might be able to build an aircraft carrier, say. But those ships take a decade or more to build. Something as fast moving as IT? That requires a different metabolism, a different workforce and a different set of skills." No, the Navy does not build aircraft carriers. The Navy has relied on a series of subcontractors for over a half-century to design, test, construct, and continually maintain it's nuclear powered warship fleet, as well as an in-house cadre of rigorously educated sailors and officers to operate these vessels. This work is rigorous and fast moving, because changes in the engineering are made to meet new directions in Navy policy as well as take advantage of new engineering efficiencies. And arguably, the stakes are immediately higher, given the very serious implications of nuclear accidents. This has been done more-or-less successfully, judging from the Nuclear Navy's record. Indeed, just for fun, I'll speculate that maybe what the Navy might need in their IT system is a Rickover.

[Jinxter13]

I'll speculate that maybe what the Navy might need in their IT system is a Rickover.

Or maybe another "Swede" Munson..

[loftycomfort]

Shoulda gone with IBM. As the saying goes, "nobody ever gets fired for buying IBM".

Terry (former Big Blue employee)

[Fishwelding]

Shoulda gone with IBM. As the saying goes, "nobody ever gets fired for buying IBM".

Terry (former Big Blue employee)

Sure. After all, historically IBM had standard uniforms, flags, and sang company songs. Why, the Navy will think it has found a long-lost twin.

[Mark M.]

Yeah but IBM doesn't have a nation-wide reputation of being the scuz-bag of the IT industry.... Dell does.

[rightwinger26]

I'm in the Navy, and I have developed a great distaste for NMCI, it sucks. I constantly get messages saying I cant send an email cause my inbox is full (not really though), its even worse at sea. If you need a new keyboard, or mouse, or printer, or anything, the IT's cant just bring one down anymore, you have to actually call, put in a trouble ticket and wait for some overpaid nerd to come hook it up. And dont get me started on the firewalls, I'm suprised ARC isn't blocked

[Collin]

Every day I come to work... I hope and pray that my computer starts up and works properly.

NMCI is kinda like kidney stones in a war zone. They have to be experienced to truly appreciate how bad it is. NMCI has to be lived and experienced to truly understand an article like this one. I pray and present sacrifices to my computer to please the gods, but yet they are still angry.

r/

ATIS (proud member of the '3 Lost Work Day Club' when they pushed the last Windows update to my system

[rightwinger26]

Its always nice when NALCOMIS won't run because NMCI thinks its a bad program. I'm just a mech, and hate computers anyway, but unfortunatly can't do my job without on

[Jennings]

Edited September 1, 2010 by Jennings

[Fishwelding]

Clinically speaking, Apple is a premium brand. Generally, the DOD isn't known for buying premium brands for bulk goods and services. Indeed, I rather think Apple would decline the contract because A> that sort of scale isn't really Apple's thing and B> Steve Job's rather demanding insistence on his own vision, while proven to generally be business-strategy gold, will not mesh well with Department of Defense procurement and contracting.

If they got into the fighter plane business, Apple might have a better shot at defense contracting. Premium, high-performance products in limited quantities indeed. Of course, when Steve insisted that the cockpit have no buttons, well...

[Jay Chladek]

Regardless of where one sits on either side of this issue, it does bring up a point about the perception of people in the IT field and the military. Granted I'm not entirely sure how the civilian workers in the Navy (those who aren't contractors) get hired. But I don't see it all that likely the Navy will actually be able to have an IT support structure under their own domain given what guys with the best skills can earn in the private sector or doing something more lucrative. Plus, those in the private sector tend to make more then government civil servants (although if one factors in certain perks, it does balance out a bit). About one thing I can see which might help the Navy to attract the geeks is if the economy stays lean and people come to them for the promise of better job stability (as tends to be one attraction for the soldiers in uniform jobs among those who join up).

[Mark S.]

Back in the late 70's and early 80's HP was know for their quality especially in test equipment. Their products have steadily declined over the years and I think it started when the bean counters and MBA's replaced the hard-nosed engineers in upper management.

Mark

[parche]

The Navy has relied on a series of subcontractors for over a half-century to design, test, construct, and continually maintain it's nuclear powered warship fleet, as well as an in-house cadre of rigorously educated sailors and officers to operate these vessels.

We don't take contractors underway to keep the reactor playing nice, but they are vital in the design and construction... and the education is a pain in the butt...

This work is rigorous and fast moving, because changes in the engineering are made to meet new directions in Navy policy as well as take advantage of new engineering efficiencies. And arguably, the stakes are immediately higher, given the very serious implications of nuclear accidents. This has been done more-or-less successfully, judging from the Nuclear Navy's record.

Thanks for the compliment...

Indeed, just for fun, I'll speculate that maybe what the Navy might need in their IT system is a Rickover.

Hmmm, Rickover just rolled over in his grave, a bunch of navy cyber-guys just started crying in fear and all of nukes started laughing about how much pain the cyber guys would be in...

Oh, and NMCI is a pain in the butt, but the system at the Army schoolhouse here is nothing to write home about either. It is really a function of the massive size IMO and I think trying to compare my home computer to work is a bit disingenuous (not saying anyone here is doing that). Visualizing the massive amount that is being done makes me think it really isn't all that bad. (Oh, god I am really becoming one of them)

Cheers,

Dave

[Spook498]

I'm in the Navy, and I have developed a great distaste for NMCI, it sucks. I constantly get messages saying I cant send an email cause my inbox is full (not really though), its even worse at sea. If you need a new keyboard, or mouse, or printer, or anything, the IT's cant just bring one down anymore, you have to actually call, put in a trouble ticket and wait for some overpaid nerd to come hook it up. And dont get me started on the firewalls, I'm suprised ARC isn't blocked

Thats odd, I dont use a computer daily at work, for work, but I have very few issues with NMCI. Every once in awhile I am on the phone with them (they are in Boise) for something, maybe twice a year. The last one was when they upgraded Outlook express to 2007, but the techie put us on net meeting, and the issue was solved in 5 minutes. However, it happened to everyone in the shop.

The biggest thing is when Radia does an update and requires a reboot that you cannot delay to a later time.

Yea, the firewall sucks. But the Navy would rather we "work" than play on the net. Im surprised they gave us back Youtube!

As for the trouble ticket, thats Navy wide. Anytime we have to call public works for something, they write a ticket with a number to track the issue by. IT is no different.

[vince14]

I'm guessing you know very little about IT Jennings!

Vince

[Antonov]

The interesting part of this article for me was the fact that the Navy contracted with a contractor - Booz Allen - to negotiate its contract with another contractor: HP.

I wonder who they hired to negotiate their contract with Booz Allen?

[Fishwelding]

Thanks for the compliment...

For all the political furor surrounding civilian nuclear power safety ashore, most notably the Three Mile Island incident (but there was also Browns Ferry, Davis-Besse), the nuclear navy has essentially not been a part of that discussion. In a real sense, given the quantity of reactors it has operated, this is amazing. One could cynically argue that it keeps its accidents or mishaps a secret, but I suspect that large quantities of irradiated sailors could be difficult to hide, as the Soviets chronically learned. The submarine fleet's two big tragedies, Thresher and Scorpion, are to my knowledge almost universally agreed to be losses due to things other than reactor problems.

The interesting part of this article for me was the fact that the Navy contracted with a contractor - Booz Allen - to negotiate its contract with another contractor: HP.

I wonder who they hired to negotiate their contract with Booz Allen?

In one sense, the problem is that we live in an age of specialization. He or she who does anything themselves "has a fool for a contractor," to paraphrase the famous defense of lawyers. After all, despite the rise of DIY stores, electricians, plumbers, and home remodelers often still have a point when they argue it's best to call in the specialist.

In another, we might be seeing the effects of long-standing disgust, legitimate or otherwise, with military bureaucracy. From even before Joseph Heller, MASH, or the six-zillion-dollar toilet seat furor of the 1980s, the Pentagon has been held up as the paragon of inefficient bureaucracy, in a land where we fancy ourselves sensibly opposed to bureaucracies. So if we subcontract everything out to private enterprise, including even warfighting, everything will be glorious, right? Well, perhaps private enterprise isn't terribly more efficient than government after all. Especially when private enterprise is contracted by government, giving rise to the possibility that the contractor thereby becomes something akin to a government bureau. In 1980, was General Dynamics or Ford Aerospace that much more efficient, ethical, or effective an organization than the Mikoyan-Geurevich or Sukhoi Design Bureau? The F-16 might indicate yes, while the DIVADs system might say no.

[11bee]

In one sense, the problem is that we live in an age of specialization. He or she who does anything themselves "has a fool for a contractor," to paraphrase the famous defense of lawyers. After all, despite the rise of DIY stores, electricians, plumbers, and home remodelers often still have a point when they argue it's best to call in the specialist.

Just wrapped up a project at a Naval facility in RI (working as a sub to another contractor). I think I saw about 5 guys in uniform the entire time. Just about everyone (including the security guards) were civilians.

[rightwinger26]

Thats odd, I dont use a computer daily at work, for work, but I have very few issues with NMCI. Every once in awhile I am on the phone with them (they are in Boise) for something, maybe twice a year. The last one was when they upgraded Outlook express to 2007, but the techie put us on net meeting, and the issue was solved in 5 minutes. However, it happened to everyone in the shop.

The biggest thing is when Radia does an update and requires a reboot that you cannot delay to a later time.

Yea, the firewall sucks. But the Navy would rather we "work" than play on the net. Im surprised they gave us back Youtube!

As for the trouble ticket, thats Navy wide. Anytime we have to call public works for something, they write a ticket with a number to track the issue by. IT is no different.

I had no idea that they gave youtube back, hooray!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm sure it'll be gone again soon.

Not sure what your rate is but juding from your location I'd say aviation:) I've been a hornet mech for 14 years, and one thing every sailor learns at an early age is how to look busy when things get slow, but NMCI took the fun out of the web. I hate that Radia thing, not even really sure what it is besides annoying. A while back I put a trouble call in for a new mouse and they told me two to three days, so I went on "black ops", a little while later the AME's were short a mouse:) Thats any PW call, it took me a week to get a door fixed, I'm miss the days when First LT and IT's could actually help.

[vince14]

It also takes two to tango. Whilst the IT supplier can (and does) get many things wrong, often the client is just as much to blame for a botched IT implementation. Many times I've seen the customer sign a contract without understanding what they're signing up for, and this is usually because they don't understand their own business needs. Frequently the supplier gets blamed for not delivering what the customer wanted, but the customer often doesn't know what it wants in the first place.

It's like this;

What The Customer Wants: A built model of a Tamiya Spitfire, in 1/48 scale and in the markings of 266 Squadron. Budget is £100.

What The Customer Asks For: A model of a Spitfire, costing less than £100.

What The Supplier Promises: James May's 1:1 model of a Spitfire, with a real working Merlin engine and machine guns. Will cost just £50.

What The Supplier Delivers: A 1/72 Spitfire kit, outsourced to Starfix and costing £200. Glue and paint to be supplied by customer to complete.

What The Customer Actually Needed: A train set.

Vince