More good press... $1 billion wasted on Air Force computer system

[tankerbum]

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/50749586/

$1 billion wasted on Air Force computer system

The Expeditionary Combat Support System, designed to save money by combining hundreds of existing computer systems, has been deemed a failure. Sen. John McCain described it as ‘one of the most egregious examples of mismanagement in recent memory.’ NBC’s Lisa Myers reports.

Edited February 9, 2013 by gbu24loader

[SocialD]

. Sen. John McCain described it as ‘one of the most egregious examples of mismanagement in recent memory.’

He obviously hasn't used DTS...

[Prosuper]

So the cost of a OPR bullet is over a billion now. Did the DB at least get promoted fort signing off on this. Can somebody explain to me why some officers have to reinvent the wheel when they get into a position to implement shit like this.

[joe1234]

Can somebody explain to me why some officers have to reinvent the wheel when they get into a position to implement shit like this.

That's pretty easy to answer. Air Force officers are excellent at fighting wars, among the best in the world. Air Force officers, however, are woefully unqualified to manage programs that involve such a massive amount of assets. You can't realistically expect the people who rise up and flourish in our current promotion system with C- business talent to produce the efficiency and results of a Fortune 500 company that requires A+ talent. So, sometimes you waste a billion dollars. Sometimes you RIF thousands of people. Sometimes you keep around Tops in Blue and cut flying hours. Nature of the beast.

Of course, senior leaders will blame it on the officers themselves for not being well-rounded enough and taking advantage of "education opportunities", as if throwing 250/credit hour at a distance MBA from a second rate school while shouldering the normal burden of the military is supposed to produce the results of a Harvard Business School grad.

[Fuzz]

Of course, senior leaders will blame it on the officers themselves for not being well-rounded enough and taking advantage of "education opportunities", as if throwing 250/credit hour at a distance MBA from a second rate school while shouldering the normal burden of the military is supposed to produce the results of a Harvard Business School grad.

We may not agree on much, but this has got be one of the best statements I have read on this board.

[Cell Dweller]

Running a well-scoped program is hard work but not so challenging that one would need a 4.0 from Harvard. The core of the problem is that someone with stars on their shoulder said they wanted all the different logistics information systems consolidate into one big interoperable database. Once that ball got rolling, there was no stopping it until $1B was wasted.

[Jaded]

There are companies out there that develop billion dollar software programs all the time. There are methods and practices that make sure they stay on budget and on time. I would expect an organization as big as the USAF to be able to do this as well, but DTS, PEX, SORTS, DEERS, etc. shows that we are not capable of developing software. We shouldn't be allowed to anymore. Outsource it to the Harvard grads who work at Microsoft. It'd cost less and be better in the end.

[17D_guy]

I think I posted about this in the WTF thread when it first game out and have watched it spiral down into the stinking black hole it is now. There's a lot to read out there on it. One of the bigger ones is that planned mx/upkeep on the systems that were going to be replaced was cancelled as this new system was coming online. So.. that sucks.

This type of work isn't impossible, it's just hard and time consuming. I'm actually getting my Masters in this sort of thing (system integrating/IA). Not even an MBA is going to be able to handle it as that's the wrong focus for this type of deployment. Pilots aren't sorted for this thing without some very specific training, and process refinement/finance (MBA) ain't it.

The fact that the project managers rotate out so often is also a problem. When is that going to get solved? How many of these failures of procurement/project management are we going to have till we learn having 1/2/3 stars rotate out every 6-months so they get project dust on them for the next star is a serious detriment to the project.

Also.. I'm still wondering when we're going to get people who do "cyber" in charge of "cyber" (and not space/missile/pilots) so we can flex our nerd cred in getting nerd things, like this, done.

[BB Stacker]

There are companies out there that develop billion dollar software programs all the time. There are methods and practices that make sure they stay on budget and on time. I would expect an organization as big as the USAF to be able to do this as well, but DTS, PEX, SORTS, DEERS, etc. shows that we are not capable of developing software. We shouldn't be allowed to anymore. Outsource it to the Harvard grads who work at Microsoft. It'd cost less and be better in the end.

We didn't develop the software, we paid CSC to do it. The problem (well, one of them anyway) was that instead of clearly defining requirements and delivering those to the contractor for them to meet, the AF allowed the contractor to define a lot of the requirements that the system needed to be able to meet...you can see the inherent problem here. Or maybe not a problem, depending on whether your goal was to actually develop a working system or to funnel a bunch of money to your contractor buddies.

The most frustrating part is that a significant amount of the shit that ECSS was supposed to replace didn't really need replacing in the first place. Instead of going through and developing individual replacements for the stuff that was old and needed replacing, they were just going to go in and overhaul everything, because 21st CENTURY LOGISTICS!!!!

[17D_guy]

We didn't develop the software, we paid CSC to do it. The problem (well, one of them anyway) was that instead of clearly defining requirements and delivering those to the contractor for them to meet, the AF allowed the contractor to define a lot of the requirements that the system needed to be able to meet...you can see the inherent problem here. Or maybe not a problem, depending on whether your goal was to actually develop a working system or to funnel a bunch of money to your contractor buddies.

The most frustrating part is that a significant amount of the shit that ECSS was supposed to replace didn't really need replacing in the first place. Instead of going through and developing individual replacements for the stuff that was old and needed replacing, they were just going to go in and overhaul everything, because 21st CENTURY LOGISTICS!!!!

Actually, it was an implementation of an Oracle ERP system with CSC "tailoring" to our needs. Why we'd pay some small company to do that and not.. IBM.. or you know, Oracle is beyond me.

The systems do need to get replaced, and doing one at a time is not cost effective especially when they mimic a lot of the same processes. There are good ways to manage this transition and giant lists of requirements isn't it.

[ol-IEWO]

Strike 2.

They tried this about 40 years ago. Same result, they pulled the plug because it didn't work.

[Swizzle]

Master's of Science in Information Systems and Financial Management sounds like the right degree for this type of project as well as many, many information system project managers, certified in their fields, might have helped this project...

hmm, how many Gantt charts did that pay for?

[17D_guy]

Master's of Science in Information Systems and Financial Management sounds like the right degree for this type of project as well as many, many information system project managers, certified in their fields, might have helped this project...

hmm, how many Gantt charts did that pay for?

You'd think with the way the AF is rolling towards this "Cyber Heaven" they'd have a few of the acquisitions guys head in this direction to run these things about 10 years ago. Again, it's not impossible, just difficult with the poor way we manage our "leadership".

[Prosuper]

If we managed our WW2 officers like this Eisenhower would have been rotated out after the invasion of Sicily and Patton would have never seen Sicily, and Nimitz would have been done after Midway.

[tac airlifter]

That's pretty easy to answer. Air Force officers are excellent at fighting wars, among the best in the world. Air Force officers, however, are woefully unqualified to manage programs that involve such a massive amount of assets. You can't realistically expect the people who rise up and flourish in our current promotion system with C- business talent to produce the efficiency and results of a Fortune 500 company that requires A+ talent. So, sometimes you waste a billion dollars. Sometimes you RIF thousands of people. Sometimes you keep around Tops in Blue and cut flying hours. Nature of the beast.

Of course, senior leaders will blame it on the officers themselves for not being well-rounded enough and taking advantage of "education opportunities", as if throwing 250/credit hour at a distance MBA from a second rate school while shouldering the normal burden of the military is supposed to produce the results of a Harvard Business School grad.

Great post, quoted for truth.

[TarHeelPilot]

http://video.msnbc.m...-news/50749586/

$1 billion wasted on Air Force computer system

The Expeditionary Combat Support System, designed to save money by combining hundreds of existing computer systems, has been deemed a failure. Sen. John McCain described it as 'one of the most egregious examples of mismanagement in recent memory.' NBC's Lisa Myers reports.

Sen McCain must not be familiar with the RQ-4 Global Hawk.

[moosepileit]

A service that killed CAASS in y2k for no good reason, still unable to match it today, will never save money.

[17D_guy]

Computer-Aided Aircrew Scheduling System?

[albertschu]

There are companies out there that develop billion dollar software programs all the time. There are methods and practices that make sure they stay on budget and on time. I would expect an organization as big as the USAF to be able to do this as well, but DTS, PEX, SORTS, DEERS, etc. shows that we are not capable of developing software. We shouldn't be allowed to anymore. Outsource it to the Harvard grads who work at Microsoft. It'd cost less and be better in the end.

You do realize that we don't actually develop any of those products don't you? The are all outsourced already.

You list PEX as a bad example, but if you compare the budgets of these programs you'd be amazed at how good PEX is for how much it costs. If we ran ECSS like we run PEX, we would actually have usable software and it wouldn't have cost $1B.

Also.. I'm still wondering when we're going to get people who do "cyber" in charge of "cyber" (and not space/missile/pilots) so we can flex our nerd cred in getting nerd things, like this, done.

I 100% agree that we need cyber folks running cyber and that the space/missile dudes calling the shots from Bldg 1 are creating disasters daily. However, cyber-dude involvement in ECSS would not have helped.

[Gravedigger]

I 100% agree that we need cyber folks running cyber and that the space/missile dudes calling the shots from Bldg 1 are creating disasters daily. However, cyber-dude involvement in ECSS would not have helped.

It's kind of like when missile dudes are calling the shots for space systems. Thank God the career fields have officially split per SecAF letter signed this week.

I have a feeling cyber wont report to AFSPC for too much longer, it just costs a shit ton of dinero to bring up a new MAJCOM, which we don't have.

[SocialD]

You list PEX as a bad example, but if you compare the budgets of these programs you'd be amazed at how good PEX is for how much it costs.

That is so sad...we are getting shit for what the tax payers are shelling out for that program. Any reputable company would have tossed that thing to the side and moved on, a long time ago! Instead we just make do with every POS program that the DOD buys. Programs designed to save time and help, which do neither. Yet another reason we are broke.

What's that...you want to do what? Oh no, it can't do that. Sure, we could write some code to make it do that, but that's going to cost you another million dollars. We should be able to get that right out to you in v6.9...around 2020!

Our contracting and acquisitions process it's totally fucked!

Here's a good masters thesis for someone. On top of the original investments, how much money have we blown, in wasted man hours caused by DTS and PEX.

[ThreeHoler]

Pex is only $50k per base. That's really cheap.

[SocialD]

Pex is only $50k per base. That's really cheap.

...and it's still a piece of shit.

[ThreeHoler]

You must have never used SEMS Pro. It crashed at least once a week and lost all data since the most recent backup if someone clicked 'yes' to the "Do you want to compress the database before exiting?" question.

Lex was light years ahead of SEMS Pro.

[17D_guy]

I 100% agree that we need cyber folks running cyber and that the space/missile dudes calling the shots from Bldg 1 are creating disasters daily. However, cyber-dude involvement in ECSS would not have helped.

You're right. I'm assuming someone would fall on their sword to show what a POS it was and how it's failing. But that doesn't happen until AFTER they retire.