Originally Posted by
BEXIL160
Once again, History repeats itself. Virtually the self same justification was trotted out durring the NERC fiasco. The end user WAS NOT consulted at an early enough stage (i.e. the begining). The result?
The result is a system (fully aided and abetted by the staff who operate it of course
) which moves a sight more traffic than West Drayton ever did or could.
I think your concern is more about how you're going to interface with the system than about what the wiggly amps are doing down the back. Lessons have been learnt since NERC and Human Factors are now involved every step of the way.
BTW we are STILL waiting for Departure CCTV in the Swanwick ops room, something many of us asked for durring the NERC development phase... but by the time any OPERATIONAL people got invloved it was all too late. I know, cos I was there.
So was I and we've had this debate before. It wasn't put in because a certain operational manager decided it wasn't required. Now you've been operating without it since 'O' date thus proving (to senior management) that you can do the job without it.
It seems from an end users viewpoint that NATS project managers have learned very little......
Over the next few years I sincerely hope you'll find that PM's have learnt a lot from the mistakes of NERC. The transition onto iFACTS should (I hope) give you the first indication that end user acceptance and buy in is very important to projects. This should be the stepping stone onto CASPIAN2/SACTA/iTEC.
BD