Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Regardless of whether they know about defence or not, for them all to be reporting the same thing they have all clearly been told it by someone. Most likely by someone official who does know about defence.
I'm not sure that a blog is the authority on the subject.
I'm not sure that a blog is the authority on the subject.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently a number of computer screens were showing XP when the journo's took a tour....... they're just reporting what they saw - which is our newest warship is using (in places) an OS that is dated and no longer supported
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends what they are using XP for.
If it's not for core systems then no big deal.
If it's for items that have a fixed scope (no regular patches required) then no big deal. It may even be on a stand-alone system.............
Plenty of big corporates out there still using and developing on XP Platforms.
The benefit is that it's quite stable and well understood.
No immediate need to panic I'd say..................
Arc
If it's not for core systems then no big deal.
If it's for items that have a fixed scope (no regular patches required) then no big deal. It may even be on a stand-alone system.............
Plenty of big corporates out there still using and developing on XP Platforms.
The benefit is that it's quite stable and well understood.
No immediate need to panic I'd say..................
Arc
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a couple of months ago there was a lot of chat on the Computer bit of Prune about this - essentially the geeks reckon that as XP is unsupported you are wide open to cyber attacks and malware.
Generally the view was "on your own head be it" but that it really was bloody silly when newer safer OS have been around for years. Avoidable problem TBH
Generally the view was "on your own head be it" but that it really was bloody silly when newer safer OS have been around for years. Avoidable problem TBH
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
IF someone can interpret GROK this stuff that would be nice.
CONTROLLING THE ROYAL NAVY’S QUEEN ELIZABETH CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIERS 13 July 2009
CONTROLLING THE ROYAL NAVY’S QUEEN ELIZABETH CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIERS 13 July 2009
"...A Networked Ship
The QE Class are completely networked ships and IPMS is one of many electronic systems that will be provided. To support the ships operational mission, and to ensure the platform systems are configured correctly at all times to support air operations, the IPMS has interfaces with the Combat Management System (CMS), the Air Group Management Application (AGMA) and a significant number of cameras provided by Visual Surveillance System (VSS). This, along with the many platform, power and propulsion system interfaces, enables real time information relating to the status of systems to be displayed to decision makers throughout the vessel. This interaction with the Mission Systems does, however, require that IPMS be designed, configured and authorised for operating in the UK Secret domain...." http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/whitePap...%20CARRIER.pdf
The QE Class are completely networked ships and IPMS is one of many electronic systems that will be provided. To support the ships operational mission, and to ensure the platform systems are configured correctly at all times to support air operations, the IPMS has interfaces with the Combat Management System (CMS), the Air Group Management Application (AGMA) and a significant number of cameras provided by Visual Surveillance System (VSS). This, along with the many platform, power and propulsion system interfaces, enables real time information relating to the status of systems to be displayed to decision makers throughout the vessel. This interaction with the Mission Systems does, however, require that IPMS be designed, configured and authorised for operating in the UK Secret domain...." http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/whitePap...%20CARRIER.pdf
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Just south of the Keevil gap.
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"a couple of months ago there was a lot of chat on the Computer bit of Prune about this - essentially the geeks reckon that as XP is unsupported you are wide open to cyber attacks and malware. "
I've been out of the MoD for some years now, but even then, with the end of Windows XP support imminent, the MoD had contracted with M$oft and was paying an arm and a leg for continued support for XP for a 2 year period after the official end of support to cover the migration to a new OS, certainly for the corporate intranet, not sure about operational systems.
That facility for continued support was also available to other large corporate users which is probably why patches were available so quickly for general users in the latest incident.
I've been out of the MoD for some years now, but even then, with the end of Windows XP support imminent, the MoD had contracted with M$oft and was paying an arm and a leg for continued support for XP for a 2 year period after the official end of support to cover the migration to a new OS, certainly for the corporate intranet, not sure about operational systems.
That facility for continued support was also available to other large corporate users which is probably why patches were available so quickly for general users in the latest incident.
Plenty of big Boeings flying around with Win XP doing the business. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Because HMS QE II isn't a waste of money at all. 
How about, " cost only about one-hundredth of the money JC would waste if he was elected" .
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The attached is pretty close to what I last saw in a ship, although I'm surprised that we moved away from WIN2000. The Command and Control System doesn't need the modern whizzy version with all the interminable patches. It is stand alone and pretty well protected from bright buggers plugging in Flash Drives and the like.
Nuclear Subs Now Run on Windows
Nuclear Subs Now Run on Windows
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Well then for the trivia buffs the first quote is from the SUB one above then second quote is from a link inside the first article. Would those POLLIES be on Windows too?
&
"...While there have been concerns raised over the security of Windows as an operating system, the UK parliament has stated that the use of Microsoft Windows is low risk. It would seem the Windows-based systems are isolated, which should mean there is little chance of an outside cyber-attack starting Armageddon...."
"...Initial reports as the programme developed suggested that the OS in question would be Windows 2000, but those who have worked on it have since informed the Reg that in fact it is mostly based on XP...." Royal Navy completes Windows for Submarines? rollout ? The Register
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
So up til now no one knows 'hows yur father'?
UK works on carrier aviation command structure 27 Jun 2017 Tim Ripley
UK works on carrier aviation command structure | Jane's 360
UK works on carrier aviation command structure 27 Jun 2017 Tim Ripley
UK works on carrier aviation command structure | Jane's 360
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not much point in doing a lot until they knew she would actually arrive and when - could have been canmcelled, delayed etc etc and 10 years ago you'd have no real idea what the ctructure of the armed forces and the MoD would be in 2017,
As recently as last year, we supplied a number of XP based systems for the 2 carriers. We were requested to supply XP as an operating system and it was a right pain in the arse to get the correct COA.
On a brighter note, we have been advised to expect an order to upgrade all the systems to a newer OS. This will likely involve some hardware updates as well so it should be a "nice little earner".
On a brighter note, we have been advised to expect an order to upgrade all the systems to a newer OS. This will likely involve some hardware updates as well so it should be a "nice little earner".
Max Hastings: HMS Queen Elizabeth is a £6bn blunder | Daily Mail Online
The above link shows Max Hastings hasn't changed his mind about the Carriers. He's right about the circumstances which forced them to be built. He's also right that the real damage has been done persevering with such an aircraft the cost of which intended to be economic for all, has due to the technological complexities disappeared off the opposite end of the scale. And I maintain the Jet which will, some day, operate from them, because no other can thanks to the design, will be the least capable of the three marks. The F-35B isn't a Harrier replacement, it is a club foot to go with a Hunched Back!
FB
The above link shows Max Hastings hasn't changed his mind about the Carriers. He's right about the circumstances which forced them to be built. He's also right that the real damage has been done persevering with such an aircraft the cost of which intended to be economic for all, has due to the technological complexities disappeared off the opposite end of the scale. And I maintain the Jet which will, some day, operate from them, because no other can thanks to the design, will be the least capable of the three marks. The F-35B isn't a Harrier replacement, it is a club foot to go with a Hunched Back!
FB
Thread Starter
Max Hastings is a moron - who seems to write to suit the agenda of the editor.
From here:
Guess who said that in 2007? Or this, in 2004 ?
Ponder who might have said this, in 2006..
Any guesses? Anyone....?
From here:
Why do you think it's worth sharing?
He makes some predictably poorly informed but biased comments such as quoting 36 a/c per platform reduced to 12. That isn't the case, the overall procurement of a/c hasn't reduced, what has changed are assumptions over how many should routinely operate from the platform apart from on specific tasking.
He bangs on about needing the entire fleet to support/protect it - which is simply ludicrous and fails to even consider operating with coalition/allied support.
He suggests cheap and cheerful steel late on top of tanker hulls for aircraft carriers - a clear indication he should stick to bottom-end journalism and leave others to Naval architecture! Even more stupidly he suggests buying low-tech aircraft - really? When in other parts he quotes the threat from a resurgent (and technically improving ) Russia!
We all know the CVF have absorbed large amounts of the EP and they are a struggle to man - that's symptomatic of the position the wider Navy is in, not just because of the CVF. The Armed Forces across the board are all finding manning an issue and I suspect will continue to do so.
As DM rants go, this is just puerile.
From here:
The government has done the right thing by ordering the carriers, which are almost indispensable to support land operations overseas.
In the air, Britain needs a modest force of ground-attackers, a lot of helicopters, and a credible plane for the Royal Navy's two planned aircraft carriers. These ships are indeed indispensable to the navy's future role.
The Royal Navy must have its carrier programme and a good aircraft to fly off the hulls
From here:
Why do you think it's worth sharing?
He makes some predictably poorly informed but biased comments such as quoting 36 a/c per platform reduced to 12. That isn't the case, the overall procurement of a/c hasn't reduced, what has changed are assumptions over how many should routinely operate from the platform apart from on specific tasking.
He bangs on about needing the entire fleet to support/protect it - which is simply ludicrous and fails to even consider operating with coalition/allied support.
He suggests cheap and cheerful steel late on top of tanker hulls for aircraft carriers - a clear indication he should stick to bottom-end journalism and leave others to Naval architecture! Even more stupidly he suggests buying low-tech aircraft - really? When in other parts he quotes the threat from a resurgent (and technically improving ) Russia!
We all know the CVF have absorbed large amounts of the EP and they are a struggle to man - that's symptomatic of the position the wider Navy is in, not just because of the CVF. The Armed Forces across the board are all finding manning an issue and I suspect will continue to do so.
As DM rants go, this is just puerile.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the bit that putting QE to sea will basically soak up all available RN surface fleet assets? Wake up and smell the roses WEBF, the carriers are a capability we cant afford and should have been sunk long ago (before they were built).
God knows what we are going to with them!
God knows what we are going to with them!