How bad is bocs
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Midlandshire
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This must be the most pointless introduction of technology that has ever existed. Total pandemonium dont know what is happening from one day to the next.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Zorg
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Best get the boards out again. One or two Sqns at Brize have done just that. It's causing no amount of grief, I am not a BOCS planner, so don't have the privilages, but if the planner aint there I can't get my flying program off the PC by A.N other if I phone up. (From home on a well earned day off)
Aha, its a cunning plan to get everyone in to work every day to check their (2) weekly program. A program that's almost certainly changed 4 times over the last 25 minutes anyway.
Aha, its a cunning plan to get everyone in to work every day to check their (2) weekly program. A program that's almost certainly changed 4 times over the last 25 minutes anyway.
Last edited by 1000CC'soffun; 22nd Feb 2007 at 01:13. Reason: Text adjustment
BOCS?
Better Off with a Chinagraph, Surely?
Well, that's what it sounds like!
The sqn planners used to do a pretty good job in the days before computer-hindered planning (the appallingly slow and cumbersome 'STARS'
) was inflicted upon them. All we needed to do as trainers was give them our requests and availabilities for the week and they would integrate them seamlessly into the main programme as they had the big picture of aircraft availability, crew availability, tasking.....and which trips the wheels wanted to steal, of course.
When the VC10C1K first appeared and 10 started doing AAR, a certain 101 Sqn OC whinged like hell when he saw the week's programme - 101 had picked up several Nimrod and Herc borexes which he resented, since 10 had been allocated quite a few decent FJ towlines..... He ranted at the planners (who were well used to dealing with d*ckheads) for accepting such an unbalanced programme.
Finally, an experienced Spec Aircrew planner turned to him and said "Well, sir - I'm sure if you paid for a centreline hose on the C1K, then they'd be quite happy to do a few Herc trips for you....."
Micro-managing idiot! Let planners do their jobs, have a say in how they do so - and about the tools they need to do so. Presumably they had a say in this BOCS thing? Not another EDS product, is it?
Mind you, planning up to 50 trips a day on ULAS was much more fun with several delightful young ladies assisting with the process. Sure beat the hell out of keyboards and screens!!
Better Off with a Chinagraph, Surely?
Well, that's what it sounds like!
The sqn planners used to do a pretty good job in the days before computer-hindered planning (the appallingly slow and cumbersome 'STARS'
) was inflicted upon them. All we needed to do as trainers was give them our requests and availabilities for the week and they would integrate them seamlessly into the main programme as they had the big picture of aircraft availability, crew availability, tasking.....and which trips the wheels wanted to steal, of course.When the VC10C1K first appeared and 10 started doing AAR, a certain 101 Sqn OC whinged like hell when he saw the week's programme - 101 had picked up several Nimrod and Herc borexes which he resented, since 10 had been allocated quite a few decent FJ towlines..... He ranted at the planners (who were well used to dealing with d*ckheads) for accepting such an unbalanced programme.
Finally, an experienced Spec Aircrew planner turned to him and said "Well, sir - I'm sure if you paid for a centreline hose on the C1K, then they'd be quite happy to do a few Herc trips for you....."
Micro-managing idiot! Let planners do their jobs, have a say in how they do so - and about the tools they need to do so. Presumably they had a say in this BOCS thing? Not another EDS product, is it?
Mind you, planning up to 50 trips a day on ULAS was much more fun with several delightful young ladies assisting with the process. Sure beat the hell out of keyboards and screens!!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Midlandshire
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to my last, I tried to log a fault with my PC, which I duly reported to the recently well advertised 'SPOC'
I was eventually transferred to an unspecified helpdesk (it wasn't my parent Station) by a Whitehall operator.
Wonderful. Is the lack of IT support at station level (particularly BOCs at my Station) a sign of things to come?
I was eventually transferred to an unspecified helpdesk (it wasn't my parent Station) by a Whitehall operator.
Wonderful. Is the lack of IT support at station level (particularly BOCs at my Station) a sign of things to come?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see that sense has won the day for once and BOCS is being dumped! 
The project team were over hear today and told that we are going back to AMS. They probably don't care because they're being disbanded along with the project shut down.
Now to get rid of JPA, capped actuals and receipts!
The project team were over hear today and told that we are going back to AMS. They probably don't care because they're being disbanded along with the project shut down.Now to get rid of JPA, capped actuals and receipts!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Turks and Cacos
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see that sense has won the day for once and BOCS is being dumped! The project team were over hear today and told that we are going back to AMS. They probably don't care because they're being disbanded along with the project shut down.
The project team were over hear today and told that we are going back to AMS. They probably don't care because they're being disbanded along with the project shut down.
Probably just the crewing aspect will get done on AMS.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To save face and justify the 5 million plus spent on it it will no doubt continue to exist in some shape or format but thank god for those Sqn Cdr's who had the fore sight to bin it early..........................
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to be realstic, you are not going to get software exactly desigined for the job.
STARS / AMS gave you EXACTLY the information you required, instantly, in an easily understood format. It didn't have a million-and-one other functions that we simply don't need slowing it down. It would, on startup, take you straight to a graphical display of your section's programme. With one click, you got all the info required about a task. It didn't have crew's names reduced to an indecipherable 4-letter code. It didn't contain masses of pointless civvy terminology. In short, it was PERFECTLY suited to our needs and worked very well for several years before they effectively turned it off. We too have been forced to go back to boards for programming.
Oh, and it didn't have a complete nobber as a ProjO......
What 2 Gp can do is bring what it does more in line with what the civies do
"Dog from Tail....wag, over"......
I hope rumours of it's demise are true - if Gp want to keep it as an IATS replacement, then hey - go nuts, guys! Just don't try to make us use it for programming. Give us our AMS back!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: planet earth
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, and it didn't have a complete nobber as a ProjO......
The man in question has put as insane amount of time and effort into trying to make BOCS work - for YOUR benifit !!
For him 14+ hr days are the norm and despite the current limitations of the system its not down to a lack of effort on his part.
As for the rest of the wingeing about BOCS posted thus far, if the system had the proper support it requires it would be fully task ready now, and giving everybody from DTMA down to the junior bod on the Sqn the synergy of information it CAN provide ( once the bugs are sorted
)Hope this helps !
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
And MFMIS? Is it about to change deferred success to current use? Got my SMU off on a course this week.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Oh, and it didn't have a complete nobber as a ProjO......
Not quite true there....
The man in question has put as insane amount of time and effort into trying to make BOCS work - for YOUR benifit !!
For him 14+ hr days are the norm and despite the current limitations of the system its not down to a lack of effort on his part.
Oh, and it didn't have a complete nobber as a ProjO......
Not quite true there....
The man in question has put as insane amount of time and effort into trying to make BOCS work - for YOUR benifit !!
For him 14+ hr days are the norm and despite the current limitations of the system its not down to a lack of effort on his part.
As for the rest of the wingeing about BOCS posted thus far, if the system had the proper support it requires it would be fully task ready now, and giving everybody from DTMA down to the junior bod on the Sqn the synergy of information it CAN provide ( once the bugs are sorted )
As a concept, it's fine (one database tracking ALL of 2 Gp activities). It's just that each end user has greatly varying requirements - section desks do not need the same info as DTMA programmers who do not need the same info as HFHQ programmers who do not need.........etc, etc.
We had a system that was perfect for the coal-face - it was called AMS and did everything we needed. Put a new front end on BOCS that replicates exactly what AMS did, and all will be well. Until then, back to chinagraph boards it is.
