Distributed Common Ground System: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Adding local short description: "System in military intelligence for the US", overriding Wikidata description "system in military intelligence"
GreenC bot (talk | contribs)
 
Line 52:
In May 2013 ''[[Politico]]'' reported that Palantir lobbyists and some anonymous returning veterans continued to advocate the use of its software, despite its interoperability limits. In particular, members of special forces and US Marines were not required to use the official Army system.<ref>{{Cite news |title= Spy Chief Called Silicon Valley Stooge in Army Software Civil War |author= Noah Shachtman |date= August 1, 2012 |work= Wired Danger Room |url= https://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/palantir/ |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130925205328/http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/palantir/ |archive-date= September 25, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref>
Similar stories appeared in other publications, with Army representatives (such as Major General [[Mary A. Legere]]) citing the limitations of various systems.<ref>{{Cite magazine |title= Boondoggle Goes Boom: A demented tale of how the Army actually does business |date= June 19, 2013 |magazine= The New Republic |author= Robert Draper |url= https://newrepublic.com/article/113484/how-pentagon-boondoggle-putting-soldiers-danger |access-date= September 30, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131101193103/http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113484/how-pentagon-boondoggle-putting-soldiers-danger |archive-date= November 1, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref>
Congressman Hunter was a member of the House Armed Services Committee which required a review of the program, after two other members of congress sent an open letter to Secretary of Defense [[Leon Panetta]].<ref>{{Cite web |title= Open Letter to Leon E. Panetta, Secretary, US Department of Defense |author= Darrell Issa |author-link= Darrell Issa |author2= Jason Chaffetz |author2-link= Jason Chaffetz |name-list-style= amp |date= August 1, 2012 |url= http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012-08-01-DEI-Chaffetz-to-Panetta-re-ATEC-assess-of-Palantir.pdf |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141014143203/http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012-08-01-DEI-Chaffetz-to-Panetta-re-ATEC-assess-of-Palantir.pdf |archive-date= October 14, 2014 |url-status= live}}</ref> The Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee included testimony from Army Chief of Staff General [[Ray Odierno]].<ref>{{Cite news |title= The Army's multibillion dollar 'money pit' |work= [[Politico]] |date= May 29, 2013 |author= Austin Wright |url= httphttps://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/army-battlefield-intelligence-network-91991.html |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130928054335/http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/army-battlefield-intelligence-network-91991.html |archive-date= September 28, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref> The [[130th Engineer Brigade (United States)]] has found the system to be "unstable, slow, not friendly and a major hindrance to operations".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://defensesystems.com/articles/2014/02/07/army-dcgs-afghanistan-criticism.aspx |title=Army units give thumbs-down to battlefield intelligence system |last1=McCaney |first1=Kevin |date=7 February 2014 |website=defensesystems.com |publisher=1105 Media, Inc. |access-date=7 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222053836/http://defensesystems.com/articles/2014/02/07/army-dcgs-afghanistan-criticism.aspx |archive-date=22 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref>
 
The equivalent system for the [[United States Navy]] was planned for initial deployment by 2015, and within a shipboard network called Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES) by 2016.<ref name="flaw" />