Distributed Common Ground System: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:31, 8 January 2021

Revision as of 15:50, 1 June 2022

Line 44:

An April 2012 report recommending further study after initial success. Palantir software was rated easy to use, but did not have the flexibility and wide number of data sources of DCGS-A.<ref>{{Cite news |title= Palantir Operational Assessment Report |date= April 5, 2012 |author= US Army Operational Test Command |url= https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2012/08/1830_001.pdf |access-date= September 29, 2013 |work= Wired |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131116073234/http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2012/08/1830_001.pdf |archive-date= November 16, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref>

In July 2012, Congressman [[Duncan D. Hunter]] (from [[California]], the state where Palantir is based) complained of [[United States Department of Defense|US DoD]] obstacles to its wider use.<ref>{{cite news |newspaper= [[The Washington Times]] |title= Military has to fight to purchase lauded IED buster |date= July 16, 2012 |author= Rowan Scarborough |author-link= Rowan Scarborough |url= http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/16/military-has-to-fight-to-purchase-lauded-ied-buste/ |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120719162415/http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/16/military-has-to-fight-to-purchase-lauded-ied-buste/ |archive-date= July 19, 2012 |url-status= live}}</ref>

Although a limited test in August 2011 by the [[United States Army Test and Evaluation Command|Test and Evaluation Command]] had recommended deployment, operation problems of DCGS-A included the baseline system was "not operationally effective" with reboots on average about every 8 hours. A set of improvements was identified in November 2012.<ref>{{Cite web |title= Distributed Common Ground System – Army (DCGS-A) |publisher= United States Army Test and Evaluation Command |date= December 27, 2012 |url= http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/fy2012/pdf/army/2012dcgs-a.pdf |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140211082334/http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/fy2012/pdf/army/2012dcgs-a.pdf |archive-date= February 11, 2014 |url-status= live}}</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20200323174951/https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1007951.pdf Director, Operational Test and Evaluation Distributed Common Ground System – Army. (DCGS-A) Increment 1 Release 2. (January 2016) Follow-on Operational Test and Evaluation (FOT&E) Report ] p.ii "There were no hardware failures during the FOT&E; however, software failures were still a challenge for users. The system required reboots about every 20 hours for users who had heavy workloads such as the fire support analysts and data managers in the BCT Tactical Operations Center (TOC)". p.iii list of recommendations. Tests coordinate with NIE 15.2. p.45: recommendations. Diagrams. Tests were Mar-Jun 2015.</ref>

The press reported some of the shortcomings uncovered by General Genaro Dellarocco in the tests.<ref>{{Cite news |title= Brain, Damaged: Army Says Its Software Mind Is 'Not Survivable' |author= Noah Shachtman |date= August 8, 2012 |work= Wired Danger Room |url= https://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/software-brain-not-survivable/ |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131115212453/http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/software-brain-not-survivable/ |archive-date= November 15, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref>

The ambitious goal of integrating 473 data sources for 75 million reports proved to be challenging, after spending an estimated $2.3 billion on the Army system alone.<ref name="flaw" /><ref>{{Cite news |title= No Spy Software Scandal Here, Army Claims |author= Noah Shachtman |date= November 30, 2012 |work= Wired Danger Room |url= https://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scandal-here-army-claims/ |access-date= September 29, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131116041237/http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scandal-here-army-claims/ |archive-date= November 16, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref>

Line 56:

A portion of the software, a distributed data framework for the DCGS integration backbone (DIB) version 4, was submitted to an [[open-source software]] repository of the Codice Foundation on [[GitHub]].<ref>{{Cite news |title= Major part of DCGS now open source |work= Fierce Government IT |date= June 24, 2013 |author= David Perera |url= http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/major-part-dcgs-now-open-source/2013-06-24 |access-date= September 30, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130910034153/http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/major-part-dcgs-now-open-source/2013-06-24 |archive-date= September 10, 2013 |url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title= Codice Foundation |work= GitHub projects |url= https://github.com/codice/ |access-date= September 30, 2013 }}</ref>

The framework was new for DIB version 4, replacing the legacy DIB portal with an Ozone Widget Framework interface.<ref>{{Cite web |title= DCGS Integration Backbone (DIB) v4.0 Overview |publisher= The DCGS MET Office |date= March 13, 2012 |url= http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a556470.pdf |access-date= September 30, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131221024755/http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a556470.pdf |archive-date= December 21, 2013 |url-status= livedead}}</ref>

It was written in the [[Java programming language]].<ref>{{Cite web |title= Frequently Asked Questions |work= Distributed Data Framework |publisher= Codice Foundation |url= https://codice.github.io/ddf/Faq.html |access-date= September 30, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141020060513/http://codice.github.io/ddf/Faq.html |archive-date= October 20, 2014 |url-status= live}}</ref>