• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

VADM Edwards' Article

xbreaka

New Member
very good read, thats truly pretty amazing that a DDG has only 5% of the bandwidth of my home internet connection :eek:
 

robav8r

D-FENS
None
Contributor
But I don't need to visit Myspace or Youtube to win a war...
Exactly . . . . . a huge percentage of all that extra bandwidth we enjoy in modern society will be the first to be neutralized in a serious IW conflict. Sure, it would be nice to have access to the internets 24/7 underway, but having access to secure, tactically relevant information will better allow me to sail back into port after all the fightin's done ;)
 

MrSaturn

Well-Known Member
Contributor
But I don't need to visit Myspace or Youtube to win a war...
Yet, one Naval Academy senior design project I saw was basically a revamped "Facebook" to explore connections between terrorists. Each terrorist would have a profile... it would show friends and etc in an easy to use interface.

Also I have seen Google Earth to help plan flight routes.

Several times I have seen pictures of Fighters escorting bears over ships on this forum. That becoming a "Youtube" video is not far away.


Some of the things we use in everyday life are being used for professional life.
 

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
Saturn, there are definitely some aspects to the planning and data sharing that increase exponentially with bandwidth. BUT, the crux of the matter, is and always be intelligent design and what information is useful at a point in time for the warfighter. You see it on watchfloors, with 30 plasmas, watchstanders with 3-8 LCDs and multiple computers, 50 chat windows, and streams, and streams of data coming IN... but was is useful, important, and tactically relevant?

All the bandwidth in the world doesn't help me as a BWC if the TASWO misses a contact report on chat, and we now have time late information.

Radio, charts, logs, mylar and grease pencils STILL work wonders :D

I could go ON and ON with this subject, shoot me a PM if you want to swap emails on sipr.
 

MrSaturn

Well-Known Member
Contributor
All the bandwidth in the world doesn't help me as a BWC if the TASWO misses a contact report on chat, and we now have time late information.

Radio, charts, logs, mylar and grease pencils STILL work wonders :D

I could go ON and ON with this subject, shoot me a PM if you want to swap emails on sipr.
Absolutely agree. There is a huge trend to just push streams, and monitors and data everywhere as if it were a valuable in of itself. However, they are just tools. Tools can make errors, fail or lie... even the grease pencil :eek: In the end the warfighter needs to be making the calls and judgements.

I am just saying that there are quite a few very VERY good tools out there that are bandwidth dependent and as we get more tools it would be nice to have them work at speed. I can do long division by hand but I can do it much faster and more accurately with a calculator. Which is great if I double check it quickly and give it a sanity check. (200 + 40 = 160?)

Unfortunately, the leading by email has become more prevalent too. I would give you my sipr but I cant afford to add more data flow through it without fear of missing something "important" :D
 

HH-60H

Manager
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
I am just saying that there are quite a few very VERY good tools out there that are bandwidth dependent and as we get more tools it would be nice to have them work at speed.
I find that hard to believe. By far the best new tools I have seen are actually low bandwidth, but they were designed smartly from the ground up with bandwidth in mind.

Rereading your post, I notice that you qualified it with "few." I guess I think that if properly designed, most software tools don't need the bandwidth.
 

Hozer

Jobu needs a refill!
None
Contributor
Given the way things are lately, PMC is victory.
Recently seen in CMO Maintenance Out of Control Office...
NMC, NMCM, NMCS...now with new subcategory, NMCWMFO (Non-Mission Capable, Wings May Fall Off).
 

MrSaturn

Well-Known Member
Contributor
I find that hard to believe. By far the best new tools I have seen are actually low bandwidth, but they were designed smartly from the ground up with bandwidth in mind.

Rereading your post, I notice that you qualified it with "few." I guess I think that if properly designed, most software tools don't need the bandwidth.
I dont view using minimal bandwidth as a primary consideration when designing a program. Is a cessna which burns less fuel than a F-18 more properly designed? ...Who cares they both lost their rotor blades.

I might be steering off topic but my main observation was that widely available commercial formats for info.. like myspace and facebook. Can easily be adapted to provide information to a warfighter and while not absolutely necessary does provide just another tool in our bag of tricks.

...is TIMS properly designed?:p
 

phrogpilot73

Well-Known Member
I dont view using minimal bandwidth as a primary consideration when designing a program. Is a cessna which burns less fuel than a F-18 more properly designed? ...Who cares they both lost their rotor blades.
Putting my software engineer hat on: bandwidth is most definitely a consideration when designing a program. I don't know what tools you use (that are government fielded) but I would bet that there are/were threshold and objective requirements for bandwidth, processor utilization, and throughput.

To use your analogy - would you select an engine for the F/A-18 that burned twice as much fuel as it's competitor while only offering 10% increase in performance?
 

MrSaturn

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Putting my software engineer hat on: bandwidth is most definitely a consideration when designing a program. I don't know what tools you use (that are government fielded) but I would bet that there are/were threshold and objective requirements for bandwidth, processor utilization, and throughput.

To use your analogy - would you select an engine for the F/A-18 that burned twice as much fuel as it's competitor while only offering 10% increase in performance?
Exactly right. It is a consideration but one of many. I would suggest primary consideration is of course producing a product. The benefit you get from it. The rest is just making it effectively utilize (usually less but sometimes different) resources.

What is great about software is it allows flexibility. Wouldnt it be great to be able to dramatically increase fuel use to get an increase in thrust from an engine and then shut it right back off when you dont need it?

Software can do that. So I would expect a warfighter to be able to use program A for said job and then program B if there is adequate bandwidth and they need the extra 10%.
 
Top