View previous topic | View next topic

Handy Hancock

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

PDR
1383975.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:25 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
No - I'm just cynical about the figures that big contractors manage to get out of Whitehall. If what they did worked, it would not matter as much.


Many of them do, of course. But we've long since established that you never pollute any of your posts with significant facts or knowledge, so you won't have bothered to check any facts befgore posting bullshit. Again.

Quote:

The NASA budget for the Perseverance programme is $2.7 billion, equivalent to approximately £2 billion. The Track and Trace budget was standing at £22 billion in January. That is eleven Mars programmes. One reached a distant planet - the other did not get off the ground.


This is one of those meaningless comparisons which the pig-ignorant moron fraternity love so much. We delivered the Harrier GR9 upgrade programme for a shade under £950m - does that make Track & Trace expensive or cheap? The two are in no way comparable - they are completely different types of projects.

Perhaps you should stick to counting beans and leave the real work to people who know what they are talking about.

PDR

 
Brock
1383976.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:26 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
Breaking news - Sajid Javid has just accepted the poisoned chalice.


Twice in one evening I learn the news from this forum! Saturday evenings are not a great time for "rolling news" coverage.

 
PDR
1383977.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:31 pm Reply with quote

barbados wrote:

Which bit are you asking for clarification on?


The NASA reference is irrelevant - the projects are not comparable, so I would like some clarification as to why this was selected as the baseline comparison. And then there's this bit:

Alexander Howard wrote:
On track & trace, I still reckon it could have been done by a spotty computer geek for a crate of beers.


This is (of course) complete and utter bollocks. Sadly we have too many self-important but grossly ignorant morons like Alexander who make such allegations and really believe them to be true.

PDR

 
PDR
1383978.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:36 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
All is based on those repeated conversations at work:

"The outcome and the tax figure are determined by an insanely complicated set of criteria, date cut-offs, bands which change according to circumstances, type, location and personal circumstances, and then there is a mathematical formula with symbols I do not understand. The government published an online system for calculating all this, and the site has gone down!"

Me: "No need to worry: over lunch I programmed an Excel sheet to do it all."


Was your spreadsheet accessible on the web so that a million users could use it simultaneously? What verification process did you use to confirm it gave correct answers for all possible input values? Did your spreadsheet gain MHRC accreditation? What security processes did you use to protect the privacy of the users' data? (I could go on, but I won't)

Quote:

(I don't do mobile apps though. I bought a book on it once, but it was like opening "Teach Yourself Basic Japanese" only to find the book written entirely in Japanese.)


So you are now openly stating you just don't have a clue. That sort of admission would normally be accompanied by an apology, you know.

PDR

 
barbados
1383983.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:27 pm Reply with quote

PDR wrote:

This is one of those meaningless comparisons which the pig-ignorant moron fraternity love so much. We delivered the Harrier GR9 upgrade programme for a shade under £950m - does that make Track & Trace expensive or cheap? The two are in no way comparable - they are completely different types of projects.

Perhaps you should stick to counting beans and leave the real work to people who know what they are talking about.

PDR

Are you suggesting that the Track and Trace program was value for money?

 
PDR
1383984.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:37 pm Reply with quote

Clearly not. Are you suggesting that a Track and Trace system is a simple project that could be created by a spotty computer geek for a crate of beers?

PDR

 
barbados
1383989.  Sat Jun 26, 2021 6:23 pm Reply with quote

So your argument is simply the use of obvious hyperbole?

A wise (well alright, not so wise) man once said
Quote:
there are those in this place who insist on treating hyperbole and allusive statements rather literally.

At least we’ve discovered who “those” are now.

Although,
Quote:
Are you suggesting that a Track and Trace system is a simple project that could be created by a spotty computer geek for a crate of beers?

I made no such claim, however in compared to sending probes successfully to Mars it is a relatively simple task. That is borne out by other countries, South Korea for example, having a successful app.

 
PDR
1383995.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 2:41 am Reply with quote

barbados wrote:
I made no such claim


Good. So we are agreed that it is not a simple project and can stop dragging the thead down a pointless rabbithole

Quote:
...however in compared to sending probes successfully to Mars it is a relatively simple task.


Sending a probe successfully to Mars is a relatively simple task compared to brain surgery (which costs much less). These comparisons are irrelevant because the relationship between complexity and cost is not a simple linear function. WHich is the whole point.

PDR

 
barbados
1383996.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 3:24 am Reply with quote

PDR wrote:

Sending a probe successfully to Mars is a relatively simple task compared to brain surgery (which costs much less). These comparisons are irrelevant because the relationship between complexity and cost is not a simple linear function. WHich is the whole point.

PDR

Which is how any normal person would realise a comment is hyperbolic.
Quote:
Good. So we are agreed that it is not a simple project and can stop dragging the thead down a pointless rabbithole

Perhaps you might read that sentence again, and take heed.
There is only one reason you find the thread in a rabbit hole - you took it there with comments like (but not restricted to)
Quote:
Or is this just you jerking off again?

 
Willie
1383997.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 4:38 am Reply with quote

Not that I would usually defend Barbados or Alexander, but in this case I think I should.

Having a very small role in the Scottish Test and Protect development, configuration and administration I have seen when outside contractors have tried to overcharge for minor pieces of work. Luckily we had control of the procurement process, not politicians and those trying to make a name for themselves, and got the work done for 6% of the cost they quoted.

Plus much of the work has been done by junior IT developers on NHS wages, not contractors charging £10,000 a day.

 
PDR
1384000.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:02 am Reply with quote

barbados wrote:

Which is how any normal person would realise a comment is hyperbolic.


Hyperbole is taking something that is true and exaggerating it to an extreme extent for rhetorical effect. There is no part of claiming that the Track and Trace system is a simple requirement or a cheap project to implement. SO Alexander's remarks are not hyperbole - they are just plain untrue.

PDR

 
barbados
1384002.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:05 am Reply with quote

I refer you back to post 1383989
Particularly the
Quote:
At least we’ve discovered who “those” are now
bit

 
PDR
1384009.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:27 am Reply with quote

Willie wrote:

Plus much of the work has been done by junior IT developers on NHS wages, not contractors charging £10,000 a day.


The "£10,000/day" stuff is restricted to the management consultants employed by corrupt conservative ministers. For contracted software work the public procurement QMAC limit is currently a fully-burdened cost of between £70 and £95/hr depending on the size of the project and any particular capital costs that they want to servitise in the spec.

This is based on a personal charging rate of approximately £50/hr and an overhead amortisation rate of £20-£45/hr (demonstrated by open-book accounting). Whenever we (MoD and Industry in my case) have done cost comparisons between engineering grades to support make/buy decisions we have established that Civil Service costs for AO/EO grades are broadly comparable - but the Civil Service rarely account the fully-burdened cost accurately for internal pricing studies (the numbers usually cited amount to just salaries, usually without even including class1 NI costs, pension costs etc). This study is repeated typically every 3-4 years, but the outcome has always been similar. As a result the general policy is to do comparative cost studies based solely on manhour estimates.

When we've done the same exercise for uniformed technical personnel they invariably come out at 2-3 times the industrial cost due to very low utilisation rates. This is because a uniformed engineer will typically only spend 600hrs/yr in their technical role, with 300hrs/yr in training/expeditions and well over 1,000hrs a year on non-technical military duties (anything from exercises to mess duty). This is not a criticism - simply swan accurate reflection of the nature of a uniformed military role. We always incorporate uniformed personnel in these teams because it's a good way to sustain technical currency & domain knowledge and provide the extra depth of system expertise which is invaluable for wartime operation.

PDR

 
PDR
1384011.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:32 am Reply with quote

barbados wrote:
I refer you back to post 1383989
Particularly the
Quote:
At least we’ve discovered who “those” are now
bit


All you are demonstrating is just how far above your head the whole discussion is.

PDR

 
Willie
1384013.  Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:42 am Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
Willie wrote:

Plus much of the work has been done by junior IT developers on NHS wages, not contractors charging £10,000 a day.


The "£10,000/day" stuff is restricted to the management consultants employed by corrupt conservative ministers. For contracted software work the public procurement QMAC limit is currently a fully-burdened cost of between £70 and £95/hr depending on the size of the project and any particular capital costs that they want to servitise in the spec.

This is based on a personal charging rate of approximately £50/hr and an overhead amortisation rate of £20-£45/hr (demonstrated by open-book accounting). Whenever we (MoD and Industry in my case) have done cost comparisons between engineering grades to support make/buy decisions we have established that Civil Service costs for AO/EO grades are broadly comparable - but the Civil Service rarely account the fully-burdened cost accurately for internal pricing studies (the numbers usually cited amount to just salaries, usually without even including class1 NI costs, pension costs etc). This study is repeated typically every 3-4 years, but the outcome has always been similar. As a result the general policy is to do comparative cost studies based solely on manhour estimates.

When we've done the same exercise for uniformed technical personnel they invariably come out at 2-3 times the industrial cost due to very low utilisation rates. This is because a uniformed engineer will typically only spend 600hrs/yr in their technical role, with 300hrs/yr in training/expeditions and well over 1,000hrs a year on non-technical military duties (anything from exercises to mess duty). This is not a criticism - simply swan accurate reflection of the nature of a uniformed military role. We always incorporate uniformed personnel in these teams because it's a good way to sustain technical currency & domain knowledge and provide the extra depth of system expertise which is invaluable for wartime operation.

PDR


£70 - £95 per hour is still overpaying as far as I am concerned, especially when the actual main work is being done by people on the same rate as nurses (the pay scale is back to front, nurses should be the ones on the higher rate than the consultants). We have contractors, but they are paid on a scale far more comparible to the full time staff.

As to the management consultants, they tend be the ones that get in the way of producing the system in a timely manner from my experience. Some of them don't even understand how a basic relational database works and keep demanding data is provided to the system with little to no validation and no unique identifier.


Last edited by Willie on Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:51 am; edited 2 times in total

 

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group