OASIS Update 

13 November 2000

As you may have heard, the evaluation of the OASIS system at Seattle was recently released by the Independent Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E) Team. This Team is an independent group whose task is to conduct an evaluation of new NAS systems looking at operational suitability. Several NAATS members were on the Team. To boil it down to its barest result, the TEAM concluded that the OASIS is not suitable for operations in the AFSS. Having said that, I need to clarify what it means to us.

The report identifies issues and ranks them according to the importance the IOT&E Team placed on them. By my first cut at it, the Team identified two issues they placed in the "High" category, one one issue they identified as "Medium" for SEA with the potential to slip to "high" for further deployments, nineteen were identified as "Medium" criticality, and thirteen that were placed at "Low" criticality.

These issues were well known within the program. The single surprise was regarding SAR which was one of the two "Highs". The issues raised are good ones that do need the attention that the IOT&E has brought to them. I will go a step further and say that there are still a large number of issues that need to be resolved that the Team did not address. That effort is underway at this time by the Human Factors Team and the program.

What impact does the IOT&E report have on the OASIS program? At this time the specialists at Seattle stand behind the OASIS system and do not want to fall back on M1FC operations. NAATS is working to support that position. At this time the system is being evaluated for liability issues and implications. If the Agency decides that use of OASIS imposes extra liability on the Agency then SEA will revert to M1FC operations until the issues causing that liability are resolved. In the absence of increased liability SEA will continue using OASIS operationally.

This is a strange situation because this is a system that has been designated unsuitable, yet the specialists using it want to keep using it. That desire is known and understood in headquarters, even by ATQ (The IOT&E organization). At headquarters they are analyzing the report to determine what can be done to address the two "Highs" and some subset of the "Mediums" in as short a time frame as possible so that the major problems can be satisfactorily resolved to relieve some of the pressure on the program. Having said that, none of the issues will be ignored.

Responding to the IOT&E report has taken up a large chunk of the program's time recently, but work continues in other areas. We recently had a Human Factors Team meeting at Harris to work on weather graphics. We have been shooting for equaling the graphics available in WSI right now. We are well on our way, but I hope to take us beyond that limitation. There is a possibility of getting our charts directly from the National Weather Service. The nice thing about that is that our current graphics and those currently being produced by the OASIS are not certified. If our graphics were produced by the NWS then they would be certified and legally useable to brief off of. A person from the Aviation Weather Center (AWC) indicated a willingness to work with us to produce what we want (not surprising that most of there funding comes from the FAA). However...and this is significant...it would take agreement and coordination at high levels between the FAA and the NWS. While the FAA is slow, the NWS is positively glacial when it comes to administrative decision-making. So while it will hopefully come to pass no one should be holding their breath. In the meantime we continue to work to make the Harris-supplied OASIS graphics the best we can.

A couple notes of interest from our trip to Harris. I had already reported that the first new hire to the OASIS program was a meteorologist. They hired another programmer who was also a meteorologist. Also, Linda Rose, the Lead Software Engineer quit to raise her new baby, so she was replaced. Harris chose Ken Bath who comes to OASIS from the WARP (Weather And Radar Processor) program. He is also a programmer/meteorologist. So we now have three people on the program at Harris with strong weather backgrounds. People we an talk to about our job who don't get lost when we start getting into details. I have high expectations for Harris for the future.

Last week there was an Acquisition Review at headquarters for Weather and Flight Service systems. This is a briefing for high level representatives of the various lines of business. I was stunned to walk in the room and find placards for NATCA and PASS at the table, but not a spot for NAATS. At a review that actuality includes Flight Service in its title! Bill Dolan and I expressed our displeasure and an embarrassed Agency invited NAATS to sit at the table. Hopefully that will be the last of that kind of blunder, but if you go by past practice... I am pleased to report though that the head of acquisitions and research (Steve Zaidman) was keenly interested in NAATS perceptions and issues. He looked to us for our input on all issues that were discussed related to OASIS. We discussed strategies for future improvements and upgrades to the system since anything put into the Pre-Planned Product Improvement (P3I) category automatically gets chopped out of the budget nearly 100 percent of the time.

The question I have started asking recently is why are we limiting ourselves to trying to replace M1FC functionality on a one for one basis? If this is the system that is supposed to take Flight Service into the future, why aren't we looking at that future? We have been thinking in the box too much. It's time to explore what we can do to take a step forward when we deploy OASIS, not a step sideways. I'm not advocating that we try and reinvent the wheel. I feel that we should be looking at enhancing the tools available to the specialist. Give him or her access to the tools that will bring the job into the 21st century, not stuck back in the 60's, 70's or even 80's. Only time will tell what kind of success I can have with that message, however I have seen some signs of hope in the reactions I have gotten to it within the agency. The people I work with have a genuine interest in the prosperity of Flight Service. However, the we will continue working to turn that system to our advantage wherever possible.

Jeff Barnes