the Other Y2K Problem -- Newly-installed (and poorly tested) Systems

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Here's something I'm trying to gauge the impact on...

With all this y2k "renovation" going on at the last minute, and entire new architectures being implemented in haste, aren't there going to be unforseen problems? Case in point: the new FAA computers where planes disappear from RADAR screens.

What about other examples where y2k "fixes" are almost as bad as y2k? Do you think these sorts of problems will amount to much?

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), August 12, 1999

Answers

How about a new AP system that you cannot cut checks to your vendors? The same vendors are cutting off customers because they haven't been paid since the start of the fiscal year.

-- (cannot-say@this.time), August 12, 1999.

I hear you, man. Check out this UK article -- the odd thing is that they are admitting that it was the Y2K fix that caused the power outage in London. Then bookmark the site - they are on the job.

http://www.y2k-news.co.uk/klimaxnews/102.htm

Snip...Londoners lose power after Y2K upgrade

About 4000 London Electricity customers were without power over the weekend after a Y2K upgrade went wrong.

London Electricity began upgrading its 400,000 pre-payment key meters, which will not register price changes after December 31, on Saturday.

But when the first customers plugged in the the new keys, their meters were corrupted and their power supplies cut off.

The company immediately began fixing the problem, but y2k-news.co.uk understands some customers are still without power.

It is still unclear what caused the problem.

"We don't know exactly what has gone wrong, but we don't believe it's a software problem," a spokesman said.

"We've suspended the programme for the time being." Un-snip

-- Jack Binns (fixes@gonna.gitcha), August 12, 1999.


Our County Assessor had that problem. They dumped his mainframe program because of y2k and gave him a desktop PC program earlier this year to replace it. It was not working up to just a few days before the legal due date for releasing the county tax rolls. He was sweating bullets because he could be personally sued if the rolls didn't come out on time. (I know cause I talked with him in line at the lumber store.)

It appears that the rolls were finaly produced because the appeal process rules were published in last night's local paper. Don't know if they did the rolls manually or what. Of course, the public will never know there was even a problem.

-- anon (anon@anon.com), August 12, 1999.


A large manufacturing company with several branches both here in the U.S. and overseas recently installed a Y2K "fix" in one of their U.S. plants. The fix created myriad problems and caused the plant to _shut down_ for two days until they could back it out and return to the old system. Expectations are that they will not have all the problems ironed out in time to reinstall in this plant - and if they do, they definitely are out of time now to introduce this fix at the other plants, for which this one was the guinea pig.

Believe it or not; I am not at liberty to tell you how I know this, but the source is...how do reporters phrase it?....unimpeachable.

-- Bonnie Camp (bonniec@mail.odyssey.net), August 12, 1999.


* * * 19990812 Thursday

Location: Detroit, Michigan Entity: City Government Source: WDIV-TV, NBC, Detroit, Channel 4 I-TEAM Investigation -- aired Tuesday, August 3, 1999

The City ( government ) of Detroit implemented a new citywide system in APRIL, 1999, at a cost of $50,000,000! Since then, they have been severely hampered paying ~5,000 vendors and issuing purchase orders for vital government services ( i.e., police, fire, etc. ). They do not know what the problems are. An unspecified number of vendors have stopped doing business with the City of Detroit. The report interviewees indicated that if the system were not fixed by mid or late September, Detroit is facing a financial catastrophe.

On Wednesday, the Detroit City Council approved $27,000,000 more to determine what the problems are. They expect another $50,000,000 may be required to make the system functional. Total final cost could be as much as ~$130,000,000.

The I-TEAM didn't overtly make the Y2K connection. However, several things are painfully obvious from this report:

1. The old system was not parallel tested before launching the new system.

2. Detroit waited way too late to implement their Y2K "compliant" system.

3. So-called "Y2K Contingency Plans" aren't worth the paper they're written on; Detroit should have implemented theirs immediately to avoid this painful demise.

How many other government/private entities are headed DOWN this Y2K path? Notice the 4-month bubble-up requirement for this Y2K story!?!

There is no substitute for REAL Y2K TESTING and VIABLE Y2K CONTINGENCY/CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), August 12, 1999.



Whew,

The MCI/Worldcom upgrade kept me unable to log on until this morning. When I kept calling Compuserver (who uses WorldCom) I was told I was not alone, that the problem was nationwide, including large financial institutions. Sigh.... it is nice to be back.

-- Kristi (securxsys@cs.com), August 13, 1999.


Some tidbits from Detroit's web site ITS section on their new computer system:

"On April 5 DRMS became the City of Detroit's "book of record". Departments have begun to use the new system for all of their "core" financial business (purchasing, accounts payable, accounts receivable, and general ledger), to track applicants for City employment, for budget processes, and for a portion of work order transactions."

"DRMS (pronounced "Dreams") stands for the D etroit R esource M anagement S ystem. It is a powerful computer system that will replace outdated systems used for the City's financial and human resources work."

"Mayor Dennis W. Archer, in conjunction with IBM and Oracle, publicly announced the DRMS project at a press conference on August 8, 1997. The event was covered widely by local media. All of the stories were positive about how the DRMS project will help the City better serve its customers."

That was then; this is now.

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), August 13, 1999.


The timing of Detroit's problem with its central financial system doesn't make sense: from the above two posts:

< On April 5 ("1999") DRMS became the City of Detroit's "book of record...DRMS (pronounced "Dreams") stands for the D etroit R esource M anagement S ystem. It is a powerful computer system that will replace outdated systems used for the City's financial and human resources work....Mayor Dennis W. Archer, in conjunction with IBM and Oracle, publicly announced the DRMS project at a press conference on August 8, 1997.

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), August 12, 1999.

____

Robert, from this it appears that as late as 1997 Detroit implemented a non-compliant financial system (the DRMS) - then replaced it improperly in April 1999, and now (Aug 1999) need some 77 million more to get the re-re-fixed system running before their credit and bond ratings get changed in Sept 1999. (Neglecting of course the city itself having even more problems in Jan 2000.)

Surely they are not "that" incompetent downtown? Are they? Or that corrupt?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), August 13, 1999.


R & R,

The August 1997 announcement was shortly (two months) after the awarding of the contract. The work was just beginning back then. The April 1999 startup, and the problems reported by WDIV, (and in the Detroit Free Press) are of the same system.

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), August 13, 1999.


* * * 19990814 Saturday

Robert: Yes! They are _that_ incompetent downtown anywhere! Nepotism at its finest.

Jerry: I apologize for omitting the DRMS nomenclature from my original ( impromptu ) post.

The DReaMS in Detroit have turned to Y2k NIghTMarES! ;-)

Regards, Bob Mangus * * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), August 14, 1999.



Bonnie Camp talks with the President?

-- clue (above@her.post), August 14, 1999.

clue,

The President was impeached; but he was not convicted. Too bad. (You can take the latter both ways.) :-)

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), August 14, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ