I'm stationed at Eglin AFB and as many in the PMEL world know we were the test base for the first version of PAMS 6.0. Here's a few ups and downs to the new PAMS coming to a base near you. Ups include: Better time management with simplicity of use (once you've gotten use to it), the ability to access Pams remotely even from your house (maybe soon we can turn equipment without ever having to come to work), GUI interface allows users to copy and paste within PAMS (I've used this a lot for inputing standards, type them in once and copy them to paste them in for follwing units of production), and the ability to create reports and view the backlog with greater parameters of search (can now sort backlog by more parameters than the old PAMS allows). Some of the downs: still several errors within pams such as: can use " ' " in the comments block (in other words you have to type cald instead of cal'd). Currently can't enter ICO, NCR, or CBU standards in PAMS (we were able to before but during the last update they messed something up and now we can't, they're still working on the problem.) Errors in date due sometimes occur (example: I turned a standard 30 June with a 6 Month cal interval and the date due should of been 30 Dec but pams entered it as 31 Dec for some reason. They're also still working on this problem.) According to scheduling, the scheduling part of PAMS isnt the easiest to work or use and has many features not needed or used (I wouldnt really know but thats what they are always gripping about.) PAMS 6.0 also has times when the servers are down so you can't turn equipment (in the future I feel a terroist group could easily attack the AF Portal and shut down not only PAMS but also CAMS since they are both there. When this happens what will happen to our production?) And dont forget about the other misc. errors that seem to keep happening here and there that they haven't been able to work out yet. If you have any further questions please feel free to e-mail me with them or leave a posting for others to see.
I don't think they will ever fix the "'" problem cause of the dataset they are using. When I was at SSG they fought with that problem for weeks and got no where with it.
I have theres a lot more than just the " ' " that they'll never fix or get working just right. Plus the whole idea of having not only PAMS but also CAMS on the same servers is a bad idea. In our new informational age the terrorist have started to use computers as a source for their destruction. I wonder what would happen to several career fields if the servers holding the information for PAMS and CAMS got attacked and destroyed. Since eventually the whole Air Force is going to be on these servers if they we down the workload production could be slowed down drastically. Plus, with all the users within PAMS and CAMS using those particular servers I wonder if the servers could be bogged down causing an even greater amount of slow procesing than it is now. We've already experienced down times from the servers where production for that particular night had to be input at a later time. I just thought it would be more useful to still use a local server to handle the data and upload backups to an overall server, greatly reducing down times for particular stations if the servers were attacked!!!
We just got the "new" PAMS running here at Cannon AFB. I was able to turn 6 items. Maybe it's my top notch MICRON pc, or maybe it's the Portal, but, this is PAINFULLY AND DREADFULLY SLOW. I'm not impressed yet.
Just got done with a full day of NEW PAMS. 6.0.2b. The "b" stands for BAD. Got a "Reimbursable" customer? If you do, you'll have to change EVERY ITEM .. SINGLY... to reimbursable.. Have fun! Shortest time to turn an item.... 5 minutes 8 seconds. LONGEST time to turn.....41 minutes 27 seconds. Stand by for TIME OUTS, LOST SERVERS, and general mayhem. It's kind of like... hmmm.. "Alternate Universe, Mr Spock with a moustache" PAMS. When this abortion comes knocking at your lab......... RUN. Somehow, getting a job at Starbucks making Frappucinos looks like fun... hahahahahaha. There ya go. An honest evaluation from a Retired Navy PMEL guy. I'm going home and getting drunk.
Not...good at all. We get ours at the end of the month. I bet Ralph and Bill are pulling their hair out with this news.
:cry: As my esteamed colleague has pointed out about our experience here at Cannon with "Bad" PAMS... it sucks. We bellyached so much about how antiquated the old PAMS was but I would gladly take that on its worst day with its ISAM and BASIC error than I would with "Bad" PAMS best day. We are BP+1 and have yet to be blown away like we were told we would be (all the concerns that we voiced and were told there is nothing to worry about has come to light, and once again showed us that the higher ups have no clue with what they talk about). Hopefully someone will pull there head out of their nether-regions and see that having us go through the portal and the like was ill concieved and let us use our servers like originally planned. I'm pretty sure you will be hearing a lot more from like minded people on this.
Yeah, I was always a little leery about the whole portal and web thing. As much as every base has their share of network troubles, I would have figured that the local server was the best idea. Hopefully in three years (when I leave Keesler), that they will have figured it out. Although, I seriously doubt it!!! :x
Probably not be fixed in 3 years.........Us K6 guys are working wth 50 year old or older standards. they don't wanta change. But I hope it changes in the next few weeks....as we go online at the end of the month
Well.. after my 5th shot of triple distilled Polish Wodka last night, I remembered that Mr Spock actually had a goatee..... Oooops
Okay.....
Our esteemed QA Guru pulled up a Production Report for yesterday...
It seems that two items cal'd here are now in "Bad Pams" as being cal'd at POPE AFB!!!!! Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Oscar!
"Dammit Jim, I'm a Metrologist, not a Computer Technician"!
As i said before there are several problems with PAMS and new problems are being found all the time. I know that a newer problem I've been having is that PAMS is not calling the certification screen after I turn a unit and in turn doesnt update the date due. This can be fixed within the time entry correction screen, but it requires you to take even more time trying to turn out a unit on an already SLOW SLOW SLOW system that no matter when it gets used seems like its slower than the time before. I really liked the local server idea but of course they chose the more diffucult way as the military normally does... For them its easier to get an 80 ton block of over a mountain intacted rather than cut it down and make several trips. I dont think I'll ever understand how they make decisions!
Ahhhh... Mondays. I love Mondays. And there's nothing I love more than cranking up my trusty 'finest quality' MICRON pc and discovering that the PAMS server isn't working. MILLIONS of dollars spent, local sever idea squashed, and we're left with "no server" messages. The only thing that keeps me from screaming is that I keep remembering this is a government system. As we used to say in the Nav... The only difference between this and the Boy Scouts? The Boy Scouts had Adult Supervision....
"Dammit Jim, I'm a Metrologist, not a Computer Technician!"
Got Pams 6 last week defenetly time for soju and cider or maybe just soju!!
So, what is the lastest? I haven't heard much on the PAMS 6 front lately...
I take it the installs have begun again? Have they worked any of the major bugs out of the system yet?
There are still some problems. We were supposed to be online last week, but were put off, again, for about a month. The rumor I'm told is that there was some faults in the original programming that needs to be repaired.
I heard all the faults lie in the servers and that they are being way over tasked and shutting down. Though that is only what I heard.
See above statement :roll:
See previous statement
So which is it? Previous, above, or both?
Is the soju getting to you John? You know, it's never a good idea to drink and post!
The latest that I know.... 36 out of 72 labs are on the new system... No more are being added for now. AND... it's slower than ever...
We have been using pams for about 3 weeks
Part of our process is to print out a standard report for each piece of equipment we turn and noticed that previous cals are coming up on the report at the same time when using job control numbers and ID numbers if we run the report again it comes up correct???
Mmmmm soju good
We got it a few weeks ago and it was so messed up at the time they cut it back to only having 4 people in the lab turning the equipment for everyone. I don't mind riding the waves with it though. Nothing is ever so important that it can't wait a bit to be turned.
We'll though not everything is fixed and theres still options that havent been implemented or working properly the load times and few installs that have happened so far are making it a little better. With the exception of times where the site is down it has significatly inmproved its load times to a managable rate. Also, we got ONE of our computers here to finally printout the PAMS labels with only a few minor glitches, though user made programs within access or excel still seem to be preferred. PAMS 6 still sucks but now its starting to suck a little less and for at leaset the everyday technician it is able to be used with out any real major delays.
Getting ready to make Hollomam's transition to 6 next weekend. Spent most of this weekend making sure the extract utility would work (had to tweak the .jcl a little bit to do everything on PAMS2 volume).
From this thread it sounds like it definately has some growing pains
Well,
PAMS still has errors. It's working for the most part, but theres frequestnly some part of it not seeming to work right. They are constantly updating though so hopefully in 5-6 years time they will have it all fixed.
PAMS 6 is PAMS 6. Nothing more and maybe something less. Bottom line is that we will live with the beast until it becomes a lamb. Beam me up Scotty, Pams went down again.