- This topic is empty.
August 7, 2008 at 11:44 am #601turbotim66MemberAugust 8, 2008 at 12:57 am #5881willKeymaster
FedBizOpps has a list of companies that have expressed interest at: https://www.fbo.gov/index?_so_list_from062209cb40f2bfe4e213919f1c740a36=0&_so_list_from062209cb40f2bfe4e213919f1c740a36_page=1
Some of these will more serious players than others, but it might give you a place to start if you’re looking for more detailed information.August 8, 2008 at 1:47 am #5882SciencetechKeymaster
Funny, I just found that same page while doing my own searches. Your link didn’t work for me, maybe this one will:
I recognize at least a few names there. Interestingly, Antarctic Research Support (ARS) shows up as “CSC Applied Technologies, LLC”. Holy smokes, Al Martin is on that list — I thought he was gone for good. And Steve Alexander at KBR. I wonder where Dunbar is?
It’s a small, small ice world.
August 8, 2008 at 2:11 am #5883Been_ThereMember
Dunbar is with CSC. Scott, Grant and Male are with Lockhheed Martin. And many more.August 8, 2008 at 11:35 am #5884
The name Ken McPherson at CSC sounds familiar. Who is he? One of the carpenters?August 9, 2008 at 2:41 am #5885SciencetechKeymaster
Ken’s a former RTSC veep who was apparently part of the team that won the NSF contract for RPSC. http://www.kenmcpherson.com/Resume.htm
Sadly, I don’t see any non-profit groups on that list. I was very much hoping to see SRI (Stanford Research Institute) make a bid, if not others. It would have been amusing to have Greenpeace make a showing too, although they’d have to do quite a hat trick to get any serious consideration.
– I wonder if CH2M Hill (let’s call ’em what they are: VECO) is getting any fallout from the Sen. Ted Stevens indictment? And if so, would that play into their chances?
– Well hey, I see CSC added the ARS name on that list — mo bettah.
– AECOM is a heavy hitter. I like them because they have a focus on renewable energy; wouldn’t mind them snagging the contract (no offense, BT).
– Ah, I see Rafael (All Points North) is looking for that postcard concession again. I should send him some pics…
– Conspicuously absent is RPSC. But this list is not necessarily comprehensive, eh? (Aside: why are we still using MAPCON? Didn’t RPSC promise to get rid of that when they bid the contract? Please correct me if I’m wrong.)
And you gotta love a company with a name like “Arapahoe SCITECH”. :-]August 9, 2008 at 9:30 pm #5886
From what I remember, Raytheon tried to implement a proprietary Raytheon inventory program to replace Mapcon. The story goes that NSF nixed the idea because they didn’t want Ratheon entrenched with the program. Any truth BT?August 10, 2008 at 5:33 am #5887Been_ThereMember
The truth is NSF realized everyone liked Mapcon so much that it wasn’t a good idea to change!
Actually Raytheon wanted NSF to allow them to go with a propieratory program and when NSF made it clear that what ever program RPSC used it would belong to NSF at the end of the contract Raytheon backed out. So at the end of the current contract the program still has Mapcon. Unbelievable!
BTAugust 10, 2008 at 5:58 am #5888DeSotoMember
Thanks for the information. Very interesting.
SusanAugust 11, 2008 at 12:19 pm #5889
Between you and me, I’m probably one of the few that like Mapcon. Once you’ve been in supply for a while, you learn all the shortcuts and it gets fairly easy to find things you want. It’s got a pretty good search engine. You just have to learn all the DOS keystrokes. Easy. The people who are used to windows only have the hard time.August 12, 2008 at 12:51 am #5890DeSotoMember
Actually Mike, I do not mind it either.
SusanAugust 12, 2008 at 4:18 am #5891
Nothing a little ALT-I SHIFT F2 won’t take care of.
August 12, 2008 at 10:02 pm #5892willKeymaster
while MAPCON does serve its basic purpose, wouldn’t it be nice to have everything barcoded so it could just be scanned into/out of inventory? so much simpler to just print stickers than having to write MAPCON numbers all over 250 items in a new order…
I hated the lack of automation, but the worst was waiting hours for the results of a relatively basic report. It shouldn’t be like that…August 12, 2008 at 10:52 pm #5893
I don’t disagree. It sure would be nice to be modern. On the other hand we have such a long supply line to buy things, I could see the scanners breaking, specialized printers on the blink and having to wait two years for upgrades. To me it sometimes seems like by the time you get something down to the ice, it’s already been obsolete for a year and you have the same problem. Mapcon and related processes while a pain and unlearnable to most fits the KISS formula and continues to work years and years after it’s replacement date. I could just imagine what it must cost to have a company build us a program that does everything Mapcon does, from requistions, POs, shipping, travel, boats airplanes, containers, where things are etc etc. I would imagine millions. Then you would have to take the manpower of an everchanging workforce and try to adapt a new system. It would be difficult enough for any company with a stable work force. With us, by the time the people who would teach the rest learned the system, the season would be over and everyone who just learned it would be gone.
In the end it will have to be changed, but its likely not to be a pretty picture.
August 13, 2008 at 5:55 am #5894BoulderGeekMember
MAPCON is like the vestigial tail of the USAP.
It doesn’t really bother anyone while it’s there. But, to others, it does look pretty freaky and out of place. And, it might feel a lot better were it removed at some point.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.