While it might appear that the decision can be taken by DPA alone, consultation with industry prime contractors will be necessary to ensure practical decisions are made. Integrated Project Teams (IPTs) should be an ideal vehicle for this joint decision-making process.
6.13 Specification
It can be difficult, if not impossible, to obtain an exact specification for any item of COTS IT, regardless of whether it is hardware or software. Furthermore, suppliers are in the habit sometimes of exaggerating the capabilities of their products, while at other times, to prevent litigation, understating them. It is also unusual to find performance guarantees provided. Formal software evaluation technology cannot test for conformance to specification even if such a specification is available. Problems with unwanted functionality are outlined in Paragraph 6.26.1.
6.13.1 Source code availability
Much COTS software, such as operating systems and office aids are complicated programs of several million or even several tens of millions of lines of code. Source code for software is rarely available, though some companies do allow their code to be inspected on their premises. Open source software, o f which UNIX® and LINUX® are examples, are gaining popularity due to the dissatisfaction with closed-source products.
6.14 Delivery
The delivery of COTS IT is remarkably short. It may often be literally off-the-shelf and may, in any case, be too quick for the purchaser. On the other hand, it may no longer be available when
required. Continuity of supply and build standard are both issues that cannot easily be resolved. Furthermore, once the COTS IT has been delivered, there may be significant system integration problems, both in terms of the need for protecting hardware, and in both hardware and software interfacing.
6.15 Cost
It is clear that bespoke systems are largely unaffordable from MoD’s current level of defence equipment budget. The same factor applies to the other industrial nations, even the US. There is a significant cost of testing COTS IT to prove that it is ‘problem free’, and this may need to be added to the actual purchase price. It should be noted that the US DoD is cany out a great deal of COTS FT testing at its own expense. The life cycle cost implications of using COTS IT are largely unknown, but may be higher, since no major platform or system has had time to pass through more than a fraction of its life since COTS IT started to be used.
Competitive policy tends to be anti COTS IT, since once a particular supplier, for example of some software, has been chosen, that supplier will be the sole potential supplier of software upgrades.
6.15.1 Modifications
COTS IT is available at remarkably low prices for standard items, though these low costs rise to ridiculous levels if modifications are demanded. It is clear that the initial operational requirement must reflect the potential for COTS IT use if major modifications to standard items are to be avoided.
6.15.2 interoperabiiity and interfaces
The need for interoperability between different COTS IT-based equipment and between COTS IT-based and bespoke military equipment is largely an issue of cost. Careful though about the architecture and the use of interfaces early in any programme is key to minimising costs at later stages.
6.15.3 Performance
The performance of the final solution being acquired is a major driver, with complex, high- performance systems demanding the most from COTS IT and other system components, while simpler equipment is usually well within the state-of-the-art of COTS IT.
6.16 Contract terms and conditions
The terms and conditions of contract offered by DPA are not attractive and often not acceptable to most COTS IT suppliers. With most of these suppliers located in the US or Pacific Rim, these foreign firms are usually reluctant to send a negotiating team to the UK for what they see as a contract in an irrelevant or sidelined market. Defence prime contractors are in no position to be able to flow down MoD terms and conditions to commercial IT companies and face a ‘take it on our terms or leave it’ attitude. Three particular issues are warranty - not unreasonable for hardware but usually quite inadequate for software - intellectual property rights for software, and
the associated availability, or not, o f source code. W arranties for hardw are provide for physical failure but not for design faults. Software warranties usually disclaim liability for their use and do not undertake to correct any faults that are discovered.
A decision m ust be made on whether to purchase outright or take out a licence for any COTS software, and the tim ing o f contract signature may need to take into account new or upgraded COTS IT release time scales.
6.17 Sector 4 and 5 decisions
A s with Sector 3 decisions. Sector 4 and 5 decisions will involve both DPA and its industry prime contractors. Again, IPTs should be an ideal vehicle for this jo in t decision-m aking process.
6.18 M ilitary or defence specification requirem ents
N o C O TS IT meets UK defence specification or US military specifications and, worse, there is no audit trail. H owever, the specifications that COTS IT can meet are increasingly severe, usually not guaranteed by the supplier but often better than the supplier suggests. A popular solution is to wrap CO TS IT to mitigate its limitations. This technique is suitable both for CO TS IT hardware and software.
▲
COTS IT cannot do it Old bespoke development CostCOTS Wrapped Bespoke
Equipment capability
Figure 17. Costs escalate as equipment capability increases, whether using a COTS IT based or
bespoke solution. However, there is some trigger point in equipment capability above which COTS IT cannot effectively meet the requirement.
6.18.1 EMP and other environmental
COTS IT hardw are is not radiation hardened and for many military applications, ruggedness is still an issue, leading to the need for wrapping to provide the required level o f protection. While environm ental requirem ents in the commercial sector are increasing, and m uch CO TS IT is built to avoid RFI, there is little actual testing and there are no Tem pest p ro o f items. Fire in a confined space, such as on board a submarine, could be w orsened by the toxic products o f com bustion from
some of the plastics and batteries found in COTS IT, However, there is convergence as commercial environmental specifications toughen and military ones, such as the need for equipment to be EMP proof, relax.