Steam powered FF system to continue

[markis10]

Looks like those hoping to see some improved functionality in the QFF system might be waiting a while:

Qantas has shelved a project to replace a 26-year-old IT system that supports almost 10 million members of its frequent-flyer program because it would cost another $40 million to complete.
The decision highlights the pressure on Qantas to slash costs to retain a cash buffer and keep up the fight in the domestic market against a rejuvenated Virgin Australia.
Qantas has already forked out $20 million on the NewGen program begun in early 2010 to replace the existing frequent-flyer IT platform called Profile.
The new system was originally due to be rolled out within 18 months.




Read more: Qantas IT system victim of cost cuts

 

[eastwest101]

Looks like those hoping to see some improved functionality in the QFF system might be waiting a while:

Qantas has shelved a project to replace a 26-year-old IT system that supports almost 10 million members of its frequent-flyer program because it would cost another $40 million to complete.
The decision highlights the pressure on Qantas to slash costs to retain a cash buffer and keep up the fight in the domestic market against a rejuvenated Virgin Australia.
Qantas has already forked out $20 million on the NewGen program begun in early 2010 to replace the existing frequent-flyer IT platform called Profile.
The new system was originally due to be rolled out within 18 months.




Read more: Qantas IT system victim of cost cuts

I realise this refers to the QFF Frequent Flyer program system but -

I could save them some more money by sacking/terminating the contract of whomever re-designed the current web site, reverting to the previous web site booking system and bringing U class classic awards back online and then freeing up some of the time of staff in the call centres.....

 

[RooFlyer]

All you need to know. From the article linked to by markis10:

Insiders have questioned the benefits of the work on the new program so far but Qantas said the old system had been enhanced by incorporating elements from NewGen. Contractors were kept on until October to ensure part of the new project was bolted on to the old Profile system.

(my highlighting)

 

[elbarto]

They call it cost cutting, but it sound like the company contracted has underestimated what was required and QF aren't having any of their excuses.

 

[Melburnian1]

IT projects routinely run over budget in government departments and agencies right around Australia, so it's interesting to see a public company having troubles.

This is not something about which competitor VA could crow as its FF web pages leave a lot to be desired.

 

[samh004]

They call it cost cutting, but it sound like the company contracted has underestimated what was required and QF aren't having any of their excuses.

Reminds me of the QLD Health payroll fiasco. Except in this case, as you point out, QF are putting a stop to it and I guess re-evaluating.

 

[zachary.august]

What would this new system add? I mean if the current system is working fine, why spend money on a new system?

 

[Hvr]

What would this new system add? I mean if the current system is working fine, why spend money on a new system?

My thoughts exactly.

The only functionality I believe we need that's not currently there is the ability to book ASA's on line. It used to be there so restore it and life will be good again.

Sometimes IT updates are done only so that companies can say it's new not to add better functionality. Way too much software is ruined because of 'enhancements'!

 

[Limewood]

My thoughts exactly.

The only functionality I believe we need that's not currently there is the ability to book ASA's on line. It used to be there so restore it and life will be good again.

Spot on there.

Its still bloated with so much wasted space like those big boxes, the most annoying thing still is those awful pop ups where seats are only partially available.

 

[JohnK]

What would this new system add? I mean if the current system is working fine, why spend money on a new system?

Like a lot of companies over the years.

Spend money on new IT systems just for the sake of spending money. Now Everyday rewards though is a totally different matter.

 

[Awesom Andy]

At least it's not getting enhanced.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

Too much time and effort is spent in the IT industry 'upgrading' back end technology for the sake of it. The main issue is the cost of maintaining a technology or language in which a diminishing number of people have experience. I assume the 26-year old system is the one written in Fortran?

 

[Mal]

Project failure in IT is common. But rarely mentioned in public, unless involving Government or a legal spout.

There are many causes. Often, the requirements are not spelt out properly at the start, sometimes the wrong contractor is chosen.

But is this any difference to building a house? Look at cost overruns with housing, and customer dissatisfaction at the end.

I do blame Qantas out shoring much of their IT. While I deal with some very talented [outsourced country citizens] on a daily basis, I question where the value of outsourcing overseas exists for anything bar basic work....

 

[OATEK]

What would this new system add? I mean if the current system is working fine, why spend money on a new system?

One of the key drivers for replacing old systems is the fear they will become obsolete and unsupportable. However, given that banks still have COBOL systems in the background, and other organisations (Government and Business) still running CICS or similar mainframe systems, there are not too many examples of businesses being brought to their knees from the failure of old systems. In fact many of the biggest problems in recent years have been from newer systems such as those used for online banking.

 

[Cossie]

One of the key drivers for replacing old systems is the fear they will become obsolete and unsupportable. However, given that banks still have COBOL systems in the background, and other organisations (Government and Business) still running CICS or similar mainframe systems, there are not too many examples of businesses being brought to their knees from the failure of old systems. In fact many of the biggest problems in recent years have been from newer systems such as those used for online banking.

As an aside and sorry for being off topic, when I started as a mainframe op back in the eighties, I was told that CICS had been developed primarily for Boeing to use for their 747 project. Dunno if that is true.
I was also told "why do you want to get into mainframes? They are dinosaurs", still chuckle when I think of this.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

What would this new system add? I mean if the current system is working fine, why spend money on a new system?

With that in mind...
Why would QF want to replace 747s? I mean they work just fine....

Sometimes, we need to look at the positives for upgrading critical pieces of our business, for example a new system:
- Would let QF/contracting company get rid of employees that were a drain on resources.
- Newer, fresher people that like and embrace technology, likelyhood of productivity increase is exceptional compared to current situation.
- Faster systems means more processing power to perform tasks that may have taken much longer to run, thus saving time and money.
- Gives a chance to add in new BI tools through enhanced data collection that may not have been possible before.

I could go on all day but you get the idea.... under the right circumstances - an upgrade could actually drive new revenue.

I'm no expert, but off the top of my head I'd say that staffing is the largest associated cost over the lifetime of a system change. If so, that needs to be the focus point instead of the perceived initial 'costs'.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

My thoughts exactly.

The only functionality I believe we need that's not currently there is the ability to book ASA's on line. It used to be there so restore it and life will be good again.

<sarcasm>Of course, the only thing a FF system owner needs to worry about is the ability of members to book flights</sarcasm>

Sometimes IT updates are done only so that companies can say it's new not to add better functionality. Way too much software is ruined because of 'enhancements'!

A 26-yo system probably doesn't run on a RDBMS, making it hard(er) to interface with any other modern tools for analysis
It also probably has interfaces (or lack of such) that make straight through processing hard - resulting in a bunch of people doing a bunch of manual things every day to keep things working
Probably runs on hardware that's hard to "scale out" - probably scale-up only. Might be starting to run into some limitations that are now impacting the time it takes for people to use the system
Probably supported by a skill-set that's becoming harder and harder to employ, and costing more in support contracts from vendors
And the application certainly can't be hosted on any sort of modern cloud-type hardware design (for example: app is designed to run across multiple nodes, and be tolerant of node failures)

I don't work for QF, but I do work for one of the big4 banks, and we have all these types of issues with older systems. Sure they "work well" for what they were initially designed for. But requirements and needs change, and retrofitting those to decades old systems eventually becomes expensive. Not to mention the risks involved in persisting with these old platforms (e.g. diminishing lack of skills, diminishing pool of vendors etc.)

 

[Cossie]

.....A 26-yo system probably doesn't run on a RDBMS, making it hard(er) to interface with any other modern tools for analysis......

Sorry for the abbreviation of the post, however I'd be very surprised if they were not running IBM's DB2, as do a lot of large gov departments with the exception of Centrelink which primarily runs Model 204 Data Base.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Sorry for the abbreviation of the post, however I'd be very surprised if they were not running IBM's DB2, as do a lot of large gov departments with the exception of Centrelink which primarily runs Model 204 Data Base.

As I said, I don't work for QF, but any large IT shop will have a bunch of DBMS in-use. We have everything from IBM's DB2 and IMS, through Sybase, Informix, Oracle, SQL Server etc.

 

[Kieran2274]

IT projects routinely run over budget in government departments and agencies right around Australia, so it's interesting to see a public company having troubles.

So true, and more than few public companies do suffer this problem when they opt to build from scratch, rather than use OTS (off-the-shelf). The trouble with software design and development projects are that scope creep is a common factor, as well as failure to adequately spend enough time working out what you really need (planning in broad brush strokes - which again leads to scope creep). As usual with these projects, bright dreams turn to dismal realities.