---

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

DECEMBER 17, 1999 . . . 7:15 EST

Marines stand up alternate Y2K comm network

BY DANIEL VERTON (dan_verton@fcw.com)

The Marine Corps last week conducted the first communications test of its new Headquarters Marine Corps Y2K Command and Control Network that will act as a backup communications pipe among major commands in case of widespread Year 2000-related computer failures.

The Corps plans to rely on the UHF satellite communications voice network as an added layer of redundancy to its critical C2 network. The Corps uses the network to deploy forces during times of crisis or emergency. The Marines also have set up a Year 2000 response cell that will act as the network control station and manage periodic network checks among all major commands and the Corps' Washington, D.C., headquarters.

Current plans call for the full-time activation of the alternate network Dec. 28. Regular communications checks will take place through the New Year's rollover and will continue until senior officers decide it is safe to deactivate the response cell.

Use of UHF satellite communications networks usually is restricted to an "as required" basis. According to an official Marine Corps message -- sent this month to 18 commands -- which outlines the plans for establishing the backup communications pipe, the UHF network "should be used only in the event that other [communications] means have failed."

Col. Kevin McHale, director of the Marine Corps' Y2K Project Office said, "In typical military fashion, we are planning for all sorts of contingencies. We are a 'belt-and-suspenders' type organization, so we have planned for backups to the backups." Although McHale added that the Corps does not expect widespread communications failures, "we would be negligent if we didn't," he said. "Better to have a plan and not have the emergency than to have the emergency and not have a plan."

Martin Libicki, a defense analyst with Rand Corp., characterized the effort as "Marines being Marines," adding "that's what we pay them for, after all."

URL:

http://www.fcw.com/pubs/fcw/1999/1213/web-marines-12-17-99.html

---

"we would be negligent if we didn't," he said. "Better to have a plan and not have the emergency than to have the emergency and not have a plan."

My point exactly!!!

...(not hittin)...

-- snooze button (alarmclock_2000@yahoo.com), December 17, 1999

Answers

Snooze,

Exactly,

If I were commander-in-chief and was told that there was a 10% chance of serious communications disorders that could have serious defense implications, I'd take it fairly seriously and quietly order some precautions. I wouldn't bother to announce it (percent is arbitrary here) or make it public because I sure wouldn't want to give any ideas to the enemy.

IF...IF however, it were 50% or 90%...pick a number that seems pretty substantial or likely for such a problem or failures in communication. I'd move heaven and earth to put new communications systems into place if it meant serious risk to defense capability. And I'd be damned sure I kept it on the QT.

It seems that by making such noise though on this UFH Satellite and all the elaborate preps ... Don't you get the sense that the gov't suspects that communications systems are running a high risk of serious, serious disruptions??? And yet stupid for blurting it out to the whole world.

Of course we have that new law that forbids any disclosures on Y2K. So...what gives? More PR Spin. For what reason? Ultimately do they know its gonna be bad for communications and they want to let every one know they're going to be okay (or so they think)even if no one else is? These guys are the master spinmeisters here.

What do they know that we don't?? I think that they think that its going to be a lot worse than they wish to let on. Whether it is or not is not the issue on this particular aspect. The issue here is that they seem to be PR spinmeistering and calling attention to themselves and to potential enemies that our systems may be at risk after all.

BTW... are their back up systems compliant? What do ya bet they're not compliant either?

-- Dick Moody (dickmoody@yahoo.com), December 17, 1999.

>why the spin

If their purpose is to confuse everyone so that friend or foe alike won't know whether their systems and/or backup systems will work or not they have done a great job! ;-)

-- cgbg jr (cgbgjr@webtv.net), December 17, 1999.

It must be the microwaves from the satellite dish, my head is buzzing and spinning. Vision blurrrrrred.

It gets worse and worse, and there's still two weeks to go. Everything is ookey-dookey, and yet,report after report comes up with another full-scale contingency plan. I truly wonder if y2k is merely an excuse for something much bigger and better than anything we suspicion. Will someone please turn off the shortwave, I've got a headache.

-- Richard (Astral-Acres@webtv.net), December 17, 1999.