Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l - Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] January VRs

usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov

Subject: U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
  • To: Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
  • Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] January VRs
  • Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 07:05:43 -0500


Hello all,

VRs are now overdue.

Thanks,

Gustaaf

-6.4 is missing
-6.4.1: it is the CPI that’s 0.57, not the SV. "The increase from $294k to
$419k” should that be to $477k? Maybe the CA should add that the VL+
purchase date will be moved as part of the rebaseline? I’ll unlock this.
-6.4.2/3 are missing

-6.5.4 looks good

-6.6.4: thanks for the update, looks good. (Does that mean we should only
attribute ~$230k to COVID?)

-6.8 is missing
-6.8.4: Be careful with statements like "The CPI is largely to due work on
the fitter being done by uncosted labor (partly as mitigation from the delay
of the EE due to gFEX).” Please remember that we argued with NSF long ago
that there is some work that needs engineers, and some work that needs
physicists. We should keep the grey area as small as possible.

-6.10.2 is missing

> On Feb 20, 2023, at 11:00 AM, Gustaaf Brooijmans
> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> January VRs are due. Here are comments on the ones that have been entered
> (thanks!).
>
> Best,
>
> Gustaafd
>
> -6.4 is missing
> -6.4.1: it is the CPI that’s 0.57, not the SV. "The increase from $294k to
> $419k” should that be to $477k? Maybe the CA should add that the VL+
> purchase date will be moved as part of the rebaseline? I’ll unlock this.
> -6.4.2/3 are missing
>
> -6.5.3 looks good.
> -6.5.4 is missing
>
> -6.6 looks good
> -6.6.1 looks good
> -6.6.3 is fine (although one has to read between the lines to get the
> actual explanation)
> -6.6.4: for the cost variance, you now list complexity. What is the
> contribution of complexity to this? I’ll unlock.
> -6.6.5 looks good
>
> -6.8 is missing
> -6.8.3: looks good. This continues to lose ground… will the future
> schedule (post-BCP-1057) be realistic?
> -6.8.4 is missing
>
> -6.10.2 is missing
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page