[EDanaII]

The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by EDanaII on Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:17 pm

The other day, Don pointed out a problem with the DB to me. This problem has actually been on my mind for some time, but fixing it represents, potentially, a lot of work. How much, I can't say, unless I actually "quantify" that work. To that end, I'm starting some initial analysis, and for that, I need the help of other minds on this.

Here's the problem: the database represents crews and the missions they flew, but this representation is a static snapshot of that crew at a given point in time, likely when they were first assigned to each other. An example of this is R.H. Kaufman's crew: http://www.401bg.org/history/crew.asp?cid=12271 , please look at the crew notes, where it mentions Crew #2: http://www.401bg.org/history/crew.asp?cid=12272 . This is because Kaufman lost a large portion of his crew on a fateful mission, and the second listing represent the change in crew.

This, however, is a dramatic representation of the problem. This problem actually occurred frequently with crews as various members were killed, captured or were reassigned. You see, events of the war changed the make up of each crew over time as the war progressed.

Resolving this issue requires introducing what's called an "Event" model into the database. What it would do is record events as they occurred to the organization, crews, groups, personnel and aircraft over the course of the war. For example, it would record the event that necessitated the creation of Kaufman's second crew and the subsequent change in crew. It would also record what happened to each member of the first crew (Killed, Missing, Captured, etc...) as well as, the events that affected the second crew until they finished their service. (Finishing their service as a crew is another example of an event that could be recorded.)

Here's why I'm opening this for all to consider: I need to identify all the "entities" involved in the 401st so that they may be associated with "events." At present, the entities I believe will need to be recorded: Persons, Combat Crews, Support Crews, Squadrons, the 401st and Aircraft.

Does anyone have any other entities that should be added to this list? Are there any other groups that need to be considered?

Please feel free to post any and all thoughts here. Do not be shy. The more ideas you provide, the more complete model I can create.

[donaldbyers]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by donaldbyers on Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:06 pm

Unless the structure is in one of the other events you mentioned I would think Mission would be the other which denotes the exact mission which things are different. You can tell me if I am wrong I can take it hahaha!

I also know the potential of lot's of work, but there was a lot of input when the database was first construted and then came the data entry.

Don

[EDanaII]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by EDanaII on Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:17 pm

And being killed in action, missing or completing a tour are events too, instead of being just status codes in the current database. But I don't want to focus on Events right now; we will get to those later. My current purpose is to identify all (or as many as I can) Entities that we will record events for. As already stated, such entities are: Personnel, Groups (Combat Crews, Ground Crews), Squadrons (composed of Crews), the 401st itself, maybe the 8th Air Force, and so on...

So, once again, does anyone have any more to add to that list? Does anyone have any additional thoughts on this subject? Some other possible (but less relevant) Entities might be Deenethorpe, or Weldon, but I doubt that they'll need to be recorded directly. For example, Deenethorpe and Weldon need only be mentioned when the "Crashed on Take Off" event is recorded for the Zenobia Al Elephanta.

Paul? Are you reading this? You've become our resident 401st expert, do you have any thoughts there? Dale? How about you? Anyone else? I just want to hear your thoughts so that I can weigh this issue.

Ed.

[donaldbyers]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by donaldbyers on Sun Jul 18, 2010 8:51 pm

Speaking of changing position you have pilots moved to staff positions, to squadron leaders and so forth.

Don

Am sure that Paul will have something to say when he reads this Topic.....

[EDanaII]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by EDanaII on Mon Jul 19, 2010 4:10 am

Yep, those would be "Events" too, but the question arises, do we want to track them? While I've been warning about the potential workload this might create, I'm more worried about the strain this could place on our Access database. It has the potential to push it to its limits. But that's why I'm doing some analysis here. The only way to find that is to explore the options a little bit.

Ed.

[donaldbyers]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by donaldbyers on Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:57 am

I do agree with you and think we should only follow them as far as crew members.

[Paul Bellamy]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by Paul Bellamy on Wed Jul 28, 2010 9:16 pm

I'll have a think and see what suggestions I can come up with.

TTFN,
Paul

[EDanaII]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by EDanaII on Thu Jul 29, 2010 1:16 pm

No worries, Paul. At this point, this is nothing more than a brainstorming session, so... if ya can't think of anything, it's possible we've thought of it all. I'm also taking this slow, considering the potential workload it represents.

[donaldbyers]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by donaldbyers on Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:00 pm

There are also instances where a pilot and or his crew flew with another squadron an that being flying as lead for that squadron. This may already be a function when filling out the information on crew members and pilots.

Don

[Paul Bellamy]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by Paul Bellamy on Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:37 am

While struggling to decipher the out-of-focus squiggles of the Gushing Gertie wall panel crew roster all I can pull out at the moment are a few of the ranks.
Of course, one of the static entries in the database are personnel ranks, which changed over time. Promotions and transferrs are a couple of the things that should be recorded in the Squadron Dailies, so in theory that's something that could be incorporated at some point.

As an aside, is there any way to make the search function a bit less rigid?
Many times I'm stuck with either having a few letters of a name, or even a number of spellings, which means I have to plough through the entire assigned personnel list with Firefox's own search function to get anything at all.

TTFN,
Paul

[donaldbyers]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by donaldbyers on Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:22 pm

You can use the "%" sign in your search just a you could use the "*" Paul *mond or %mond.

Don

[EDanaII]

Re: The 401st DB Analysis: fixing a problem.

by EDanaII on Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:23 am

Yep, Don's correct. You can pattern match any name simply by inserting a % sign. So, if you not sure if the person is a Johnson or a Johnsen, you can enter Johns%n, or even John%. Or if you're sure he's a son, but not of what, you can specify %son. Nor are you limited to one %. Place as many as you need strategically in the persons name. That said, the use of too many % could cause things to slow down, so use them wisely.

That said, I'll try and put a quick Event model together over the weekend, to push the discussion a little further.