this meeting has been recorded all right so this meeting is being recorded um Chris take it away thanks Jace Kia Ora kotokatoa it's welcome to everyone and thanks for coming along for this presentation um it's kind of weird um it's a bit like talking to myself because I can't actually see anybody except Jess but that's fine um that'll suffice um I'm I'm honored pleased to be presenting to the New Zealand chapter of and cozy and I do see a number of uh familiar names um and uh and some of you for the first times at first time uh greetings to everybody so my presentation is entitled The p3k to Orion a systems engineering retrospective um or perhaps um more relevant how I became a systems engineer um I believe I've got about 30 minutes but as this is the first time I've done this kind of thing I'm likely to be either way too long or way too short um the upside is that nobody has to travel home right we're all probably already there so when I joined Becca I didn't know how to spell systems engineer now it is one a bit about me though I'm a main lender cantabrian which means I've got one eye shut and the other one doesn't see very well when it comes to rugby I went to school in Christchurch studied Agricultural Science of all things at what was then called Lincoln College now a university in its own right I joined the Royal New Zealand Air Force 1987 at the ripe old age of 24 just sneaked in under the age limit I learned how to fix planes how to fly planes well briefly and partly I didn't really I didn't get through the course and learned how to operate systems on planes as an air Electronics operator and an air Warfare officer my career focused on the P3 Orion and on number five Squadron who really feel to me like my whanau um and uh it has been um a lifetime it feels like of Engagement with them I had two flying tours about 2 000 odd hours and I truly got to see the world with fire Squadron along the way um I had a few other jobs I was adjutant at rnz based Woodburn for my sins quite early in my career so I was quite bad quite young two years in Penang Malaysia as training officer for the integrated air defense system flight commander of the techcoms flight um officer commanding of the operational software maintenance unit for about five years that was for the p3k so it was the predecessor of the K2 and then about another five years of staff officer of Maritime Patrol in the headquarters um and along the way I did six months uh in Sudan um working for the United Nations and that was an experience that is a presentation all in its own right just in case you don't know who Becker is we're a Professional Services business based in New Zealand the officers in the New Zealand Asia Pacific and further afield according to this wonderful graphic I've got here four thousand plus people 14 countries 25 offices 75 disciplines 75 plus disciplines I suspect systems engineering is the plus um where uh Becca replied Technologies as a subset of big Becker 60 systems software and security Engineers thanks for that great yes so we account for less than uh 1.5 of the percent of the number but we do in fact do the cooler stuff but enough about Baker let's talk about me um I didn't start my career knowing much about systems engineering but along the way I undertook a significant body of training made extensive use of having a training budget for both myself and the team around me and and we were in the end well versed in both Doctrine and practices associated with systems engineering um learned how to write specifications and learn about the rtca do 178b software Assurance at guidance as it was when it was B later on you'll see I did a differences course about 178c when it became a standard did an E3 course did some systems engineering training requirements writing requirements management which is um pretty much the same course whoops same course but I know I'm just giving you all my slides whoa uh showing my secrets before we get there um test writing um systems engineering management safety analysis and that was quite cool that was in Cranfield University in the UK and some process change management and my favorite which is I missed out in the middle there which was my cognitive cognitive systems engineering course that I did in Australia where we um got to talk about things like information aggregation cognitive Transformations human machine transactions etc etc all very um cool stuff and while reflecting on my association with the P3 and this Slide by the way is supposed to convey a lot um and um it may not necessarily be entirely readable and I apologize for that but I'm going to talk to it um I realized that Becker Applied Technologies has been involved in pretty much the entire life cycle of the p3k2 mission system and I personally haven't been involved right from the outset I've seen a complex integrated system through all the stages of its life cycle starting with the problem definition and requirements analysis phase while I was still in the Air Force then there's at least one other person potentially two um in this audience who were part of that process as well um and culminating in the end of uh in the end of service and disposal of the aircraft with the activities that are currently underway for archiving and disposing of componentry and of engineering data the bigger Applied Technologies team that I'm uh so proud to be part of has done some pretty cool stuff within this context um we started off by embedding seven Engineers with the OEM in the USA um in Texas no less and they participated in the design implementation and component testing and integration testing of the delivered system we aided the rnz AF to design set up and configure the new Support Facility for the mission system at fanuapai we assisted with the introduction into service of both the aircraft and its support systems we worked alongside the rnzaf to develop an appropriate lifecycle support model and walk alongside them as they developed their own capability in both aeronautical software and complex systems engineering disciplines we conducted ongoing fault definition and safety analysis on the identified defects and we assisted the OEM and warranty defect isolation and rectification through this we helped the rnzf to better understand the functioning of the complex system that the p3k2 mission system was and I did them both in its operational use and also in their technical support of it to further support that we built tools to optimize workflows leverage outputs from the system we maintained and enhanced the mission simulation and Training Systems to Aid an air crew and Technical Training and Pierce the resistance we produced a series of eight major software updates that variously optimize the existing existing system functions added new functions improved system performance rectified defects added entirely new sensors or upgraded existing sensors that were already in part of the system and lately we conducted obsolescence analysis and integrated replacement system components as obsolescence started to take hold we even spent time with the Air Force on deployment to better understand their mission and identify ways that both the physical system elements and the human elements elephants the human elements of the system might be employed differently to achieve a better effect and we are assisting now in the closeout of the engineering processes as I said before we've stood alongside the Air Force throughout this entire time both as a repository and caretaker of the evolving system understanding ensuring that lessons and knowledge were not lost through the passage of time and the attrition of Air Force personnel and just talking directly to the slide for a second and there isn't the full set of system system life cycle activities it's uh a key set that was sort of mentioned within the the um wordage that I just put in front of you there but and in fact some of it has slipped off the bottom of this screen on mine I don't know if it is anyway but we we as well as the data management system we were supporting the uh initially what we were calling the Cecil the commercial software integration lab which was um a an environment that we were using to do our initial software testing and integration using a commercial off-the-shelf Hardware rather than any of the actual aircraft Hardware the system integration and training lab which was um a um a set of racks that um roughly um were a rough facsimile of the layout within the aircraft and included all of the aircraft um components so that we would be able to test our software changes and any integrated new system components in the uh final Hardware environment environment and that minimized the amount of actual aircraft testing we had to do we also had the mission simulation subsystem which we were supporting and developing throughout its life cycle and the flight deck trainer and the mission planning and Analysis system which has slipped off the bottom of the slide I see um and um all of those integral activities uh along the right hand side um we're over and above um and had to be had to be um considered and at various points were preeminent in terms of the work that we were doing um at the time and depending on the stage of the life cycle we were talking to a couple of those a little bit later on in the slides but right now I'm going to talk a little bit about the team um and uh and no engineering presentation would be complete without a graph or so and so I've combined four into one slide I dredged some data from the Becca system and to uh to show a little bit around the shape of the support um that we provided to the rnz AF this is showing the uh roughly it was 14 years but it was 15 years from 2008 to 2023 the last year's data has uh has hasn't been aggregated onto this slide but you can see that we started off if you look at the staff numbers in blue with a mere seven people at fanuapai um in fact it was six and a six when I before I began and I joined a couple of months after the um the the unit was set up we expanded pretty rapidly uh sorry and um at its high there were 46 different people in two um in 2018 who contributed towards the job um if you look at the yellow you can see how that equates out into full-time equivalent and we negotiated the full-time equivalent um delivery um on an annual basis within the the framework of our fixed contract so we had a five plus five contract uh with a full review at the five-year Point um it rolled through the five-year review we went through to the 10-year point and then we got a a five-year contract to follow on from that that took us through to the end of life for the aircraft at its peak and you can't really see that here because it says 19.8 we were actually at 21 that's just the maths and the numbers weren't quite correct we were we had 21 people um on our full-time team at fanuapai when we were deep in the throes of major software change and major Hardware obsolescence integration and for the aircraft um so as I said it was 15 years of support if you add the four years that were spent in Texas that's uh 19. so nearly 20 years of supporting the the p3k2 mission system the aircraft itself on retirement had done over a hundred their Fleet had done over 148 000 hours of of flying um and I estimate based on approximately 2 000 hours a year around 30 000 hours of that um was uh by the p3k2 variant the one that we were um um the one that we were supporting and um when you look at the dark green line um you'll see that um over the course of the contract we've delivered 32 000 hours of um support effort to the rnz AF in order to enable them to keep flying that aircraft and keep improving that aircraft to meet the operational outputs required um that's uh a bit startling when you look at it I won't do the maths um to tell you how much um that cost the Air Force um but I can tell you you wouldn't have found a cheaper software contract of that sort anywhere in the world let alone in New Zealand but you know that's when we were looking at at this we were taking a big risk and so the Air Force took a big risk as well um and signed up for 10 years um and ended up being 15 and we're very proud of that achievement over a hundred Uh current and former Becca staff have contributed 50 50 split between software and systems engineers and six major software releases two major Hardware obsolescence upgrades two new sensor Integrations and as I've said before we even spent time for with them on operational deployment and that was an interesting um uh point in the life cycle of the system where we actually got to see in fact when the uh the Air Force Five Squadron actually got to exercise most of the capability that was inherent in that aircraft in Anger for the first time on uh on their deployments to um to the Middle East and there were a lot of things that were coming out of that in terms of of issues that they were facing and um we suggested at one of our um monthly contract meetings that we may be able to help if we could get more information about what they were doing and seeing how they were operating it but of course um it's all classified and the only way that we could do that was to be present and lo and behold that's what happened um two of us got issued some uh some camouflage gear and a pair of sunglasses and we went and spent about eight days up in places Sandy and hot and I flew five it was five or six operational sorties while my offsider um software engineer by the name of Peter brazendale spent a lot of time sitting with the the ground element of the deployed team I was with the Airborne element and between us we sat down and dealt with I think about 15 to 20 different aspects of how the system was being used they were either completely unexpected they were using it to do things that we didn't know they were using it for or not to put to find a point on it completely wrong they weren't using the system the way it was designed to be used and therefore they were making life hard without intent and you know it's just that it was the first time that these things had been put together in an operational scenario and they were doing the best they can with the knowledge they had so that was a really exciting phase in our engineering support the recommendations that came out of that um that deployment um fed an entire major software release which followed shortly thereafter so one of the key early hurdles that we had to overcome when setting up the um the support operation um was they needed we needed to Define and establish the required process and by the way I do not expect you to be able to read the words on the right that's um showing you complexity more than anything else um with the introduction of the support for the K2 we were introducing both systems engineering and rtca do 178b software Assurance to the Air Force who at the time were new to both in truth so was Becca but we learned alongside them um and it was our job um to get ahead of the game to bring the skill set up to get the capability to support the aircraft fully functioning by the time the aircraft the first aircraft was delivered we were aided in that endeavor by the fact that the first aircraft which was due to arrive in late 2008 didn't actually arrive until uh Marty helped me out was it 2010 and I think wasn't declared operationally um uh ready until 2011. so we had plenty of time which was which was a good thing because it was a complex and heavy process that um that was initially developed and of course everything was going to be waterfall um using the systems engineering V model um and overlaying uh do17hc Assurance um and on top of that um trying to mirror the mill standard 498 project uh process with all of its steps and all of its dids But as time went on both we and the Air Force we're very keen to reduce both the time and the cost associated with such a heavyweight process and to optimize throughput to get more um uh change through the change process and onto the aircraft to fix more defects to add more capability just looking at that picture on the right and all of the colored rectangles um were reviews we had that many different review points throughout the process um and the column that is labeled products that is all of the outputs um from our process and all of those had to be put through their own review process and and so we spent an enormous amount of our time um oops an enormous amount of our time sorry I feel like I don't know what I'm doing um should I get up no down we spent an enormous amount of our time sitting around the review table um and eventually that it became clear that that wasn't going to be sustainable for the level of uh change agility that the Air Force was going to need um just let me catch up with myself and so uh the Air Force we worked with the Air Force to start to optimize our um our our process uh you see sorts you would have seen on that busy blue slide that was uh higher up one of the things that was in there was uh continuous Improvement program um throughout it all we were looking constantly at ways that we could uh either um combine or remove steps completely um where we felt that they added no value or that they were being met through other mechanisms and the process got leaner and leaner we'd we adopted standing plans so we didn't have to re-agurgitate and put through a full review process all of the uh the plans that we needed for um a um a do 178 software process we um published them got them accepted and and only if we needed to make changes with changes made to those documents and it was the changes that were reviewed at the start of the next project we had uh better and better engagement with the certification Authority which was um a cell within the the Air Force um That Grew organically from uh a beginning of I think it was two and Russ McMullen may have been in that very early team and one of one of the the people on the in the audience um and as that experience was developed and um Engineers were being put through training including we had Junior engineer from the Air Force embedded within the software support and system support area that we were part of um so that they could learn how to spell 178 learn how to speak um systems engineering and be able to understand what was being what was being done and eventually we were able to um make some real gains in terms of making the process efficient and um and effective at the same time and continuing um to maintain the level of safety that's required with aeronautical software um both the other the other thing that was a significant contributor to that was the developing the relationship with the certified certification or authority um so that we were not so much throwing our products over the wall for them to um put through some Arcane review process and then throw back a bunch of um information requests but instead they came and sat with us um and we talked to them through the outputs from the process that they were interested and answered their questions directly and satisfied their concerns and um uh significantly reduced uh the effort that was required to get certification approval at each of the gateways along with that we were operating an active risk management program um and so that was both a safety risk management through the do 178 process where all software changes were put through a safety risk assessment um that that evolved significantly over time and that was a lot to do with the rnz af's growing understanding of what they meant by by System safety and what they needed from an assurance perspective with regard to system safety and it is one of the most difficult aspects of the well it was one of the most difficult aspects of the program was the fact that we're required by 178c to to put our um to put any changes um to the system through a safety assessment process which um would normally be um contingent um will the safety um assessment is based on the platform level safety case and safety assessment that flows down from that and there was none and which meant that um the process of doing safety assessment became a bottom-up process and as a result was um quite um subjective required a significant amount of knowledge of how the system was um intended to be used and early on that knowledge was not as easy to come by as it could have been but that's largely because there were not that many um people who had been through the training and who were had enough flying on the system to understand how things interacted um that being said um that process worked well and there were no safety incidents that resulted from um that process however it was always a little uncomfortable that we didn't have a high level safety case or a high level system safety analysis um from which we could then distill um the safety impact from our software changes yeah um as I said in that picture up there you can see that the the the colored boxes uh reviews they're 16 and total by the time we did the final software release that was just reduced to five um five major reviews uh review points and we were doing um iterative um integration because we were integrating Hardware changes as well as software changes and feeding that back via the safety assessment process into the software change process and then rolling back into integration testing and then final acceptance testing at the end of that much more efficient we still only managed to roll out a software release about every couple of years um but we got a lot more out in our software releases I believe then would have been possible if we were sticking if we'd stuck to the heavyweight process that we started with so some of the challenges that we faced um in in this um obviously and I've mentioned this already and we were introducing new processes and new standards and and they were new to uh to us um as well as new to the to the client to the Air Force um we had um uh we believed and we've subsequently um you know proven right that the Air Force would do well to put its Trust on us um we made absolutely certain that we um put our people through the training you would have seen that from the from the the list of courses that I myself did and and plenty of others were doing training at the same time the idea being that we would rapidly gain the textbook knowledge and along the way the experience that comes from actually doing the job and turn that into expertise and um we certainly did that on both sides of the fence both the Air Force and uh and Becker Applied Technologies have moved uh massively forward in the area of systems engineering and in high integrity systems engineering as I said we had no platform safety case which made one of the integral components of software change at all levels in 178 uh that of safety analysis um a little tricky but we overcame that through some creative uh uh well some some compromise um and I think another member of the audience uh Harley James was was instrumental in um getting the first couple of those over the wire um quite a long and drawn out process as we sought to understand the system and how the system was going to be used and I'm talking about the mission system here um but nevertheless laid a good foundation um for us to be able to go forward and we essentially did the same thing for every project from then onwards um Harley used to be used to be my client and now he's my boss um and this should be an advert about that I think on you know what was that one was it toothpaste no it was a shaver I loved it I loved it so much I bought the company well kind of the opposite um but that um tells you a bit about um the relationship that um we developed um with with the client um that um we were um we almost had a permeable kind of a boundary between the two and we weren't breaking any lines in terms of poaching um we had such a relationship that um we all felt like we were in it together I've uh stepped out of the hard bits and talked what to something that's on the next slide but I'll come to that another significant um set of issues that we faced particularly early on was that we were dealing with OEM documentation including requirements that um had not been maintained since they were delivered as dids at uh um the point in the project the program that they were required and so requirements the final set of requirements were required for the critical design review or the final design review and from that point onwards um there was most definitely change to system design which would have flowed back into requirements change and there were things that were traded out that that were not in the system that were still in the requirements things that were um that were new in terms of function that had not been written up into the requirements and because where you because requirements were the fundamental building block for um developing um the the software in the first place and then subsequently developing the tests for the for the system and that made they gave us a significant amount of work that we had to do in the early stages of choosing which part of the um enormous requirements database indoors we were going to Endeavor to bring up to the current state and and we always had this dichotomy between the bits of those Doc and same with the other design documents things like the interface control control documents and that specified all of the layouts for the HMI Etc signed off at CDR but changes were made during the integration the final acceptance testing there were subsequent changes um and they didn't flow into the documents and so we had to do a lot of work to bring those documents from where they were put down by the OEM and where we were picking them up we didn't go do the entire set we didn't feel and and we you know and ordered the Air Force feel that that was going to be value for money it added nothing but what we'd had to have was a sound requirements um set and sound design documentation station set for the pieces of the system that we were modifying or the places that we were going to make change a big one was that we didn't know what we didn't know um in the early days of the system design system implementation in Texas we had as I said we had six people on the ground in Texas but there was more teams than that and even within the Thames each of the software Engineers was only working on us on on a part of a subsystem potentially so there were elements of the systems that we didn't have any expertise in and if you go back to the um the issues with the documentation that sometimes we had to do um we had to essentially reverse engineer the question of how does this system actually work by going through the going through the source code looking at um the the decision flow path and working out what was actually going on and that was fun apparently for the software Engineers um not something that I myself got into um and not a point of Pride so much as a point to notice that I never claimed to be a software engineer and I've never written a line of code and what I did was manage a a major systems engineering project that involved um software change and um if you were to look back at the size of our team if you recall we went from seven people initially to about 16 and from there we went up to 21. and the bulk of the increase was systems Engineers we started off with when it was seven six software engineers and me systems engineer and I couldn't even spell systems engineering at that point um and by the time we got to um you know the the peak of our our size we had um about 50 50 of the 20 so 10 software engineers and 10 systems Engineers um and at times it was even more systems engineering heavier than than uh than that we also had to encounter the tribulations that are associated with working in a classified environment the security of the systems uh the security of the software development system and the requirements under under the um the U.S trafficking and arms regulations
um which meant that we had we were not only responsible for the safety um and integrity of the Integrity of the data thereby the safety of the the system we were also responsible for this security um of the information on behalf of the Air Force and we spent most of our working days inside um secure areas working on networks that had no connection to the outside world we weren't able to have um any personal communication devices which personally um these days I think is a bit of a bonus no cell phones um nothing that radiated and there was no connection to the outside world and in about the last six years um we introduced um the ability to use um specifically modified Becca um laptops to enable us to have company Communications at our desktop um part of the problem with the security was that the Air Force was a little bit schizophrenic in regards in regards to uh security um there was a hard and fast set of rules and uh in a classifications guideline document that was put out and we were Bound by a contract to follow that explicitly and at times implicitly because it was a little bit internally um contradictory but um most of the rest of the Air Force had never even seen that document um and there were there were numerous occasions where people needed to see data that we had and information that we were responsible for but we were unable to provide it to them because of a classification that was on it and they could not understand why um and yeah we we had to work our way through that by the end I think everybody understood and it was working pretty well but in the early stages it was a little bit of a a stumbling block um another thing that was uh quite difficult at times um was the rate of turnover in our in our key clients uh contact you know we had a um um a zipper um engagement with the rnzf engineering World um and our people stayed reasonably constant in terms of who was doing what and in what role but um those of you with any military background or military knowledge knows know that um the military likes nothing better than to post people as soon as they get uh as soon as they get um to be a an expert and able to uh you know um Implement a bit of change and you step back and have to induct a whole new set of people into how things are operating and um what the whole project is about and what the process is and um why we can't do some things and why we have to do other things um there was a sometimes an exercise in resilience but another times it was a really refreshing opportunity to have a look at what we were doing you ask ourselves the question of are we still are we doing it just because um somebody said we should do it or is there still a good reason um so they kind of acted as a bit of a review Point as well and perhaps um last but not least and uh obviously from my perspective having um a 30-year engagement with the aircraft it was really hard to see the aircraft retire um and that that is the downside to uh you know to being engaged through the entire life cycle you have to see something go out of use um and all of your work um is no longer being put to good use the Best Bets um at the top there I say living with the client we were embedded we were inside the clients of the Air Forces engineering organization we were acting as a part of an Air Force um unit and we were engaging with them both as a contractor and also as colleagues and that was a very stimulating environment for a high performance high functioning um teams to to grow so that was that was really cool um right up there with that was the fact that we knew we were solving important problems we were making a difference um in the things that we did and we weren't just um changing the color of logo on a on a banking app or um or you know um fixing a back end um glitch with a with a database in an HR System this was stuff that was um contributing to the Safety and Security of people and the confidence of our government in the New Zealand Air Force um right up there with living with the client also was learning and growing alongside them so we started this journey at the same level and we grew in tandem in terms of um our our um our proficiency our um flexibility and our expertise and that's been really cool and watching that as Air Force people um having said that they moved on super quick um with they also a lot of them moved on and up and uh holding key positions within the organization and that's really cool to see as well um and lastly we've done it again oh look at those beautiful people um uh taking a bit of a uh a leaf from an old Maori proverb um heater to Miya Nui OTL hitangata you know what is the most important thing it's the people it's the people it's the people and um definitely for me that was uh that has uh certainly been critical in this whole process and I'm not just talking about Becca people um and here's when our team was out at its peak um but as I said you know we lived and breathed Air Force and five Squad and at the same time as we lived in breathed Becker um the relationship that we had was founded our mutual trust along the way we shared tribulations and also celebrations so you can see us here celebrating the completion of our 10-year contract and at that point rolling forward into the next five years and together we built a systems engineering capability for New Zealand Inc from scratch and both Becca and the Air Force now have significant capability point to note or point of interest at least from my perspective um is none of the Air Force people that are in this photo are the same as the people that we started with um although four of them do now work for Becca six of the Becca team that were there at the start of the contract are still working for Becca um and we're pretty proud of the fact that people stay um and people enjoy the work and like I said right at the start we do the coolest stuff so I guess to round out my retrospective the p3k2 has been retired the 19 years of bigger support to the p3k2 has come to an end but that is not the end of the story we prayed that at this point um the rnz area for well placed to welcome in the new generation of aircraft into service and Beyond the rnz AF Becker has drawn on our experience with the P3 to Branch out into other similar high integrity systems software engineering Services you can tell I'm reading it from from lines here can't you this includes this includes work for the oh Navy the Army and the information Warfare branches of the New Zealand Defense Force and the growth of the defense market and services in Australia we've also extended them into other markets and clients including rail health civil aviation and even into space and that's something that we could only have dreamed about um in 2004 when the first people were sent to Texas to start work on the P3 project so sad as it is to bid farewell to the P3 and to be finishing that up Becca has its eyes on the next Horizon and Beyond we can continue to forge ahead in the world of systems engineering with the capability that we've developed and ultimately to be making every day better for our clients oh yeah and that's why I can now call myself a systems engineer that's the end of my slides ladies and gentlemen well it's only one lady and this someone's arrived and I haven't seen um may not have been exactly what you were expecting but then it wasn't exactly what I was expecting either because half of what I wrote wasn't what I said um um but I am totally open to take questions and there's too many people in the audience who know the answers potentially to for me to tell lies so expect complete honesty uh we do have a few minutes left thank you Chris um so if there are uh questions out there um we invite you to put your hand up um if you want to stop your screen stop share great and Camera oh no camera on yeah yeah what a moment not seeing any uh any hands go up or um any mics come off mute so Chris I'm I'd like to thank you for um this an excellent presentation um the being the [Music] um being the life cycle of the p3k2 through a systems engineering lens and and Becca has been really just fascinating so it's it's um it's great to have seen that and really appreciate you pulling pulling that presentation together today so you're welcome so I'm going to do one last thing here um and then we'll wrap up uh so that should still be sharing very good um so again next our next Meetup will be in May um the 16th of May Richard full of love from transport New South Wales will come um and speak to us the exact title and topic are to be confirmed um but Richard's Richard's done quite a bit of work in uh systems engineering in the transport space um and that is I think going to be a pretty cool uh to go and see um and then finally as as always this is ways you can connect uh contact emails uh over there on the left uh mailing list mailing list is definitely some definitely something if you're here you probably got it um but encourage your colleagues um to to sign up as well the slack workspace we do still use that for uh Communications um and at that point I'll just stop here and thank you for for your time and attention and thank you Chris uh for your presentation cheers everybody yeah thank you very much thanks cheers thanks for sharing Chris great okay cheers thank you thank you just for organizing us oh good thanks Jess as well to appreciate all your efforts welcome see you next time everybody thanks guys that was awesome good to see
2023-04-04