Contact us Heritage collections Image license terms
HOME ACL Associates Technology Literature Applications Society Software revisited
Further reading □ Overview08/10/6524/04/6630/09/6604/01/6717/07/6717/11/6726/04/6823/07/6804/02/6915/07/6910/12/6903/06/7024/08/7011/11/7031/03/7116/09/7113/10/71 SBSTAR-100 Apr 72
ACD C&A INF CCD CISD Archives Contact us Heritage archives Image license terms

Search

   
ACLLiteratureCommittee MinutesSRC ACC :: SRC ACC Minutes
ACLLiteratureCommittee MinutesSRC ACC :: SRC ACC Minutes
ACL ACD C&A INF CCD CISD Archives
Further reading

Overview
08/10/65
24/04/66
30/09/66
04/01/67
17/07/67
17/11/67
26/04/68
23/07/68
04/02/69
15/07/69
10/12/69
03/06/70
24/08/70
11/11/70
31/03/71
16/09/71
13/10/71 SB
STAR-100 Apr 72

Minutes of the meeting held on 24/ 8/1970 at State House, London

1 Future Role - AC/70/6

In the absence of Sir Rudolf Peierls in America, the Chairman of the Science research Council, Professor Sir Brian Flowers, had had called the meeting to discuss the future role of the Atlas Computer Laboratory. Dr Howlett had submitted a background paper, ACC/70/6.

The Chairman opened the meeting with a survey of the present situation. When it was set up, the Laboratory had had the most powerful computer available to British universities and with this had been able to provide a unique service. As a consequence of the improvement in university equipment this was no longer so and, even when the ICL 1906A was installed in mid-1971 the Laboratory would still be no better equipped than several universities. The plans for re-equipping the Laboratory had been based on lCL's proposals, but it now seemed most unlikely that lCL would be able to produce a machine of the performance required by an acceptable date.

An SRC laboratory had to have some unique feature to justify its existence and must in some way help scientists to do things which otherwise they would not be able to do. A return to its original role of providing a uniquely powerful back-up computing service did not seem possible unless the: Laboratory were to install a large American machine. He did not see a case for operating the Laboratory solely as a place where SRC's own computing projects were done (eg data-processing for space satellites), nor for the computing needed by holders of SRC grants. In particular, the high-energy physics laboratories had to do their computing on their own sites because of the demands of on-line work. A policy of providing selective support for large-scale problems led again to the need for powerful equipment. The Chairman concluded by saying that the Computer Board was responsible for the provision of general computing equipment to universities and had the right to comment publicly on any proposed purchases by SRC which related to general university needs; that the whole question of how computing services were to be supplied could be profoundly affected in the future by decisions on charging; and that it was necessary to consider the future equipment for the Atlas Laboratory without reference to the British computer industry.

Mr Taylor said that the Ministry of Technology would look very hard at a proposal to put a big American machine at the Atlas Laboratory. They would want to know what work would be done on it and why an American machine was necessary.

Mr Walker stressed the importance. of. deciding first on the Laboratory's role, from which the scale of machine-power needed would follow.

Mr Laver said that, with machine performance doubling every few years, setting out to have the biggest machine was a losing battle. He suggested that the Atlas Laboratory could have the biggest of the 1906As and could aim to provide, a back-up service to the smaller universities rather than to all. He commented on the need for careful control of access to a very powerful machine, the Chairman adding that a large allowance of time could be equivalent to a grant of say, £100,000.

Dr Dunworth felt that the Laboratory's difficulties were due to the very rapid growth of computing. He could see the desirability of having a small number of major computing centres in the country, with the Atlas Computer Laboratory as the biggest. This implied to him a big American machine, the use of which would have the additional value of bringing experience of American practice into the country. He did not think that the proposal to share the Rutherford Laboratory's 360/l95 would be satisfactory.

Professor Wilkes questioned the need for the Laboratory to undertake research in computer science, which was more properly done in a university. He felt that everyone would welcome a continuation of the original policy; as alternatives the Laboratory might be incorporated into a university - which would be difficult but not impossible - or transferred to some other Government, or possibly non-Government, body. He did not feel that it could give much support to, or influence, ICL, because a big company would in general only be affected by a body with which it was closely linked.

Mr Rutterford said that he could see no viable national role for the Laboratory other than the top of the university computing hierarchy. A specialist role would be a purely SRC matter.

Mr Berman asked if the Laboratory could provide a service to Government departments generally; Mr Walker said that a number had been approached some time ago, but there seemed to be no enthusiasm for this.

Dr Howlett said that he felt that the Laboratory should combine the provision of a computing service with a policy for producing software tools of general application in selected fields.

There was some general discussion of the Working Party on Computational Physics, set up by the SRC under the chairmanship of Dr K V Roberts of the Culham Laboratory, and due to report soon. It was agreed that the report should be studied as soon as it was available, with the expectation that this would be a valuable guide to future computational needs and to how these might be met. The Chairman agreed that it would be of value to initiate a similar study of the computational needs for engineering science.

Concluding, the Chairman asked Dr Howlett to seek the views of the Computer Board on the role of the Laboratory, and suggested that proposals should be formulated by the Atlas Computer Committee at a meeting in October for submission to the Science Board in December.

⇑ Top of page
© Chilton Computing and UKRI Science and Technology Facilities Council webmaster@chilton-computing.org.uk
Our thanks to UKRI Science and Technology Facilities Council for hosting this site