text:
Battle of San Juan Hill
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
For other uses, see Battle of San Juan (disambiguation).
Battle of San Juan Hill
Part of the Spanish–American War

Detail from Charge of the 24th and 25th Colored Infantry at San Juan Hill, July 1, 1898.
Date
July 1, 1898
Location
Near Santiago, Cuba
20°01′15″N 75°47′58″W / 20.02083°N 75.79944°W / 20.02083; -75.79944Coordinates: 20°01′15″N 75°47′58″W / 20.02083°N 75.79944°W / 20.02083; -75.79944
Result
Cuban-American victory[1]
Belligerents
United States Kingdom of Spain
Commanders and leaders
William R. Shafter
Joseph Wheeler[2] Arsenio Linares y Pombo
Strength
8,412[3] 521[4]
Casualties and losses
144 killed[3]
1,024 wounded[3]
72 missing[3] 114 killed [4]
366 wounded[4]
2 captured[4]
show
v
t
e
Spanish–American War and Cuban War of Independence: Santiago Campaign, 1898
1st Cardenas
2nd Cardenas
3rd Cárdenas
1st Cienfuegos
USS Merrimac
Guantánamo Bay
Fort Toro
2nd Cienfuegos
Las Guasimas
1st Manzanillo
Tayacoba
Aguadores
El Caney
San Juan Hill
2nd Manzanillo
Aguacate
1st Santiago
2nd Santiago
3rd Manzanillo
Nipe Bay
Manimani
4th Manzanillo
The Battle of San Juan Hill (July 1, 1898), also known as the battle for the San Juan Heights, was a decisive battle of the Spanish–American War. The San Juan heights was a north-south running elevation about 2 kilometres (1.2 mi) east of Santiago de Cuba, Cuba. The names San Juan Hill and Kettle Hill were given to the location by the Americans. This fight for the heights was the bloodiest and most famous battle of the war. It was also the location of the greatest victory for the Rough Riders, as claimed by the press and its new commander, Theodore Roosevelt, who was to eventually become first vice president and then president, and who was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor in 2001 for his actions in Cuba.[5]
Contents
[hide]
1 Background
2 Order of battle
2.1 U.S.
3 Battle
3.1 "Hell's Pocket"
3.2 San Juan Heights
3.2.1 San Juan Hill
3.2.2 Kettle Hill
3.3 Spanish counterattack
4 Aftermath
5 References
6 Bibliography
7 External links
Background[edit]
Spanish General Arsenio Linares ordered 760 Spanish Army regular troops to hold the San Juan heights against an American offensive on July 1, 1898. For unclear reasons, Linares failed to reinforce this position, choosing to hold nearly 10,000 Spanish reserves in the city of Santiago de Cuba.
Spanish hilltop entrenchments, while typically well-concealed, were not all correctly positioned for plunging fire, which made return fire at the advancing Americans more difficult. Most of the Spanish fortifications and trench lines were laid out along the geographic crest of the heights instead of the military crest. This meant that the fire from the Spanish troops would have difficulty hitting the advancing enemy when the attacking Americans reached the defilade at the foot of the heights. Once they began scaling the hill, however, the attackers would be in full view of the defenders, who could engage the Americans with both rifle and artillery fire.[6]
Most Spanish troops were recently arrived conscripts, but their officers were skilled in fighting Cuban insurgents. The Spanish were well equipped with supporting artillery, and all Spanish soldiers were armed with 7 mm Mauser M1893 rifles, a modern repeating bolt-action weapon with a high rate of fire that used high-velocity cartridges and smokeless powder. Spanish artillery units were armed mainly with modern rapid-fire breech-loading cannon, again using smokeless powder.[7]
The American regular forces and troopers were armed with bolt-action Krag rifles chambered in the smokeless .30 Army caliber.[8] However, U.S. 3.2-inch artillery pieces were of an outmoded design, with a slow rate of fire due to bag powder charges and lack of a recoil mechanism.[7] They also used less powerful black powder charges, which limited the effective range of support fire for U.S. troops. The Americans also had a four-gun Gatling Gun Detachment commanded by Lt. John Henry Parker. Parker's men were equipped with four Colt Model 1895 Gatlings in .30 Army caliber. Although these guns were hand-cranked, they were nevertheless capable of 700 rpm or more in continuous fire, and were equipped with swivel mounts to allow greater field of fire coverage.[9]
General William Rufus Shafter commanded Fifth Army Corps, of about 15,000 troops in three divisions. Jacob F. Kent commanded the corps' 1st Division (brigade and division numbers in this era were only unique within their parent formation), while Henry W. Lawton commanded the 2nd Division. Joseph Wheeler commanded the dismounted Cavalry Division but was suffering from fever and had to turn over command to General Samuel S. Sumner.[10] Shafter's plans to attack Santiago de Cuba called for Lawton's division to move north and reduce the Spanish stronghold at El Caney, a task which was to take about two hours. Then they were to join with the rest of the troops for the attack on the San Juan Heights. The remaining two divisions would move directly against the San Juan heights, with Sumner in the center and Kent to the south. Shafter, too ill to personally direct the operations, set up his headquarters at El Pozo 2 mi (3.2 km) from the heights and communicated via mounted staff officers.
Order of battle[edit]
See also: San Juan Hill order of battle
U.S.[edit]
U. S. Army photo taken near the base of Kettle Hill about July 4, 1898. The soldier is pointing at the top of Kettle Hill. In the background are the block houses on San Juan Hill and the American encampment.
Fifth Army Corps – Major General William Rufus Shafter, Corps Executive Officer – Major General Joseph Wheeler (Cavalry Division)
1st Division – Brigadier General Jacob Ford Kent
1st Brigade – Brigadier General Hamilton S. Hawkins; consisted of the 6th and 16th Infantry Regiments, along with the 71st (New York Volunteer) Infantry Regiment
2nd Brigade – Colonel E. P. Pearson; consisting of the 2nd, 10th, and 21st U.S. Infantry Regiments
3rd Brigade – Colonel Charles A. Wikoff; consisting of the 9th, 13th and 24th (Colored) U.S. Infantry regiments
Cavalry Division (Dismounted) – Major General Joseph Wheeler; Division Executive Officer Samuel S. Sumner (1st Brigade) was in command of the division when the battle began as General Wheeler was ill. Wheeler returned to the front once the battle was underway.[11]
1st Brigade – Brigadier General Samuel S. Sumner, Brigade Executive Officer Colonel Henry K. Carroll (6th Cav); consisted of the 3rd U.S. Cavalry, 6th U.S. Cavalry and 9th U.S. Cavalry
2nd Brigade – Brigadier General Leonard Wood;[12] consisted of the 1st U.S. Cavalry, 10th U.S. Cavalry and 1st Volunteer Cavalry
The American assault line consisted of the following regiments: From the far left, attacking what later became known as San Juan Hill, was the 6th Infantry, the 9th Infantry, the 13th Infantry, the 16th Infantry, the 24th (Colored) Infantry, the 10th (Colored) Cavalry (the 10th was the only unit that assaulted both high points on the San Juan heights), with the 3rd Cavalry, 1st Volunteer Cavalry on the far right, attacking what later became known as Kettle Hill.
Battle[edit]
At the Bloody Ford of the San Juan by Frederic Remington, 1898
"Hell's Pocket"[edit]
A company from the Signal Corps ascended in a hot air balloon to reconnoiter the hills. The balloon made a good target for the Spaniards. Hawkins' brigade had already passed by the newfound route[clarification needed] and Kent ordered forward the brigade under Colonel Charles A. Wikoff. Wikoff began heading down the trail at noon, and 30 minutes later he emerged from the woods and was struck by a Mauser bullet. He died as his staff officers carried him to the rear. Lt. Col. William S. Worth, next in rank, assumed command, but within five minutes fell wounded. Lt. Col. Emerson Liscom assumed command and within another five minutes received a disabling wound. Lt. Col. Ezra P. Ewers, fourth in command of the brigade, assumed command. Kent and Sumner lined up for the attack and waited for Lawton's division to arrive from El Caney. Lawton did not arrive as scheduled, and no orders came from either Shafter or Wheeler. The troops waited at the base of the hill, plagued by constant Spanish Mauser gunfire in areas dubbed "Hell's Pocket" or "Bloody Ford".
San Juan Heights[edit]
San Juan Hill[edit]
In the meantime, Gen. Hamilton Hawkins' 1st Infantry Brigade was preparing to assault San Juan Hill, the higher of the two hilltops forming San Juan heights. The southernmost point was most recognizable for the Spanish blockhouse, a defensive fort that dominated the crest. The Cavalry Brigade then moved into position. In open view of the Spanish positions on the heights, the Americans suffered casualties from rifle and artillery fire while awaiting orders from General Shafter to take the hill. As the volume of fire increased, officers began to agitate for action.[6]
US Army photo showing trench and block house on San Juan Hill about July 4, 1898. Soldiers are from the 10th U.S. Cavalry Regiment.
The 2nd and 10th Infantry regiments of the 2nd Brigade were ordered by the brigade commander, Col. E. P. Pearson, to advance towards the Spanish lines. Positioned on the far left of the American line, the two regiments moved forward in good order, advanced towards a small knoll on the Spanish right flank, and drove groups of Spanish skirmishers back towards their trenches. A former brigade staff officer, First Lieutenant Jules Garesche Ord (son of General E. O. C. Ord),[6] officially of the 6th Infantry Regiment but temporarily assigned to D Company of the 10th due to sick and heat-disabled officers in the Fifth Corps, made a special request to General Hawkins. "General, if you will order a charge, I will lead it." Hawkins responded, "I will not ask for volunteers, I will not give permission and I will not refuse it," he said. "God bless you and good luck!"[6] Lt. Ord then asked the leaders to the right of the 10th Cavalry (members of the 3rd and 1st Volunteers) to "support the regulars" when they charged the heights. When Ord returned to his assigned unit, he advised his commander, Captain John Bigelow, Jr. of D Troop, of his conversation with the general. Bigelow gave the honor to sound the advance to Lt. Ord. With a sword in one hand and a pistol in the other, Ord stood up and ordered the advance of his unit. The Buffalo Soldiers (members of the 10th Cavalry Regiment) moved out of the trenches and up the hill. Units to the right began moving forward in a ripple effect to support the regulars. To the left of the 10th, a cheer went out from members of the 24th all-black Infantry Regiment, and they too moved toward the top of the heights. They were accompanied by elements of the 6th Infantry Regiment, including E Company, led by Capt. L. W. V. Kennon, as well as units from the 9th and 13th Infantry Regiments.[6][13] The 16th Infantry followed some distance behind the lead formations, while the 71st (New York Volunteer) infantry regiment, having failed to initially advance with the other regiments, remained at the rear.[14] As the units began their advance up the hill, they became separated, with the battalions of some regiments placed between those of other regiments.
The Scream of Shrapnel at San Juan Hill, by Frederic Remington, 1898
The Fifth Corps' newly formed Gatling Gun Detachment participated in the U.S. Army's first use of machine gun fire for mobile fire support in offensive combat.[15] Because U.S. black-powder artillery pieces lacked the range to reach the Spanish positions, Lt. John Parker's Gatling battery of four .30 caliber 10-barrelled guns was originally conceived as providing covering fire for the artillery trains. The Gatling Gun Detachment was ordered to move forward in support of the U.S. assault, and Lt. Parker received orders from his colonel to detach one gun to General Shafter's aide, Lt. John D. Miley, then to take the remaining three guns forward "to the best point you can find".[16] Parker set up his three Gatlings approximately 600 yd (550 m) from the San Juan Hill blockhouse and its surrounding trenches, occupied by Spanish regulars; 800 yd (730 m) away was another ridge-line, also with Spanish entrenchments. Being exposed, the Detachment soon came under attack and quickly lost five men to wounds and others to severe heat stroke. Ordinarily, four to six men were required to operate each Gatling gun. Nevertheless, the crews continued to fire at the Spanish. Lt. Parker's three rapid-fire[17] Gatlings provided covering fire for U.S. forces assaulting both hills.[18][19] Equipped with swivel mountings that enabled the gunners to rake Spanish positions, the three guns poured a continuous and demoralizing hail of bullets into the Spanish defensive lines. Witnessing the assault on San Juan Hill, more than one observer from the U.S. side noticed some of the Spanish defenders fleeing their trenches to escape the intense fire.[20][21] The Gatlings continued to fire until Lt. Parker observed Lt. Ferguson of the 13th Infantry waving a white handkerchief as a signal for the battery to cease firing to avoid causing friendly casualties.[22][23] The American assault then broke into a charge about 150 yd (140 m) from the crest of the hill.[16][24]
Major William Auman was the first commanding officer to reach the top of the hill. Lt. Ord was among the first to reach the crest of San Juan heights. As the Spanish fled, Lt. Ord directed supporting fire into the remaining Spanish until he was mortally wounded by a shot to the throat. General Hawkins was wounded shortly after.[6] At 13:50, Private Arthur Agnew of the 13th Infantry pulled down the Spanish flag atop the San Juan blockhouse.[25] General Wood sent requests for General Kent to send up infantry to strengthen his vulnerable position. When General Wheeler reached the trenches, he ordered breastworks constructed. The Americans' position on San Juan was exposed to artillery fire from within Santiago, and General Shafter feared the American position on Kettle Hill was vulnerable to counter-attack by Spanish forces. A Spanish counter-attack was launched late in the afternoon, but was easily beaten back with the aid of supporting Gatling fire from San Juan Hill. Though General Wheeler assured Shafter that the position could be held, Shafter nevertheless ordered a withdrawal. Before the men on Kettle Hill could withdraw, General Wheeler called aside Generals Kent and Sumner and reassured them that the line could be held. During the night, the Americans worked at strengthening the lines while awaiting reinforcements.[6]
Kettle Hill[edit]
Charge of the Rough Riders at San Juan Hill by Frederic Remington. In reality, they assaulted San Juan Heights and the portion later called Kettle Hill by the Americans.
The 1st U.S. Volunteer Cavalry (Rough Riders), along with the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, began a near simultaneous assault supporting the regulars of the 10th Cavalry (Buffalo Soldiers) up Kettle Hill, supported by the fire of three Gatling guns commanded by Lt. John H. Parker. Trooper Jesse D. Langdon of the 1st Volunteer Infantry, who accompanied Col. Theodore Roosevelt and the Rough Riders in their assault on Kettle Hill, reported:
We were exposed to the Spanish fire, but there was very little because just before we started, why, the Gatling guns opened up at the bottom of the hill, and everybody yelled, “The Gatlings! The Gatlings!” and away we went. The Gatlings just enfiladed the top of those trenches. We’d never have been able to take Kettle Hill if it hadn’t been for Parker’s Gatling guns.[18]
During the battle, Parker's Gatling guns expended approximately 18,000 rounds in eight and a half minutes (over 700 rounds per minute of continuous fire) into the Spanish defensive lines atop the heights, killing many of the defenders and forcing others to flee the trench lines, while disrupting the aim of any still alive who continued to resist.[26] Col. Egbert, commander of the 6th Infantry assaulting San Juan Hill, stated that his regiment was brought to a halt near the top of the hill to await the cease-fire order, as the Gatling fire striking the crest and trench line was so intense.[23] Col. Theodore Roosevelt later gave much of the credit for the successful capture of the Spanish positions atop the heights to Parker's inventive use of his Gatling Gun Detachment: "I think Parker deserved rather more credit than any other one man in the entire campaign ... he had the rare good judgment and foresight to see the possibilities of the machine-guns. He then, by his own exertions, got it to the front and proved that it could do invaluable work on the field of battle, as much in attack as in defense."[27] Roosevelt observed that the hammering sound of the guns raised the spirits of his men: "While thus firing, there suddenly smote on our ears a peculiar drumming sound. One or two of the men cried out, 'The Spanish machine guns!' but, after listening a moment, I leaped to my feet and called, 'It's the Gatlings, men! Our Gatlings!' Immediately the troopers began to cheer lustily, for the sound was most inspiring."[28][29]
Under continuous fire, the advance slowed as troops dropped from heat exhaustion. Officers from the rest of Wood's brigade, along with Carroll's, bunched up under fire. When the regulars of the all-black Buffalo Soldiers punched toward the top of the hill, the units became intermingled. One of the 10th's officers who took part in the attack, 1st Lieutenant John J. "Black Jack" Pershing, would later reach the highest rank ever held in the United States Army by a living officer—General of the Armies of the United States. Pershing later recalled that:
...the entire command moved forward as coolly as though the buzzing of bullets was the humming of bees. White regiments, black regiments, regulars and Rough Riders [i.e. volunteers], representing the young manhood of the North and the South, fought shoulder to shoulder, unmindful of race or color, unmindful of whether commanded by ex-Confederate or not, and mindful of only their common duty as Americans.[30]
When the American formations (10th, 3rd, and 1st Volunteers) reached the summit of Kettle Hill, they briefly fought hand to hand within the Spanish defensive works, at which point the Spanish retreated. Most reports name the first American soldier to reach the crest of Kettle Hill as Sgt. George Berry of the 10th Cavalry, who took both the 10th and 3rd Cavalry battle flags to the summit. This is supported in the writings of Pershing, who fought with the 10th on Kettle Hill and who was present when Col. Roosevelt reached the top.[6] Politics and racial discrimination led to many myths about the African-American involvement in the fighting in Cuba.[31][32]
Second Lieutenant Thomas H. Rynning is credited with being the first Rough Rider to reach the top of the hill, where he rallied his men with the Rough Riders' flag.[33]
General Linares's troops on San Juan heights fired on the newly-won American position on the crest of Kettle Hill. The Americans returned fire on the entrenched Spanish troops.[6] Seeing the "spontaneous advance" of the 1st Infantry Brigade, led by the 10th Cavalry, General Wheeler (having returned to the front) gave the order for General Kent to advance with his whole division and ordered the 3rd Brigade into the attack. Kent sent forward the 3rd Infantry Brigade, now effectively commanded by Lt. Col. Ezra P. Ewers,[34] to join the advance, which had successfully reached the heights.[6]"Previous to the return of the troops the newspapers in the Territory claimed the distinction for Arizona that [George] Truman of B Troop was the first American soldier on the Heights of San Juan. On return of the troops this statement was verified by Middleton, Owens and Sargent Norton of B Troop who were along with, and close to, Truman at the time the ascent was made."[35]
Spanish counterattack[edit]
Original title: "Colonel Roosevelt and his Rough Riders at the top of the hill which they captured, Battle of San Juan Hill. US Army victors on Kettle Hill about 3 July 1898 after the battle of San Juan Hill(s)." Left to right are 3rd US Cavalry, 1st Volunteer Cavalry (with Roosevelt at center), and 10th US Cavalry.
A second similar picture is often seen, in which all but the 1st Volunteer Cavalry and Roosevelt are cropped out.
Witnessing the assault on San Juan Hill, Col. Roosevelt decided to cross the steep ravine from Kettle Hill to San Juan Hill to support the ongoing fighting. Calling for his men to follow, he ran forward, only to find just five of the Rough Riders following him (most had not heard his command). Roosevelt returned, gathered a larger group of men. Under advice he led them down the less steep western slope of Kettle Hill, past a small lagoon, and was ready to start up the northern extension of San Juan Hill. By then the fighting was over at the top of the heights. General Summer intercepted Roosevelt and angrily ordered him to return to Kettle Hill immediately to prepare for the expected counterattack. When he returned, his men were exhausted and his horse was spent from the heat. When the expected counterattack came, these men were ineffective.[36]
After the Spanish positions atop San Juan Hill had been taken, two of Lt. Parker's Gatling guns were dragged by mules up the slope to the captured position on San Juan ridge, where both were hurriedly emplaced among a line of skirmishers.[37] As the Americans were setting up the guns, the Spanish commenced a general counterattack on the heights.[38] Though the attack on San Juan was quickly broken up, the men on Kettle Hill faced a more serious attack from some 120 Spanish regulars.[citation needed] Ignoring an order from Col. Leonard Wood to reposition one or two of his Gatling guns to the top of Kettle Hill to support the 1st Volunteer and 3rd Cavalry, Parker instead ordered the closest Gatling, manned by Sgt. Green, to fire obliquely against 600 enemy soldiers attacking Kettle Hill.[24][38] From a range of 600 yd (550 m), Sgt. Green's Gatling responded, killing all but 40 of the attackers.[16][39][40]
After the counterattack was driven off, Lt. Parker moved to Kettle Hill to view the American positions, where he was soon joined by Sgt. Weigle's Gatling and crew from San Juan, detached to the service of Lt. Miley.[41] Miley (who was primarily tasked with inspecting troop positions for General Shafter) had restrained Weigle's crew from opening fire during the entirety of the fighting.[41] Parker then ordered Sgt. Weigle and his crew to emplace their gun on Kettle Hill.[41] This Gatling was used to eliminate Spanish sniper fire against the American defensive positions on Kettle Hill.[41]
Returning to the two Gatlings on San Juan Hill, Lt. Parker had the guns relocated near the road to avoid counter-battery fire.[16][41] Despite this precaution, the guns were bombarded by a heavy Spanish 6.3 in (160 mm) gun.[16][41] Parker located the enemy gun and trained the two Gatlings using a powerful set of field glasses. The two Gatlings then opened fire, silencing the Spanish 6.3 in (160 mm) gun at a range of roughly 2,000 yd (1,800 m).[16][41] July 4, Parker ordered his three operational guns moved into the battle line around the city of Santiago. The wheels of the Gatling carriages were removed, and the Gatlings, along with two 7 mm Colt–Browning machine guns (a gift from Col. Roosevelt) were placed in breastworks where they could command various sectors of fire. The fourth Gatling was repaired and placed in reserve. However, it was soon moved to Fort Canosa, where it was used during the siege of Santiago to fire 6,000–7,000 rounds into the city to help force a surrender.[42]
Aftermath[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Buffalo Soldiers who participated in the Spanish–American War at San Juan Hill.
The Americans suffered almost five times as many losses as the Spanish.[clarification needed] The Spaniards fought to the knife, losing a third of their force in casualties, but yielding very few prisoners. In view of the large number of U.S. casualties incurred from small-arms fire, the Army decided to update and modernize its small arms arsenal. The .45-70 and M1892 (Krag) Springfield rifles were quickly retired from service in favor of new Mauser-pattern .30-03 (later .30-06 Springfield) M1903 Springfield rifles, while the remaining .30 Army Gatling guns were replaced in 1909 by the M1909 Benét–Mercié machine gun.[citation needed]
Lawton's division, which was supposed to have joined the fight early on July 1, 1898, did not arrive until noon the following day, on July 2, 1898, having encountered unexpectedly heavy resistance in the battle of El Caney. The Americans, aided by Cuban insurgents, immediately began the investment of Santiago, which surrendered just over two weeks later, on July 17, 1898.[citation needed]
Although Roosevelt and the Rough Riders achieved considerable fame with the victory, other soldiers fared less well. Ord never received recognition in the popular press of the day for his actions. The Army turned down[why?] requests for a medal for his heroism from his commanding officer and his commanding general.[clarification needed][citation needed]
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Konstam, Angus. San Juan Hill 1898: America's Emergence as a World Power: 1998, p. 77
Jump up ^ Wheeler was the senior most frontline commander during the battle Santiago Campaign, 1898 by Joseph Wheeler
^ Jump up to: a b c d Clodfelter 2017, p. 255.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Sus, A (dir), (1983) Historia de las Fuerzas Armadas. Vol. I Zaragoza: Palafox
Jump up ^ Brands, H. W. ed. The Selected Letters of Theodore Roosevelt. (2001), Chapter 13
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Kinevan, Marcos E., Brigadier General, USAF, retired (1998). Frontier Cavalryman, Lieutenant John Bigelow with the Buffalo Soldiers in Texas. Texas Western Press, The University of Texas at El Paso. ISBN 0-87404-243-7.
^ Jump up to: a b Roosevelt, Theodore, The Rough Riders, Scribner's Magazine, Vol. 25, January–June 1899, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, p. 423
Jump up ^ While the Rough Rider's troopers carried the Krag, each Rough Rider officer was equipped with a .30 Army caliber M1895 Winchester lever-action rifle, courtesy of Col. Roosevelt.
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, UK: Echo Library (reprinted 2006)
Jump up ^ Once the fighting had begun General Wheeler rode to the front becoming the senior ranking officer on the front lines as General Shafter was far to the rear at his headquarters. There he directed parts of Kent's division and his own Cavalry Division during the attack.
Jump up ^ Longacre, Edward G. A Soldier to the Last: Maj. Gen. Joseph Wheeler in Blue and Gray: 2006 p.227
Jump up ^ Nofi, Albert The Spanish-American dragon, 1898, 1997 p.149
Jump up ^ Larned, J.N., History for Ready Reference: Report of General Kent, Vol. 6 (1901), Springfield, MA: C. A. Nichols, pp. 604–605: In his official report, General Kent stated that the 6th, 9th, 13th, 16th, and 24th regiments of infantry participated in the assault on San Juan Hill, and were due equal credit for its capture. The 25th Infantry Regiment (Colored) participated in the Battle of El Caney, and was not present for the attack on San Juan Hill.
Jump up ^ "General Kent's Report: His Official Account of the Three Days' Fighting Around Santiago de Cuba", The New York Times, July 22, 1898: "Armed with obsolescent M1873 Trapdoor single-shot rifles, and with many of its soldiers ill with malaria, the 71st failed to advance with the lead formations, and played no role in the actual assault."
Jump up ^ Lt. Parker's use of the Gatling machine gun as offensive fire support was preceded by the U.S. Marines' use of the M1895 Colt–Browning machine gun a month before in their assault on Spanish positions surrounding Guantanamo Bay Harbor.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Armstrong, David A., Bullets and Bureaucrats: The Machine Gun and the United States Army 1861–1916, Greenwood Publishing (1982), ISBN 0-313-23029-3, ISBN 978-0-313-23029-5, p. 101
Jump up ^ The Model 1895 10-barrelled Gatling Gun was capable of an initial rate of fire of some 800–900 rpm.
^ Jump up to: a b Jones, V. C., "Before the Colors Fade: Last of the Rough Riders", American Heritage Magazine, August 1969, Vol. 20, Issue 5, p. 26
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), History of the Gatling Gun Detachment, Kansas City, MO: Hudson-Kimberly Publishing Co. (1898), pp. 85–89
Jump up ^ Armstrong, David A., Bullets and Bureaucrats: The Machine Gun and the United States Army 1861–1916, Greenwood Publishing (1982), ISBN 0-313-23029-3, ISBN 978-0-313-23029-5, p. 104: Capt. Lyman Kennon of the 6th Infantry and Capt. James B. Goe of the 13th Infantry reported that they personally observed Spanish troops running away to escape the Gatling fire.
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings at Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006): The three Gatling guns expended a total of 18,000 .30 Army rounds against Spanish troop positions in support of the assault by U.S. forces.
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), History of the Gatling Gun Detachment, Kansas City, MO: Hudson-Kimberly Publishing Co. (1898), p. 138
^ Jump up to: a b Parker, John H. (Lt.), History of the Gatling Gun Detachment, Kansas City, MO: Hudson-Kimberly Publishing Co. (1898), pp. 137–138
^ Jump up to: a b Tucker, Spencer C., The Encyclopedia of the Spanish–American and Philippine–American Wars, Santa Barbara CA: ABC-CLIO Press (2009), p. 238
Jump up ^ "General Kent's Report: His Official Account of the Three Days' Fighting Around Santiago de Cuba", The New York Times, July 22, 1898
Jump up ^ Armstrong 1982, p. 104: "Well before the American infantry had reached the top of the heights, Capt. Lyman Kennon of the 6th Infantry and Capt. James B. Goe of the 13th Infantry reported that they personally observed Spanish troops running away to escape the Gatling fire."
Jump up ^ Roosevelt, Theodore, The Rough Riders, p. 568
Jump up ^ Parker 2006, p. ??[page needed]
Jump up ^ Roosevelt, Theodore (May 1899). "The Rough Riders". Scribner's Magazine. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 25: 568.
Jump up ^ Cashin, Herschel V., Under Fire with the 10th U.S. Cavalry, Chicago: American Publishing House (1902) pp. 207–208
Jump up ^ Anthony L. Powell (1998). "Black Participation in the Spanish–American War". The Spanish–American War Centennial web site. Retrieved September 11, 2009.
Jump up ^ Evan Thomas (2008). "A 'Splendid' War's Shameful Side. The finale of the Spanish–American war, rooted in misunderstanding and racism, still reverberates". Newsweek. Retrieved September 11, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Arizona Ranger Rynning". Genealogytrails.com. Retrieved June 15, 2012.
Jump up ^ Ewers was the ranking surviving officer of the 3rd Brigade, after Colonel Wikoff, Lt. Col. Worth, and Lt. Col. Liscum had all been killed in action while the Brigade formed for the assault in full view of the Spanish lines atop San Juan Heights.
Jump up ^ Connors, Jo, 1913, Who's Who in Arizona, Volume 1, p. 748.
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), pp. 59–61
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), pp. 58–59: The third gun had broken its pintle pin, and could not be limbered.
^ Jump up to: a b Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), p. 59
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), p. 59: Parker's account is very clear that he never obeyed Col. Wood's order to redeploy his guns to Kettle Hill ("The order to move the guns was disregarded."), instead ordering Sgt. Green's Gatling to fire immediately from its existing position atop San Juan at the Spanish assaulting Kettle Hill.
Jump up ^ Roosevelt, The Rough Riders, p. 568
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), pp. 60–61
Jump up ^ Parker, John H. (Lt.), The Gatlings At Santiago, Middlesex, U.K.: Echo Library (reprinted 2006), p. 68
Bibliography[edit]
Clodfelter, M. (2017). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1492–2015 (4th ed.). McFarland. ISBN 978-0786474707.
Roosevelt, Theodore. The Rough Riders.
Nofi, Albert A., The Spanish American War, 1898, 1997.
Carrasco García, Antonio, En Guerra con Los Estados Unidos: Cuba, 1898, Madrid: 1998.
"Buffalo Soldiers at San Juan Hill | from a talk in 1998 during the Conference of Army Historians in Bethesda, Maryland". History.army.mil.
External links[edit]
Spanish – American War Centennial website
show
Rough Riders
Officers
Leonard Wood
Theodore Roosevelt
Alexander Oswald Brodie
James H. McClintock
Buckey O'Neill
Seth Bullock
John Campbell Greenway
John Avery McIlhenny
Allyn K. Capron Jr.
Allyn K. Capron Sr.
George Curry
Woodbury Kane
Thomas H. Rynning
Enlisted men
George G. McMurtry
Chris Madsen
Hamilton Fish
Thomas Grindell
Henry Barrett
Billy McGinty
Juan Alamia
Frank Frantz
Craig Wadsworth
Henry Nash
Ben Daniels
Frank Knox
Robert Wrenn
Engagements
Spanish–American War
Battle of Las Guasimas
Battle of San Juan Hill
Siege of Santiago
Memorials
Rough Riders Memorial
Buckey O'Neill Cabin
Bucky O'Neill Monument
Bronco Buster
Theodore Roosevelt Monument Assemblage
Film
The Rough Riders (1927 film)
Teddy, the Rough Rider (1940 film)
Rough Riders (1997 mini-series)
See also
Buckhorn Saloon
Arizona Rangers
Three Guardsmen
Canyon Diablo Train Robbery
Tiburón Island Tragedy
Roosevelt's World War I volunteers
The Lost Battalion
show
v
t
e
Theodore Roosevelt
26th President of the United States, 1901–1909
25th Vice President of the United States, 1901
33rd Governor of New York, 1899–1900
Assistant Secretary of the Navy, 1897–1898
New York City Police Commissioner, 1895–1897
New York State Assemblyman, 1882
1883
1884
Presidency
First inauguration
historic site
Second inauguration
"Square Deal"
Booker T. Washington dinner
Conservation
Newlands Reclamation Act
Transfer Act of 1905
Antiquities Act
Pelican Island
Devils Tower National Monument
Muir Woods National Monument
Other National Monuments
United States Forest Service,
United States Reclamation Service
National Wildlife Refuge System
Roosevelt Arch
Conference of Governors
Northern Securities Company breakup
court case
Coal strike of 1902
Pure Food and Drug Act
Food and Drug Administration
Meat Inspection Act
Expediting Act
Elkins Act
Hepburn Act
Aldrich–Vreeland Act
Federal Employers Liability Act
Kinkaid Act
Big Stick ideology
Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty
Panama Canal Zone
Panama Canal
Venezuelan crisis
Roosevelt Corollary
Occupation of Cuba
Russo-Japanese War
Treaty of Portsmouth
1906 Nobel Peace Prize
Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907
College football meetings
Bureau of Investigation
Department of Commerce and Labor
Bureau of Corporations
Keep Commission
Inland Waterways Commission
Bureau of the Census
Great White Fleet
Perdicaris incident
Cabinet
White House West Wing
State of the Union Address, 1901
1906
1908
White House desk
Federal judiciary appointments
Other
events
Spanish–American War
Rough Riders
Battle of Las Guasimas
Battle of San Juan Hill
"Bull Moose" Progressive Party
New Nationalism
Assassination attempt
Boone and Crockett Club
Smithsonian–Roosevelt African Expedition
"River of Doubt" Amazonian expedition
Life and
homes
Birthplace, boyhood home replica
Sagamore Hill Home and Museum
Oyster Bay
Elkhorn Ranch
Maltese Cross Cabin
Pine Knot cabin
Gravesite
Writings
and speeches
Theodore Roosevelt bibliography
The Naval War of 1812 (1882 book)
"The Strenuous Life" (1899 speech)
"Citizenship in a Republic" (1910 speech)
"Progressive Cause Greater Than Any Individual" (1912 post-assassination-attempt speech)
Theodore Roosevelt: An Autobiography (1913 book)
The Forum magazine articles
Theodore Roosevelt Cyclopedia
Archival collections
Elections
New York state election, 1898
Republican National Convention, 1900
1904
1912
1916
United States presidential election, 1900
1904
1912
Legacy
Mount Rushmore
Theodore Roosevelt Center and Digital Library
White House Roosevelt Room
Theodore Roosevelt National Park
Theodore Roosevelt Wilderness
Theodore Roosevelt Island
Roosevelt National Forest
Roosevelt Study Center
Theodore Roosevelt Association
Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Park
Monument Assemblage
Roosevelt River
Theodore Roosevelt Award
Roosevelt Road
U.S. Postage stamps
Theodore Roosevelt, Rough Rider sculpture
Equestrian statue
Popular
culture
Teddy bear
"Speak softly, and carry a big stick"
Books
Films
Roosevelt in Africa 1910 documentary
The Roosevelts 2014 documentary
Related
Political positions
"Bully pulpit"
Ananias Club
"Nature fakers"
Progressive Era
A Guest of Honor
Porcellian Club
"Muckraker"
National Collegiate Athletic Association
"Roosevelt Republican"
Family
Alice Hathaway Lee (first wife)
Edith Kermit Carow (second wife)
Alice Lee Roosevelt (daughter)
Theodore Roosevelt III (son)
Kermit Roosevelt (son)
Ethel Carow Roosevelt (daughter)
Archibald Roosevelt (son)
Quentin Roosevelt (son)
Theodore Roosevelt Sr. (father)
Martha Stewart Bulloch (mother)
Anna Roosevelt (sister)
Elliott Bulloch Roosevelt (brother)
Corinne Roosevelt (sister)
Cornelius Roosevelt (grandfather)
James Stephens Bulloch (grandfather)
James A. Roosevelt (uncle)
Robert Roosevelt (uncle)
James Dunwoody Bulloch (half-uncle)
Irvine Bulloch (uncle)
Theodore Douglas Robinson (nephew)
Corinne Robinson (niece)
Anna Eleanor Roosevelt (niece)
Hall Roosevelt (nephew)
← William McKinley
William Howard Taft →
Category
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_San_Juan_Hill&oldid=845337091"
Categories:
Battles of the Spanish–American War
Battles involving Cuba
1898 in Cuba
History of Santiago de Cuba
Rough Riders
Theodore Roosevelt
July 1898 events
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from October 2012
Articles with inconsistent citation formats
Use mdy dates from May 2018
Pages using deprecated image syntax
Coordinates on Wikidata
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from September 2013
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from March 2018
Articles needing additional references from July 2012
All articles needing additional references
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from March 2016
Articles with unsourced statements from March 2016
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Español
Français
Latina
Português
Edit links
This page was last edited on 11 June 2018, at 03:39.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

attrs: class href

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: th

attrs: class colspan style

value: tr

value: td

attrs: colspan style

attrs: href class

value: i

values:
/wiki/Santiago,_Cuba
mw-redirect
Santiago, Cuba

values: Maps, aerial photos, and other data for this location

values:
/wiki/Spain_under_the_Restoration
mw-redirect
Spain under the Restoration

values: Template:Campaignbox Spanish-American War: Cuba

values: Template talk:Campaignbox Spanish-American War: Cuba

values: Battle of Aguacate (page does not exist)

values: Bombardment of Manzanillo (page does not exist)

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible mw-collapsed

values:
/wiki/Arsenio_Linares
mw-redirect
Arsenio Linares

values:
/wiki/Springfield_Model_1892-99
mw-redirect
Springfield Model 1892-99

values:
/wiki/Gatling_Gun
mw-redirect
Gatling Gun

values:
/wiki/Jacob_F._Kent
mw-redirect
Jacob F. Kent

values:
/wiki/Henry_W._Lawton
mw-redirect
Henry W. Lawton

values:
/wiki/10th_Cavalry_Regiment
mw-redirect
10th Cavalry Regiment

values: Black and white print of an oil painting by Frederic Remington shows slouch-hatted soldiers advancing in a crouch while crossing a stream

values:
noprint Inline-Template
margin-left:0.1em; white-space:nowrap;

attrs: alt src width height class data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/E._O._C._Ord
mw-redirect
E. O. C. Ord

values:
/wiki/John_Bigelow,_Jr.
mw-redirect
John Bigelow, Jr.

values:
/wiki/71st_Infantry_Regiment_(New_York)
mw-redirect
71st Infantry Regiment (New York)

values:
/wiki/Buffalo_Soldiers
mw-redirect
Buffalo Soldiers

values: General of the Armies of the United States

values: A black and white photo of US Army soldiers on 3 3 July 1898, in an upside down V type formation on top of Kettle Hill; two American flags are center and right. Soldiers facing camera.

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (March 2018)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Refimprove

values: The text near this tag may need clarification or removal of jargon. (March 2016)

values: Hotchkiss M1909 Benét–Mercié machine gun

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (March 2016)

values: This citation requires a reference to the specific page or range of pages in which the material appears. (October 2012)

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.newsweek.com/id/128987

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.spanamwar.com

values:
/wiki/Allyn_K._Capron_Jr.
mw-redirect
Allyn K. Capron Jr.

values:
/wiki/Allyn_K._Capron_Sr.
mw-redirect
Allyn K. Capron Sr.

values:
navbox-image
6
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values:
/wiki/Bronco_Buster
mw-redirect
Bronco Buster

values:
/wiki/Rough_Riders_(film)
mw-redirect
Rough Riders (film)

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-made-collapsible

values: List of Vice Presidents of the United States

values:
*_26th_President_of_the_United_States,_1901–1909_
*_25th_Vice_President_of_the_United_States,_1901
*_33rd_Governor_of_New_York,_1899–1900
*_Assistant_Secretary_of_the_Navy,_1897–1898
*_New_York_City_Police_Commissioner,_1895–1897
*_New_York_State_Assemblyman,_1882_
*_1883_
*_1884

values: First inauguration of Theodore Roosevelt

values: Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural National Historic Site

values: Second inauguration of Theodore Roosevelt

values: Booker T. Washington dinner at the White House

values: List of National Monuments of the United States

values: History of the National Wildlife Refuge System

values: Northern Securities Co. v. United States

values: National Collegiate Athletic Association

values: United States Department of Commerce and Labor

values: List of federal judges appointed by Theodore Roosevelt

values: Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace National Historic Site

values: Theodore Roosevelt's Maltese Cross Cabin

values: s:Progressive Cause Greater Than Any Individual

values: United States presidential election, 1900

values: United States presidential election, 1904

values: United States presidential election, 1912

values: Roosevelt Institute for American Studies

values: Presidents of the United States on U.S. postage stamps

values: Political positions of Theodore Roosevelt

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible mw-collapsed

values: Category:Battles of the Spanish–American War

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from October 2012

values: Category:Articles with inconsistent citation formats

values: Category:Pages using deprecated image syntax

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing clarification from September 2013

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from March 2018

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from July 2012

values: Category:All articles needing additional references

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing clarification from March 2016

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from March 2016

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Battle_of_San_Juan_Hill
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: Batalla de las Colinas de San Juan – Spanish

values: Proelium in collibus Sancti Ioannis – Latin

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Battle_of_San_Juan_Hill rootpage-Battle_of_San_Juan_Hill skin-vector action-view


text:
Systems development life cycle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
For other uses, see SDLC (disambiguation).
Model of the systems development life cycle, highlighting the maintenance phase
The systems development life cycle (SDLC), also referred to as the application development life-cycle, is a term used in systems engineering, information systems and software engineering to describe a process for planning, creating, testing, and deploying an information system.[1] The systems development lifecycle concept applies to a range of hardware and software configurations, as a system can be composed of hardware only, software only, or a combination of both.[2]
Contents
[hide]
1 Overview
2 History and details
3 Phases
3.1 System investigation
3.2 System analysis
3.3 Design
3.4 Environments
3.5 Testing
3.6 Training and transition
3.7 Operations and maintenance
3.8 Evaluation
4 Systems analysis and design
5 Object-oriented analysis
6 Life cycle
6.1 Management and control
6.2 Work breakdown structured organization
6.3 Baselines
6.4 Complementary methodologies
7 Strengths and weaknesses
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Overview[edit]
A systems development life cycle is composed of a number of clearly defined and distinct work phases which are used by systems engineers and systems developers to plan for, design, build, test, and deliver information systems. Like anything that is manufactured on an assembly line, an SDLC aims to produce high-quality systems that meet or exceed customer expectations, based on customer requirements, by delivering systems which move through each clearly defined phase, within scheduled time frames and cost estimates.[3] Computer systems are complex and often (especially with the recent rise of service-oriented architecture) link multiple traditional systems potentially supplied by different software vendors. To manage this level of complexity, a number of SDLC models or methodologies have been created, such as waterfall, spiral, Agile software development, rapid prototyping, incremental, and synchronize and stabilize.[4]
SDLC can be described along a spectrum of agile to iterative to sequential methodologies. Agile methodologies, such as XP and Scrum, focus on lightweight processes which allow for rapid changes (without necessarily following the pattern of SDLC approach) along the development cycle. Iterative methodologies, such as Rational Unified Process and dynamic systems development method, focus on limited project scope and expanding or improving products by multiple iterations. Sequential or big-design-up-front (BDUF) models, such as waterfall, focus on complete and correct planning to guide large projects and risks to successful and predictable results.[citation needed] Other models, such as anamorphic development, tend to focus on a form of development that is guided by project scope and adaptive iterations of feature development.
In project management a project can be defined both with a project life cycle (PLC) and an SDLC, during which slightly different activities occur. According to Taylor (2004), "the project life cycle encompasses all the activities of the project, while the systems development life cycle focuses on realizing the product requirements".[5]
SDLC is used during the development of an IT project, it describes the different stages involved in the project from the drawing board, through the completion of the project.
The SDLC is not a methodology per se, but rather a description of the phases in the life cycle of a software application. These phases (broadly speaking) are, investigation, analysis, design, build, test, implement, and maintenance and support. All software development methodologies (such as the more commonly known waterfall and scrum methodologies) follow the SDLC phases but the method of doing that varies vastly between methodologies. In the Scrum methodology, for example, one could say a single user story goes through all the phases of the SDLC within a single two-week sprint. Contrast this to the waterfall methodology, as another example, where every business requirement (recorded in the analysis phase of the SDLC in a document called the Business Requirements Specification) is translated into feature/functional descriptions (recorded in the design phase in a document called the Functional Specification) which are then all built in one go as a collection of solution features typically over a period of three to nine months, or more. These methodologies are obviously quite different approaches yet, they both contain the SDLC phases in which a requirement is born, then travels through the life cycle phases ending in the final phase of maintenance and support, after-which (typically) the whole life cycle starts again for a subsequent version of the software application.
History and details[edit]
The product life cycle describes the process for building information systems in a very deliberate, structured and methodical way, reiterating each stage of the product's life. The systems development life cycle, according to Elliott & Strachan & Radford (2004), "originated in the 1960s, to develop large scale functional business systems in an age of large scale business conglomerates. Information systems activities revolved around heavy data processing and number crunching routines".[6]
Several systems development frameworks have been partly based on SDLC, such as the structured systems analysis and design method (SSADM) produced for the UK government Office of Government Commerce in the 1980s. Ever since, according to Elliott (2004), "the traditional life cycle approaches to systems development have been increasingly replaced with alternative approaches and frameworks, which attempted to overcome some of the inherent deficiencies of the traditional SDLC".[6]
Phases[edit]
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: parts of this section appear to be unfinished and half-written/typed Please help improve this article if you can. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
The system development life cycle framework provides a sequence of activities for system designers and developers to follow. It consists of a set of steps or phases in which each phase of the SDLC uses the results of the previous one.
The SDLC adheres to important phases that are essential for developers, such as planning, analysis, design, and implementation, and are explained in the section below. It includes evaluation of present system, information gathering, feasibility study and request approval. A number of SDLC models have been created: waterfall, fountain, spiral, build and fix, rapid prototyping, incremental, synchronize and stabilize. The oldest of these, and the best known, is the waterfall model: a sequence of stages in which the output of each stage becomes the input for the next. These stages can be characterized and divided up in different ways, including the following:[7]
Preliminary analysis: The objective of phase 1 is to conduct a preliminary analysis, propose alternative solutions, describe costs and benefits and submit a preliminary plan with recommendations.
Conduct the preliminary analysis: in this step, you need to find out the organization's objectives and the nature and scope of the problem under study. Even if a problem refers only to a small segment of the organization itself, you need to find out what the objectives of the organization itself are. Then you need to see how the problem being studied fits in with them.
Propose alternative solutions: In digging into the organization's objectives and specific problems, you may have already covered some solutions. Alternate proposals may come from interviewing employees, clients, suppliers, and/or consultants. You can also study what competitors are doing. With this data, you will have three choices: leave the system as is, improve it, or develop a new system.
Describe the costs and benefits.
Systems analysis, requirements definition: Defines project goals into defined functions and operation of the intended application. It is the process of gathering and interpreting facts, diagnosing problems and recommending improvements to the system. Analyzes end-user information needs and also removes any inconsistencies and incompleteness in these requirements.
A series of steps followed by the developer are:[8]
Collection of Facts: End user requirements are obtained through documentation, client interviews, observation and questionnaires,
Scrutiny of the existing system: Identify pros and cons of the current system in-place, so as to carry forward the pros and avoid the cons in the new system.
Analyzing the proposed system: Solutions to the shortcomings in step two are found and any specific user proposals are used to prepare the specifications.
Systems design: Describes desired features and operations in detail, including screen layouts, business rules, process diagrams, pseudocode and other documentation.
Development: The real code is written here.
Integration and testing: Brings all the pieces together into a special testing environment, then checks for errors, bugs and interoperability.
Acceptance, installation, deployment: The final stage of initial development, where the software is put into production and runs actual business.
Maintenance: During the maintenance stage of the SDLC, the system is assessed to ensure it does not become obsolete. This is also where changes are made to initial software. It involves continuous evaluation of the system in terms of its performance.
Evaluation: Some companies do not view this as an official stage of the SDLC, while others consider it to be an extension of the maintenance stage, and may be referred to in some circles as post-implementation review. This is where the system that was developed, as well as the entire process, is evaluated. Some of the questions that need to be answered include: does the newly implemented system meet the initial business requirements and objectives? Is the system reliable and fault-tolerant? Does the system function according to the approved functional requirements? In addition to evaluating the software that was released, it is important to assess the effectiveness of the development process. If there are any aspects of the entire process, or certain stages, that management is not satisfied with, this is the time to improve. Evaluation and assessment is a difficult issue. However, the company must reflect on the process and address weaknesses.
Disposal: In this phase, plans are developed for discarding system information, hardware and software in making the transition to a new system. The purpose here is to properly move, archive, discard or destroy information, hardware and software that is being replaced, in a manner that prevents any possibility of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive data. The disposal activities ensure proper migration to a new system. Particular emphasis is given to proper preservation and archival of data processed by the previous system. All of this should be done in accordance with the organization's security requirements.[9]
In the following diagram, these stages of the systems development life cycle are divided in ten steps from definition to creation and modification of IT work products:
A ten-phase version of the systems development life cycle[10]
Not every project will require that the phases be sequentially executed. However, the phases are interdependent. Depending upon the size and complexity of the project, phases may be combined or may overlap.[10]
System investigation[edit]
The system investigates the IT proposal. During this step, we must consider all current priorities that would be affected and how they should be handled. Before any system planning is done, a feasibility study should be conducted to determine if creating a new or improved system is a viable solution. This will help to determine the costs, benefits, resource requirements, and specific user needs required for completion. The development process can only continue once management approves of the recommendations from the feasibility study.[11]
Following are different components of the feasibility study:
Operational feasibility
Economic feasibility
Technical feasibility
Human factors feasibility
Legal/Political feasibility
System analysis[edit]
The goal of system analysis is to determine where the problem is, in an attempt to fix the system. This step involves breaking down the system in different pieces to analyze the situation, analyzing project goals, breaking down what needs to be created and attempting to engage users so that definite requirements can be defined.
Design[edit]
In systems design, the design functions and operations are described in detail, including screen layouts, business rules, process diagrams and other documentation. The output of this stage will describe the new system as a collection of modules or subsystems.
The design stage takes as its initial input the requirements identified in the approved requirements document. For each requirement, a set of one or more design elements will be produced as a result of interviews, workshops, and/or prototype efforts.
Design elements describe the desired system features in detail, and generally include functional hierarchy diagrams, screen layout diagrams, tables of business rules, business process diagrams, pseudo-code, and a complete entity-relationship diagram with a full data dictionary. These design elements are intended to describe the system in sufficient detail, such that skilled developers and engineers may develop and deliver the system with minimal additional input design.
Environments[edit]
Environments are controlled areas where systems developers can build, distribute, install, configure, test, and execute systems that move through the SDLC. Each environment is aligned with different areas of the SDLC and is intended to have specific purposes. Examples of such environments include the:
Development environment, where developers can work independently of each other before trying to merge their work with the work of others,
Common build environment, where merged work can be built, together, as a combined system,
Systems integration testing environment, where basic testing of a system's integration points to other upstream or downstream systems can be tested,
User acceptance testing environment, where business stakeholders can test against their original business requirements,
Production environment, where systems finally get deployed to, for final use by their intended end users.
Testing[edit]
The code is tested at various levels in software testing. Unit, system and user acceptance testings are often performed. This is a grey area as many different opinions exist as to what the stages of testing are and how much, if any iteration occurs. Iteration is not generally part of the waterfall model, but the means to rectify defects and validate fixes prior to deployment is incorporated into this phase.
The following are types of testing that may be relevant, depending on the type of system under development:
Defect testing the failed scenarios, including defect tracking
Path testing
Data set testing
Unit testing
System testing
Integration testing
Black-box testing
White-box testing
Regression testing
Automation testing
User acceptance testing
Software performance testing
Training and transition[edit]
Once a system has been stabilized through adequate testing, the SDLC ensures that proper training on the system is performed or documented before transitioning the system to its support staff and end users.
Training usually covers operational training for those people who will be responsible for supporting the system as well as training for those end users who will be using the system after its delivery to a production operating environment.
After training has been successfully completed, systems engineers and developers transition the system to its final production environment, where it is intended to be used by its end users and supported by its support and operations staff.
Operations and maintenance[edit]
The deployment of the system includes changes and enhancements before the decommissioning or sunset of the system. Maintaining the system is an important aspect of SDLC. As key personnel change positions in the organization, new changes will be implemented. There are two approaches to system development; there is the traditional approach (structured) and object oriented. Information Engineering includes the traditional system approach, which is also called the structured analysis and design technique. The object oriented approach views the information system as a collection of objects that are integrated with each other to make a full and complete information system.
Evaluation[edit]
The final phase of the SDLC is to measure the effectiveness of the system and evaluate potential enhancements.
Systems analysis and design[edit]
The systems analysis and design (SAD) is the process of developing information systems (IS) that effectively use hardware, software, data, processes, and people to support the company's businesses objectives. System analysis and design can be considered the meta-development activity, which serves to set the stage and bound the problem. SAD can be leveraged to set the correct balance among competing high-level requirements in the functional and non-functional analysis domains. System analysis and design interacts strongly with distributed enterprise architecture, enterprise I.T. Architecture, and business architecture, and relies heavily on concepts such as partitioning, interfaces, personae and roles, and deployment/operational modeling to arrive at a high-level system description. This high level description is then further broken down into the components and modules which can be analyzed, designed, and constructed separately and integrated to accomplish the business goal. SDLC and SAD are cornerstones of full life cycle product and system planning.
Object-oriented analysis[edit]
Object-oriented analysis (OOA) is the process of analyzing a task (also known as a problem domain), to develop a conceptual model that can then be used to complete the task. A typical OOA model would describe computer software that could be used to satisfy a set of customer-defined requirements. During the analysis phase of problem-solving, a programmer might consider a written requirements statement, a formal vision document, or interviews with stakeholders or other interested parties. The task to be addressed might be divided into several subtasks (or domains), each representing a different business, technological, or other areas of interest. Each subtask would be analyzed separately. Implementation constraints, (e.g., concurrency, distribution, persistence, or how the system is to be built) are not considered during the analysis phase; rather, they are addressed during object-oriented design (OOD).
The conceptual model that results from OOA will typically consist of a set of use cases, one or more UML class diagrams, and a number of interaction diagrams. It may also include some kind of user interface mock-up.
The input for object-oriented design is provided by the output of object-oriented analysis. Realize that an output artifact does not need to be completely developed to serve as input of object-oriented design; analysis and design may occur in parallel, and in practice the results of one activity can feed the other in a short feedback cycle through an iterative process. Both analysis and design can be performed incrementally, and the artifacts can be continuously grown instead of completely developed in one shot.
Some typical (but common to all types of design analysis) input artifacts for object-oriented:
Conceptual model: Conceptual model is the result of object-oriented analysis, it captures concepts in the problem domain. The conceptual model is explicitly chosen to be independent of implementation details, such as concurrency or data storage.
Use case: Use case is a description of sequences of events that, taken together, lead to a system doing something useful. Each use case provides one or more scenarios that convey how the system should interact with the users called actors to achieve a specific business goal or function. Use case actors may be end users or other systems. In many circumstances use cases are further elaborated into use case diagrams. Use case diagrams are used to identify the actor (users or other systems) and the processes they perform.
System Sequence Diagram: System Sequence diagram (SSD) is a picture that shows, for a particular scenario of a use case, the events that external actors generate, their order, and possible inter-system events.
User interface documentations (if applicable): Document that shows and describes the look and feel of the end product's user interface. It is not mandatory to have this, but it helps to visualize the end-product and therefore helps the designer.
Relational data model (if applicable): A data model is an abstract model that describes how data is represented and used. If an object database is not used, the relational data model should usually be created before the design, since the strategy chosen for object-relational mapping is an output of the OO design process. However, it is possible to develop the relational data model and the object-oriented design artifacts in parallel, and the growth of an artifact can stimulate the refinement of other artifacts.
Life cycle[edit]
Management and control[edit]
SPIU phases related to management controls[12]
The SDLC phases serve as a programmatic guide to project activity and provide a flexible but consistent way to conduct projects to a depth matching the scope of the project. Each of the SDLC phase objectives are described in this section with key deliverables, a description of recommended tasks, and a summary of related control objectives for effective management. It is critical for the project manager to establish and monitor control objectives during each SDLC phase while executing projects. Control objectives help to provide a clear statement of the desired result or purpose and should be used throughout the entire SDLC process. Control objectives can be grouped into major categories (domains), and relate to the SDLC phases as shown in the figure.[12]
To manage and control any SDLC initiative, each project will be required to establish some degree of a work breakdown structure (WBS) to capture and schedule the work necessary to complete the project. The WBS and all programmatic material should be kept in the "project description" section of the project notebook. The WBS format is mostly left to the project manager to establish in a way that best describes the project work.
There are some key areas that must be defined in the WBS as part of the SDLC policy. The following diagram describes three key areas that will be addressed in the WBS in a manner established by the project manager.[12] The diagram shows coverage spans numerous phases of the SDLC but the associated MCD has a subset of primary mappings to the SDLC phases. For example, Analysis and Design is primarily performed as part of the Acquisition and Implementation Domain and System Build and Prototype is primarily performed as part of delivery and support.
Work breakdown structured organization[edit]
Work breakdown structure[12]
The upper section of the work breakdown structure (WBS) should identify the major phases and milestones of the project in a summary fashion. In addition, the upper section should provide an overview of the full scope and timeline of the project and will be part of the initial project description effort leading to project approval. The middle section of the WBS is based on the seven systems development life cycle phases as a guide for WBS task development. The WBS elements should consist of milestones and "tasks" as opposed to "activities" and have a definitive period (usually two weeks or more). Each task must have a measurable output (e.x. document, decision, or analysis). A WBS task may rely on one or more activities (e.g. software engineering, systems engineering) and may require close coordination with other tasks, either internal or external to the project. Any part of the project needing support from contractors should have a statement of work (SOW) written to include the appropriate tasks from the SDLC phases. The development of a SOW does not occur during a specific phase of SDLC but is developed to include the work from the SDLC process that may be conducted by external resources such as contractors.[12]
Baselines[edit]
Baselines are an important part of the systems development life cycle. These baselines are established after four of the five phases of the SDLC and are critical to the iterative nature of the model .[13] Each baseline is considered as a milestone in the SDLC.
functional baseline: established after the conceptual design phase.
allocated baseline: established after the preliminary design phase.
product baseline: established after the detail design and development phase.
updated product baseline: established after the production construction phase.
Complementary methodologies[edit]
Complementary software development methods to systems development life cycle are:
Software prototyping
Joint applications development (JAD)
Rapid application development (RAD)
Extreme programming (XP);
Open-source development
End-user development
Object-oriented programming
Comparison of Methodology Approaches (Post, & Anderson 2006)[14]
SDLC
RAD
Open source
Objects
JAD
Prototyping
End User
Control Formal MIS Weak Standards Joint User User
Time frame Long Short Medium Any Medium Short Short
–
Users Many Few Few Varies Few One or two One
MIS staff Many Few Hundreds Split Few One or two None
Transaction/DSS Transaction Both Both Both DSS DSS DSS
Interface Minimal Minimal Weak Windows Crucial Crucial Crucial
Documentation and training Vital Limited Internal In Objects Limited Weak None
Integrity and security Vital Vital Unknown In Objects Limited Weak Weak
Reusability Limited Some Maybe Vital Limited Weak None
Strengths and weaknesses[edit]
Few people in the modern computing world would use a strict waterfall model for their SDLC as many modern methodologies have superseded this thinking. Some will argue that the SDLC no longer applies to models like Agile computing, but it is still a term widely in use in technology circles. The SDLC practice has advantages in traditional models of systems development that lends itself more to a structured environment. The disadvantages to using the SDLC methodology is when there is need for iterative development or (i.e. web development or e-commerce) where stakeholders need to review on a regular basis the software being designed.
A comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of SDLC:
Strength and Weaknesses of SDLC [14]
Strengths
Weaknesses
Control Increased development time
Monitor large projects Increased development cost
Detailed steps Systems must be defined up front
Evaluate costs and completion targets Rigidity
Documentation Hard to estimate costs, project overruns
Well defined user input User input is sometimes limited
Ease of maintenance Little parallelism
Development and design standards Automation of documentation and standards is limited
Tolerates changes in MIS staffing Does not tolerate changes in requirements
Projects canned early result in little or no value
An alternative to the SDLC is rapid application development, which combines prototyping, joint application development and implementation of CASE tools. The advantages of RAD are speed, reduced development cost, and active user involvement in the development process.
See also[edit]
Application lifecycle management
Decision cycle
IPO Model
Software development methodologies
System lifecycle
References[edit]
Jump up ^ SELECTING A DEVELOPMENT APPROACH. Retrieved 17 July 2014.
Jump up ^ Parag C. Pendharkara; James A. Rodgerb; Girish H. Subramanian (November 2008). "An empirical study of the Cobb–Douglas production function properties of software development effort". Information and Software Technology. 50 (12): 1181–1188. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2007.10.019.
Jump up ^ "Systems Development Life Cycle from". FOLDOC. Retrieved 2013-06-14.
Jump up ^ Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), PowerPoint – Powered by Google Docs
Jump up ^ James Taylor (2004). Managing Information Technology Projects. p.39.
^ Jump up to: a b Geoffrey Elliott & Josh Strachan (2004) Global Business Information Technology. p.87.
Jump up ^ Kay, Russell (May 14, 2002). "QuickStudy: System Development Life Cycle". ComputerWorld.
Jump up ^ Control and Audit, Information Systems. SDLC (August 2013 ed.). Chapter 5: Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. p. 5.28. |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Jump up ^ Radack, S. (n.d.). "The system development life cycle (SDLC)" (PDF). National Institute of Standards and Technology.
^ Jump up to: a b US Department of Justice (2003). INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Chapter 1. Introduction.
Jump up ^ Marakas, James A. O'Brien, George M. (2010). Management information systems (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. pp. 485–489. ISBN 0073376817.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e U.S. House of Representatives (1999). Systems Development Life-Cycle Policy. p.13.
Jump up ^ Blanchard, B. S., & Fabrycky, W. J.(2006) Systems engineering and analysis (4th ed.) New Jersey: Prentice Hall. p.31
^ Jump up to: a b Post, G., & Anderson, D., (2006). Management information systems: Solving business problems with information technology. (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Further reading[edit]
Cummings, Haag (2006). Management Information Systems for the Information Age. Toronto, McGraw-Hill Ryerson
Beynon-Davies P. (2009). Business Information Systems. Palgrave, Basingstoke. ISBN 978-0-230-20368-6
Computer World, 2002, Retrieved on June 22, 2006 from the World Wide Web:
Management Information Systems, 2005, Retrieved on June 22, 2006 from the World Wide Web:
This article is based on material taken from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the GFDL, version 1.3 or later.
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Systems Development Life Cycle.
The Agile System Development Lifecycle
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation – Information Technology Solutions Lifecycle Methodology
FSA Life Cycle Framework
HHS Enterprise Performance Life Cycle Framework
The Open Systems Development Life Cycle
System Development Life Cycle Evolution Modeling
Zero Deviation Life Cycle
Integrated Defense AT&L Life Cycle Management Chart, the U.S. DoD form of this concept.
hide
v
t
e
Software engineering
Fields
Computer programming
Requirements engineering
Software deployment
Software design
Software maintenance
Software testing
Systems analysis
Formal methods
Concepts
Data modeling
Enterprise architecture
Functional specification
Modeling language
Orthogonality
Programming paradigm
Software
Software archaeology
Software architecture
Software configuration management
Software development methodology
Software development process
Software quality
Software quality assurance
Software verification and validation
Structured analysis
Orientations
Agile
Aspect-oriented
Object orientation
Ontology
Service orientation
SDLC
Models
Developmental
Agile
EUP
Executable UML
Incremental model
Iterative model
Prototype model
RAD
UP
Scrum
Spiral model
V-Model
Waterfall model
XP
Other
SPICE
CMMI
Data model
ER model
Function model
Information model
Metamodeling
Object model
Systems model
View model
Languages
IDEF
UML
USL
SysML
Software
engineers
Victor Basili
Kent Beck
Grady Booch
Fred Brooks
Barry Boehm
Peter Chen
Danese Cooper
Ward Cunningham
Tom DeMarco
Edsger W. Dijkstra
Delores M. Etter
Martin Fowler
Adele Goldstine
Margaret Hamilton
C. A. R. Hoare
Lois Haibt
Mary Jean Harrold
Grace Hopper
Watts Humphrey
Michael A. Jackson
Ivar Jacobson
Alan Kay
Nancy Leveson
Stephen J. Mellor
Bertrand Meyer
David Parnas
Trygve Reenskaug
Winston W. Royce
James Rumbaugh
Mary Shaw
Peri Tarr
Elaine Weyuker
Niklaus Wirth
Edward Yourdon
Related fields
Computer science
Computer engineering
Project management
Risk management
Systems engineering
Category
Commons
hide
v
t
e
Systems engineering
Subfields
Aerospace engineering
Biological systems engineering
Configuration management
Earth systems engineering and management
Electrical engineering
Enterprise systems engineering
Performance engineering
Reliability engineering
Safety engineering
Processes
Requirements engineering
Functional specification
System integration
Verification and validation
Design review
Concepts
Business process
System
System lifecycle
V-Model
Systems development life cycle
Tools
Decision-making
Function modelling
IDEF
Optimization
Quality function deployment
System dynamics
Systems Modeling Language
Systems analysis
Systems modeling
Work breakdown structure
People
James S. Albus
Ruzena Bajcsy
Benjamin S. Blanchard
Wernher von Braun
Kathleen Carley
Harold Chestnut
Wolt Fabrycky
Barbara Grosz
Arthur David Hall III
Derek Hitchins
Robert E. Machol
Radhika Nagpal
Simon Ramo
Joseph Francis Shea
Katia Sycara
Manuela M. Veloso
John N. Warfield
Related fields
Control engineering
Computer engineering
Industrial engineering
Operations research
Project management
Quality management
Risk management
Software engineering
Category
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Systems_development_life_cycle&oldid=845206557"
Categories:
Systems engineering
Computing terminology
Software development process
Software engineering
Hidden categories:
Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from December 2009
Articles needing cleanup from July 2015
All pages needing cleanup
Cleanup tagged articles with a reason field from July 2015
Wikipedia pages needing cleanup from July 2015
Articles needing additional references from September 2010
All articles needing additional references
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
العربية
Čeština
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Nederlands
日本語
Português
Русский
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
10 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 10 June 2018, at 05:27.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/SDLC_(disambiguation)
mw-redirect mw-disambig
SDLC (disambiguation)

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: img

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: class style

value: b

attrs: href title

values:
/wiki/Incremental_development
mw-redirect
Incremental development

values:
/wiki/Extreme_Programming
mw-redirect
Extreme Programming

values:
/wiki/Scrum_(development)
mw-redirect
Scrum (development)

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (December 2009)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Anamorphic_development
mw-redirect
Anamorphic development

values:
/wiki/Project_life_cycle
mw-redirect
Project life cycle

values:
/wiki/Product_life_cycle_(engineering)
mw-redirect
Product life cycle (engineering)

values:
/wiki/Business_systems
mw-redirect
Business systems

values:
/wiki/Business_conglomerate
mw-redirect
Business conglomerate

values:
/wiki/Number_crunching
mw-redirect
Number crunching

values: Structured systems analysis and design method

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-style ambox-Cleanup

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Refimprove

values:
/wiki/Process_Diagram
mw-redirect
Process Diagram

values:
/wiki/Automation_testing
mw-redirect
Automation testing

values:
/wiki/User_acceptance_testing
mw-redirect
User acceptance testing

values: Edit section: Operations and maintenance

values:
/wiki/Object_oriented
mw-redirect
Object oriented

values: Edit section: Systems analysis and design

values:
/wiki/Interaction_diagram
mw-redirect
Interaction diagram

values:
/wiki/System_Sequence_Diagram
mw-redirect
System Sequence Diagram

values:
/wiki/Relational_data_model
mw-redirect
Relational data model

values: Edit section: Work breakdown structured organization

values: Edit section: Complementary methodologies

values:
/wiki/Joint_applications_development
mw-redirect
Joint applications development

values:
/wiki/Fabrycky,_W._J.
mw-redirect
Fabrycky, W. J.

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: commons:Category:Systems Development Life Cycle

values:
nofollow
external text
http://OpenSDLC.org

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible

values: Earth systems engineering and management

values:
/wiki/Barbara_Grosz
mw-redirect
Barbara Grosz

values: Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from December 2009

values: Category:Articles needing cleanup from July 2015

values: Category:Cleanup tagged articles with a reason field from July 2015

values: Category:Wikipedia pages needing cleanup from July 2015

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from September 2010

values: Category:All articles needing additional references

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Systems_development_life_cycle
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: دورة حياة تطوير البرمجيات – Arabic

values: Životní cyklus informačního systému – Czech

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cs
display: none;

values: Systems Development Life Cycle – Spanish

values: Vivciklo de sistema konstruado – Esperanto

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-eo
display: none;

values: چرخه حیات توسعه سیستم‌ها – Persian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fa
display: none;

values: Cycle de développement (logiciel) – French

values: 소프트웨어 개발 수명 주기 – Korean

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ko
display: none;

values: सिस्टम डेवलपमेंट लाइफ साइकल – Hindi

values:
https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDLC
SDLC – Indonesian
id
id
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOJ_SDLC
DOJ SDLC – Dutch
nl
nl
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-nl
display: none;

values: システム開発ライフサイクル – Japanese

values: Ciclo de vida de desenvolvimento de sistemas – Portuguese

values: Жизненный цикл программного обеспечения – Russian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sv
display: none;

values: ஒருங்கியம் விருத்திச் சுழற்சி வட்டம் – Tamil

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ta
display: none;

values: วงจรชีวิตของการพัฒนาซอฟต์แวร์ – Thai

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-th
display: none;

values: Життєвий цикл програмного забезпечення – Ukrainian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-uk
display: none;

values: Vòng đời phát triển hệ thống – Vietnamese

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-vi
display: none;

values: 系统发展生命周期 – Chinese

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Systems_development_life_cycle rootpage-Systems_development_life_cycle skin-vector action-view