Questions and Responses RFI 70ZA0127AIRC12001_04NOV2026.pdf

Question Vendor Question Government Response

Section 5 conditions its capability questions on that aviation VR experience, while Item 12 invites comments. Would you welcome standalone, nonproprietary Item 12 feedback on vendor-neutral checklist/MPC content interfaces, student-event data contracts and repeatable software conformance/acceptance tests, or should we participate only through a qualified team addressing all 16 items? This would describe proposed engineering methods, not a fielded platform or established teaming arrangement.

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Item 13 asks for instructors to oversee training, inject faults and interact with students remotely. Item 15 asks whether the system can operate in a completely air-gapped offline environment. Should remote instructor oversight and fault injection remain available over an isolated government network without internet access, or may those functions be unavailable during fully disconnected operation? This distinction would inform separate acceptance tests for instructor events, local student-performance logging and approved xAPI/SCORM export.

The USCG is asking the vendor how they handle the ability to have a "classroom" stand alone option, a remote classroom/ remote instructor (cloud based?) and the ability for a student to sign in and take the course alone with and without guidance. The USCG is asking industry how this might work or if they are already doing this for the military.

Tier 1 (Enterprise / Closed Intranet Mode): Remote instructor oversight, multi-student observation, live voice interaction, and dynamic fault injection must function over an isolated, closed Government network without requiring access to the public internet or commercial cloud servers. Acceptance testing for distributed instructor events and remote telemetry will evaluate performance across this closed, air-gapped network environment.

Tier 2 (Autonomous / Fully Disconnected Mode): For detached operations (e.g., deployed cutters, isolated hangars, or network outages), individual training stations must remain fully operable as autonomous, standalone units. In this mode, remote instructor controls may be unavailable; however, headsets must execute all checklist, emergency, and MPC procedures locally, record student event performance to encrypted local storage, and queue standardized xAPI/SCORM run-time data for delayed batch synchronization once reconnected to the enterprise environment.

Acquisition Timeline: Is there an anticipated timeline for issuing a formal solicitation or beginning the acquisition process following this market research phase?

Our planned solicitation issuance is within the next 12 months, but there is currently no formal acquisition timeline.

Funding and Budget: Has preliminary funding been identified for this initiative, or is there an estimated budget range or acquisition value that may be shared with interested vendors?

No.

Technical Resources: Does the Coast Guard anticipate providing government-furnished technical information, such as aircraft models, maintenance procedures, or relevant documentation, to support development and validation?

Yes. Following contract award, the Government anticipates providing all GFI pertaining to this effort. All applicable manuals that the Coast Guard does have will be furnished as part of GFI. The USCG, however, does not have 3D models of aircraft, vendors are encouraged to provide a solution to this as part of their RFI response.

Acquisition and Teaming Strategy: Is the Coast Guard considering small business participation, teaming arrangements, or specific acquisition vehicles for this requirement?

The USCG is in the Market Research phase for this requirement. The acquisition strategy will be based on the Market Research results.

Would there be interest in a hands-on equipment demo with the RFI customer?

Not at this time.

Does the Coast Guard have an estimated number of training procedures, operational checklists, maintenance tasks, emergency scenarios, and diagnostic exercises required for each of the four aircraft platforms (HC- 130J, HC-144B, MH-60T, and MH-65E)?

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Does the Coast Guard envision primarily procedural training within interactive 3D aircraft environments, or more extensive functional simulation of aircraft systems, including Built-in Test (BIT) functionality, fault injection, and diagnostic troubleshooting?

Yes.

Will the Coast Guard provide aircraft CAD/3D models, technical manuals, Maintenance Procedure Cards (MPCs), system schematics, and other aircraft-specific technical information? If so, is the Government able to identify the anticipated availability and permitted use of these materials?

Following contract award, the Government anticipates providing all GFI pertaining to this effort. All applicable manuals that the Coast Guard does have will be furnished as part of GFI. The USCG, however, does not have 3D models of aircraft, vendors are encouraged to provide a solution to this as part of their RFI response.

Does the Coast Guard have an anticipated development and deployment schedule or period of performance, such as 24, 36, or 48 months, or is industry expected to recommend an achievable timeline based on the proposed technical approach?

No development/deployment schedule will be provided at this time. Yes, Industry should provide an estimated timeline.

Would the Coast Guard consider a phased implementation beginning with a representative aircraft platform and selected training procedures, followed by incremental development and deployment across the remaining aircraft platforms and locations?

Yes, since this would provide the USCG with an opportunity to adjust content and take advantage of technological advances.

Would the Coast Guard consider a common training architecture incorporating immersive VR, tablet/desktop-based interactive training, and conventional eLearning?

Based on our experience, different instructional objectives may be better served by different delivery methods. For example, immersive VR is particularly valuable for spatial familiarization and procedural practice, while tablets and eLearning can support systems knowledge, troubleshooting, and refresher training.

A blended approach could also help address human-factors considerations associated with prolonged headset use, including visual fatigue and potential discomfort, while providing flexibility in training delivery.

The USCG is interested in learning the capabilities and developments available with this type of training technique and welcomes the information.

Would the Coast Guard consider brief one-on-one technical discussions or capability demonstrations with interested industry respondents during this market research phase?

Not at this time.

Could you advise whether a specialist software studio can contribute through a hardware or integration partner, and which channel we should use for that introduction?

The Vendors are responsible for identifying partners for teaming or subcontracting opportunities.

Government-Furnished Information: Does the Coast Guard anticipate providing aircraft CAD models, technical manuals, maintenance procedure cards, avionics documentation (if needed), and other engineering data necessary to develop and validate the training environments?

Following contract award, the Government anticipates providing all GFI pertaining to this effort. All applicable manuals that the Coast Guard does have will be furnished as part of GFI. The USCG, however, does not have 3D models of aircraft, vendors are encouraged to provide a solution to this as part of their RFI response.

Training Scope: Is there an anticipated number of procedures, maintenance tasks, and diagnostic scenarios per aircraft type that respondents should use when estimating development costs?

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Network Architecture: Should ‘remote instructor functionality’ operate between geographically separate Coast Guard installations, or would instructor control over an isolated local network at each training site satisfy the intended requirement?

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Cybersecurity: Would fully offline training systems require a separate Authority to Operate, and which cybersecurity standards or authorization requirements should respondents anticipate?

Please respond with how you have worked with other agencies and their cybersecurity standards. We would like to learn how vendors are coordinating cybersecurity frameworks based on lessons learned with other government agencies.

Hardware Support: Would a contractor-managed inventory of replacement headsets, components, and spare units be an acceptable approach to equipment maintenance and support? i.e We procure headsets from a supplier and connect the coast guard with the rep in order to handle returns or upgrade.

a. Hardware type: is the Coast guard looking for tethered headsets, or would standalone units be preferrable? (I’m currently leaning toward stand-alone as a much better solution given the spec)

b. Type: Should the hardware be ruggedized or will it mainly be used in non/low kinetic environments. ?

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Training Fidelity: Is the Coast Guard seeking procedural and systems-familiarization simulation, or are higher-fidelity aircraft dynamics and avionics behavior required for some training applications?

The Coast Guard is interested in training all aviation ratings and positions potentially under VR, which would include systems-familiarization, checklists procedures, maintenance procedures and emergencies. Please provide any additional trainings your company can provide for market research purposes.

Hand Tracking, Controllers, and Haptic Feedback: Could the Coast Guard clarify its expectations regarding physical interaction within the virtual training environments? Specifically, is native headset hand tracking sufficient for manipulating cockpit controls, operating equipment, and performing maintenance procedures, or is there an expectation for dedicated physical controllers, instrument replicas, or specialized haptic-feedback devices?

Additionally, what level of precision, tactile feedback, and physical realism is expected for these interactions, particularly for maintenance tasks intended to develop muscle memory?

Vendors are reminded that this RFI is an exploratory market research notice conducted pursuant to FAR Part 10. It is not an active solicitation, nor does it represent a final technical specification. The primary objective at this stage is to survey industry capabilities, technological maturity, commercial best practices, open architecture standards, and rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost drivers across our aviation enterprise. Detailed technical specifications, data deliverables, precise interface definitions, and binding requirements are intentionally not defined at this juncture.

Information and insights gathered through this exploratory phase will directly inform the USCG's acquisition strategy, requirements maturation, and budgeting, which will subsequently be used to develop a formal and comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFPs). Vendors are encouraged to submit responses reflecting their current commercial offerings, operational concepts, and high-level recommendations rather than seeking definitive contract-level specifications at this time.

Sheet 1