BNJ_Joy Signal No2 Brand Name Justification 2_11 Sept 2020_Redacted.pdf

PDF 136 KB Posted

Attached to
Joy Signal Patch Cords No. 2 Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA8126-21-Q-0001
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Materiel Command Air Force Sustainment Center

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Joy Signal Patch Cords No. 2, newest first.
File Type Posted
CSS_RFQ FA812621Q0001 Joy Signal Patch Cords_05 October 2020.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OKLAHOMA CITY AIR LOGISTICS COMPLEX

(AFMC) TINKER AIR FORCE BASE OKLAHOMA

September 11, 2020

TO: AFSC/PZIM

FROM: OC-ALC/OBCA for 76 SMXG/556 SWES

SUBJECT: Brand Name Justification for Joy Signal Patchcords.

1. 76th Software Engineering Group (SWEG) was tasked to procure or produce the Test Program Set Hardware for Avionics Testing (“the Hardware”), which will support B-2, B-1 and B-52 weapon systems. SWEG Test Program Set (TPS) Research and Development (R&D) was performed in house with overhead funds.

2. Other brand name patch cords were tested during R&D. SWEG found the Joy Signal Single- Signal Interconnect (SSI) patch cord were capable of providing the signal integrity and density needed. Joy Signal brand name was approved for use and specified in all relevant Interface Test Adapters (ITA) designs to our external contractors.

3. The 556 SWES is now manufacturing ITAs with Joy Signal Patchcords. 556 SWES requires the following part numbers to build ITAs: Two thousand four hundred (2400) Item: SSI-01-VPC610 103 130-09-036 - P/N: 9-906610, Four Hundred (400) Item: SSC-3-50 - P/N: 9-490014, and Four Hundred (400) Item: SSI-01-00-53-036 - P/N: 9-906609

4. The 76 SWEG’s market research did not reveal any other brands that were cross compatible with the functionality required. Other manufacturers parts would require modification, a complete system redesign and the scrapping of all current stock. This would cost over This is not cost effective as it would produce duplication of costs not expected to be recovered through competition.

5. Point of contact for additional information is

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .