AFRE_Consolidated_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

DARPA BAA‐16‐45 AFRE Questions and Answers

1. On pg. 8 of the BAA it is stated that NASA will waive occupancy and operations costs for use of the 8ft tunnel, PSL, and 10X10 facilities. At the AFRE proposer's day, a longer list of NASA facilities was presented (chart 47) as covered under this special pricing. Is this offer limited to only these three facilities or the full list presented at the AFRE proposer's day?

Response: The information presented at Proposer’s Day is the NASA model for the facilities shown and with the caveats stated. As always, the proposer should coordinate with the facility to determine cost and schedule.

2. The BAA states that the Government intends to provide an off‐the‐shelf F‐405‐RR‐402 turbine engine for integration into the AFRE demonstration system (pg. 8). Does the government plan to perform any required refurbishment of the engine hardware for use in AFRE following its use in the water injection activity?

Response: The F‐405‐RR‐402 turbine engines ownership will be transferred to NASA in September. The primary engine (most remaining life) will be refurbished and checked out in England and should be available around contract ATP. A second engine will be available after April 2018 but will not be refurbished. To the extent possible, the Government will adjust their test schedules according to proposed AFRE test schedules. As mentioned at Proposers Day, choice of turbine engine is a proposer decision.

3. On page 10 of the BAA, there are 6 minimum success metrics for Phase 1 demonstrations. The first item listed is: "Matched mass flow during mode transition matches total inlet mass capture within 2%". We interpret this to mean that the total inlet mass capture must either go into the turbine or the scramjet flowpath. No more than 2% can be spilled, bypassed or bled. Is this interpretation correct? If not, can the government restate this metric to clarify?

Response: This metric is to minimize spillage drag. All other sources of drag (bypass/bleeds) mentioned should be consistent with acceleration requirements for the vehicle concept carried by the proposer.

4. On page 10 of the BAA, there are 6 minimum success metrics for Phase 1 demonstrations. The first item listed is: "Matched mass flow during mode transition matches total inlet mass capture within 2%". What is the genesis of this requirement?

Response: Engineering judgement based upon previous efforts where spillage drag was a major issue in closing vehicle designs.

5. On page 10 of the BAA, there are 6 minimum success metrics for Phase 1 demonstrations. The first item listed is: "Matched mass flow during mode transition matches total inlet mass capture within 2%". If a particular integration makes greater than 0.25G's of acceleration without strictly meeting this mass flow matching metric (ex. 3% match), will this be negatively graded relative to the metrics?

Response: This effort is evaluated using a scientific review and grades are not applied. However, operational methods such as dives to attain required acceleration should be avoided.

6. On page 10 of the BAA, there are 6 minimum success metrics for Phase 1 demonstrations. The last item listed is: "Component manufacturing estimates consistent with vehicle design engine allocation". Does this mean that the weights used for the demonstrator vehicle design engine are validated via the weights of the components tested? If not, can the government restate this metric to clarify?

Response: Yes, your interpretation is correct within the uncertainties of tools in going from components to flight engine. As you may recall, that is the purpose of the ongoing concept assessment activity within the government.

7. Appendix A of the BAA (pg 44), review criteria CDR‐3a states that the detailed design is complete. Figure 1 of the BAA (pg 7) shows design updates in Phase 2, after the critical design review (CDR). Can the government explain this discrepancy?

Response: There is no discrepancy. The government will continually assess data coming from the AFRE engine ground demonstration program to update vehicle performance and assure that the AFRE technology can close vehicle designs (e.g. contractor and government baseline vehicles). The CDR criteria are specifically addressing the AFRE ground demonstration engine.

8. Can CDR move within the total Period of Performance?

Response: Yes, as stated at Proposer’s Day, the proposer should provide a schedule/phasing consistent with their technology/development timelines. As further stated in the BAA, the government will require a CDR before committing to the full system demonstration, but it should be event and not time based.

9. What is the anticipated date of award/authorization to proceed?

Response: The Government anticipates making an award in the 2nd quarter of Government Fiscal Year 2017.

10. As we consider using an OTA approach to our proposal for BAA‐16‐45, can we have clarification on DARPA's parameters for qualification as a nontraditional contractor?

On the DARPA website we find the following:

"Specifically, OTs for Prototypes require that there be at least one nontraditional defense contractor involved, or all significant participants in the transaction must be small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors. A non‐traditional defense contractor is defined as an entity that is not currently performing or has not performed in the last one‐year period any contract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) coverage."

Does work as a subcontractor on a DoD contract in the last year preclude a contractor from being considered "non‐traditional?"

Response: A non‐traditional contractor is defined as follows:

The term 'nontraditional defense contractor' means an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one‐year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the Department of Defense for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards (CAS). Full CAS coverage applies to contractor business units that:

(1) Receive a single CAS‐covered contract award of $50 million or more; or

(2) Received $50 million or more in net CAS‐covered awards during its preceding cost accounting period.

If your business was not subject to full CAS coverage during the previous year, you would still qualify as a non‐traditional defense contractor.

11. Our reading of the BAA shows that a single award is the intention of the solicitation as stated in the following sections;

(1) The AFRE program will be a two‐phased effort to conduct component‐level and full scale ground‐ based testing of a reusable propulsion system that will enable future long range hypersonic air vehicle applications. Total amount of money to be awarded – Approximately $65M (Phase I and II) Anticipated individual awards – A singe award is anticipated. (p3) and.

(2) Award Information ‐ Number of Awards ‐ A single award is anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. (p15)

Response: Per the BAA, a single award is anticipated. That does not preclude nor does it signify that other ideas may not be entertained. Here is the relevant BAA language, "The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting award may be segregated into pre‐priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases."

12. The BAA gives the intention of the government to provide an off–the‐shelf F‐405‐RR‐402 turbine engine for integration into the AFRE demonstration system. During the Proposers Day there was verbal discussion as to availability of a WILLIAMS engine. Is the BAA to be amended to include both or either engines as GFE?

Response: The Government does not intend on amending the BAA. The BAA simply states that a F‐405‐ RR‐402 turbine engine could be made available for contractor integration. The cost of this engine would not count against the total amount of funding available. Any GFE requirements will be defined in the individual contractor’s proposal. Selection of an alternative turbine engine, access to that engine, and the associated cost is the proposer’s responsibility.

13. Reference Question #12, will the Government/NASA provide support for the WILLIAMS and/or F‐405‐RR‐402 turbojet engines to the successful proposer(s)/awardees.

Response: The proposer is responsible for identifying any and all support required to execute their proposal. Any government support required must be agreed to with that government organization prior to proposal submission. The government can, of course, make available any data that it has the authority to release.