Q and A 2 Dec 09.doc

Questions and Answers

FA3002-09-R-0028

International IFS

4 Dec 09

An Industry Day has been scheduled for 17 Dec 09 at 0800 in the AETC CONS Training Room (2021 First Street West, Randolph, AFB, TX 78150). Interested offerors should indicate in writing whether or not they will attend this meeting. INDUSTRY DAY ATTENDEES MUST INDICATE THEIR ATTENDANCE NOT LATER THAN 11 Dec 2009. Please include the names of all attendees. Due to limited space, we request no more than 3 members per company or partnering arrangement. The Industry Day is for planning/information purposes only and proposals will not be accepted at that time. Please contact Ty Senour at ty.senour@randolph.af.mil with any questions.

1. PWS, Para 1.1.1. requires students be taught at an FAA Regulation Part 61 or Part 141 certified flight school, and Para 1.2.4.1 states maintenance and logistics shall be done in accordance with FAA regulations, but does not mention a Repair Station Certificate. Will the PWS be amended to require aircraft maintenance be performed in accordance with FAR Part 145 Repair Station Certification?

Yes, AFSAT intention is that if contractor is maintaining/repairing aircraft in accordance with FAA regulations, the contractor would be in compliance with FAR Part 145. AFSAT will specify in PWS edit.

2. PWS, Para 1.2.1.2.1 indicates the Service Provider shall provide instructors to support the training requirement and Para 1.2.1.6.1 indicates that CFIs must have two years of CFI experience or 100 hours as a flight instructor, but the requirement makes no mention of having military experience or being a graduate of a military flight training class/curriculum which would contribute to the high qualifications recommended for a contract of this nature. Will the qualifications be amended/changed to require instructors pilots be graduates of a formal military instructor training course or former military instructor pilot as in other AF contracts?

Para 1.2.1.6.1. in second sentence states “Two years prior experience as a military instructor pilot will satisfy the two-year requirement.” This implies the CFI must have graduated/completed a military flight instructor course/school.

3. PWS, Para 1.2.2. indicates all Aircraft shall be identically configured/standardized and then goes on to state “If the Service Provider uses more than one type of aircraft, students shall be restricted to the type of aircraft in which they begin training.” We believe that will contribute to a non-standardized fleet of aircraft which would be extremely challenging for students and instructors. It will also be difficult to impossible to execute contractual requirements when one type of aircraft is in maintenance. Will the PWS be changed to reflect that all aircraft must be a common configuration?

The intention is that based on multiple training aircraft available from several companies, that at times there will be a student whose height and/or weight require a larger aircraft or because of the availability of aircraft, a student will start out in a larger aircraft. AFSAT wants the student to fly the same aircraft throughout training and not have to fly different models, types or configurations. If contractor maintains a common fleet of aircraft that can accommodate all types of students, then this is acceptable. However, through market research and RFI process, many schools had two types of aircraft to use for training.

4. PWS, Para 1.2.2.1.4 describes Aircraft Weight & Balance, student weight, and survival equipment stored on the aircraft, but does not mention additional personnel or equipment. Will there be a requirement for a back seat (additional student observation sorties, VIPs, visiting dignitaries, etc.)?

There is no requirement beyond the student and instructor pilot.

5. PWS, Para 1.2.5.1 requires the Service Provider to provide all aircraft fuel. Will this be a separate CLIN, or a pass-through item, or should the fuel cost be included in the Section B pricing?

AFSAT expects the fuel cost to be included in the cost per student. Each student will fly 25 hours at an average burn rate of 6 gallons per hour for 150 gallons. Any additional flight time will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. AFSAT also understands that depending on aircraft type, fuel consumption rate will differ.

6. PWS, Para 1.2.6.2 describes the requirement for an individual to handle calls regarding noise abatement issues. May this be an additional duty?

Yes, as long as the person is identified.

7. PWS, Para 1.2.1.8 requirement for Emergency, Fire, Crash and Rescue Requirements is well defined, but makes no mention whether this will be priced separately or included in the student load pricing. Will there be a separate CLIN for these services?

AFSAT expects this cost to be included in the cost per student.

8. PWS, Para 1.2.11.5 indicates the Service Provider shall be subject to commercial safety inspections and also mentions the USAF Safety staff may conduct work site visits. Should we interpret “commercial safety inspections” to mean the FAA and civil service personnel, or are there other agencies who may conduct inspections? How often are these safety inspections anticipated?

Contractor is subject to inspection by those agencies (FAA, DHS, etc.) that would normally inspect for compliance. The inspection schedule of these agencies is not controlled by AFSAT. AFSAT, via Contracting Officer, will visit the site to ensure contract compliance or resolve issues. AFSAT will notify the contractor of visits.

9. PWS, Para 1.2.13.7 indicates the Service Provider shall obtain and maintain current required FAA, manufacturer, and vendor publications. Appendix A-3.3 allows all Air Force publications to be obtained from the internet. Will FAA, manufacturer/vendor publications be acceptable if they are available via internet access?

Contractor will obtain/maintain an original hard copy and updates can be obtained via internet.

10. PWS, Para 1.2.14.3 requires certain meal requirements and meal times based on cultural or religious beliefs, but does not clarify those requirements. Should we anticipate more than three meals per day, or is this verbiage suggesting dietary restrictions rather than additional meal times?

Since this contract is for all foreign costumers, depending on religious beliefs, student cannot eat during daylight hours (Ramadan). Contractor not obligated to more than three meals a day, but must be accommodating to religious/cultural requirements within reason.

11. The AETC Syllabus, dated September 2005 is currently in disagreement with PWS requirements, i.e. the Syllabus (Chapter 1, Para 4 – Duration) indicates there will be 25 flying days completed within 60 calendar days, whereas the PWS indicates 20 training days within 30 calendar days (PWS Para 1.2.1.1.3.) Will these two documents be reconciled?

PWS Para 1.2.1.1.3 takes into account a full (8 hour) day of academic and/or flight instruction. Based on market research, executing 25 flight hours and or 19 sorties in a dedicated learning environment can be accomplished within 20 academic days/30 calendar days. PWS also states that contractor and AFSAT may change days to improve training. This will be done after contract award. In addition, contractor will provide schedule taking into account holidays, weekends and availability of instructors/resources.

12. The AETC Syllabus, Chapter 2, Para 3 h. “Sortie Lengths” indicate that some sorties will be 1.4 hours in length and describes the total time as 25.0 hours. A sortie length of 1.4 hours in an aggressive tasking to comply with PWS requirements of 20 days as mentioned in question 11. Will this be changed?

Same response as 11.

13. The AETC Syllabus, Chapter 2, Para 3 e. indicates the desired minimum total solo time is 1.5 hours which appears to conflict with the same chapter, Para 9 d that states the student must accomplish three (3) solo landings. Are the three solo landings “full stop” or will this requirement be clarified in the Syllabus?

Per PWS Para 1.2.1.1.1, student flight experience may vary and as such may advance through the academic portion, but will still comply with all flight requirements and graduate as scheduled. Therefore, all student will start and complete training as scheduled and there will be no need for waivers as stated in AETC Syllabus, Chapter 2, Para 3e. AETC Syllabus, Chapter 2, Para 9d addresses situation beyond student control that effect student solo are not a reason for failure (weather, ground/flight emergency, etc.). Solo landings are subject to instructor preference. Typically, solo landings are full stop and take off to avoid student performing “touch and goes”.

14. 1.1.1 – The provider shall be a FAR Part 61 or 141 Flight School, We feel the requiring the flight school to be a FAR Part 141 would be in the best interest of the USAF for the following reasons:

a. 141 Flight Schools are open to inspections by the FAA (FAR 141.21) for compliance with all FAR 61, 91 and 141 regulations. This is not the case with a FAR Part 61 school.

b. 141 Flight School personnel, equipment and airports must meet minimum requirements and follow a strict compliance with approved training standards and curriculum. (FAR 141.33, 141.35, 141.36, 141,37, 141.38, 141.39, 141.43 and 141.45)

c. 141 Flight Schools are bound by regulation to set operating rules that require the Flight Instructor to be standardized. (FAR Part 141.75, 141.79, 141.81 and 141.83)

d. 141 Flight Schools are bound to maintaining training records in an approved manner by the FAA. (FAR Part 141.101)

15. 1.2/1.2.1.1.2 – Scope of work/Student Load. We understand a maximum of 6,000 flight hours and 240 plot candidates per year:

e. What is the maximum number of students per class? 20 students per class.

f. What is the maximum number of students (or classes) training at one time? Contractor preference, but not to exceed 6000 hrs/240 student a year.

16. 1.2.1.2.2 – Ground School / Equipment Provided. The initial courseware will be developed by the Service Provider.

g. What is the timeline for the development and approval of the initial courseware? AFSAT has provided the course syllabus, contractor only adapts for instruction.

h. Will the USAF require a review and approval of courseware before the initial class begins? Yes

i. If a review is required what is the required USAF review time? AFSAT require 30 days to review courseware.

17. 1.2.1.2.2 - Ground School / Equipment Provided. The IFS-FMS training center must be separate from other civilian flight screening facilities…

j. Can the flight school share a common building, with separate facilities, with other US Federal Government flight training programs? Yes, but security must be a top concern. Students attending training may not have been fully vetted by their country or USG processes and should be under tighter controls.

18. 1.2.1.6.1 – Certified Flight Instructors. Service Provider must have two year instructors or 100 hours logged as a flight instructor.

k. We feel initial flight screening should only be conducted by instructors with a minimum of 2 years instruction and the 100 hour dual given. It has been our experience that a “green” flight instructor is not qualified to administer this type of initial ground and flight training.

l. We recommend that as a minimum 2 years of flight instructor experience be required for this program.

19. 1.2.1.8 – Emergency, Fire, Crash and Rescue Requirements.

m. Can satellite airports, with off airport emergency, fire, crash and rescue services, be used as secondary facilities, just for “touch-and-goes” with an instructor on board in the event of runway closure, traffic stoppage or adverse wind conditions at the primary base? The satellite airport could be restricted to only be used when local conditions warrant and no solo operations would be conducted at these satellite airports. AFSAT understands that there may be a need to conduct flying in the local areas utilizing auxiliary airfields. However, the intent of this program is to have the student train at the main operating location for security reasons.

20. 1.2.2.1.10 – Avionics.

n. We recommend requiring “All Glass” cockpits for flight training. Technically Advanced Aircraft with all glass cockpits provide the latest in avionics and would help students prepare for the type of aircraft configurations they will see in the majority of modern military aircraft. Experience with glass cockpits at this level will result in future savings as students enter advanced training in aircraft with significant higher operating costs.

21. 1.2.7.4 – Student Training Records.

o. Will AFSAT accept electronic training records provided through a secure on-line information system? No. AFSAT requires original hard copies of training records. Records management is up to the contractor, but at the end of training, AFSAT requires all training records be sent to them.

p. We recommend requiring an electronic training record system. An electronic secure on-line system allows for access to training records from any location and eliminates time delays in forwarding student training information. Several systems are approved by the FAA for FAR Part 141 training records. The Army Aviation, Ft. Rucker, AL. (USAACE) uses this type of system for their Army Aviation Flight Training Center and all student information can be made available on-Line.

22. 1.2.14 Student Support.

q. Is the flight school required to provide students dress/uniforms? No. Students will be required to wear their military uniform which clearly identifies them as international students.

23. Questions and observations regarding the USAF International Introductory Flight Screening/Training AETC Syllabus for IFS-FMS:

Page 1, Chapter 1, Paragraph 8 Ground Training.

a. Is the required FAA Knowledge Test the FAA Solo Knowledge Test, or the FAA Private Pilot Knowledge Test? Since the USG does not provide private pilot licenses to foreign student, FAA Solo Knowledge Test.

24. Page 4/Paragraph 1.2.1. Difficult as it may be to evaluate in a diverse mix of international cultures, wouldn’t some level of officership need to be screened somehow as a common aspect of potential to complete UFT?

As with all international training programs, the level of “officership” is subjective. AFSAT and its in country counterparts will do their utmost to ensure that those students sent for training are professional in every way possible.

25. Page 4/Paragraph 1.2.1.1.3. The PWS says here that students are to complete training within approximately 30 calendar days once enrolled; however, in the Course Description of the Syllabus (page 1), it says the entire program should be completed within 60 days. Can you clarify?

The AETC Syllabus is not based on attending a full 8-hour academic day. Based on market research, 25 flight hours/19 sorties with ground school can be accomplished within 20 academic days or 30 calendar days. AFSAT and contractor can change the number of days of instruction, but do this upon contract award.

26. SYLLABUS CONTENT

· Training Philosophy. A case could be made for strengthening, shortening, and lowering the cost of this course with the addition of simulator training. Has this been – or can it be – considered?

Understandably so, however the AETC syllabus selected doesn’t take simulator into account. AFSAT’s goal is to provide the international student as much actual flight time to ensure them the best chance of success. However, it can be considered .

· Page 4/Paragraph 7. Especially given accommodations for and guidance on proficiency advancement, consideration should be given to the addition of a MIF Level for performance of an operation, maneuver, or task to an advanced or exceptional level that exceeds the standard.

27. ADMIN ONLY

· APPENDIX A-1. In the first line of the single paragraph, it says “Appendix A-2 is a separate document.” Should this reference be “Appendix A-1?” AFSAT corrected.

· APPENDIX A-2. The number sequencing is “A-3.X”. Should it be “A-2.X?” AFSAT corrected.