FA441721QC204 QnA - JA AV System.pdf
PDF 3 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA441721QC204
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions & Answers
FA441721QC204
Judge Advocate AV System / Court Room Digital Evidence Presentation System
1. FROM SOW: “OPTION: Drop down project display with minimum 5,000 lumen projector.”
I. Is the drop-down description in the SOW related to the projector or the projection screen? A fixed projector mount is dramatically less expensive and is understood to be currently in use.
A: The current projector doesn’t function and points to a wall that can’t be used during court because it’s directly behind the defense table. The drop down refers to the screen only, not the projector. Regarding the projector, a fixed projector mount is acceptable.
II. Is a drop-down projection screen what is being asked for? If so, do you want it powered? If controlled, do you want a switch on the wall to raise and lower the screen or control via the program/control system?
A: If the projector and screen is able to be provided by the company, I would want it powered and controlled by remote/through the requested system if possible; if not, a wall switch is sufficient.
III. If powered projection screen, do you want a wall mount (less expensive) or ceiling/recessed mount (more expensive)?
A: The Government prefers a recessed mount.
2. AUDIO:
I. The SOW calls for 10 microphones. Please identify the location for each and preferred style. Style examples might be gooseneck (length?) or boundary mics.
A: Gooseneck microphones are preferred. The location will be discussed upon award in the design meeting. Please propose a recommended height.
II. Please identify the FTR input device that is currently on-site and/or will be present at the time of installation.
A: There shouldn’t be a need for the presentation system to interact with FTR, only that there be an audio input that connects to the recording system. See attached pictures.
III. Is there an existing mixer or DSP to manage microphones and audio feed to the FTR recording system or is one needed? It is assumed that one is needed due to quantity of microphones requested.
A: See attached pictures. Mixer is in place.
IV. Is a sound reinforcement system (amplifier/speakers) required to allow presented content to be heard in the courtroom? Sound reinforcement is part of the Nomad LT-Q system which other vendors are likely to overlook.
A: This assumption is correct and the sound reinforcement that is in the requested system is expected to be needed.
3. CABLING:
Please confirm that the following assumptions are accurate:
I. The building is available for cabling activities during normal business hours.
A: Yes per the SOW. Due to the nature of the space, the installation can take no longer than 3 business days per the SOW.
II. The building has no asbestos or other harmful substances that require abatement.
A: The Government is not aware of asbestos or any other harmful substances that will require abatement.
III. Core drilling is not allowed or feasible.
A: Correct, core drilling is not allowed or feasible.
IV. Ceiling drops or floor moldings are acceptable.
A: Yes, both are acceptable.
4. 80” TOUCH MONITOR
FROM SOW: “One (1) 80” 1080p display for the Panel. Touch screen capability on a mobile stand that wirelessly connects to the digital system.”
I. Is an 80” monitor without touch acceptable by moving the annotation function to the Nomad LT-Q’s confidence monitor?
A: Yes, please quote an 80” monitor without touch that is compatible with the Nomad LT-Q confidence monitor.
II. Background: Although the proposed 80” touch monitor could potentially be used for annotation, the function for this touch feature was not identified in the SOW. To avoid presenting attorneys from turning their back on the panel or judge, it is recommend to utilize the Nomad LT-Q confidence monitor for attorney annotation vs the 80” monitor for this purpose. Using the confidence monitor for annotation allows the 80” monitor to be used solely as a way for participants to clearly see presented evidence. (Witness monitor will also have annotation capabilities as defined in the SOW).
A: The Government concurs with this assessment.
This is a shot of the court room looking East.
This is a shot of the court room looking Northeast.
This is a shot of the court room looking Southeast.
This is a shot of the court room looking Northwest.
This is a shot of the court room looking Southwest.
This is a shot of the wireless receivers and the mixer.
This is a shot of the existing microphone
Questions & Answers
FA441721QC204
Judge Advocate AV System / Court Room Digital Evidence Presentation System
1. FROM SOW: “OPTION: Drop down project display with minimum 5,000 lumen projector.”
I. Is the drop-down description in the SOW related to the projector or the projection screen? A fixed projector mount is dramatically less expensive and is understood to be currently in use.
A: The current projector doesn’t function and points to a wall that can’t be used during court because it’s directly behind the defense table. The drop down refers to the screen only, not the projector. Regarding the projector, a fixed projector mount is acceptable.
II. Is a drop-down projection screen what is being asked for? If so, do you want it powered? If controlled, do you want a switch on the wall to raise and lower the screen or control via the program/control system?
A: If the projector and screen is able to be provided by the company, I would want it powered and controlled by remote/through the requested system if possible; if not, a wall switch is sufficient.
III. If powered projection screen, do you want a wall mount (less expensive) or ceiling/recessed mount (more expensive)?
A: The Government prefers a recessed mount.
2. AUDIO:
I. The SOW calls for 10 microphones. Please identify the location for each and preferred style. Style examples might be gooseneck (length?) or boundary mics.
A: Gooseneck microphones are preferred. The location will be discussed upon award in the design meeting. Please propose a recommended height.
II. Please identify the FTR input device that is currently on-site and/or will be present at the time of installation.
A: There shouldn’t be a need for the presentation system to interact with FTR, only that there be an audio input that connects to the recording system. See attached pictures.
III. Is there an existing mixer or DSP to manage microphones and audio feed to the FTR recording system or is one needed? It is assumed that one is needed due to quantity of microphones requested.
A: See attached pictures. Mixer is in place.
IV. Is a sound reinforcement system (amplifier/speakers) required to allow presented content to be heard in the courtroom? Sound reinforcement is part of the Nomad LT-Q system which other vendors are likely to overlook.
A: This assumption is correct and the sound reinforcement that is in the requested system is expected to be needed.
3. CABLING:
Please confirm that the following assumptions are accurate:
I. The building is available for cabling activities during normal business hours.
A: Yes per the SOW. Due to the nature of the space, the installation can take no longer than 3 business days per the SOW.
II. The building has no asbestos or other harmful substances that require abatement.
A: The Government is not aware of asbestos or any other harmful substances that will require abatement.
III. Core drilling is not allowed or feasible.
A: Correct, core drilling is not allowed or feasible.
IV. Ceiling drops or floor moldings are acceptable.
A: Yes, both are acceptable.
4. 80” TOUCH MONITOR
FROM SOW: “One (1) 80” 1080p display for the Panel. Touch screen capability on a mobile stand that wirelessly connects to the digital system.”
I. Is an 80” monitor without touch acceptable by moving the annotation function to the Nomad LT-Q’s confidence monitor?
A: Yes, please quote an 80” monitor without touch that is compatible with the Nomad LT-Q confidence monitor.
II. Background: Although the proposed 80” touch monitor could potentially be used for annotation, the function for this touch feature was not identified in the SOW. To avoid presenting attorneys from turning their back on the panel or judge, it is recommend to utilize the Nomad LT-Q confidence monitor for attorney annotation vs the 80” monitor for this purpose. Using the confidence monitor for annotation allows the 80” monitor to be used solely as a way for participants to clearly see presented evidence. (Witness monitor will also have annotation capabilities as defined in the SOW).
A: The Government concurs with this assessment.
This is a shot of the court room looking East.
This is a shot of the court room looking Northeast.
This is a shot of the court room looking Southeast.
This is a shot of the court room looking Northwest.
This is a shot of the court room looking Southwest.
This is a shot of the wireless receivers and the mixer.
This is a shot of the existing microphone
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .