Industry_Questions_22_Nov_16_Posting.pdf
PDF 84 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4890-16-R-0032
About this file
Responses to Industry Questions received prior to Draft RFP posting.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) has more files on GovTribe.
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
Industry Questions (Q) and Responses (R) 22 Nov 16
1. Q. Since there are numerous types of unmanned pilots and sensor operators in the DoD and since the MQ‐1/9 LRE crews require unique skills, it would be logical that ACC/AMIC would reduce risk by requiring resumes for a certain portion of the requirement. Correct?
R. We won’t be requiring resumes or flight histories for the re‐compete proposals. Flight history requirements will be spelled out in the PWS and submitted by the winning offeror after award.
2. Q. Due to the expanded scope of the program across medium and high altitude maintenance and medium altitude LRE crews, it would be logical that ACC/AMIC would reduce risk by requiring resumes for at least the program manager and chief pilot. Correct?
R. AMIC will not require resumes, however, key personnel requirements are addressed in the PWS.
3. Q. Are all downrange LRE locations covered under bilateral agreements, SOFA, and/or business tax agreements?
R. There are various SOFA and other agreements that vary by country. For example, the winning offeror will have to register with the Afghan Government to obtain a business license.
4. Q. Considering the speed at which modifications to aircraft, weapons, sensors, and GCSs have occurred over the past 7 years, it is clear there will continue to be considerable changes that have to be integrated into the fleet for the maintainers and aircrews. Can ACC/AMIC incorporate some type of CLIN whereby the contract can include modifications? This would improve speed and ease of integration of future changes making it easier for the end user to enhance their capabilities. Logically, ACC/AMIC would reduce risk by requiring past examples of modification installs and might ask for sample TOs on how to integrate these mods into the fleet. Correct?
R. TCTOs & mods are considered a part of normal Organizational‐level maintenance support and performed by assigned site personnel as required. AMIC will not incorporate a separate CLIN for TCTOs/mods.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .