Copy_of_T-1A_Industry_Site_Visit_Questions_29_June.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 164 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Aircraft and Airframe Structural Components
- Solicitation number
- FA8106-16-R-0004
About this file
Updated Questions and Answers as of 29 JUN 2016
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 69 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
New Pivot
| Row Labels | Count of Complete | |
| SRD | 95 | |
| "The avionics suite shall use non-proprietary architecture and interfaces (MANDATORY)." SRD 3.2.1. Please describe the mandatory and desired elements of the “non-proprietary” architecture and interface for the avionics suite. | 1 | |
| "The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide dual independent flight directors (MANDATORY)." SRD 3.11.1. Dual is self-explanatory; what is meant by “independent”? | 1 | |
| "The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for the display of National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA)/Department of Defense (DOD) enroute and terminal area approach and departure charts Flight Information Publications (FLIP) at both the pilot and copilot positions (MANDATORY)." SRD 3.8.16. Is this intended to be an electronic display? If so, may this upgraded capability be provided as an Electronic Flight Bag, e.g., IPads? Integrated electronic FLIP at both pilot and copilot positions could require an additional display and add significant costs. | 1 | |
| A modified OFT shall still be able to operate with legacy OFT simulators in networked exercises. SRD 4.1.4. Do current OFT networks support WAN or LAN capability? | 1 | |
| A modified OFT shall still be able to operate with legacy OFT simulators in networked exercises. SRD 4.1.4. Will current network capabilities, architecture, and interface be provided in the Bidder’s Library so we can estimate the scope of work required for continued support of legacy OFTs with modified OFTs? | 1 | |
| ACCS shall work in single and network configurations. SRD 4.1.18. Will the existing ICD be provided? | 1 | |
| ACCS shall work in single and network configurations. SRD 4.1.18. Is this accomplished via a LAN system? | 1 | |
| ACCS shall work in single and network configurations. SRD 4.1.18. Is this for the CSO OFTs only? | 1 | |
| All modified T-1A aircraft environment, safety, and occupational health hazard risks shall be mitigated to the Acceptable level in accordance with current Radio Technical Commissions for Aeronautics / Document Number (RTCA/DO)-160 (MANDATORY). SRD 3.17.8. Are zonal DO-160 requirements available for the program? | 1 | |
| Appendix E Obsolete Items | ||
| Comment/Question: Based on discussions with Ametek, the Fuel Quantity Indicator P/N 128-384031-3 will not be supportable past 2020. Shouldn’t it be included on the SRD Appendix E – Obsolete Items list? | 1 | |
| Appendix E of the Draft SRD lists the parts that have been marked for obsolescence. Can USAF provide a full avionics parts list? It would be helpful to know the models of the existing FDR, UHF control, TACAN, etc. | 1 | |
| As with the previous question regarding DAFIF versus Jeppesen airport database information, utilizing a Jeppesen format would then allow the USG/CLS provider to update the database in a similar and non-proprietary fashion as the aircraft and would make this requirement less costly to be realized. SRD 4.1.20. | 1 | |
| Can the current intercom of the CSO jet be touched? | 1 | |
| Can the Government provide the definition or specification for the "data bus connection with the CSO platform"? | 1 | |
| Can the Government provide the Interface Control Document or similar technical data for the CSO STC without requiring prospective bidders travel to the bidders’ library? The current bidder library approach seems overly restrictive with unnecessary travel burden while access can be accomplished through more efficient methods. | 1 | |
| Communications and navigation receiver volume levels shall be separately adjustable at each crew position (MANDATORY). SRD 3.9.13. Does "each crew position" mean pilot/co-pilot only, or does it include the observer position as well? If it does include the observer position, can the existing control panel be retained? Can the ICD for the existing control panel at the observer position be made available in the Bidder's Library? | 1 | |
| Define narrow band for RFP? (SRD 3.9.4) | 1 | |
| Do the currently installed G-meter, AOA indicator, and clock meet the operational requirements of this solicitation, (ie. May these be retained as is)? (SRD 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.12) | 1 | |
| Does the Government intend that plain test only be transmitted; will ECCM (HAVE QUICK-I/II) be required? Is so, will timing (Mickey) be required from the GPS receiver(s)? (SRD 3.9.3) | 1 | |
| Does the USAF have Government Purpose Rights to Arinc 429 Data Dictionary for the received CSO Station data from the existing avionics suite? If yes, will this be provided to contractor? SRD Sec 3.3 | 1 | |
| Does this mean the TCAS-II system must accept ADS-B IN Traffic information and provide this as a combined (active interrogation and ADS-B IN Traffic) presentation on the new cockpit displays. SRD 3.7.6.2 | 1 | |
| For LRUs installed as part of the T-1A AMP, removal of a failed LRU shall not require removal of any other LRU (MANDATORY). SRD 3.16.1. Can this requirement be modified to instead specify a maximum number of minutes for removal of an LRU? There are potentially advantageous installation considerations if the requirement allows for removal of an LRU to get to another LRU. | 1 | |
| How does a student "select" a scripted mission? SRD 4.2.6 | 1 | |
| How many waypoints are required for storage in the FMS? | 1 | |
| Is current “Dutch Roll” data available? (SRD 3.10.5) | 1 | |
| Is it assumed that this figure will be achieved/proven through analysis? (SRD 3.1.3) | 1 | |
| Is it intended that this STC effort go through the FAA Military office? (SRD 3.1.2) | 1 | |
| Is it the intent that single or dual DME T/R's be installed? (SRD 3.8.3 & 3.8.12) | 1 | |
| Is LPV approach capability intended to be mandatory? (SRD 3.8.14) This is beyond the current T-1A capability, not an FAA mandate, and will add cost to the proposal. | 1 | |
| Is NVIS goggle compatibility desired for Cockpit/Cabin/CSO lighting? (SRD 3.15.3) | 1 | |
| Is the current installation compliant? (SRD 3.18.1) | 1 | |
| Is the GDL-90 installed in the CSO aircraft an independent system? | 1 | |
| Is VHF COM SIMOPS also required? (SRD 3.9.8) | 1 | |
| LPV is listed as a mandatory requirement. SRD 3.8.14. This is neither an FAA mandate nor a current capability of the T-1A. Please confirm that this new capability (and associated cost) is a mandatory requirement. | 1 | |
| May the AoA and G-meters be retained? SRD 3.5.1 & 3.5.2 | 1 | |
| MSP-85 mode select panel is on the obsolete parts list. Is this correct? | 1 | |
| P/N 76621-4 Pitch Trim Controller & 132-384029-1 Soft Start Module are related to airframe hardware (Non COTS / Proprietary to Airframe Manufacturer) and not part of the current Avionics Suite. Since the AMP is addressing primarily COTS avionics suite replacement, can these parts be removed from the requirement to replace? SRD Appendix E | 1 | |
| Please clarify, this reads as components not meeting this requirement (fire resistant) can only be used when in the aircraft configuration? SRD 4.1.25 | 1 | |
| References to AC120-40B. SRD 4.1.14 and 4.1.15. How are specified tolerances for the OFTs tested, is a QTG required? | 1 | |
| References to AC120-40B. SRD 4.1.14 and 4.1.15. How come 120-40B was used when the OFTs are not FFS? Why not use 120-45 which provided guidance on fixed-base, flight training devices (FTDs)? The concern is that some tolerances for FFS are not applicable to a non-FFS and the added burden may be an unnecessary cost factor for the USG. | 1 | |
| Requirements for non proprietary architecture and COTS solutions appear to be in contradiction with one another in Government procurement language. Commercial Off the Shelf and CaNDi products/services are used to simplify procurement processes but are not exposed to Government Purpose Rights (GPR) since COTS solutions are developed outside of a contract vehicle. If proprietary items are required as GPR, what assurance can the Govt provide for protecting proprietary items such as source code, particularly when CLS providers may be potential competitors within the industry? SRD 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 | 1 | |
| Should Wind Shear be reactive or predictive; is the Government also asking for a lightning detection system? (SRD 3.7.7.6) | 1 | |
| SRD 3.11.2: Flight directors shall function with the autopilot and the instrument approach subsystems to provide Category I ILS capability with separate remote course and heading selection controls and a single cue command steering presentation (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Is the requirement to have two separate heading control knobs (one for the pilot and one for the copilot), or will a single knob accessible from both sides meet this requirement? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.12.1: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide a settable 24-hour digital clock, readable at night, with continuous time display to include hour, minutes, and seconds at the pilot and co-pilot positions (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Can the existing clocks be eliminated in favor of a clock and elapsed timer selectable on the flight displays? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.2.4.1: The selected avionics system suite shall not exceed the current power draw of the pre-modified installed equipment to an extent that at least 20% of the T-1A power budget remains for future use (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Does the current avionics installation meet this requirement? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.3.1: The aircraft avionics shall maintain data bus connection with the CSO platform on the 21 CSO modified aircraft (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Will the 21 CSO platform’s Interface Control Document (ICD) be provided in the Bidder’s Library? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.2.3: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide range and bearing to similarly equipped aircraft (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Does the aircraft currently provide range and bearing to similarly equipped aircraft? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.2.4: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for verification of range and bearing signal (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question/Request for Clarification: What is meant by “verification” for this requirement? Please clarify how to provide verification of range and bearing signal. | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.3.6: The FMS shall store a minimum of 50 pilot generated flight plans (MANDATORY). | ||
| Comment/Question: The SRD requires the FMS to store a minimum of 50 pilot-generated flight plans, but the SRD Matrix has a requirement for 20. Should the SRD Matrix be revised to match the SRD? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.5.3: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide a minimum of two independent signal generators (MANDATORY). If one signal generator fails, the remaining signal generator shall supply information to both the pilot and copilot EFIS (MANDATORY). | ||
| Request/Questions: Please reword this as a requirement because it currently reads like an implementation detail. Is “signal generator” meant to mean “symbol generator”? Rather than specifying two independent signal generators, shouldn’t the requirement be for a redundant system to supply information to both the pilot and copilot EFIS? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.6.2: TCAS II shall be ADS-B compatible (MANDATORY). | ||
| Comment/Question: The requirement currently states the TCAS II shall be ADS-B compatible. Should this state “ADS-B Out compatible”? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.7.9.2: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide the flight crew with visual and aural warnings to allow safe recovery of the aircraft while flying at 500 feet AGL and 330 Knots Calibrated Air Speed (KCAS) (MANDATORY). | ||
| Request for Clarification: Please clarify the meaning of this requirement. | 1 | |
| SRD 3.8.16: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for the display of National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA)/Department of Defense (DOD) enroute and terminal area approach and departure charts Flight Information Publications (FLIP) at both the pilot and copilot positions (MANDATORY). | ||
| Comment/Questions: The majority of U.S. Government crew aircraft use electronic flight bags (EFBs). Is the intent of this requirement to have the digital charts displayed on the integrated aircraft displays, or can this requirement be satisfied with carry-on devices? | 1 | |
| SRD 3.9.10: The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for operating one UHF and one VHF multi-frequency transceiver while simultaneously monitoring UHF guard frequency (243.0 MHz) (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question/Comment/Question: What is the definition of “operating” in this paragraph? If only one UHF radio is proposed, it is likely that signal reception on the guard frequency will be desensitized when transmitting on another frequency. Do the current aircraft radios have the capability for operating one UHF and one VHF multi-frequency transceiver while simultaneously monitoring UHF guard frequency? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.1.19: The modified OFT shall be initially programmed with a Continental United States (CONUS) Digital Aeronautical Flight Information File (DAFIF) current on the date of issue of this contract (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Does the current OFT CLS contractor update/maintain DAFIF? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.1.20: The modified OFT shall include a non-proprietary procedure for updating the DAFIF (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Does the current OFT include a non-proprietary procedure for updating the DAFIF? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.1.22: Workmanship including all assemblies, parts, and accessories shall follow the guidelines of MIL-HDBK-454 (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Are the current OFTs manufactured to the requirements of MIL-HDBK-454? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.1.28.3: Equipment shall be compatible with the emergency power-off system and not sustain any damage during unexpected power down (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Are the current OFTs compatible with the emergency power-off system, and do they not sustain any damage during unexpected power down? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.2.12: The PTT shall provide a maintenance mode for troubleshooting (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Do the current PTTs provide a maintenance mode for troubleshooting? | 1 | |
| SRD 4.2.8: The PTT shall allow the operator to select AIR or GROUND to perform a scripted mission (MANDATORY). | ||
| Question: Do the current PTTs allow the operator to select AIR or GROUND to perform a scripted mission? | 1 | |
| SRD Non-Mandatory SRD Requirements: | ||
| Question: How will the Government evaluate the non-mandatory SOW requirements? | 1 | |
| SRD Section 3 Aircraft Requirements (including all subsections): | ||
| Question: What Section 3 requirements currently are met by the existing aircraft systems? | 1 | |
| SVO-85B, servo in autopilot, is on the obsolete parts list. Is this correct? | 1 | |
| TCAS II shall be ADS-B compatible (MANDATORY). SRD 3.7.6.2. Can further explanation on this requirement be provided? ADS-B compatibility is typically a separate and independent function from TCAS II functionality. | 1 | |
| The accelerometer display shall be readable from the pilot, copilot, and jump seat positions (MANDATORY). SRD 3.5.1.5. Does the existing sensor/display provide this capability as currently installed, and if so it is acceptable to leave the sensor as-is? | 1 | |
| The avionics installed as part of the T-1A AMP effort shall provide for ground operations through takeoff in an outside ambient temperature range from -40 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level to +130 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level, including corresponding internal temperatures (MANDATORY). SRD 3.17.1. Is there data on the corresponding internal temperatures that can be provided? What is the expected duration that the avionics would need to operate at these extreme temperatures? | 1 | |
| The avionics suite shall use non-proprietary architecture and interfaces (MANDATORY). SRD 3.2.1. Is it acceptable for connections between LRUs that constitute the AMP modification to use proprietary interfaces for LRU to LRU connections, provided that all required interfaces with 3rd party LRUs are non-proprietary? | 1 | |
| The FAA STC database search indicated the STC00055MC was not valid. Correction? (SRD 3.3.4) | 1 | |
| The FCC-4001 is on the obsolete parts list. Does this mean the autopilot must be replaced? | 1 | |
| The modified OFT as a minimum shall retain current capabilities of the Instructor Operating Station (IOS). – Regardless of avionics solution platform, it is likely many normal, abnormal, and emergency/failure modes and functions will change along with the Circuit Breakers for the avionics suite. SRD 4.1.5. We wish to clarify if any of the IOS functions relating to the current solution still need to be maintained/retained as stated, or with the modification if those features no longer required (as part of the legacy avionics) can be discarded? | 1 | |
| The modified OFT shall be initially programmed with a Continental US (CONUS) Digital Aeronautical Flight Information File (DAFIF) current on the date of issue of this contract. – Current avionics solution platforms extract data from the Jeppesen database as the NGA ceased to provide public access to the DAFIF database in 2006. SRD 4.1.19. Will standard COTS Jeppesen databases be acceptable or will USG provide an agreement with the NGA to provide DAFIF information? Utilizing the Jeppesen format would be more in-line with commercial avionics solutions and would also allow better facilitation to maintain concurrency of information on databases available to the aircraft, OFTs, and PTTs. | 1 | |
| The modified OFT shall retain the current aero and engine models. SRD 4.1.11. Any new autopilot will require development in both control loading and host, will source code for host be provided? | 1 | |
| The modified OFT shall retain the current aero and engine models. SRD 4.1.11. A new avionics modification may result in a lighter empty weight and new CG. If there is significant weight or CG change, will adjusting the aero model be considered in scope, or will this be considered Over and Above (O&A), or require a contract modification? | 1 | |
| The modified T-1A aircraft shall have an ICS with a minimum of one VHF communication, one UHF communication, and two VHF navigation radios (MANDATORY). SRD 3.9.1. Can the ICD for the existing UHF be made available in the Bidder's Library? Is it acceptable if the proposed installation includes two VHF comms instead of one? | 1 | |
| The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide a settable 24-hour digital clock, readable at night, with continuous time display to include hour, minutes, and seconds at the pilot and co-pilot positions (MANDATORY). SRD 3.12.1. Is it acceptable to retain existing clock? What are the requirements for being "settable"? Must it be able to be set to any time, or is the choice between setting the clock with different time formats acceptable? | 1 | |
| The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide an AOA instrument display that compares the relative wind to the chord line of the wing (MANDATORY). SRD 3.5.2.1. What is the existing AOA sensor? Can it be retained? | 1 | |
| The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for crew members in the pilot, copilot, and jump seat positions to silence all extraneous radio signals allowing communications among themselves via headset and microphone (MANDATORY). SRD 3.9.21. What is the design criticality level of this function? | 1 | |
| The modified T-1A aircraft shall provide for rendezvous using Air-to-Air TACAN (MANDATORY). SRD 3.7.2.1. Can the ICD for the existing TACAN be made available in the Bidder's Library? | 1 | |
| The PTT shall have the same tactile feel as the aircraft. – It is clear the current PTT does not replicate tactical feel throughout the entire cockpit or many of the avionics sub-systems and components. What is the scope of tactile feel? SRD 4.2.3. Will a list of training tasks currently performed on the PTT be provided in the Bidder’s Library? | 1 | |
| The T-1A aircraft shall maintain FAA certification following the AMP modification effort (MANDATORY). SRD 3.1.2. It is our understanding that the T-1A is not currently FAA certified. Beechcraft certified the model 400T. Is the intent of this that the 400T certification would be updated? | 1 | |
| The UHF communication radios shall provide at minimum tuning frequencies from 225 – 399.975 MHz in 25kHz increments (MANDATORY). SRD 3.9.3. Does the existing UHF comm provide this capability? | 1 | |
| Were requirements 4.1.23 and 4.1.25 omitted from the matrix on purpose? OFT/PTT | 1 | |
| What is the current CSO intercom system; will wiring diagrams be provided prior to the RFP? (SRD 3.3.3) | 1 | |
| What is the current data transmission type/method; parameters transmitted; parameter addresses or labels? (SRD 3.3.1) | 1 | |
| What level of RNP is aircraft certified for? | 1 | |
| Who owns the current Aircraft Structural Integrity software and will details of the system/software be made available prior to RFP? (SRD 3.13.3) | 1 | |
| Why is the Flight Data Recorder not a requirement? | 1 | |
| Will an aircraft flight manual be present in the bidders library which will show a current T-1A SUPT and CSO aircraft weight and balance? SRD 3.2.5 | 1 | |
| Will an existing Electrical Load Analysis be provided prior to the RFP? (SRD 3.2.4.1) | 1 | |
| Will bidders library contain the wiring diagrams for the CSO modification to include interface to the existing avionics systems and audio system? SRD Sec 3.3 | 1 | |
| Will inner/outer loop flight data from current AFCS installation be made available; will serial yaw damping be required (Take-Off/Touch-Down)? (SRD 3.10) | 1 | |
| Will the contractor be required to have an ACA (Associate Contractor Agreements) with Stevens Aviation or Camber if contractor does not need support from either of these companies? If Yes, does the Govt see this as a potential conflict of interest due to potential Stevens Aviation and Camber teaming toward pursuing this award? SRD Sec 3.3 | 1 | |
| Will the CSFDR recorder parameters and freq of capture be part of the bidders library? SRD 3.13.1 | 1 | |
| Will the CSFDR wiring interface be part of the bidders library? SRD 3.13.1 | 1 | |
| Would the mounting of one each LRU associated with engine indication (analog to digital converter) in a rack assembly behind the respective Pilot and Copilot Primary Flight Display PFD be acceptable if this is the intended avionics manufacturer design and can be accessed by removing 4 fasteners for the PFD? SRD 3.16.1 | 1 | |
| SOW | 76 | |
| Is it acceptable to state that testing and verification shall be done in accordance with FAA-approved procedures? | 1 | |
| Accurate staffing and pricing for meeting support will be hindered if meeting/review groupings are not identified during the proposal phase. Is combining meetings only allowed for the three that are designated as such in Table 3-1? | 1 | |
| All T-1A AMP developed software shall use a structured programming language and open-system approach as defined by the Open System Joint Task Force and consistent with existing Air Force guidance. SOW Section 9. Can this requirement be amended to include an alternative that allows for FAA and commercially approved processes? | 1 | |
| All technical data and training device software related to this program will be IAW 10 USC § 2320 (a)(2)(A)(C)(iii) and will be marked IAW DoDI 5230.24 as Distribution “D”, Government purpose rights, which will allow the Government to use all data related to this modification for sustainment and future training as necessary with no additional cost. This includes, but not limited to, TO, training material, OFT and PTT software, installation drawings, and STC. SOW 3.3. Can a more definitive definition of "technical data" be provided? For example, does "technical data" include source code for software, or only the completed software product? | 1 | |
| Are the Program Protection Plan (PPP) (refer to first sentence) and Program Protection Implementation Plan (PPIP) (refer to last sentence) the same plan or two different plans? Should these two sentences refer to the same plan (with the same name) in both instances? SOW 4.7.1 | 1 | |
| Because the Government requires a solution based upon an existing STC, would the following FAA documents associated with the STC be equivalent to the SOW required documents? |
SOW Required Document
1. Configuration Management Plan
2. Systems Engineering Management Plan FAA STC Document
1. Conformity Plan
| 2. ODA Manual | 1 | |
| Can the Government provide a list of manuals that are available in a Bidder’s Library when the RFP is released? SOW Sect 8 Para 8 | 1 | |
| Can the suite come from an equivalent aircraft, same class, or any business jet in same class? (SOW 1.2) | 1 | |
| Can this requirement be amended to include an alternative that allows for FAA and commercially approved processes? | 1 | |
| COTS vs Military Development. Many of the requirements in Section 9 and throughout the document are consistent with software exclusively developed for an Air Force program rather than software developed for COTS avionics. SOW. Is it possible to add language that the software and hardware used in AMP either be developed per the requirements in the SOW or alternatively per FAA and commercially approved processes? | 1 | |
| DI-MGMT-80368A, 3.2.3 Itemized man-hours and costs: Itemized man-hour and cost expenditure incurred for the reporting period by category and task, total contractual expenditures, and funds remaining as of the reporting date. | ||
| Comment/Question: Man-hour and cost expenditure reporting is not required for Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contracts. Will the Government tailor the DID to remove Paragraph 3.2.3 since this is an FFP contract? | 1 | |
| Does the Prime Contractor have to be CMMI certified? And if so, to what level? | 1 | |
| Does the USAF consider the Learjet 70/75 to be an equivalent aircraft with respect to SOW paragraph 1.2? | 1 | |
| Does this mean that the top-level system shall be TRL 8 or that every component and subsystem meet this standard? All of the candidate architectures (with STCs in equivalent aircraft) will have to be modified and adapted to the T-1A to the extent that none appear to meet the TRL 8 requirement, e.g., UHF radio controller. SOW 1.2 Paragraph 2 | 1 | |
| Down to what level must components be “entirely Commercial off-The-Shelf”? COTS LRUs may require that interfaces, controllers, data concentrators, etc. be developed and/or modified to adapt to the T-1A. | 1 | |
| FAR Clauses and SOW 4.4 Manpower: The Contractor shall allow employees to be passengers on T-1A aircraft if determined necessary and authorized by the T-1A SPO IAW the Ground & Flight Risk Clause. | ||
| Comment/Request: DFARS Clause 252.228-7001 Ground and Flight Risk is referenced in SOW Paragraph 4.4 but not included in the model contract. Please add this clause to the list of FAR clauses included in this solicitation. | 1 | |
| If an ACF is required for production aircraft, will the Contractor crew or Government crew perform the ACF? SOW 7.5 | 1 | |
| If the government directs return of property, will shipping and handling costs be treated as an O&A? | 1 | |
| In regards to Draft SOW Section 4.2, it is implied that the contractor must be compliant to AS9100C. Would USAF consider changing this to the contractor having AS9100C Certification? | 1 | |
| In regards to Draft SOW Section 6.8, contractors must apply for Equipment Frequency Allocation. In past experience, this can be a lengthy process. Since the modification must be certified within 12 months, can this be scheduled concurrently with the FAA certification process? | 1 | |
| In regards to Draft SOW Section 7.2, it stipulates that the contractor will store all removed items and that USAF will determine disposition at a later date. Can contractors quote trade-in credit for the removed equipment as a part of their proposal? | 1 | |
| In which CLIN(s) should this price be included in the offeror’s proposed price? | ||
| Is an induction aircraft weighing required or will the Government provide base-line weight and moments for engineering calculations? | 1 | |
| Is FDR required? | 1 | |
| Is ICS required for the aircraft and the simulators, or only for the simulators? | ||
| Is LRIP required? | 1 | |
| Is the STC expected 12 months from contract award? | 1 | |
| Is this a required mandate that the Contractor use an FAA approved ODA (Organization Designation Authorization) unit or will an approved FAA Part 145 Repair Station Inspection Procedure suffice? SOW 5.6 | 1 | |
| Many of the requirements in Section 9 and throughout the document are consistent with software exclusively developed for an Air Force program rather than software developed for COTS avionics. Is it possible to add language that the software and hardware used in AMP either be developed per the requirements in the SOW or alternatively per FAA and commercially approved processes? SOW Section 9 | 1 | |
| Question #3: "Follow on operator and maintenance training shall be conducted at each MOB ." This goes back to Question #1; does the contractor have to train the "first crew" from each base at the contractor facility or at the MOB as "follow-on" training. | 1 | |
| Question #4: "Follow on training shall be conducted at each MOB as the OFT and PTT are modified." Since one OFT & PTT have to be operating prior to the first aircraft arrival at each MOB, does this imply that additional training must be conducted as each OFT &PTT are brought on line? | 1 | |
| Reference SOW 11.0 Training | ||
| Question #1: Is the "initial cadre" defined as only the crews for the two "prototype" aircraft? Or does this mean the "initial cadre" from each base? | 1 | |
| Reference SOW 11.0 Training |
Question #2: "Initial operator and maintenance training shall be provided at the contractor facility."
Since the OFT and PTT have to be installed and operational at Pensacola (CSO aircraft) and one other MOB (SUPT aircraft) prior to first aircraft arrival, would the government allow the contractor to conduct the "initial cadre" training at the base so that the OFT & PTT could be utilized for the training?
This would provide much better training being able to use actual training devices rather than just classroom/electronic/on-line training.
Would the government allow the contractor to propose this approach --in-lieu of or in addition to the current SOW requirement -- without being in violation of submitting an "alternative proposal"?
Unless the contractor is allowed to conduct the initial training at the MOB, how is the contractor to comply with the last paragraph of SOW 11.0 : " Methods of instruction SHALL include computer based training, classroom and hands-on ground training via simulator and/or PTT."
| Initial maintenance training would be still be conducted at the contractor facility since that is where the prototype aircraft would be located. | 1 | |
| Request the Government clarify if the costs for fuel, oil and petroleum products etc. used by the contractor for ground and airborne testing/certification are to be included in our pricing as part of overhead or if they are considered over and above costs? SOW 6.4 | 1 | |
| Request the Government clarify that DO-178C is a hard mandate. Currently available systems may not be at DO-178C vs DO-178B. | 1 | |
| Request the Government clarify the composition and personnel that make up of these Groups. SOW 3.4.15. | 1 | |
| Respectfully request that the Government provide additional guidance on the cybersecurity requirements as they apply to COTS and FAA-approved equipment. SOW 4.7 | 1 | |
| Section 3.4 does not address entry / exit criteria for this review. Are there any applicable criteria for this review? SOW 3.4 | 1 | |
| SOW 1.2 Scope, second paragraph: The Contractor shall provide a solution for this contract which utilizes an Avionics Suite for an existing Beechcraft 400A (or equivalent aircraft) Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), as a baseline for prototype approval, and resulting in a FAA 400T STC solution for the T-1A fleet. | ||
| Question: What are the criteria to determine if an aircraft is “equivalent” IAW this requirement? | 1 | |
| SOW 1.2 Scope, third paragraph: The Contractor’s proposed solution shall satisfy the FAA’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) mandate for CFR 14 Part 91, supporting the T-1A's standing requirement to access the National Airspace System. | ||
| Comment/Question: The word “Out” is missing from this requirement. Should this sentence read: “The Contractor’s proposed solution shall satisfy the FAA’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out mandate for CFR 14 Part 91, supporting the T-1A's standing requirement to access the National Airspace System.”? | 1 | |
| SOW 12.6 Fixed Hourly Rate Items: For the purpose of negotiating prices for Fixed Hourly Rate Items, the “hands on” labor hours to which the fixed hourly rate is applied are limited to only that labor performed by personnel actually engaged in the direct performance of work required. “Hands on” labor shall not include any labor performed by support or supervisory type personnel, such as, but not limited to: engineering, inspection, planning and estimating, timekeepers, payroll clerks, purchasing, materials handling, quality control, storing and issuing personnel. Quality control personnel are considered as those personnel who apply standards to finished work/products to determine that finished production work is serviceable in all respects. | ||
| Question/Comment: How will reimbursement for contractor costs associated with the functions that are required in support of O&A activities be provided? The SOW does allow for the functions listed in subparagraphs a) through i) to be included in the composite hourly rate. | 1 | |
| SOW 3 Program Requirements, first paragraph: The Contractor’s proposed avionics suite shall have demonstrated successful operation on Beechcraft 400A or similarly equipped aircraft. | ||
| Question: What are the criteria to determine if an aircraft is “similarly equipped” IAW this requirement? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.1 Hazardous Material, third paragraph: The Contractor shall ensure that hazardous materials (HAZMAT) and ozone depleting substances (ODSs) are not required for the manufacture, operation, maintenance, support, or disposal of the T-1A avionics suite or simulator equipment. The Contractor shall review all drawings and processes for compliance with Environmental Protection Agency guidelines on ODSs. Hazardous materials contained in or generated by the T-1A avionics suite or simulator equipment shall be documented in the review findings by including the following information for each instance. | ||
| Comment/ Request for Clarification: This paragraph appears to contradict itself. The first sentence states the contractor shall ensure that HAMAT and ODSs are not required in the T-1A avionics suite or simulator equipment solution, but the third sentence states that HAZMAT contained in or generated by the T-1A avionics suite or simulator equipment shall be documented. Please clarify the HAZMAT requirements. | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4 Meeting Support and Table 3-1 Contractor Conducted Meetings: Meetings, reviews and working groups may be combined with other meetings, reviews and working groups as appropriate. Meetings, reviews and working groups shall support attendance via teleconference. Tentative dates, scheduling, and grouping of meetings and reviews will be determined during the Post Award Meeting. | ||
| Comment/Questions: Accurate staffing and pricing for meeting support will be hindered if meeting/review groupings are not identified during the proposal phase. Is combining meetings only allowed for the three that are designated as such in Table 3-1? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.1 System Requirements Review (SRR), c): Technical requirements from all acquisition documentation [e.g., Program Protection Plan (PPP); Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP); Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, and Cost (RAM-C) rationale report] are allocated to specifications. | ||
| Question: Will these documents be provided with the final RFP? If not, when will they be provided to the contractor to support this requirement? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.1.1 SRR Entrance Criteria, b): The government has received evidence that the system specification, technical plans, and program budget estimate are sufficiently mature to support the case for a successful SRR as judged against the tailored product acceptance criteria. | ||
| Question: Where is the tailored criteria for the product acceptance criteria defined? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.11 Other Meetings, first sentence: The Contractor shall participate in bi-weekly teleconferences to discuss program status and issues. | ||
| Question: As used in this sentence, does “bi-weekly” mean every two weeks or twice a week? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.14 System Supportability Reviews (SSR): The Contractor shall participate in an annual SSR. The Contractor shall prepare Presentation Materials and present program performance and status, trend analysis, requirement compliance, and resolution of open issues. | ||
| Question: Will SSRs be required for each Option Period as well? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.8 Production Readiness Review (PRR): The PRR shall be conducted to ascertain that the system design is ready for production and that the supplier has accomplished adequate production planning for entering low-rate initial production (LRIP) or full-rate production (FRP). | ||
| Question: Is a PRR required before LRIP and FRP (two PRRs)? | 1 | |
| SOW 3.4.9 Physical Configuration Audit (PCA): The PCA shall be conducted to determine conformance of the as-built configuration of a validated CI with its design documentation, and to verify the product baseline. | ||
| Question: When is the PCA required? | 1 | |
| SOW 4.4 Manpower, last paragraph: The Contractor shall provide names and contact information for key personnel to the PCO and COR at least 30 days prior to contract performance and provide updates within seven days if changes are made throughout contract performance. The Contractor shall develop, deliver, and maintain an organizational chart identifying key personnel with a line of responsibility between the organizational elements. | ||
| Question: Who are considered key personnel? | 1 | |
| SOW 5.6 Aircraft installation Kit-Proofing: The Contractor shall perform kit proofing on the installation of A-kits and B-kits into the AMP LRIP and production T-1A aircraft. | ||
| Question: Does this mean that kit-proofing activities are to be performed on the installation of all LRIP and Production kits, or are only the first kit for LRIP and the first kit for production considered kit-proof aircraft? | 1 | |
| SOW 5.6 Aircraft Installation Kit-Proofing: The Contractor shall provide the installation kits in accordance with the Supplemental Type Certificate installation package. All kits will be confirmed by authorized ODA inspectors before kits are authorized for installation. Existing COTS items will be delivered with FAA Parts Manufacturing Authority (PMA) certificates or FAA Form 8130-3, Airworthiness Approval Tag, as appropriate. | ||
| Comments/Request for Confirmation: Prior to STC Issuance, it is not possible to PMA parts and/or kits applicable to the STC. Please confirm that the requirement should read that all parts prior to STC issuance will be “conformed” prior to installation on the aircraft. Following STC issuance, all kits will be delivered with 8130-3 Airworthiness Approval Tags, as appropriate. There should be no need to conform parts kits following the approval of the STC and issuance of PMAs. | 1 | |
| SOW 7.5 Post Installation, last paragraph: The Contractor shall conduct Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) and Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) testing. | ||
| Questions: Are EMI and EMC testing required on each aircraft? | 1 | |
| SOW 7.5 Post Installation, second paragraph: The Contractor shall weigh the aircraft post modification and recalculate the center of gravity for each aircraft in accordance with TOs 1-1B-50, Basic Technical Order for USAF Aircraft Weight and Balance and 1T-1A-5-1, Sample Basic Weight Checklists T-1A. | ||
| Comment/Request: This paragraph requires that the contractor weigh each aircraft and perform a weight-and-balance calculation for each production aircraft. Please confirm that this must be accomplished for each aircraft. | 1 | |
| SOW 8.2 Interim Contract Support (ICS): The Contractor shall provide service and repair capabilities at each MOB until maintenance (MX) staff is trained to service and repair the Avionics Suite. |
Until the corresponding COMBS, for each MOB, are fully stocked with the needed support and test equipment for the Avionics Suite, and stocked with replacement parts and LRUs, the Contractor shall be responsible for initial sparing and maintenance.
| Comment/Question: The requirements for interim contract support listed here are undetermined and, therefore, cannot be accurately priced. Will the Government add a specified time limit to the above requirements to aid in pricing this portion? | 1 | |
| SOW Appendix B Production Planning Schedule: LRIP quantity is TBD (estimated to be between 4 and 6 aircraft). **The quantities in this table are subject to change. | ||
| Questions: Will the final LRIP quantity be inserted in place of “TBD” in the first sentence? Will the quantities in the table in the final SOW be fixed and not subject to change. | 1 | |
| SOW. Applicable Documents. Are the listed documents provided for reference only, or is the intent that all documents listed in Section 2 and subsequent subsections must be followed in their entirety? In many cases, COTS avionics products do not follow the MIL processes listed in the tables of Section 2. | 1 | |
| The Contractor shall utilize its Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) certified Technical Consistent Process (TCP) to develop the T-1A avionics suite and simulators. SOW Section 9. Suggest modifying this language to state "The Contractor shall utilize its Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) certified Technical Consistent Process (TCP) or equivalent FAA and commercially approved processes to develop the T-1A avionics suite and simulators." | 1 | |
| The DoD Open Systems Architecture Contract Guidebook for Program Managers v.1.1 states "Achievement of (Open Systems Architecture) principles requires an affirmative answer to a fundamental question: Can a qualified third party add, modify, replace, remove, or provide support for a component of a system, based on open standards and published interfaces for the component of that system?” Question: Is this what is intended by this requirement? SOW Section 3 | 1 | |
| The production schedule (SUPT vs COS aircraft) by location ( Sim and PTT) will be required to determine spare parts inventory levels, prices by year and acquisition lead times. Will the Government provide a detailed schedule of SUPT vs COS / Simulator and PTT modifications – by location—so that spares provisioning may be calculated in the proposal? SOW 5.4 | 1 | |
| The SOW lists system requirements for a COTS solution with a TRL Level of 8. Will the Air Force entertain streamlining or eliminating some gate reviews should a COTS TRL Level 9 system be proposed and accepted. | 1 | |
| The SOW states that all technical data and training device software related to the program will be marked Government Purpose Rights. Would like to clarify that Government Purpose Rights are not applicable for technical data and software items developed by the contractor with no funding from the Government. | 1 | |
| There are 2 meetings required for System Functional Review (SFR) and Physical Configuration Audit (PCA). The notes specify that the aircraft and training device reviews will be held together. Please verify there are two meetings for each of these events. | 1 | |
| Various references throughout the SOW to DO-178C. The SOW requires DO-178C rather than DO-178B. FAA AC 20-115C states that Applicants who have used DO-178B in the past may still be able to use the same means of compliance for certification projects, and gives guidance for determining if DO-178B is acceptable for previously approved appliances and their derivatives. Is it acceptable products to be certified under DO-178B as allowed by AC 20-115C? | 1 | |
| What does the Government consider to be an “equivalent aircraft” to the Beechcraft 400A? | 1 | |
| Will AIA NAS 411 and 411-1 be provided as part of the Bidders library? | 1 | |
| Will it be acceptable for previously TSO'd equipment types to continue to follow the standards and processes under the previous certifications? Specifically, we are concerned with moving to DO-178C, DO-160G, DO-357, and the specific engineering processes called out in the SOW. | 1 | |
| Will the Government accept an Avionics Suite solution for the Beechcraft 400A that is in the process of receiving an STC but has not been finalized prior to the proposal due date, as long as the solution is expected to be certified prior to the start of the contract period? | 1 | |
| Will the Government allow removed items to be transferred as “scrap” to the contractor for recycling of parts, reuse or must the parts be destroyed? SOW 3.2 | 1 | |
| Will the Government clarify if airborne training on the newly installed system will be required for the pilots by the contractor? | 1 | |
| Will the Government consider providing a list of currently owned support equipment, by location, so that the Contractor may evaluate the applicability of such equipment and identify new requirements? | 1 | |
| Will the Government permit the contractor to recycle removed wiring if it is part of their normal waste management program? | 1 | |
| Will the Government project or clarify the anticipated timeframe to receive disposition instructions for the referenced items? Excessive quantities of removed items in contractor storage may accumulate into a very large inventory over time. SOW 3.2 | 1 | |
| Will the Government provide the CPI/critical component list during the proposal process to facilitate pricing? SOW 4.7.2 | 1 | |
| Will the Program Protection Plan (PPP) be provided with the RFP to facilitate pricing for this program element? SOW 4.7.1 | 1 | |
| With respect to previously asked question #25, and with respect to the STC requirements found in the second paragraph 1.2, and considering the added statement " (or equivalent aircraft) " please confirm it is the Government's intention to allow proposed solutions that may not have established STC's specifically for the 400A if STCs do exist for "equivalent aircraft." If this is not the Government's intention, please provide additional detail as to what the intention of thisadded statement is. | 1 | |
| Would the Government estimate the response time / turnaround time to provide the contractor with O&A approval and disposition? Will the Government clarify how delays in the depot mod schedule will be treated if the Government is delayed in providing disposition instructions? Would the Government consider a standard time of three days, or the contractor may submit a schedule extension request. | 1 | |
| SIM | 40 | |
| A model of the cockpit is used to repeat instrument settings at the IOS of the OFT. What format is the model in and will we have access to the source files for that model? | 1 | |
| Are the Simulators networked together? | 1 | |
| Clarify software transition for simulator (OFT & PTT), and aircraft. | 1 | |
| Do the OFT and PTT utilize the same software or the same software base? | 1 | |
| Do we have a list of faults for IOC? | 1 | |
| Do you want software the same so the training syllabus doesn't have to change? | 1 | |
| Does the 20 year requirement for the aircraft also pertain to the simulators? | 1 | |
| Does the OFT CSO push threats to the cockpit instruments? | 1 | |
| Does the OFT have two levels of visual system (regular vs. hi-def)? | 1 | |
| Does the PTT software change or remain the same? | 1 | |
| How do you get an ACA with the simulator CLS contractor when we don’t know who the contractor will be? | 1 | |
| How many hours per day are Simulators used? | 1 | |
| How periodic are the software updates in the OFT? | 1 | |
| Interface from SIM to interactive airport environment, do you replace or maintain? | 1 | |
| Is it mandatory for students to spend time at the PTT? | 1 | |
| Is the courseware requirement part of the Draft RFP (PTT)? | 1 | |
| Is the FMS in the OFT and PTT synthetic? | 1 | |
| Is the hardware in the CSO OFT the same as the aircraft? | 1 | |
| Is the IOS in the PTT the same as the OFT? | 1 | |
| Is the software on the IOC a L-3 Link product? | 1 | |
| Is there a certification requirement for the simulators? | 1 | |
| Is there a debrief station for the OFT? | 1 | |
| Is there a flight model in the PTT? | 1 | |
| Is there a parts list of what is real vs. synthesized in the OFT? | 1 | |
| Must a PTT/OFT solution use DAFIF? | 1 | |
| There are concerns that systems within the OFT will either become obsolete or extremely costly to the USG to maintain system functionality until 2035. These are systems beyond the areas affected by a potential avionics modernization program but will impact the overall sustainability and life-cycle costs of the OFTs. There is also concern that software of this vintage may also be impossible to support until 2035 due to technology advancement. Would the Government consider additional modification to the OFTs in order to enable support/sustainability until 2035, reduce life-cycle costs and mitigate obsolescence to be within the scope of the requirements as currently outlined and defined? | 1 | |
| Upon completion of the simulator modifications, who will accept the OFT's and PTT's for the Government? | 1 | |
| What are the existing operating systems of the OFT and PTT? | 1 | |
| What are the testing/acceptance requirements for the OFTs and PTTs – DCMA approval via ATP, FAA QTG? | 1 | |
| What is the interface from the airport environment computers to the OFT simulators? | 1 | |
| What software language are the different modules in the OFT written? | 1 | |
| What type of data rights do we have for the OFT? Can we leverage GP data rights? | 1 | |
| Who owns information on PTT? | 1 | |
| Who performed the latest PTT modifications? | 1 | |
| Will network connectivity need to be maintained between a modified and unmodified OFT? | 1 | |
| Will OFT simulator code be provided as Government Furnished Information? | 1 | |
| Will OFT simulator drawings be provided as Government Furnished Information? | 1 | |
| Will the AMP contractor be responsible for hardware and software in the OFT? | 1 | |
| Will the successful Offeror be able to look at the PTT after contract award? | 1 | |
| Will USAF provide PTT scenario book to Contractor? | 1 | |
| General | 33 | |
| Are there any glare issues from the cockpit? | 1 | |
| Are there any known weight and balance issues for the T-1? | 1 | |
| Can a contractor offer new ICS components for the CSO aircraft? USAF would like to keep the existing ICS configuration, however would USAF be open to new components that have the same functionality? | 1 | |
| Can the FDR be replaced? | 1 | |
| Can USAF provide technical data from Stevens Aviation for the CSO STC to possibly include a Wiring Diagram/System Schematic, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, Maintenance Manual Supplement, Parts List, etc.? It was indicated at Industry Day this would be the selected contractor’s responsibility. It seems that the USAF may already have this information. | 1 | |
| Can you clarify the 8210 requirement? (Noted, many small businesses can't comply)? | 1 | |
| Can you stack LRU's in avionics rack? | 1 | |
| Does the antenna require replacement if it will work with the proposed solution? | 1 | |
| Does the relevant period of “past three years from the date of the of issuance of this solicitation” include the warranty period of a particular effort or contract ? | 1 | |
| Does the T-1 use a 1553 data bus? | 1 |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .