ALE-47_CMDS_Upgrade_RFI_8_Oct_19_(002).pdf

Request for Information (RFI)

AN/ALE-47 Upgrade Program

TITLE

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION for AN/ALE-47 Upgrade Program

SOURCES SOUGHT SYNOPSIS INSTRUCTIONS

AN/ALE-47 Upgrade Program

PURPOSE

As required by DFARS PGI 206.302-1(d), this market survey is being conducted to identify potential sources that may possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the services requirements for the USAF AN/ALE-47 Upgrade Program.

NOTICE

The Government is conducting market research to identify potential sources that possess the expertise, experience and capabilities required to develop, integrate and field the next generation ALE-47 Countermeasures Dispenser System (CMDS).

Contractors/Institutions responding to this market research are placed on notice that participation in this survey may not ensure participation in future solicitations or contract awards. The government will not reimburse participants for any expenses associated with their participation in this survey.

INSTRUCTIONS

1. The document(s) below contain a description of the ALE-47 Upgrade attributes the Government is seeking and a Contractor Capability Survey, which allows Contractors to provide their company’s capability.

2. If after reviewing these documents, you desire to participate in the market research, you should provide documentation that supports your company’s capability in meeting these requirements. Failure to provide documentation may result in the government being unable to adequately assess your capabilities. If you lack sufficient experience in a particular area, please provide details explaining how you would overcome the lack of experience/capabilities in order to perform that portion of the requirement (e.g., teaming, subcontracting, etc.)

a. Identify any areas of work that your organization believes should be broken out exclusively for Small Business.

3. Both large and small businesses are encouraged to participate in this Market Research.

Joint ventures or teaming arrangements are encouraged.

4. Questions relative to this market survey should be addressed to Kesia Dawson, ALE-47 Procuring Contracting Officer, at 478-926-0145 or lakesia.dawson@us.af.mil. Technical questions should be addressed to Jose Crespo, ALE-47 Engineer, at 478-222-4182 or israel.crespo@us.af.mil.

5. The Government is only seeking white paper type synopses pertaining to the purpose/description area and information in Part I at this time. After receipt of white paper responses from interested parties, the Government will provide information pertaining to more specific requirements. Interested parties will then be requested to provide additional information based on these specific requirements.

PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION

The ALE-47 dispenses chaff, flares, and active RF expendables to protect an aircraft from ground-based and air-to-air threats. The CMDS supports the dispensing scenarios needed for aircraft survivability which include manual dispensing, semi-automatic and automatic dispensing, coordinated dispensing with jammer, reactive dispensing against detected threats, preemptive dispensing to prevent lock on, and threat adaptive dispensing. The ALE-47 is currently installed on aircraft supporting various government agencies including all services of the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of State, NATO, and Foreign Military customers. The system consists of the following major components:

1) Control Display Unit (CDU)

2) Programmer

3) Sequencer

4) Safety Switch

5) Dispensers (USAF, Navy and Army Configurations)

6) Magazines, Breech Plates and Retaining Plates

Much of the ALE-47 hardware and software are Non-Foreign Release with portions being classified, with limited functionality and/or data released as defined per standard FMS polices.

The Government is conducting market research to identify potential sources that possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the requirements of providing the technical solution for the ALE-47 Upgrade program. The USG is interested in current (fielded or available for integration into an aircraft system within the next three to twelve months), near-term (twelve to 36 months), and long-term (3 years+) capabilities for consideration and potential use.

The ALE-47 Upgrade program requires, at a minimum, the capability improvements outlined in Section A below. The Program Office intends to use this opportunity to improve upon the system’s adaptability, modularity/openness, and safety, as well as to formulate a CMDS capability roadmap for spiral development. Additionally, other proposed areas of technology improvement are open for consideration which are outlined in Section B below. Security impacts of the redesigned system/LRUs shall be considered throughout the program. The solution may require procurement of hardware and necessary items to fulfill the requirement.

A. Minimum Capability Improvement Requirements:

1) Programmable display with the capability to display, at a minimum, eight (8) user-definable payload categories/types

2) Fully programmable control of all Bypass functions

3) Display of available dispense count per Manual Program

4) Easy aircrew access of payload category/types displays and inhibit switches (final designs will require coordination with Air Crews and Human Factor Engineering)

B. Technology Areas for Design Consideration:

1) Long-term adaptability to threat changes

2) Safety improvements

a. Design and BIT improvements for uncommanded dispense reduction (i.e., reduction and/or detection of potential wiring shorts which could lead to uncommanded dispenses, hardware failure modes which potentially lead to inadvertent firing commands, etc.)

b. Improved jettison switch performance (Jettison switch is currently being accidently triggered in some AC installs; design should seek to improve Air Crews and Human Factor Engineering)

3) Improved integration options for future system interfaces

a. Potential communication improvements between all LRUs and external system interfaces. Below could be available as options or with improved speeds/flexibility for the current system function.

i. Ethernet

ii. MIL-STD-1553

iii. TIA-422/485

iv. Fiber

b. System integration (e.g., ALQ-213, Army CMWS)

c. Open Architecture – alignment with MOSA/SOSATM and NATO integrated

Defensive Aids System (NDAS) STANAG 4781

4) Support for data exchange (e.g., Programming, Status) between ALE-47 and advanced expendables still in development

5) Improved capability for simultaneous dispenses

6) Field Tester ALM-288 impacts and potential redesign requirements

7) A-Kit backwards compatibility with current ALE-47 design

Written responses, no facsimiles or e-mails please, must be received no later than close of business 15 Nov 2019. Please mail two (2) copies of your response to:

AFLCMC/WNY

Attn: Jose Crespo, ALE-47 Upgrade Engineer Bldg 229S 235 Byron St., STE 19A Robins AFB GA 31098-1600

Any supplemental classified information must be provided separately from the unclassified response. Please provide two (2) copies of any classified material to the following address:

AFLCMC/WNY

Attn: Jose Crespo, ALE-47 Upgrade Engineer Bldg 229S 235 Byron St., STE 19A Robins AFB GA 31098-1600

NOTE: Ensure data is either hard copy or in a readable electronic format. Ensure electronic data can be received through a firewall – please avoid using RoxioBurn.

CONTRACTOR CAPABILITY SURVEY

ALE-47 Upgrade

Part I. Business Information

Please provide the following business information for your company/institution and for any teaming or joint venture partners:

• Company/Institute Name:

• Address:

• Point of Contact:

• CAGE Code:

• Phone Number:

• E-mail Address:

• Web Page URL:

• Size of business pursuant to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code:

541330 Based on the above NAICS Code, state whether your company is:

• Small Business (Yes / No)

• Woman Owned Small Business (Yes / No)

• Small Disadvantaged Business (Yes / No)

• 8(a) Certified (Yes / No)

• HUBZone Certified (Yes / No)

• Veteran Owned Small Business (Yes / No)

• Service Disabled Veteran Small Business (Yes / No)

• Central Contractor Registration (CCR). (Yes / No)

• A statement as to whether your company is domestically or foreign owned (if foreign, please indicate the country of ownership).

Part II. Capability Survey Questions

A. General Capability

1. Describe briefly the capabilities of your facility and the nature of the goods and/or services you provide.

2. What quality assurance processes and test qualification practices does your company employ? Please provide a description of your quality program (ISO 9001, AS9100, etc.)

3. Include a detailed listing of facilities and equipment, including quantities, required to satisfy the requirements of this effort.

a. Provide an outline of the proposed process, including inspections.

4. Describe your company’s capability for handling and storing classified material within the Department of Defense and exclusive of the Department of Defense.

B. CMDS Development, Integration, Production and Maintenance Capabilities

1. Describe your company’s technology, highlighting if and how it addresses each of the requirements listed in Sections A (Minimum Capability Improvement Requirements) and B (Technology Areas for Design Consideration).

a. Include your assessment of the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) per the attached DoD Guidelines.

b. Include information on growth potential and ability to incorporate countermeasures defense against new, emerging and future threat(s), known or unknown at this time.

2. Describe your company's past experience on previous projects similar in complexity to this requirement. Include contract numbers, a brief description of the work performed, period of performance, agency/organization supported, and individual point of contact (Contracting Officer or Program Manager).

3. Describe your company's capabilities and experience in performing software development and/or maintenance for Electronic Warfare and countermeasure systems.

4. Describe your company's capabilities and experience in designing complex circuit modules.

5. Describe your company’s capabilities and experience in performing ICS on Electronic Warfare and countermeasure systems, specifically systems developed by other companies.

DoD Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Guidelines

DoD Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Guidelines Level Definition DoD MRL Description

1 Basic Manufacturing Implications Identified

Basic research expands scientific principles that may have manufacturing implications. The focus is on a high level assessment of manufacturing opportunities. The research is unfettered.

2 Manufacturing Concepts Identified

This level is characterized by describing the application of new manufacturing concepts. Applied research translates basic research into solutions for broadly defined military needs.

3 Manufacturing Proof of Concept Developed

This level begins the validation of the manufacturing concepts through analytical or laboratory experiments. Experimental hardware models have been developed in a laboratory environment that may possess limited functionality.

Capability to produce the technology in a laboratory environment

This level of readiness acts as an exit criterion for the MSA Phase approaching a Milestone A decision.

Technologies should have matured to at least TRL 4. This level indicates that the technologies are ready for the Technology Development Phase of acquisition. Producibility assessments of design concepts have been completed. Key design performance parameters have been identified as well as any special tooling, facilities, material handling and skills required.

Capability to produce prototype components in a production relevant environment

Mfg. strategy refined and integrated with Risk Management Plan. Identification of enabling/critical technologies and components is complete. Prototype materials, tooling and test equipment, as well as personnel skills have been demonstrated on components in a production relevant environment, but many manufacturing processes and procedures are still in development.

Capability to produce a prototype system or subsystem in a production relevant environment

This MRL is associated with readiness for a Milestone B decision to initiate an acquisition program by entering into the EMD Phase of acquisition. Technologies should have matured to at least TRL 6. The majority of manufacturing processes have been defined and characterized, but there are still significant engineering and/or design changes in the system itself.

Capability to produce systems, subsystems, or components in a production representative environment

System detailed design activity is nearing completion. Material specifications have been approved and materials are available to meet the planned pilot line build schedule. Manufacturing processes and procedures have been demonstrated in a production representative environment. Detailed producibility trade studies are

Level Definition DoD DAG Description

Basic principles observed and reported

Lowest level of technology readiness. Scientific research begins to be translated into applied research and development. Examples might include paper studies of a technology’s basic properties.

Technology concept and/or application formulated.

Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical applications can be invented.

Applications are speculative and there may be no proof or detailed analysis to support the assumptions. Examples are limited to analytic studies.

Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof of concept.

Active research and development is initiated. This includes analytical studies and laboratory studies to physically validate analytical predictions of separate elements of the technology. Examples include components that are not yet integrated or representative.

Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment.

Basic technological components are integrated to establish that they will work together. This is relatively “low fidelity” compared to the eventual system. Examples include integration of “ad hoc” hardware in the laboratory.

Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment.

Fidelity of breadboard technology increases significantly. The basic technological components are integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements so it can be tested in a simulated environment.

System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment.

Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond that of TRL 5, is tested in a relevant environment. Represents a major step up in a technology’s demonstrated readiness.

System prototype demonstration in an operational environment.

Prototype near, or at, planned operational system. Represents a major step up from TRL 6, requiring demonstration of an actual system prototype in an operational environment such as an aircraft, vehicle, or space.

Actual system completed and qualified through test and demonstration.

Technology has been proven to work in its final form and under expected conditions. In almost all cases, this TRL represents the end of true system development. Examples include developmental test and evaluation of the system in its intended weapon system to determine if it meets design specifications.

Actual system proven through successful mission operations.

Actual application of the technology in its final form and under mission conditions, such as those encountered in operational test and evaluation. Examples include using the system under operational mission conditions.

http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/materiel-solutions-analysis-phase http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/milestone-a http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/risk-management-plan http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/milestone-b http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/emd-phase completed and producibility enhancements and risk assessments are underway. Technologies should be on a path to achieve TRL 7.

Pilot line capability demonstrated; Ready to begin Low Rate Initial Production

The system, component or item has been previously produced, is in production, or has successfully achieved low rate initial production. Technologies should have matured to TRL 9. This level of readiness is normally associated with readiness for entry into Full Rate Production (FRP). All systems engineering/design requirements should have been met such that there are minimal system changes. Major system design features are stable and have been proven in test and evaluation.

Low rate production demonstrated; Capability in place to begin Full Rate Production

The system, component or item has been previously produced, is in production, or has successfully achieved low rate initial production. Technologies should have matured to TRL 9. This level of readiness is normally associated with readiness for entry into Full Rate Production (FRP). All systems engineering/design requirements should have been met such that there are minimal system changes.

Full Rate Production demonstrated and lean production practices in place

Technologies should have matured to TRL 9. This level of manufacturing is normally associated with the Production or Sustainment phases of the acquisition life cycle.

Engineering/design changes are few and generally limited to quality and cost improvements. System, components or items are in full rate production and meet all engineering, performance, quality and reliability requirements. Manufacturing process capability is at the appropriate quality level.

http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/full-rate-production-decision-review-frpdr http://acqnotes.com/acqNote/engineering-change-proposal-ecp