QA response to DRFP FA8533-11-R-31160.doc

Draft Information Release, FA8533-11-R-31160 B-1 Advanced Radar/Electronic Warfare Test Stations (ARTS)

25 July 2011

The following questions have been received in the WR-ALC/GRVKBB, Major Programs Contracting Office on the above referenced information for the ARTS solicitation. The questions as well as the applicable answers are provided below for assistance to all potential offerors for the greater understanding of the Government’s requirement.

1. Question: On page one (1) of the draft CLIN schedule, it states that the Basic Contract Period is effective from date of contract award through a period of twenty‐four months. On page 14 of the draft CLIN schedule, the notes state that two (2) each of the Pre‐production Tester Stations should be delivered no later than 24 months ARO, one (1) each of the Pre‐production Tester Stations should be delivered no later than 30 months ARO, and that TPS Group 1 should be delivered no later than 30 months ARO. Should we assume that all deliveries are within 24 months, or that only the first 2 Testers are delivered within 24 months, and the 3rd tester and TPS group 1 are delivered within 30 months?

Government’s Response: It is anticipated that the final RFP will identify the first two testers along with Self-Test and Cal TPSs with a 24-month ARO delivery requirement; the third tester along with the first three LRU TPSs will have a 30-month ARO delivery requirement. Delivery orders for both of these items may or may not be awarded at the same time.

2. Question: Are the Best Estimated Quantities in the Basic Contract CLIN schedule firm, or can the government order fewer or greater than the listed quantity of testers and ITAs?

Government’s Response: The Government can order less or more than the listed quantity of testers and ITAs shown in the schedule as these represent best projected quantities.

3. Question: The schedule identifies a total of seven (7) production copies of Station Self‐Test interface test adapters (ITAs) and seven (7) production copies of Calibration ITAs in CLINs 0018, 1024 and 1025. Will the ITAs associated with CLIN 0002 Station TPS Development be delivered as a part of CLIN 0002AA Self‐Test and CLIN 0002AB Cal‐Test? If yes, will the engineering development model be acceptable?

Government’s Response: The ITAs associated with CLIN 0002AA and AB will be delivered as a part of CLIN 0002AA and AB. The engineering development model (EDM) will be acceptable. The EDM will be used as basis for PCA and must match the drawing package.

4. Question: On page four (4) of the draft CLIN schedule, it states that Option I may be exercised on or before the last effective date of the Basic Contract Period, which is stated as 24 months after contract award. Each production CLIN requires unit prices for each of four (4) years, with a BEQ shown only for the total CLIN. Is it the government’s intention to make one Option award per CLIN for the BEQ in one (1) of the four (4) years, or does the government intend to make multiple orders of varying quantities in any, or all, of the option years? Is there a Best Estimated Quantity for each year?

Government’s Response: The Government intends to exercise Option I at the end of the Basic 24 month Contract period. Individual delivery orders will be issued for various CLINs included in the Option. The overall BEQ is for that particular CLIN over the four year span of Option I. How many units the Government will order in a year depends upon the availability of funding. Depending on the funding, the Government’s intention is to order as follows:

Option period year 1: TPS Group II w/ ITA copies; Data

Option period year 2: Production station Batch 1 (BEQ of 7 stations); TPS Group III w/

ITA copies; Data

Option period year 3: Production station Batch 2 (BEQ of 7 stations); TPS Group IV w/

Option period year 4: Production station Batch 3 (BEQ of 6 stations); TPS Group V w/

5. Question: In the draft CLIN schedule, there does not appear to be a data CLIN for the Production Acceptance Procedure and Report, in accordance with SOW 3.5.3. SOW 3.5.3 calls out DI‐NDTI‐80809B, Test/Inspection Report, but there does not appear to be a corresponding data CLIN in the option portion of the draft CLIN schedule. Will there be a data CLIN added for this CDRL in the final RFP?

Government’s Response: Yes, this will be corrected in the Final RFP.

6. Question: On page two (2) of the draft CLIN schedule, CLIN 0018 Copy of Station TPS ITA has two subCLINs numbered 0008AA and 0008AB. Should these subCLINs be 0018AA and 0018AB?

Government’s Response: Yes, this will be corrected in the Final RFP.

7. Question: On page three (3) of the draft CLIN schedule, CLIN 0023 DATA in support of CLINs 0001 ‐ 0022 has four subCLINs numbered 0013AA, 0013AB, 0013AC, and 0013AD. Should these subCLINs be 0023AA, 0023AB, 0023AC and 0023AD?

Government’s Response: Yes, this will be corrected in the Final RFP.

8. Question: On page seven (7) of the draft CLIN schedule, CLIN 1020 LRU TPS for NSN 5865‐01‐240‐0092 has four subCLINs numbered 1020AA, 1020AB, 1020AC, and 1021AD. Should subCLIN 1021AD be 1020AD?

Government’s Response: Yes, this will be corrected in the Final RFP.

9. Question: There does not appear to be a CLIN for Data Item DI‐ILSS‐80872, Training Materials. Will the final RFP include a CLIN for this data item?

Government’s Response: CLIN 1052 is the Training Material data item. It is not the Government’s intention to order training materials for the preproduction units because these units will be located at the contractor’s facility. The units that will be shipped to bases will be ordered within the option period; thus, the training material CLIN is found within Option I.

10. Question: We recommend that a draft of sections L and M be made available prior to release of the final RFP to ensure industry can quickly respond to the final RFP with a proposal that is compliant to instructions and provides best value for the Government. Will Sections L and M be made available for review prior to the final RFP?

Government’s Response: No. Because the evaluation provisions are not so complex, the Government considers that the final RFP will provide sufficient time for offerors to review and adhere to the provisions. The utmost concern of industry sources was the availability of technical data in order to understand the specifications in the drafts of the PD and SOW. The technical data was made available on 1 April 2011 through 20 May 2011.

11. Question: Will the government provide the following manuals as GFE, or part of the bid package with the final RFP?

A) Operator Test Instructions Manual, TO 33D7-24-23-8-1

B) Career Field Education and Training Plan (CFETP) for the AFSCs using the Test

Stations, or location specific AF Form 797 for the current Test Station.

Government’s Response: A) TO 33D7-24-23-8-1 is not relevant to this effort.

B) No

12. Question: Will the CDRL descriptions be made available for review prior to the final RFP?

Government’s Response: The DD1423 CDRLs will be made available during the final RFP. The draft Data Item Descriptions can be found at the following website: http://www.assistdocs.com/search/search_basic.cfm

13. Question: In SOW 3.3.2.2, it is stated that “The contractor shall design each ITA to test as many UUTs as possible without significantly increasing the footprint of the ITA.” In the draft CLIN schedule, each TPS ITA is called out separately, and it appears that the government is expecting a set of ITAs for each TPS. Is this correct, or can the contractor propose one set of ITAs for multiple TPSs, assuming they will be shared?

Government’s Response: One set of ITAs can accommodate multiple TPSs; however, the requirement is for the contractor to deliver a quantity of two (2) ITAs per TPS per location for a total of eight (8) ITAs per TPS.

14. Question: The existing R/EW tester O&M manuals are to the Intermediate Maintenance level. The SOW specifies an Overhaul (Depot level) manual (significantly more expensive). Is this correct, or should the tester O&M manuals be Intermediate Maintenance level?

Government’s Response: The tester O&M manual should be at the Intermediate Maintenance level. A Depot level manual is not required. The SOW and associated CDRL will be updated in the final RFP.

15. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.1.1 Commerciality. The paragraph states “Synthetic instruments (SI) and/or instrument‐on‐a‐card, such as PXI (or PXI Express) and VXI, shall be used to the maximum extent possible to minimize the physical size and logistics footprint of the station. The ARTS shall include the use of a minimum of two (2) SI chassis for implementation of instrumentation to meet the performance requirements of section 3.2.” Since the automatic test industry associates SI with RF instrumentation, this requirement is interpreted to mean a minimum of two (2) instrument‐on‐a‐card chassis to meet the RF performance requirements. While we agree with the concept of minimizing physical size and logistics footprint through the use of instrument‐on‐a‐card technology and we fully intend to use SI in our proposed solution to address RF performance requirements, the requirement to “include a minimum of two (2) SI chassis” appears arbitrary, limits innovation and could cause an increased physical size and logistics footprint. For example, although the US Navy’s two recent members of the DoD Family of Testers (RT‐CASS & eCASS) use SI, they do not meet this requirement. Moreover, newer approaches can address the RF stimulus and measurement performance requirements of section 3.2 while consuming rack‐space of 10u or less, if not restricted to the use of a minimum of two (2) SI chassis. Therefore we recommend either:

Deleting “SI” from the “The ARTS shall include the use of a minimum of two (2) SI chassis”, thereby broadening application to other areas of the test station ‐ or ‐

Delete the last two sentences from paragraph 3.1.1 Commerciality, thereby making the requirement to use instrument‐on‐a‐card technology “to the maximum extent possible to minimize the physical size and logistics footprint of the station.”

Government’s Response: SI is not intended to mean only RF functionality, and should not be interpreted that way. This will be revised in the PD to clarify.

16. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.2.1.2 AC Power Stimulus

Do the three phase angles need to be programmable relative to each other, in other words, what does the programmable phase resolution requirement mean?

Government’s Response: Yes, relative to each other, variable at the resolution given in the table.

17. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.2.2.1 Analog Stimulus

What is the total power requirement of the AFG High voltage Specification (is it the max current at the max voltage)?

Government’s Response: It is the max current at the max voltage.

18. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.2.2.2 Analog Signal Measurement

What is the maximum voltage expected between 300KHz and 50MHz?

Government’s Response: 100 Volts

19. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.2.2.7 DC Stimulus

What is the total power requirement of the DC stimulus (is it the max current at the max voltage)?

Government’s Response: It is the max current at the max voltage.

20. Question: Reference PD paragraph 3.2.2.8 AC Stimulus

Does the transducer have a two‐wire output or multi-wire output?

Government’s Response: This is a design aspect that shall be determined by the contractor during its own design process.

21. Question: Would the government consider that only one TPS Group is placed on order within a given 12 month period or alternatively, to increase the number of stations available for TPS integration by utilizing some of the production stations to supplement the three pre-production units?

Government’s Response: Contingent upon on availability of funding, the Government’s intent is to order one TPS Group per year.

22. Question: Paragraph 3.1.1 of the PD indicates that Synthetic Instrumentation (SI) and /or instrument-on-a-card, such as PXI and VXI, shall be used to the maximum extent possible. Is this approach mandated, or would a COTS approach utilizing rack mounted instrumentation be considered acceptable?

Government’s Response: Although it is acceptable to have some 19-in. rack-mounted instrumentation, ARTS must utilize at least two (2) chassis with SI and/or instrument-on-a-card for implementation of instrument functionality.

23. Question: Will the following Government Furnished Equipment/Government Furnished Information (GFE/GFI) be provided as part of the awarded program?

A) One set of operational LRUs with passing ATP datasheets to be maintained/repaired by the Government as required.

B) Access to Government test personnel for technical discussions relating to operation of the existing test equipment and LRUs C) System level AN/ALQ-161 operational manuals.

Government’s Response: A) Fully serviceable LRUs will be provided as GFE to facilitate TPS development.

B) Access to Government test personnel, on a non-interference basis, will be granted after contract award.

C) The system level AN/ALQ-161 operation manual is not relevant to this effort.

24. Question: We understand that the existing ATLAS code will be converted to a current test language. Is Visual Studio 2010 Visual Basic or equivalent an acceptable language to use for the software on the TPS?

Government’s Response: No. PD paragraph 3.2.6.2 will be revised to clearly state what is acceptable language to use for the software on the TPSs.

25. Question: We assume that the Government WILL NOT provide test station peripherals; e.g. power and cooling for use with the new ARTS test stations. Is this assumption correct?

Government’s Response: Refer to PD paragraph 3.2.5.1 for station cooling requirements and 3.2.5.2 for UUT cooling requirements. Oil cooling carts for LRUs will not be provided; however, holding fixtures will be provided.

26. Question: TO 33D7-44-251-1 Table 1-1 “LRU Assignments” includes a broad range of test functions for DAV, R/EW, RF, and DIG. Does the ATP included on pg 62, paragraph 4.7; Section 3 Requirement Verification Reference of the ARTS PD include all of the required test stations functions?

Government’s Response: The purpose of the table is to summarize Section 4.0 in its entirety, and it includes all of the required test station functions.

27. Question: Can functional block diagrams of the ALQ-161 system and corresponding test set be provided?

Government’s Response: Any functional block diagrams will be made available after contract award.

28. Question: Reference: Purchase Description: PD10WRGBGBEA34 rev A

Section 3.2.1.1 – DC Power Stimulus

Which LRUs require the application of 12 simultaneous, individually programmable, variable DC power supplies?

Government’s Response: LRU: Band 8 RFS P/N: 435029-12, NSN: 5865-01-553-2000 requires 11 simultaneous, DC power supplies

29. Question: Reference: Section 3.2.2.1 – Analog Stimulus This section defines the requirements for 2 Arbitrary Function Generators (AFG), 2 Pulse Generators, and 2 Sinewave Stimulus outputs.

A) What is the source impedance requirement for the AFG when in the high voltage mode?

B) What is the source impedance requirement for the Pulse Generators when driving +20 Vp?

C) Can the 20MHz and 40MHz Sinewave stimuli be part of the AFG capability, or is there a simultaneous requirement that makes them separate source requirements?

D) There is an additional Programmable Square Wave requirement described towards the bottom of Table 3-3. Is this an additional source requirement, or is it part of the 2 Pulse Generator capabilities?

E) What is the output level capability of the Programmable Square Wave defined in Table 3-3?

Government’s Response: A) 50, 75, or 93Ω as stated in PD paragraph 3.2.2.1

B) 50, 75, or 93Ω as stated in PD paragraph 3.2.2.1

C) They are separate source requirements.

D) It is an additional source requirement.

E) -20V to 20V

30. Question: Reference: Section 3.2.2.2 – Analog Signal Measurement

What are the maximum expected amplitudes of the signals when selecting the 50 Ω, 75 Ω, or 93Ω terminations?

Government’s Response: Refer to Table 3-4 in the PD.

31. Question: Reference: Section 3.2.2.3 – Waveform Analysis

What are the maximum expected amplitudes of the signals when selecting the 50 Ω, 75 Ω, or 93 Ω terminations?

Government’s Response: Refer to Table 3-5 in the PD.

32. Question: Reference: Section 3.2.5.2 – UUT Cooling

What ducting is available on the existing legacy UUT holding fixtures to facilitate the directing of cooling air to the UUT?

Government’s Response: Any ducting for an LRU holding fixture will be in accordance with the LRU’s Test Procedures Manual.

33. Question: Reference: TPS Integration Section 3.6.3 Fault Detection/Isolation Does the legacy TPSs meet the requirements of 3.6.3?

Government’s Response: TPS requirements for execution on ARTS shall meet the requirements in PD paragraph 3.6. It is not known if all legacy TPSs meet the ARTS TPS requirement.

34. Question: As referenced in the Data List for ARTS program PDF, two Technical Orders (TOs) are missing from the technical CDs provided on both the RF DAAE and Digital DAAE. The TOs are 33D7-13-99-1 and 33D7-13-100-1.

Government’s Response: The TOs left out of the original data disk were mailed out May 6th, 2011.

35. Request: We will also need C.I.D. A-A-59828 for the Oil Cooling Cart.

Government’s Response: The document is available on the following website: http://www.assistdocs.com/search/search_basic.cfm

36. Question: Does the USAF intend to include long term Performance Based Logistics (PBL) support with this contract?

Government’s Response: PBL support is not included with this requirement.

37. Question: Does the USAF intend to do the provisioning, spares management, and supply chain management instead of the prime contractor during the contract period of performance?

Government’s Response: Provisioning requirements for this contract are identified in paragraph 3.4.2 of the Statement of Work and associated CDRL.

38. Question: Under CLIN 0018, the individual items are numbered 0008AA though AB respectively. Do you mean 0018AA-AB?

Government’s Response: Yes. This will be corrected for the final RFP.

39. Question: Under CLIN 0023, the individual items are numbered 0013aa though ad respectively. Do you mean 0023AA-AD?

Government’s Response: Yes. This will be corrected for the final RFP.

40. Question: SOW paragraph 3.3.2 requires the ADE to be “ship in place” for TPS development efforts. The six ADE systems are delivered at the end of the contract. Is the end of the contract the end of option 1?

Government’s Response: The ADE will be delivered to the Government upon conclusion of this entire contract, including Option I.

41. Question: Does the ADE require an installation and checkout at the customer’s site?

Government’s Response: No

42. Question: For the purpose of the proposal what site(s) should the six ADE systems be delivered to?

Government’s Response: As of the present date, the delivery site shall be Robins AFB, GA.

43. Question: Paragraph 3.3.2.5.1: (FIAT) requires an FCA and PCA for each TPS. Shall an FCA / PCA be conducted on the ADE?

Government’s Response: No.

44. Question: What sites and quantities should the 23 ARTS stations be delivered to?

Government’s Response: Recognizing that the quantities are only estimates, the Government anticipates that the following locations will receive the estimated number of stations: Ellsworth AFB – 8; Dyess AFB – 8; Ga ANG – 3; WR-ALC Depot – 4

45. Question: Reference: Purchase Description paragraph 3.2.4.2.6 Modulation Detection A) Are the values below considered nominal, minimum or maximum?

3.2.4.2.6 Modulation Detection

Parameter Requirement

Pulse Modulation

Pulse Width

7.0 S

Rise Time 100 mS

Fall Time 100 mS B) Where do we get the classified BI –Phase Coded Demodulation requirements?

Government’s Response: A) Consider them nominal, but they must be verified by the contractor at System Requirements Review.

B) The Government will provide after contract award.

46. Question: Reference Purchase Description paragraph 3.3.3.2.1 Output Ports

A) The summary lists 18 low power ports yet the count adds up to only 17. We believe the RF Source No. 5 Phase Shift is missing in the details. Is this correct?

B) What are the RF output requirements for the seven spares?

Government’s Response: A) Yes. The PD will be revised accordingly.

B) To be verified by the contractor as part of the System Requirements Review.

47. Question: Reference Purchase Description paragraph 3.2.4.1.9 High Power RF Requirements

Previously the legacy ATE high power requirement for Bands 6 and 7 were external to the station. Should it be integrated into ARTS? If so this paragraph needs to specify bands 6 and 7 as well as Bands 1 through 5.

Government’s Response: Bands 6, 7, and 8 should all be integrated into ARTS. The PD will reflect this change.

48. Question: Reference Purchase Description paragraph 3.2.3.7.3 Differential TTL I/O and TTL Buffers The ARTS shall provide at least 25 TTL compatible I/O tri-state buffers and 25 differential TTL I/O driver circuits. The refresh rate shall be 5ns or faster.

Is the 200 MHz rate correct?

Government’s Response: As of the present date, this information is correct; however, this shall be verified by the contractor at System Requirements Review.

49. Question: For the Option I period, is the Government’s intent to place an order at the beginning of each ordering period? For example, at month 24 for year 1 and month 36 for year 2.

Government’s Response: The Government reserves the right to place an order for CLINs at any point to the option year ordering period. Albeit contingent upon availability of funding, the Government anticipates the following:

Option period year 1: TPS Group II w/ ITA copies; Data

Option period year 2: Production station Batch 1 (BEQ of 7 stations); TPS Group III w/

Option period year 3: Production station Batch 2 (BEQ of 7 stations); TPS Group IV w/

Option period year 4: Production station Batch 3 (BEQ of 6 stations); TPS Group V w/

50. Question: For the Option I period, can the Government confirm that each option year expires as follows: year 1 – 36 months, year 2 – 48 months, year 3 – 60 months, and year 4 – 72 months?

Government’s Response: Yes

51. Question: For the Option I period, can the Government confirm that the delivery date for ALL copies of LRU TPSs is no later than 24 months ARO effective the date the delivery order is exercised?

Government’s Response: As of the present date, these are the anticipated delivery times that will be identified in the Final RFP.

52. Question: What is the Government’s intent of the requirement “Existing ATLAS code from the legacy TPSs shall not be reused,” in SOW paragraph 3.3.2.3?

Government’s Response: TPSs for execution on ARTS shall not be written in ATLAS.

53. Question: What is the perceived overall quality of the legacy ATLAS TPSs?

Government’s Response: To the best of the Government program team’s knowledge, the legacy ATLAS TPSs adequately tests the UUTs. The TPSs have been continuously maintained and corrected as needed and updated for any modication to the LRUs resulting in a change to testing requirements.

54. Question: Is it possible to redefine the requirement for UUT/ITA FIAT fault insertion?

Government’s Response: It is not possible to redefine this requirement. The requirements stated in SOW paragraph 3.3.2.3.1 are the Government’s minimum requirements for the UUT/ITA FIAT fault insertion.

55. Question: Are these TPSs to be considered rehosts or new development?

Government’s Response: TPSs are considered new development in the sense that ATLAS is not the language to be used on ARTS for TPS execution. However, the existing ATLAS code can be used for analysis of required stimulus, measurement, and pass/fail criteria.

56. Question: Are the performance specifications of the new TPSs as good as or better than the legacy TPSs or will there be new performance specs?

Government’s Response: TPS requirements for execution on ARTS must meet PD paragraph 3.6. It is not known if all legacy TPSs meet the ARTS TPS requirement.

57. Question: The SOW does not reference the TPS programming language, but the May 2, 2011 postings included an ATLAS programming manual. Is the TPS programming language then assumed to be in ATLAS, or is the programming language per the discretion of the Contractor?

Government’s Response: TPSs for execution on ARTS shall not be written in ATLAS. The ATLAS programming manual was provided per the request of industry sources to facilitate test program analysis and/or translation. PD paragraph 3.2.6.2 will be revised to clarify acceptable language to use for the software on the TPSs.

58. Question: SOW paragraph 3.3.2.4.1, states that the contractor will be provided UUTs listed in Attachment A for TPS development/integration. Are all UUTs in Attachment A unclassified?

Government’s Response: Yes, the UUTs listed in Attachment A are unclassified.

59. Question: SOW paragraph 3.5.3.1 Production Delivery and Installation, states “the contractor shall perform delivery and setup of each production ARTS station at the locations identified in Attachment B.” Does the Government have estimates of the number of stations that will reside at each location? This would greatly assist the contractor in estimating its delivery and installation costs.

Government’s Response: Recognizing that the quantities are only estimates, the Government anticipates that the following locations will received the estimated number of stations: Ellsworth AFB – 8; Dyess AFB – 8; Ga ANG – 3; WR-ALC Depot – 4

60. Question: There are a few inconsistencies between the UUT TPS data provided and the UUTs that we are responsible for providing TPSs or analysis. Table 1 below lists the inconsistent data against the UUT by part number. The table cross references the UUT part number against the corresponding document and the part number of the UUT that the document references. Even though the data references a part number not identical to the part number of the UUT for which we are responsible, is the data still adequate or is there other available data that we need to adequately assess the UUTs? (Note: all other data for all other UUTs matched part numbers consistently).

Government’s Response: With the exception of WFG-8 (NSN 5895-01-497-7220), the part numbers and National Stock Numbers identified in the SOW are accurate and represent the LRU configuration for which the contractor will be responsible for developing a TPS and performing analysis. The correct P/N for the WFG-8 is 435030-8 and will be updated in the SOW/PD issued with formal RFP solicitation. Please note that T.O. 12P3-2ALQ161-228-1 accommodates both the -7 and -8 configurations of the WFG-8 LRU. Also please note that T.O. 12P3-2ALQ161-358-1 for the ADR6-8 accommodates both the -5 and -6 configurations of this LRU. The P/N (0074002-3) and NSN (5985-01-335-4937) for the Band 7 TX ANT are correct. The P/N 0074002-3 is for the basic antenna, and the 3 P/Ns listed in T.O. 12P3-2ALQ161-293 and 12P3-2ALQ161-298-1 are for the basic antenna plus the specific waveguides that are connected depending on where it is located in the aircraft. P/N 0075001-3 is for Forward Left, P/N 0076001-3 is for Forward Right, and P/N 0074001-3 is for AFT.

The actual technical data items (i.e. source code, T.O., TRD) provided with the draft RFP are the latest versions available to the government at the time of draft RFP solicitation. There are cases where a particular LRU is undergoing modification or already modified and the revised data item (such as TRD) was not completed/available in order to provide with the draft RFP. The data items provided with the draft RFP are adequate in accuracy for the development of a technical and cost proposal. Additional data items, such as LRU/SRU drawings and schematics and other T.O.s, can be made available post-award to contractor upon request for use in requirements analysis to ensure accuracy of data as it pertains to LRU configuration.

Table 1: B-1 ARTS UUT TPS Data Issues

Technical Manual

Instructions Test Procedures

Band 8 RFS TRD

(PN 435029-10)

Jammer Logic B TRD

(PN 442600-4)

Jammer Logic A TRD

(PN 442590-4)

WFG TRD

(PN 435030-6)

TO 12P3-2ALQ161-228-1

(PN 435030-8)

DF Encoder TRD

(PN 0065001-6)

TX5A TRD

(PN435098-5)

RX Threshold Cntrl TRD

(PN 435034-6)

Receiver, CM IR-5 TRD

(PN 440313-4)

TO 12P3-2ALQ161-118-1

(PN 440313-4)

(PN 0064001-5)

No TRD Found

TO 12P3-2ALQ161-358-1

(PN 0064001-5)

TO 12P3-2ALQ161-293

(PN 0075001-3)

(PN 0076001-3)

(PN 0074001-3)

TO 12P3-2ALQ161-298-1

(PN 0075001-3)

(PN 0076001-3)

(PN 0074001-3)

61. Question: When will all the data be made available?

Government’s Response: All data identified by Government as necessary for preparation of proposals was provided with the Draft schedule, PD and SOW. Any other data relevant to this procurement, such as Technical Data Package for ITAs, LRUs, and/or stations, will be made available after contract award.

62. Question: Will a complete specification and documentation package (schematics, firmware, microcode, theory of operation, etc.) for the DAAE be supplied?

Government’s Response: Technical Orders 33D7-13-99-1 and 33D7-13-100-1 were mailed on May 6th, 2011 to all companies that requested data for the Draft RFP. Any other data pertinent to the DAAE stations that are available for release will be provided after contract award.

63. Question: Will the existing ATE and Test Fixtures be made available to the prime contractor, at the contractor’s facility, to support the ATE development and TPS rewrite effort?

Government’s Response: Assuming “Test Fixtures” refers to holding fixtures for the LRUs, then they will be provided. ATE/ITAs will not be provided for use at the contractor’s facility; however, access to the equipment in the field can be provided on a non-interference basis after contract award.

64. Question: Will all test stations built be available for the TPS development effort or does the Government intend to utilize them for other purposes?

Government’s Response: The Government intends to leave the three (3) Pre-production stations at the contractor’s facility for the TPS development effort. Subsequently, the Government will have the contractor ship them to a final destination.

65. Question: Will LRUs be made available for the duration of the TPS development effort?

Government’s Response: Yes

66. Question: PD Section 3.2.3.7.3 Differential TTL I/O and TTL Buffers has a refresh rate requirement of 5ns or faster. Please clarify what this means.

Government’s Response: Buffer refresh rate as identified in both 3.2.3.7.3 and 3.2.3.7.4 reflects buffer performance capability in the legacy tester. However, the contractor must verify at System Requirements Review that this is in line with LRU testing requirements.

67. Question: PD Section 3.2.4.2.6 Modulation Detection-The specification is missing the frequency band definitions for Bands 4 thru 8. Do these bands fall within the .01GHz to 18.0 GHz specified for the system?

Government’s Response: Yes, .01 GHz to 18.0 GHz is correct.

68. Question: PD Section 3.2.4.2.7 VSWR Measurement- The specification is missing the frequency band definitions for Bands 4 thru 8. Do these bands fall within the .01GHz to 18.0 GHz specified for the system?

Government’s Response: Yes, .01 GHz to 18.0 GHz is correct

69. Question: How many oil cooling carts will be provided to the Contractor as GFE to support the TPS development effort? This will have a direct impact on how many TPS can be developed in parallel.

Government’s Response: Oil cooling carts will not be available for the contractor to use as GFE to support the TPS development effort.

70. Question: How many LRUs require the oil cooling rack?

Government’s Response: Refer to the LRU Test Procedure Manuals for oil cooling requirements which were provided with the draft schedule, PD, and SOW.

71. Question: The hardware quantities specified in the draft schedule delineates eight ITAs and eight sets of cables for each UUT test program. Was the actual intent of the government to have eight total copies of each ITA type and eight cable sets (including adapters/accessories) for each UUT Test Group?

Government’s Response: The Government’s requirement is to have eight total sets of ITAs and cables per TPS.