Industry Questions with Answers_01 Apr 2025.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 11 KB Posted

Attached to
Common Armament Tester for Fighter (CAT-F)
Solicitation number
FA8533-25-R-0002
Issued by

About this file

This document is an Industry Questions with Answers file for the Common Armament Tester for Fighter (CAT-F) program, Solicitation Number FA8533-25-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Air Force Materiel Command. The file contains industry feedback and government responses regarding technical specifications, including concerns about the F-15 Alternate Mission Equipment (AME) list, battery requirements, and the implementation of Automatic Test Markup Language (ATML) and Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) on legacy platforms.

Key details include a draft RFP review period ending 4 pm EST on 10 Dec 24, with comments to be submitted to specific government contacts: Oya Harrison (PCO), Alexis Davis (Contract Specialist), and Dan Bennett (Program Manager). The government is not requesting proposals at this time but seeking industry feedback on draft documents including Sections L&M, Statement of Objectives, and technical requirements. A future draft with cost/price language is anticipated, with the final RFP release date to be determined in a subsequent update.

View the file

Other files

Show all 16

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

Sheet1

Question/ConcernResponse
The F-15 Alternate Mission Equipment (AME) list. The current list is incomplete and missing test requirements, which will lead to confusion and errors during the proposal and execution phases. The list contains incorrect references, inconsistencies, and unusual test groupings, which will cause delays, amendments, and may result in
estimating errors from bidders.The AME lists and TPS lists (SOO attachments 2 and 3) have been reviewed and updated to be as complete, consistent, and correct as possible according to ATS armament tester Subject Matter Experts.
We recommend that the M-900 evaluation criteria be revised to include an assessment of the handheld (O-Level) product maturity. Currently, the evaluation criteria may not adequately prioritize the maturity of the handheld solution at contract award, which is a critical factor in determining the overall viability of the proposed system.The evaluation criteria has been reviewed and no changes will be made at this time.
The requirement for non-rechargeable batteries, which conflicts with MIL-PRF-28800 G, Class 1 (KPP and SRD_1.5.2.1.1). This requirement may lead to operational issues, as non-rechargeable batteries can severely affect operation at cold temperatures, reducing the overall performance and effectiveness of the system.SRD_1.5.2.1.1 has been changed to read "The CAT-F Handheld Tester shall be powered by common design batteries which are non-proprietary and replaceable in minimal amount of time. Preload testing will utilize battery power for all go/no-go preload and stray voltage testing. In addition to having the required battery power, user should have the option to use aircraft or Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE) power for preload testing. Power adapter cables must be provided for all user power options. Verification of handheld preload testing can be accomplished without the use of external power (AGE, aircraft, building etc.). Verification team will ensure the handheld tester internal batteries can be replaced in under 2 minutes. If required, the verification team will ensure preload testing can easily utilize AGE, aircraft, and backshop building power to execute requirements."
The implementation of Automatic Test Markup Language (ATML) and Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) on legacy platforms, such as the F-15, A-10, and F-16. Implementing these technologies on already fielded TPSs may drive redesign costs and schedule. We recommend a more cost effective approach with maximum speed to capability by focusing on applying ATML and MBSE to newer platforms or systems, where the return on investment benefits can be realized over a longer life span.The evaluation criteria has been reviewed and no changes will be made at this time. The offerors are encouraged to present their rationale for increased schedule cost due to these requirements in their proposal.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .