Additional_Industry_Q_and_A_C-130H_ALR-69A_RFP.pdf

Ref: C-130H ALR-69A RWR Modification, RFP Solicitation FA8553-17-R-0019

Additional Industry Questions & Answers

1. There is no way for the contractor to know how many pilot instrument panel configurations there are across the C-130 (H2, H2.5, H3) fleet for both the barren and non-barren aircraft. The same is true for the number of configurations for the Navigator station. To accurately estimate design deltas, drawing impacts, parts list, labor hours, etc. the contractor needs to understand the number of configurations and areas available to install the azimuth indicators, indicator control panels, audio control panels, fan control panels and Ethernet/1553 ports. To ensure a consistent requirements baseline will the USG provide the number of configurations for the six variants for both the pilot instrument panel and the Navigator station that the contractor should propose or does the USG want each contractor to include a ground rule with their proposal stating the number of configurations that are proposed? If the latter, does the USG intend to cover the added scope via an ECP or Over and Above?

USG RESPONSE: An ACFT site survey is required on six ACFT. That should cover most of the configurations. Government recommends conducting as many surveys as possible at each of the three bases to get better idea on the various configurations. The government understands that all configuration may not be covered and accepts the risk during production installs.

2. I see no technical rationale that would require FO Test Cable assemblies meet thermal cycling requirements as outlined in TIA-455-3B. Standard practice is for FO Test Cable Assemblies to be AMQJs built to industry standards (outlined in ARINC 805, para 4.2.2, and/or SAE AS5675 para 3.4) for low loss and repeatability.

After contacting various Fiber Optic experts in the industry, they have not seen this requirement levied on FO Test Cable assemblies and it would require outside lab testing and add unnecessary cost to the program. Therefore it is requested that the TIA-455-3B requirement be deleted from the SOW. NOTE: The components (FO cable, Connectors, Termini) used to manufacture test cables must meet Military Specification requirements that contain thermal testing amongst other requirements of their own, e.g., Mil-PRF-85049/16 FO Cable.

USG RESPONSE: The reason for the TIA-455-3B is due to the current failed fiber cables in the field. To reduce future failure of the cables, USG requires cable assemblies to meet thermal cycling requirements as outlined in TIA-455-3B.

3. In Amendment 0002, the SOW dated 14 June 2017, Paragraph 23.0 has been updated to now read “The Contractor shall ensure that the UII are applied to all Group A components and to the top kit, or intermediate/external container.” Is it the intent for every line item ordered to receive a UII, to include all miscellaneous items such as nuts, bolts, rivets, etc.? On page 34 of FA8553-17-R-0019, it states “Items less than $5000, which require UID, will be specifically identified in the schedule”. Is the contractor to assume only Group A items greater than $5000 will receive the UII requirements unless specifically annotated?

USG RESPONSE: Yes, mark IAW solicitation clause (Group A items greater than $5,000).

4. The Part Number for the AN/PLM-4 Threat Simulator has been changed in Appendix C of the SOW in Amendment 0002. The part number was P/N FT0100-5 and the revised SOW has P/N FT0100-3. This will require an updated supplier quote. Therefore we request a proposal extension of 45-60 days.

USG RESPONSE: This request for proposal extension will not be granted.

5. Paragraph 5.9 of the SOW, is it the intent that the contractor shall provide serial numbers for each fiber optic cable assembly and not each fiber optic cable?

USG RESPONSE: On the assembly only

6. Are there any CDRL requirements for the Production Options?

USG RESPONSE: No but status reports/updates should be provided.

7. CDRL A038 needs to reference Rev P of the TMCR.

USG RESPONSE: CDRL A038 has been corrected, resigned and updated in the CDRL package.

8. The current CDRL requirement as stated in A003 for drawing delivery is for “final reproducible data” shall be delivered 90 days after completion of CDR. CDR is scheduled for 6 months ARO, and the first Trial Installation Aircraft starts 8 months ARO with a completion of 9 months ARO. As scheduled, the drawings will be delivered before all 3 Trial Installations are complete.

Recommend changing the drawing delivery schedule to 60 days after the 3rd Trial Installation kit completion.

USG RESPONSE: The engineering data OPR concurs with changing the drawing delivery schedule to 60 days after the 3rd Trial Installation kit completion. The word "final" has been removed from the CDRL A003 attachment, page 3, Blocks 12 & 13, para 3