FA930226Q0055 QA.pdf

All vendors should note, testing is the primary mission of Edwards AFB, and its Test Squadrons; the acquired station will support that test mission. The Boom

Operator is a high-risk occupational specialty in the Air Force. An incorrect virtual rendering not only does not support the test mission, but could result in negative training for the operator. Enhanced safety in conducting military testing reduces risk to our airmen & aircraft, which concludes the Governments need for vendors to provide a proven track record in supporting such systems.

1. Under the Past Performance evaluation criterion, does the government consider the documented experience of key personnel at prior employers as qualifying evidence, in cases where the offeror entity itself does not yet have a corporate past performance record for tanker-specific simulation efforts?

a. Yes the government can consider the documented experience of key personnel as qualifying past performance evidence when there is a lack of corporate track record

2. SOR Bullets 1/2 - What items need to have "physical user interfaces"? Just the flight controls?

a. All flight controls to include AAR boom flight controls and a mouse and keyboard for the engineering station

3. What are the physical interfaces of the instrumentation pallet?

a. Mouse and keyboard

4. SOR Bullet 5 - What level of fidetly is required for the communications system?

a. Communications system which integrates the ARO station, receiver pilot station, and engineering station in a closed loop communication net, to allow for the replication of communication patterns of airborne 418th FLTS ARO, receiver pilot, FTEs, and DEs. That is to say, the communication system should allow for selectable channels between the ARO, receiver pilot, and engineering station. Typically this is done via radio between flight deck and receiver pilot, and then interphone through the boom once in contact.

5. SOR Bullet 6 - How will "accurate" aero models be determined? What criteria will be used to determine if the models are "accurate"?

a. Accurate aeromodels will be determined by operator evaluation

6. SOR Bullet 7 - What method will the devices "integrate" with similar systems, e.g., DMO?

Can "similar systems" be defined?

a. Similar systems would include other AAR VR training devices

7. SOR Bullet 8 - Can the software (and its interfaces) being used by the 418th be defined?

a. The software is Curtis Wright IADS. IADS is a suite of display and analysis tools for creating displays, parameter definitions, analysis options, and test setup. For more information, please reach out to Curtis Wright. Below is an image of the display:

b.

8. Where an offeror's qualifying tanker simulator past performance was developed under a commercial-product delivery to a commercial end-user, or under an Internal Research and Development (IR&D) effort demonstrated to U.S. Government stakeholders, how does the Government wish the offeror to populate the Contract Number, Contract Title, and Period of Performance fields in PPQ Section 1, and is the end-user point of contact for such an effort an acceptable respondent under the Section 3 evaluation criteria?

a. Contract Identification Fields (Section 1):

· Contract Number: FA9302-26-Q-0055

· Contract Title: KC-46A ARO/Receiver/Engineering Virtual Reality Simulator

· PoP: Award + 12 Months End user point of contact is acceptable respondent under Section 3 evaluation criteria.

9. May the Government make available representative photographs, layout diagrams, or unclassified summary documentation of the 418 FLTS special instrumentation pallet in its ARC configuration, sufficient to inform contractor scoping of the required physical-interface replica?

a. Yes, see attached ARC configuration along with room dimensions and potential engineering screen layout

10. For the required IADS integration, can the Government specify the depth of integration anticipated — for example, (a) post-flight file-replay ingestion only, (b) real-time telemetry streaming with event-driven hooks, or (c) interactive bidirectional integration during simulator operation?

a. The engineering station should allow for all of the examples provided. The engineering station should faithfully simulate the station on the aircraft which provides real-time display of the given parameters during the flight.

11. Can the Government identify which receiver aircraft variant(s) must be modeled and selectable in the initially delivered system, and which receiver variants are anticipated as post-delivery additions to the receiver database during follow-on receiver-compatibility certification campaigns?

a. KC-46A with the ability to add more receivers in the future.

12. Does the Government have a preferred or required simulator interoperability framework for the cross-USAF integration capability — for example, Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS, IEEE 1278), High-Level Architecture (HLA, IEEE 1516), the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA), or another framework

a. No