QandA HOTAS_V2.pdf

Q&A FA930226Q0080

1. In the Statement of Requirements for F-35 HOTAS (Solicitation No. FA930226Q0080), Section

6.0 Environment & Durability Standards states the following: Operational Lifespan: Crucial switches and buttons must be rated for a minimum of 1,000,000 operations (MTBF) and ideally conform to US military specifications (such as MIL-PRF-8805E). Since a 2-year warranty is required, would the Government consider reducing the MTBF to 500.000 operations?

Yes. Back-of-the envelope math at 2 x years = 100 weeks (holidays off) and 8 sim flights per week = 800 flights. 500k / 800 = 625 operations per flight, very acceptable.

2. Basis of Award and Required Quote Content: The "Evaluation Factors for Award" section (page

16) contains no evaluation criteria, and FAR 52.212-1 is incorporated by reference without an addendum. Please confirm the basis of award (e.g., lowest priced technically acceptable or best value tradeoff) and identify what technical documentation, if any, must accompany the quote for the Government to determine technical acceptability against the SOR.

Please see the description section of SAM.gov for the basis of award, evaluation factors for award, and technical documentation required for submission.

3. Quote Submission Instructions: Please confirm the required method of quote submission (e.g., email to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist), any file format or page limitations, and the deadline for submitting questions under this RFQ.

Please see the description section of SAM.gov for the required submission information.

4. Engine Shutdown Implementation — Lift-to-Cutoff Latch vs. Aircraft-Representative Engine Control: SOR Section 5.0 requires "an operational mechanical lift-to-release cutoff latch to transition cleanly between the 'Idle' and 'Cutoff' states." The production F-35 throttle does not incorporate a lift-to-cutoff latch. In the aircraft, engine shutdown is commanded from the engine control panel via the ENGINE switch (RUN / OFF / MOTOR) together with the VS BIT pushbutton. Under the F-35's FADEC-governed engine control logic, setting the ENGINE switch to OFF always shuts the engine down; there is no throttle-lever cutoff gate as found on legacy fighter throttles. Please clarify the Government's intent: a. Is the requirement to replicate the aircraft's engine control functionality — i.e., an ENGINE (RUN / OFF / MOTOR) switch and VS BIT pushbutton, either integrated into the throttle assembly or supplied as an accompanying panel?

b. Or does the Government specifically require a lift-to-release cutoff latch on the throttle lever itself, understanding that this feature does not exist on the F-35 and that the delivered device would therefore be an F-35-like HOTAS incorporating a non-aircraft-representative control, rather than an F-35-representative HOTAS? If (b) is intended, please confirm the Government accepts the associated fidelity deviation for pilot training applications.

The VATS does not currently have any method to shutdown the engine, nor is that capability required. If a future requirement for engine shutdown is identified it could easily be added to the rest of the PCD touchscreen controls. So from an operational requirements standpoint we do not need the lift-to-cutoff capability, nor will this HOTAS be used in an actual F-35 simulation.

5. Throttle Travel and Thrust Command Representation: In the aircraft, the throttle quadrant sends an electronic signal to the vehicle management computers proportional to the percentage of thrust requested, ranging from idle power with the throttle against the aft stop, through MIL power at the detent, to maximum afterburner at the most forward stop. SOR Section 5.0 requires a minimum 9-inch travel with mechanical tactile detents. Please confirm the Government intends aircraft-representative travel and detent logic (idle at the aft stop, MIL at the detent, maximum afterburner at the forward stop, with output reported as a proportional axis), or specify any different mapping desired.

Yes, we require the aircraft-representative travel and detent logic listed above.

*edited, The current configuration (Aerotronics)is acceptable, the 9 inches of travel is not required for the desktop version.

6. Throttle Variant Configuration and STOVL Mode Activation: SOR Section 5.0 requires mechanical, tactile detents delineating the Afterburner and STOVL positions. The STOVL position applies to the F-35B throttle configuration. On the aircraft, STOVL mode is not entered by throttle position alone: conversion is commanded via the HOOK/STOVL button located on the Landing Gear Control Panel. Please clarify: a. Do all five pairs require the F-35B (STOVL) throttle configuration, or is a CTOL (F-35A/C) configuration with an afterburner detent only required or acceptable? b. If STOVL functionality is required, does the Government intend STOVL mode activation to be replicated as it is on the aircraft — via a HOOK/STOVL control consistent with the Landing Gear Control Panel — or activated by another method on the delivered device?

These determinations materially affect grip configuration, detent design, control population, and price.

We do not require any STOVL functionality, that is not part of the VATS simulation.

7. Intended Training Application and Visual Environment: We understand the requirement to be for standalone desktop HOTAS for individual training and familiarization, not devices for installation into a simulator cockpit. Please confirm this understanding, and clarify the intended visual environment in which the devices will be employed: (a) virtual reality or mixed reality head-mounted display, (b) an out-the-window visual with a Panoramic Cockpit Display (PCD) touch screen, or (c) a PCD touch screen only. The intended employment informs mounting geometry, cable routing, and configuration options and will allow offerors to propose the most suitable configuration.

Yes, this HOTAS is intended only for a tabletop VATS configuration using flat-panel displays rather than domes for out-the-window and a touchscreen PCD for cockpit instruments and switchology.

8. Data Interface — USB Sufficiency: SOR Section 2.0 states the systems "must support data connection via USB or Ethernet," while the power requirement specifies 5V USB bus power with no external power source. Please confirm that a USB-only interface (ruggedized Type-B to Type- A) is fully compliant and that Ethernet connectivity is not additionally required.

Yes, a USB-only interface would be sufficient.

9. FENIX Compatibility and Linux Calibration Utility: SOR Section 1.0 requires native compatibility with "Windows, FENIX, SUSE, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux." We understand FENIX to refer to the F-35 FENIX training device rather than an operating system. Please clarify what "natively compatible with FENIX" entails — for example, recognition as a standard USB HID device by the FENIX host system — and identify the FENIX host operating system if compatibility beyond standard HID operation is required. Additionally, SOR Section 7.0 requires GUI calibration and diagnostic tools compatible with SUSE/RHEL: please confirm whether the calibration utility must execute natively on Linux, or whether a utility that writes profiles to ondevice non-volatile memory (with the device operating as a standard driverless HID on all listed operating systems) satisfies this requirement

a) We can remove FENIX from this specific requirement – OS compatibility is sufficient.

b) We would require the calibration software to execute natively on Linux

10. arm64 Architecture Verification: USB HID class operation is inherently architecture-agnostic.

Please confirm whether standardscompliant USB HID enumeration satisfies the x86_64/arm64 requirement in SOR Section 1.0, or whether documented test evidence on arm64 platforms is required with the quote or at delivery.

Compliance with the USB HID standard is sufficient, we don’t need explicitly documented tests.

The concern was more for products that require OS-dependent drivers

11. Switch Durability Rating — Threshold vs. Objective: SOR Section 6.0 requires switches rated for a minimum of 1,000,000 operations that "ideally conform" to MIL-PRF-8805E. Please confirm that formal MIL-PRF-8805E qualification is an objective (not a threshold requirement) and that commercial-grade switches with a documented 1,000,000-cycle rating are technically acceptable.

See response to Question 1

12. Spare Parts Package — Contract Line Structure: SOR Section 3.0 requires the vendor to offer a dedicated spare parts package, but the schedule contains only CLIN 0001 (5 pairs). Please confirm whether the spare parts package should be quoted as a separate line item or option, and whether the Government has defined desired quantities or content beyond the potentiometers/sensors, buttons, and set screws listed.

Spares will be a separate CLIN. The USG is open to recommendations on what should be included in the spare part kit. Any individual item with a cost over $500 shall be listed separately.

13. Warranty and Support Pricing: SOR Section 8.0 requires a minimum 2-year hardware warranty, guaranteed RMA turnaround, and enterprise-level technical support. Please confirm whether these are to be included in the CLIN0001 unit price or quoted separately.

2-Year Hardware Warranty should be included in base price, Please provide Cost of additional Warranty options as Option CLINs

14. Letter of Volatility and Sanitization Documentation: Please confirm whether the Letter of Volatility and documented sanitization procedures (SOR Section 8.0) are required for submission with the quote, or as deliverables with the units at delivery.

Proof of LOV and Sanitization procedures are required with proposal. The USG will not consider equipment that does not have this.

15. Applicability of the Nonmanufacturer Rule: This acquisition is a 100% small business set-aside under NAICS 336413. Please confirm whether the nonmanufacturer rule (FAR 19.505) applies to this procurement and, if so, whether an SBA individual or class waiver is in effect, or whether a small business offeror must furnish the product of a domestic small business manufacturer.

The nonmanufacturer rule does not apply to this procurement.

16. When we provide our best proposal, will the AFMC or Edwards base provide drawings/design for the F-35 stick and throttle, along with the technical requirements that were posted? We want to ensure our best quality form-fit-function for the training devices.

The AFMC does not have drawings/designs for the F-35 stick. This should be a COTS product that is already in production.

17. What is the expected lead time to deliver these HOTAS hardware, is there a timeline that needs to be met?

Historically deliveries are expected within 4-6 months.