Heavy Sims PWS FA930426Q5002.pdf

FA# Heavy Sims

Page - 1 - of 12

CUI

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

FOR

USAF/TPS Qualitative Evaluation Heavy Aircraft Simulator Services

For

USAF Test Pilot School, Edwards AFB, CA

1 Jul 2026

Revision 2.0

Page - 2 - of 12

USAF/TPS Qualitative Evaluation Heavy Aircraft Simulator Services

Table of Contents

1.0 SECTION I: DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

1.1 General Scope

1.2 Background

1.3 Inherently Governmental Function

1.4 Period of Performance

1.5 Place of Performance

1.6 Specific Tasks

1.7 Qualifications, Experience, and Resume

1.8 Contract Line Numbers (CLINs)

2.0 SECTION II: SERVICE SUMMARY

2.1 General

2.2 Performance Evaluation

2.3 Government Quality Assurance

2.4 Performance Assessment

2.5 Quarterly Progress Meetings

2.6 Contracting Officer’s Representative

2.7 Contractor’s Performance

3.0 SECTION III: GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY and SERVICES

4.0 SECTION IV: GENERAL INFORMATION

5.0 SECTION V APPENDICES & EXHIBITS

Appendix 1 Abbreviations and Acronyms

Page - 3 - of 12

SECTION I

1. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

1.1. General Scope. This is a non-personnel services contract to provide full motion simulators and operators/instructors with the ability to instruct students on the systems, performance and flying qualities of the simulated aircraft provided. The contractor shall provide in-simulator instruction, briefings, all management, personnel, tools, vehicles, equipment, and labor necessary to support the TPS Qualitative

Evaluation program. The contractor shall perform all requirements and obtain all permits and licenses in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local guidelines. The Government shall not exercise any supervision or control over the contract service providers performing the services herein. Such contract service providers shall be accountable solely to the Contractor who, in turn is responsible to the Government.

The Contractor shall provide all management, personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and other items and non-personal services necessary to perform support and instruction as defined in this Performance-based Work Statement (PWS). The Contractor shall perform to the standards in this contract. This includes the planning, coordination, and surveillance of the activities necessary to ensure disciplined work performance and timely resources application to accomplish all taskings under the contract. The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining communication with the

Contracting Officer (CO), Contracting Officer Representative (COR), and/or the Project Manager (PM) and to immediately notify both the CO, COR, and/or the PM of any problems that would prevent timely performance of this contract. The Contractor is responsible for and required to implement, and maintain management control systems necessary to plan, organize, direct, and control all activities under this contract.

1.2. Background. The USAF TPS is where the Air Force's top pilots, navigators, and engineers learn how to conduct flight tests and generate the data needed to carry out test missions. The Qualitative

Evaluation (QE) program introduces students to a wide variety of aircraft exhibiting unique flying characteristics or mission systems and is used to broaden the students’ range of experience with unfamiliar aircraft. Heavy Simulators will provide the unique experience of heavy (weight) aircraft handling characteristics and flight test techniques appropriate to such civil transport aircrafts.

1.3. Inherently Governmental Function. The contractor shall not perform inherently governmental functions as defined in FAR Subpart 7.5 in relationship to this PWS.

1.4. Period of Performance. One (1) year from contract award date.

1.5. Place of Performance. Performance of this contract shall be primarily conducted at the Contractor location(s). During contract performance, any need to change to an alternate location shall be coordinated with the CO, COR, and/or PM. A CO-written determination, to include justification for the change, shall be conducted to determine whether the change in location would require modification of the contract. Any costs incurred due to a change in location, without proper CO-written determination, may result in the Contractor not being paid.

1.6. Specific Tasks.

1.6.1. Primary Tasks. The contractor shall provide:

The contractor shall provide:

• A Boeing Wide-Body (>300,000lbs MTOW) full-motion, Level-D simulator.

• An Airbus Wide-Body (>300,000lbs MTOW) full-motion, Level-D simulator.

Page - 4 - of 12

CUI

• The simulators are required to be in the same location to allow students and faculty to complete a side-by-side comparison of the aircraft on the same day.

• The newest models of Boeing and Airbus aircraft are highly desired.

• If an aircraft >300,000lbs MTOW is unavailable, USAF TPS reserves the right to satisfy syllabus requirements with a narrow-body simulator at the request of the contractor.

• Maneuvers and evaluations, which may include but are not limited to:

• General flying and handling qualities.

• Takeoff performance (heavy weight configurations, engine-out, low RCR, etc.).

• Takeoff speed development (VMCA, VMCG, VMU).

• Flight control system evaluation (normal and degraded modes).

• Stall characteristics and recovery.

• Envelope protection modes (stall, overspeed, pitch & roll limits/rates).

• Warning systems (EGPWS, CFIT, windshear, etc.).

• Landing performance (engine-out, low/zero visibility, crosswinds, degraded flight controls, no-flap, etc.).

• Aircraft automation and flight management system during departure, cruise, arrival, and reroute.

• Aircraft electronic checklist and takeoff manifest data integration during preflight.

• Aircraft electronic checklist during a complex EP, such as hydraulic failure.

• Additional training in historical airline crashes and emergencies.

1.6.2. Secondary Tasks. Use of Heavy Simulators in TPS Test Management Projects (TMP)

TMPs are team-based training events that are ongoing through the second semester of the TPS curriculum. TMPs can be any real-world test, and although they often include testing developmental sensors, datalinks, weapons, or software modifications on military aircraft, they could also focus on other types of testing with civil aircraft. The Government may request the use of simulators in the development, research, and/or execution of these TMPs. TPS students and staff shall occupy the simulators while it supports TMPs.

1.6.3. Pre-deployment. Any available academic materials or videos for student familiarization with the aircraft's flying qualities, handling qualities, and avionics are highly desired.

1.6.4.Scheduling. There are typically 2 execution windows per calendar year that corresponds to the two classes per year (“Alpha” and “Bravo” classes) at USAF TPS.

A. Event scheduling. The PM will give the contractor a 30-day notice of the required training dates.

Some flexibility is expected on the part of both parties due to simulator availability and TPS curriculum constraints. If both (Boeing and Airbus types) simulators are not available, alternatives may be approved by the PM.

B. If a date changes due to the needs of TPS or the contractor within the 30-day window, a new date will be negotiated between the PM and the contractor. If a new date cannot be agreed upon by both parties, the party responsible for the date change request will be considered at fault.

C. Daily scheduling and flight approval. The training schedule will allow the students to fly both simulators on the same day for comparison purposes and travel/instructional efficiency. The PM may approve exceptions due to simulator availability or student travel constraints.

D. Each student group will have a TPS faculty member accompanying them. Actual times and numbers of students may vary. Staff/students may bring onboard hand-held instrumentation systems that are

Page - 5 - of 12

CUI

approved by the PM and coordinated with the contractor. The contractor has the right to refuse any carry-on equipment if it causes safety concerns.

1.6.5. Preflight/Postflight Briefs. The contractor shall provide preflight and postflight briefings sufficient to cover learning objectives, basic aircraft systems, safety, and questions. Typical preflight briefings should be approximately 1 hour and postflight briefing length as required. The contractor shall provide preflight safety briefings geared towards pilots who have limited experience in large aircraft simulators. Simulator safety equipment certifications shall be current and are subject to inspection by government personnel. The contractor is liable for any damage to the simulator. The contractor shall provide technical support for any investigations related to the contract.

1.6.6. Inflight Instruction. The contractor shall provide a familiarization and safety briefing in the cockpit prior to takeoff. The purpose of the pre-flight brief is to familiarize students and staff with flying and safety controls and emergency procedures. The TPS staff representative will ensure all learning objectives are met.

Any inputs from the contractor are appreciated (but not necessary). The sortie duration is approximately four

(4) hours. The contractor instructor pilot (or operator) shall occupy an instructor seat while students and staff shall occupy primary seats and jump seats. Sortie completion determination will be the responsibility of the

TPS government representative.

1.7. Qualifications, Experience, and Resumes. The PM may complete evaluations of the following prior to contract award.The Contractor shall submit a resume or list of experience of instructor(s) to the CO and

PM for review and consideration.

Instructors with test experience: Simulator instructors with prior developmental test experience are highly desired. Furthermore, instructors with experience in the contractor’s flight test department are also highly desired.

1.8. Contract Line Numbers (CLIN):

CLIN 1 (Boeing Aircraft Simulator hours): Actual training time in the simulator. This may include required/mandatory pre-flight time in the sim. In the event that TPS cancels a simulator sortie within 7 days of the scheduled training date, the contractor may charge the full contracted price for the unused simulator hours only. Instructor Pilot/Simulator Operator costs included during sim operations time.

CLIN 2 (Airbus Aircraft Simulator hours): Actual training time in the simulator. This may include required/mandatory pre-flight time in the sim. In the event that TPS cancels a simulator sortie within 7 days of the scheduled training date, the contractor may charge the full contracted price for the unused simulator hours only. Instructor Pilot/Simulator Operator costs included. Instructor Pilot/Simulator

Operator costs included during sim operations time.

Page - 6 - of 12

SECTION II

2. Service Summary (SS)

2.1. General. The contractor service requirements are summarized into performance objectives (Service

Summary Table) that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement. These thresholds are critical to mission success but do not represent all contract performance requirements. All contract performance requirements in this PWS will be monitored.

2.2. Performance Evaluation. Performance of a service shall be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance requirements of this contract. Re-performance of unacceptable services at no additional cost is the preferred course of action when appropriate. In the case of issued Corrective Action

Reports (CARs), the Contracting Officer shall take appropriate measures according to inspection of services clause in the contract, i.e., FAR 52.246-4, 52.246-5, or 52.212-4(a). Corrective Action Reports may categorize nonconformance as minor, major or critical IAW the following FAR 46.101 definitions.

“Minor nonconformance” means a nonconformance that is not likely to materially reduce the usability of the supplies or services for their intended purpose or is a departure from established standards having little bearing on the effective use or operation of the supplies or services.

“Major nonconformance” means a nonconformance, other than critical, that is likely to result in failure of the supplies or services, or to materially reduce the usability of the supplies or services for their intended purpose.

“Critical nonconformance” means a nonconformance that is likely to result in hazardous or unsafe conditions for individuals using, maintaining, or depending upon the supplies or services; or is likely to prevent performance of a vital agency mission.

Service Summary Table

Instruction

Item # Performance

Objective

PWS

Section Performance Threshold

Rating Criteria

Based on Findings per Base or Option Year Period of

Performance before Re-performance, unless otherwise noted

“In-flight” instruction on

STUDENT

missions.

1.6.1

1.6.2

Of all student missions, no more than two (2) missions reported as “non-effective” due to instructor performance.

Exceptional: Of all student missions, zero (0) reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Very Good: Of all student missions, no more than one (1) mission reported as "non- effective" due to instructor performance.

Satisfactory: Of all student missions, no more than two (2) missions reported as "non- effective" due to instructor performance.

Marginal: Of all student missions, no more than three

(3) missions reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Unsatisfactory: Of all student missions, four (4) or more missions reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Page - 7 - of 12

CUI

“In-flight” instruction on

STAFF

missions.

1.6.1

1.6.2

Of all staff missions, zero

(0) missions reported as

“non-effective” due to instructor performance.

Satisfactory: Of all staff missions, zero (0) reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Unsatisfactory: Of all staff missions , one (1) or more missions reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

In-class instruction

(preflight brief, post flight brief)

1.6.1

1.6.2

1.6.3

1.6.5

Of all in-class instructions, no more than two (2) events reported as "non-effective" due to

Exceptional: Of all in-class instructions, zero (0) reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Very Good: Of all in-class instructions, no more than one (1) mission reported as "non- effective" due to instructor performance.

Satisfactory: Of all in-class instructions, no more than two (2) missions reported as "non- effective" due to instructor performance.

Marginal: Of all in-class instructions, no more than three (3) missions reported as "non-effective" due to instructor performance.

Unsatisfactory: Of all in-class instructions, four (4) or more missions reported as "non-effective" due to

Simulator/Facility Availability

Item # Performance

Objective

PWS

Section Performance Threshold Rating Criteria

Mission-ready simulator/facility 1.6.4

Simulator/facility available and effective for

100% of scheduled student missions.

Exceptional: Simulator available and effective for

100% of scheduled student and staff missions.

Very Good: Simulator available and effective for

100% of scheduled student missions, 50% of scheduled staff missions.

Satisfactory: Simulator available and effective for

100% of scheduled student missions

Marginal: Simulator unavailable or mission non-effective for scheduled student missions up to 10% or up to two (2) missions. (whichever is less)

Unsatisfactory: Simulator unavailable or mission non-effective due to maintenance for more than 10% or more than two (2) missions. (whichever is less)

Management

Item# Performance

Objective

PWS

Section Performance Threshold Rating Criteria

Maintain workforce and key personnel

1.7

Contractor has no more than two (2) validated customer complaints per

Base or Option Year Period of Performance.

Satisfactory: Contractor has no more than two (2) validated customer complaints per year of performance.

Unsatisfactory: Contractor has more than two (2) validated customer complaints per year of performance.

2.3. Government Quality Assurance. The government shall inspect and evaluate the contractors’ performance to ensure services are received in accordance with requirements set forth in this contract. The

Page - 8 - of 12

CUI

COR will use the contractor’s work schedule, or modified version thereof, to record validation results.

Results of the validation then become the official Air Force record of the contractor’s performance.

Government surveillance of tasks not listed in the PWS or by methods other than those listed in the PWS

(such as provided for by the Inspection of Services clause) may occur during the performance period of this contract. Such surveillance will be done according to standard inspection procedures or other contract provisions. Any action taken by the CO as a result of surveillance will be according to the terms of this contract.

2.3.1. The government will periodically evaluate the contractor’s performance in accordance with this

PWS. The government may inspect each task as completed and increase the number of quality assurance inspections if deemed appropriate because of repeated failures discovered during surveillance inspections or because of repeated customer complaints. Likewise, the government may decrease the number of quality assurance inspections if performance dictates.

2.3.2. When an observation indicates defective contractor performance, the COR will require the contractor’s Contract Manager or representative at the site to initial the observation. The formal process is, when a performance threshold has not been met or contractor performance has not been accomplished, the

COR will initiate and provide the CO with a Corrective Action Report (CAR) for issuance to the contactor.

The contractor shall respond to the CAR IAW instructions provided and in the CAR. While the formal process of this paragraph addressing unacceptable contractor performance is always available, the

Government reserves the right to initiate a less formal process involving the contractor, the COR and the CO meeting together at no additional cost to the Government regarding unacceptable contractor performance.

2.4. Performance Assessment.

2.4.1. Periodic Surveillance. This method requires the COR to employ a “spot check” style of evaluation based on the contractor’s services. Periodic surveillance will be conducted on a scheduled basis and may be adjusted, based on quality trends.

2.4.2. Customer Complaints. The COR will receive and investigate all complaints. The COR will be responsible for validating customer complaints. The CO shall make final determination of the validity of customer complaint(s) in cases of disagreement with the COR and the contractor. Validated customer complaints shall be reperformed, if possible, within 3 business days of notification at no additional cost to the Government IAW the inspection clause of the contract and the direction of the Contracting Officer.

2.4.3. 100 Percent Inspection. This method requires the COR to do 100 percent inspection on all tasks performed.

2.5. Quarterly Progress Meetings. The CO, Government’s Program Manager (PM), Services Acquisition Lead (SAL), COR, other government personnel as appropriate, and the contractor shall meet quarterly (or as necessary) to discuss the contractor’s performance.

The following issues, at a minimum, shall be discussed:

- Opportunities to improve the contract

- Any modifications required of the contract

- Unsatisfactory inspections

- Valid customer complaints against each performance objective observed

- Steps taken by the contractor to prevent occurrences in the future

The contractor shall provide a summation of unsatisfactory inspections and customer complaints and provide insight into any identified trends.

Page - 9 - of 12

The minutes of these meetings will be reduced to writing, signed by the CO and any other signatures as deemed appropriate, distributed to the functional area and the contractor. Should the contractor not concur with the minutes, the contractor will provide a written notification within 5 working days to the CO identifying areas of non-concurrence for resolution.

2.6. Contracting Officer Representative (COR). CORs are representatives of the CO and will participate in the administration of this contract. After award of the contract, the contractor will be provided with a letter identifying the COR and setting forth their duties and authorities. The COR is not authorized to change any of the terms and conditions of the contract/task order.

2.6.1. Acquisition Team Meetings. The contractor’s Contact Manager (CM) with the CO, Contract Administrator (CA), COR, and other government personnel constitute an acquisition team [See FAR 1.102 (c)] and shall meet on a regular basis. The Acquisition Team will establish how often meetings are needed based on contract complexity. As a subset of the Acquisition Team, Government members of the Acquisition Team are often referred to as the Multi-Functional Team (MFT) and may meet as determined by the MFT.

The contractor may request a meeting with the CO when the contractor believes such a meeting is necessary.

If the CO or CA deems necessary, written minutes of any such meetings shall be recorded by the CA in the contract file and signed by the PM and the CO or CA. If the contractor does not concur with any portion of the minutes, such nonconcurrence shall be provided in writing to the CO within 10 calendar days following receipt of the minutes.

2.7. Contractor’s Performance. The government assesses a contractor’s performance on an on-going basis, both positive and negative, and provides a record on a given contract during a specified period of time.

2.7.1. Past Performance Information (PPI). PPI can be provided to other government agencies, as requested.

2.7.2. Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPARS). Depending on the estimated value of the contract, formal assessment and reporting of contractor performance is required and is documented using the CPARS system. An assessment usually provided on an annual basis is sent to the contractor’s representative for their comment. The contractor will have up to 60 days to review and comment on the assessment.

Page - 10 - of 12

SECTION III

3. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES

There is no Edwards AFB support required.

Page - 11 - of 12

SECTION IV

4. GENERAL INFORMATION

There is no Edwards AFB support required.

Page - 12 - of 12

SECTION V

APPENDIX 1

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AFMC Air Force Materiel Command

AFTC Air Force Test Center

CAR Corrective Action Report

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Contracting Officer

COR Contracting Officer Representative

CPAR Contractor Performance Assessment Report

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

IAW In Accordance With

IDIQ Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

MOTW Maximum Takeoff Weight

PM Program Manager

PWS Performance Work Statement

QA Quality Assurance

QE Qualitative Evaluation

SAL Service Acquisition Lead

TMP Test Management Program

TPS Test Pilot School

TW Test Wing

USAF TPS United States Air Force Test Pilot School