FSN RFI Questions_12.03.2024_Final.pdf

FSN RFI Questions and Answers

(Updated 15NOV24)

# Question Answer Date

The requirements of SOO Attachment 2

(Primary Training Helicopter

Requirements) do not mention any requirements for engine quantity/configuration. What was the

Governments' intent in placing the words

"(Single-Engine)" on slide 7 of the slides for industry distributed on 25 Oct?

The intent with slide 7 utilized for the live briefing was that the government has not made a decision on a type of aircraft, length of training, hours of academics etc… the government is looking for input from industry to help inform the way forward. Single engine is the minimum threshold however if a dual engine aircraft can perform the mission in a cost competitive environment then the government will welcome the competition.

As stated during the briefing this is not about the cost of the aircraft but it is about the cost of a flight hour for a predicted

150,000 hour a year annual flight hour program.

26-Nov-24

If simulators are used by the contractor, what additional space (outside of what is stated to be provided in the SOO) will be provided for the COCO simulation devices?

Depends on the size of the simulation devices. Any full motion device requiring high bay type building space would be not be provided by the government.

26-Nov-24

If the contract is COCO would the contractor fall under DOD 95-1 or FAR's?

Irrelevant at this time. Focus is on the

SOO RFI, not a possible RFP. 13-Nov-24

What is the Format you would like to have proposals in?

The response to the RFI & SOO should be a White Paper, NOT A PROPOSAL. The government currently is only seeking interest and generalities at this point. RFI sections for SOO Response.

a. Cover page: 1 page limit

b. Contact information page: 1 page limit

c. Aircraft Discussion & Recommendation:

20-page limit

d. Aviation Services Discussion &

Recommendation: 20-page limit

e. Contract Type Discussion &

Recommendation: 10-page limit

f. Summary page: 1 page limit

13-Nov-24

# Question Answer Date

While in combat and operational flights in the Army pilots are flying near the aircraft capacity. Although while in training they are operating aircraft that are nowhere near the aircraft limits as they are turbine helicopters that are designed for 4+ people. Why is the requirement to use turbine fuel when the aviation piston engines are very reliable and a tiny fraction of the operating cost?

Due to several factors including the fuel storage, delivery and aircraft fueling capabilities, which would cause as increase in the requirement for fuel trucks as all the current "go to war" aircraft are turbine and utilize turbine fuel and share fuel trucks, shared stagefields with a single above ground storage tank etc.

Also the experience of the local aviation mechanics, and primacy of learning on systems, and while manageable it would put another risk factor at play adding in the variable of an aircraft getting the incorrect fuel.

8-Nov-24

Will the answers to these questions and any other further information be posted within the SAM system RFI?

Yes.

8-Nov-24

What is the current fuel rate and the current procedure for fuel billing?

CURRENT DLA Rate is $4.00 a gallon.

For Fuel billing the fuel contractor just keeps track of the exact amount of the fuel issued on a form 1898 and the government signs for it since it is government fuel going into government aircraft.

8-Nov-24

Are there specific noise requirements the helicopters must meet for noise abatement? Is there a certain decibel level requirement?

No, noise abatement is done by using structured flight corridors with altitude restrictions as well as employing the FAA regulations and flying friendly when conducting Nap of the Earth Training.

8-Nov-24

I would like to request a list of available classrooms, briefing rooms, and the sizes of each classroom.

Not relevant to the current SOO we are only seeking information and interest at this time. The government expects to provide this one there is an RFP released.

8-Nov-24

How many classes will be given each year? I have in my notes that there are 10 classes at any given time under the current program. However, the RFI states classes begin every two weeks. Can you please clarify the class scheduling?

The current class schedule is one class starting every two weeks but skipping the second half of DECEMBER for 25 total starts a year with each class lasting 20 weeks. The purpose of this effort however is to get away from such an inflexible system and better utilize both assets and time.

8-Nov-24

# Question Answer Date

During the base tour it was mentioned that the current maintenance is taking place under an FAA approved 145 repair station.

Is this repair station owned and operated by the Army? Can I please be provided the information in regards to the 145 repair station availability?

Correction to the characterization it was stated that there exists a Part 145 FAA

Repair station at Fort Novosel. The license changes as the maintenance contractor who performs maintenance on the FAA fleet changes. It is currently held by M1 for the UH-72A which is managed as both an OEM and FAA airframe, we cannot speak to how much maintenance is being conducted under its auspices.

8-Nov-24

How many flight instructors are current in place for the UH-72 initial training program.

~280 it varies from month to month.

8-Nov-24

How many Full Flight Simulators are currently on base at Fort Novosel?

irrelevant to this effort as this effort is only for Initial Entry Rotary Wing training and does not cover the advanced aircraft.

Additionally, we are looking for an assessment of better utilization and cost reductions.

8-Nov-24

If available, I would like to request the accident rates from year to year of the

Army rotorcraft fleet from 1987 to present.

No it is irrelevant to this effort as that period of times covers 4 separate training aircraft and multiple versions of flight training.

8-Nov-24

What is the current accident rate throughout the Army fleet?

The Army fleet is not relevant to this effort.

For training aircraft at Fort Novosel, Since

2018 there have been 716,573.1 flight hours flown in the training aircraft at Fort

Novosel, Alabama in support of the U.S.

Army Initial Entry Rotary-Wing flight training. This is due to the increased pilot training requirement beginning in 2021.

During this timeframe the U.S. army has experienced 4 Class A aircraft accidents defined as an accident resulting in $2.5M in damage or greater, or a loss of life.

During the same period there have been

13 Class C accidents defined as having an

Estimated Cost of Damage between $60K and $600K. 15 were during the day and 2 were at night or under Night Vision

Goggles when that was part of the curriculum.

8-Nov-24

What is the current attrition rate of students in primary flight training?

Below 5% we expect it to be higher under this next effort.

8-Nov-24

# Question Answer Date

Is there a standardized format which the

RFI should be upon submission?

The response to the RFI & SOO should be a White Paper, NOT A PROPOSAL. The government currently is only seeking interest and generalities at this point.

RFI sections for SOO Response.

a. Cover page: 1 page limit

b. Contact information page: 1 page limit

c. Aircraft Discussion & Recommendation:

20-page limit

d. Aviation Services Discussion &

Recommendation: 20-page limit

e. Contract Type Discussion &

Recommendation: 10-page limit

f. Summary page: 1 page limit

8-Nov-24

Does USAACE anticipate additional virtual or in person events that provide more specific details on targeted areas of improvement for the Flight School Next effort prior to the August 2025 Industry

Day?

It depends. The Secretary of the US Army will be providing further direction after the initial results of the SOO RFI are consolidated and submitted.

8-Nov-24

In lieu of a full response to the SOO will the government accept white papers targeting specific areas in which USAACE is soliciting ideas or recommendations for improvement?

Yes, any input to assist with the future of this effort is appreciated.

8-Nov-24

We got the list update however it doesn’t have any contact info. Is that something you can still provide for certain companies?

No. Unfortunately, we did not receive authority to release all identifiable information for all attendees; however, we did learn our lesson and if there is a follow-on event, each registrant will be asked for the contact information they would agree to share.

6-Nov-24

Since the Army has stated that it is its intent to enter into a long-term contract, will the Army be open to including an

Economic Price Adjustment (EPA clause)?

The Army will be open to clauses that are needed and required; however, at this point the Army is in a Market Research phase, not a contract creation phase. If a

RFP is produced, it will contain the clauses that the Army intends to incorporate. This question would be more suitable at that time.

1-Nov-24

If the Contractor proposes a Government

Owned/Contractor Operated solution, can the contractor incorporate the use of the existing simulators into its proposed solution?

Yes, however, you are restricted to proposing the training with the Current UH-

72A as the current simulators are FAA certified trainers for the UH-72A.

1-Nov-24

# Question Answer Date

Due to the length of many of the

Deliverables, would the Government be open to including all the Deliverables as separate Appendices to the RFI response document with all Appendices to be excluded from the page count? E.g., Proof of Insurance.

The response to the RFI should be a

White Paper, NOT A PROPOSAL. The government currently is only seeking interest and generalities at this point. It is acceptable to merely state that provide proof of insurance is available or there is a plan on self-insuring.

1-Nov-24

Recommend that in addition to the 20-year

ROM, that the Government also request pricing for the first 5 years, a more typical contract length. As long as we stay within the total max page count can we vary the structure of the RFI?

The pricing information the government is looking for at this stage is not a proposal or exact pricing, but the methodology on how you would like to price it. For example, FFP, Cost +, any incentives, etc.

The response to the RFI is a White Paper, not a Proposal. Please keep to the page limitations previously presented and defined.

1-Nov-24

Regarding pricing, would the government consider providing plug numbers and percentages and/or a standardized template to account for variable costs?

Two examples readily appear – fuel costs and escalation. Without a standardized approach, industry responses will be difficult to normalize and compare.

The Government will charge the current

DLA rate which as of today is $4.00 a gallon for Aviation Fuel. That rate however changes over time and the government has no forewarning of the changes from month to month just like gas prices anywhere else.

1-Nov-24

Will RFI respondents be allowed to give oral presentations?

No. The requested response to the RFI is a White Paper.

1-Nov-24

Would the Government flow us existing

POIs?

Not for the FAA Part 141 requirements the government would assist with lesson plans for the tactical portion. The full Program of

Instruction is something we are trying to change and do not want to see it duplicated as this negates this effort entirely.

1-Nov-24

How many parking pads are at Shell? Shell currently has a Ramp Rehabilitation

Project underway. The end state of the project will provide 92 parking pads. (75 for skid aircraft only and 17 for all RW minus

CH). See attached diagram in file "RFI

Supporting Documents."

31-Oct-24

How many parking pads are at Cairns? Cairns has a total of 224 parking pads.

197 are for Common Core aircraft. (19 are assigned to USAF and 8 to Flatiron

MEDEVAC). See attached diagram in file

"RFI Supporting Documents."

31-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

Do scaffolds and fall protection come with hangers as GFE?

Yes the ones currently there will come as

GFE in as is condition, as do the tool boxes, test equipment and Kubota UTVs.

31-Oct-24

What time of the year do they (students) come?

Students arrive throughout the year and there are normally students waiting to start training. There are times when there are a large number of students waiting to train and times when the Government is unable to fill classes to full capacity.

31-Oct-24

What are the surge periods when you get more students into the pipeline?

There is a historical surge during the summer period however those students that come during that timeframe will often times have to wait to start the pipeline in

Basic Officer’s Leader Course or Warrant

Officers Basic Course.

31-Oct-24

When can we set students? Do we have to consider formation & PT times?

When students are assigned to common core it will be up to the contract to determine the students schedule, generally the duty day is limited to 12 hours this includes PT, Academics and

Flight/Sim training. Unforeseen government requirements may force administrative type time commitments.

31-Oct-24

How many IERW IPs are there? Approximately 280 the number varies month to month 31-Oct-24

What is the project timeline? Draft RFP?

Final RFP? Start of the contract?

The USAACE next steps forward include completing the RFI on 06DEC2024.

Completing analysis of all White Papers and preparing a recommendation to Senior

Army Leadership. Based upon the decisions of the Secretary of the Army, the

USAACE will develop a path forward.

31-Oct-24

When will these positions (department of the Army civilians working as instructors/academic instructors) “go away” to make them available as instructors on new contract.

Unknown as many will be retained and utilized elsewhere.

31-Oct-24

Will the Aviation Center re-assign

Department of the Army Civilians (DACs) to other Aviation contractor duties?

The government will determine how to best utilize government personnel some portion will become Quality Assurance on the next effort.

31-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

Are current IERW civilians/IPs in a labor union.

Yes there is a union for both the instructor pilots on the current rotary wing flight training contract and the current maintenance contract. The union for the

Instructor Pilots is the Professional

Helicopters Pilots Association Local 102.

The union for the maintenance workers is the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers IAM Local Lodge

2003. Alabama is a right to work state.

31-Oct-24

If your team could outline or provide guidance on the award decision-making process, it would be helpful.

Please re-read the SOO in the RFI and produce a White Paper formatted response IAW the restrictions established in the 18OCT2024 Q&A.

30-Oct-24

I understand USAACE wants the contractor to modernize/upgrade classrooms, AVS and IT hardware, courseware, maintenance hangars, etc., which if included in a proposal will increase the bid amount, particularly if compared to a competing proposal that does not include these improvements.

The current SOO, as posted in the RFI, is only for Information, it was not a RFP –

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.

Therefore, there will not be competing proposals nor will there be any price analysis conducted. Please re-read the

SOO in the RFI and produce a White

Paper formatted response IAW the restrictions established in the 18OCT2024

Q&A.

30-Oct-24

What metrics will be used to determine which proposal will win the award?

The current SOO as posted in the RFI is only for Information. There will not be an award made in response to the RFI.

30-Oct-24

What is the timeline and action steps moving forward with FSN?

The USAACE next steps forward include completing the RFI on 06DEC2024.

Completing analysis of all White Papers and preparing a recommendation to Senior

Army Leadership. Based upon the decisions of the Secretary of the Army, the

USAACE will develop a path forward.

30-Oct-24

Why does the Army want to change our current flight training structure?

See sub questions below.

30-Oct-24

46a Is it a quality of pilot training the Combat

Aviation Brigades are getting?

Yes.

30-Oct-24

46b Is it a cost issue, the amount of money we are spending to train a student?

Yes and the current amount is not relevant to this effort.

30-Oct-24

46c

Is this the right thing to do at this time, think the first two remarks need to be answered first?

Yes a reset has been long overdue this should have been done years ago. 30-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

46d

What are the underlying priorities of this initiative, these need to be answered to move forward?

Train a more proficient pilot for the Army at a lower cost with a more efficient and accountable contract structure.

30-Oct-24

46e

The industry day didn’t provide enough information to help MG Gill to answer the

Army’s CoS questions.

That was not the intent of the industry day, the only answer USAACE is seeking out of the industry day is should this be a full

Contractor Owned(Aircraft and Parts)

Contractor Operated Model or a

Government Owned Contractor Operated

Model. The intent of industry day was to inform industry that USAACE is looking for a dramatic change in how the U.S. Army conducts flight training and seek input from the industry on how to best achieve the results we are seeking.

30-Oct-24

46f

It would be a substantial cost to convert from the UH-72 to another aircraft for

IERW training, it would help MG Gill to see what that would look like across several single engine aircraft. This effort would require numerous training efforts and cost analysis would be beneficial for the CG.

As discussed at the FSN Industry Day, USAACE has conducted analysis over the past 4-5 years and all analysis has shown a significant cost savings that well exceeds the replacement cost for the current aircraft fleet. As stated during Industry

Day, the main cost driver, in the opinion of

USAACE, is the cost per flight including fuel, parts and maintenance due to the size of the flight hour program. The

FIGURES GIVEN AS EXAMPLES and for

EASE OF ANALYSIS are as follows: a) currently there are about 123,000 flight hours annually and estimated to exceed

150,000 under this effort. b) Those

150,000 hours, at AN ESTIMATED

$3,000/hour, is $450M annually, for the flight hour program. c) Those 150,000 hours, at AN ESTIMATED $500 an hour, this only $75M annually. d) Based UPON

THIS EXAMPLE, there’s a savings of

$375M a year. This is one method of how the aircraft could be paid for under this effort, if it is COCO.

30-Oct-24

What are the major issues from USAACE concerning the ability to fill the required amount of aircraft for the three flight periods? Is it a MX contract issue NMCM?

Is it a MX Supply issue NMCS?

Not relevant to this effort.

30-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

How many UH-72 aircraft are there? Not relevant to this effort as the government feels aircraft could be better 30-Oct-24

Has the Army / USAACE looked at the

USAF/USMC/Navy initial flight training programs to potential gain efficiencies?

Yes, USAACE has looked at both programs and assisted the USAF with their effort. Both programs run differently and have different desired outcomes than the

USAACE effort will have.

30-Oct-24

Will the Army / USAACE pay for any IT upgrades?

No; however, the Army is interested in specifically what IT upgrades would be most beneficial to improving the program and the training spaces. If there is an

RFP posted, the Army would be receptive to IT Upgrades as suggested in individual proposals.

30-Oct-24

What are the employment security classifications?

Requirements on an unclassified contract will be Tier1 assuming they require access to computers on the NIPR network.

30-Oct-24

What is the rough estimate for a UH-72 flying hour?

The information provided at the FSN

Industry Day was strictly for the ease of providing an example. The figure, $3000/hr, is not the actual Army cost and should not be considered a reliable figure as it was only used for demonstrating the size, cost, and potential cost saving that could be realized with program efficiencies and training improvements.

30-Oct-24

Can we get the rough estimate of the cost to train a student up to their advance aircraft?

No, it is not relevant to this effort.

30-Oct-24

Can we get the MX rates? You can look up the CBA in the public sector for IAM Local Lodge 2003 for current rates, however Alabama is a right to work state

30-Oct-24

Can we get a list of all the Industry

Partners that attended the event.

Yes. Update: Posted on SAM.gov

30-Oct-24

As this is a 20-year contract term, will there be a Termination Liability clause

(52.241-10) in the resultant contract?

No decision has been made on length or term of contract, we are seeking input as to what is viable from industry. The

Government is currently leaning towards an award term contract.

# Question Answer Date

There seem to be things you could be doing now to change the way you are executing flight training. Have you considered a phased approach to meet your overall goals?

This will be a phased approach, the government looked at doing this with the current contract environment and decided it would be simpler and more effective to turn the page with everything at once.

30-Oct-24

How are you thinking about the identification of responsibility in aircraft mishaps? Financial or other penalties?

Responsibility will be determined through a normal accident investigation procedure through either the Army or the NTSB depending on COCO vs GOCO. No

Financial or other penalties are being considered unless there is intentional malice or irresponsible behavior directly responsible for the accident, aviation is an inherently dangerous business and the

Army acknowledges this.

30-Oct-24

What is the annual aircraft mishap rate? Since 2018 there have been 716,573.1 flight hours flown in the training aircraft at

Fort Novosel, Alabama in support of the

U.S. Army Initial Entry Rotary-Wing flight training. This is due to the increased pilot training requirement beginning in 2021.

During this timeframe the U.S. army has experienced 4 Class A aircraft accidents defined as an accident resulting in $2.5M in damage or greater, or a loss of life.

During the same period there have been

13 Class C accidents defined as having an

Estimated Cost of Damage between $60K and $600K. 15 were during the day and 2 were at night or under Night Vision

Goggles when that was part of the curriculum.

30-Oct-24

Threshold and Objective performance requirements?

We are not at that point yet and looking for input from industry.

30-Oct-24

How are you thinking about incentives in the contract?

Contract incentives are not an ingredient in the SOO posted in the RFI. If industry wishes to have incentives considered, then this can be addressed in the White Paper provided. DUE DATE is 06DEC2024.

30-Oct-24

It appears that your contracting strategy is to transfer most/all of the execution risk to the contractor.

There has not been discussion on contract format or structure at this point; however, the US Army is interested in hearing from industry on these topics.

# Question Answer Date

What is the average flight hours/month for

IPs? Is a minimum amount of flight hours they must fly?

Currently under the current construct they fly between 2.2 and 3 hours a day each in either aircraft or simulator, this is the total time flown on 2 students i.e. 2 students at

1.1 each or 2 students at 1.5. The monthly average depends on how many training days there are in a month, USAACE trains

Mondays to Fridays and then about 9-20

Saturdays a year depending on how the amount of weather, instructor shortage, supply, or maintenance days are lost to training. We are seeking a solution that better utilizes these assets and is flexible enough to be able to account for delays in training.

30-Oct-24

Who maintains the infrastructure at the outlying fields, grass cutting, building maintenance, etc.…

The U.S. Army under a separate arrangement 30-Oct-24

How many contracts are currently being executed that you are looking to replace with the new contract?

This is a new contract that will take parts of four currently existing contracts to add both efficiency and accountability to the structure. There will be a multi-year phase-in/phase-out process. The contracts impacted by this effort will be:

a. IERW flight training contract

#W9124G17C005- Provides Instructor

Pilot and some academic instruction

b. Fort Novosel Aviation Maintenance

Contract #W9124G17C0104- provides

AVN Maintenance to all aircraft at Fort

Novosel

c. Flight School Training Support Services

Contract #W900KK23D0001 Provides simulation for multiple airframes at

Novosel

d. Airbus CLS Contract #unknown run by

PEO AVN for class IX air parts for current training aircraft

30-Oct-24

The support equipment in the hangars

(maintenance stands, etc.), is that GFE or

CFE? If it’s GFE, how do you handle replacements?

Yes. it is GFE provided in as is condition if it works for your airframe you can use it if not we will divest it. Tools, Test Kits, Smart Toolboxes and Kubota UTVs are also GFE in as is condition if you want or need to replace them that is on you.

# Question Answer Date

Is crash, fire and rescue support part of the anticipated contract?

No, it is provided see above.

30-Oct-24

Is providing air controllers (tower) or other air traffic control support part of the anticipated contract?

No, Air Traffic controllers are provided but will have to be scheduled through the

Aviation Resource Training System

Software, along with the Crash Fire

Rescue and Refuel when the stagefield is requested.

30-Oct-24

This announcement shows an RFI due date of 6 Dec, but there isn’t a list of specific questions/information to address.

Is the intent to release those after the industry day, or are you looking for a more general response that simply outlines capabilities that our company can offer?

The USG put out a State of Objectives, not a PWS or Statement of Work. We are looking for what's possible. We are looking for input on how you would run this massive flight training program while keeping costs in check and adding innovation and efficiency. Tell us what you think your firm can do!

28-Oct-24

Regarding the three independent internal intercom system requirements, do the rear seats need the ability to transmit outside the aircraft (ATC, etc.) or only internal aircraft communications? Rationale:

Communications with ATC/external stations is typically only done by front seat crewmembers.

Intent is make the backs-seater a viable member of the crew to include the ability to make outside radio calls. Will consider internal coms only as a threshold and outside comms as objective. 28-Oct-24

Regarding the self-sealing crashworthy fuel system requirement, would it be better to require (per FAA) “demonstrated compliance with CFR 27.952(c)” as opposed to possibly inferring a ballistic sealing capability? Rationale: Current verbiage can be interpreted in different ways.

Will consider using CFR 27.952 verbiage in contract development to clarify “self sealing” verbiage.

28-Oct-24

Can the Vertical and Tilt Axis seat adjustment requirement be removed and replaced with “meets the ergonomic requirement to accommodate the 5th percentile female and 95th percentile male”? Rationale: Wide ranging ergonomic range can be accomplished without these features.

Intent is that a medically qualified flight student or instructor pilot is restricted from performing any flight procedure.

28-Oct-24

Can the steerable landing light be an objective requirement and a fixed landing light be the threshold requirement?

Rationale: Normal night operations may be conducted with a fixed landing light.

Will review requirements and consider steerable as the objective and fixed as the threshold. Night flight is not currently planned but the government wants to ensure room for expansion in the future.

28-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

Can the Crew Weight Restrictions be changed to 720 lbs. total crew weight as opposed to an individual crewmember weight, while still accommodating a max crewmember weight of up to 300 lbs.?

Rationale: 720 lbs. total weight would give

3 x 240 lb. crew weight (220 lb. 80th percentile male pilot plus 20 lb.

clothing/equipment each), or 1 x 300 lb.

crew weight (280 lb. 95th percentile male pilot plus 20 lb. clothing/equipment) and 2 x 210 lb. crew weight (190 lb. 75th percentile male pilot plus 20 lbs.

clothing/equipment each).

The intent is for no maneuver limitations due to Center of Gravity and weight during all flight profiles.

28-Oct-24

Regarding the twist grip throttle requirement, would it be better to word it as “the ability to train antitorque malfunction maneuvers”? Rationale: Some modern aircraft do not have a twist grip throttle and instead are FADEC controlled.

Intent is no maneuver limitations (ex.

Autorotation/fixed pedal) due to FADEC or similar fuel control system equipped aircraft. 28-Oct-24

Can the 90 KTAS identified for the

Endurance requirement be changed to

Vbe (best endurance airspeed)?

Rationale: Maximum endurance is achieved at a lower, more efficient airspeed.

Intent is aircraft is capable of performing all syllabus requirements plus VFR/IFR reserve fuel as required for up to two flight periods. 28-Oct-24

Is there any opportunity to still register for

Industry Day?

Industry Day RSVP and registration are now closed, and no other opportunities exist for attending this event.

24-Oct-24

For Pricing Purposes should we assume that the entire Instructor Pilot requirement and contract for UH-72A and the new aircraft will fall under this effort at the end of the Phase in Year?

No, the UH-72A program will continue being a part of flight school for several years. The government assesses that this will be a phased approach to replacing the current system i.e. 20% of the student load annually (20 out of 100 students) or 25% or 33%. Both versions of flight school will have to run simultaneously as the new version is phased-in and phase the old version is phased-out.

23-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

Are foreigners/foreign companies allowed to attend?

All companies are welcome to attend;

however, any company listed on the

Sam.gov Excluded Parties List System

(EPLS) will not be available for award or as a sub on a Prime’s Award. Each attendant, including international visitors, is responsible for getting appropriate access to post for the event. As long as they are part of the Visa Waiver Program, they should not have issues. Anyone with concerns on access to post can contact the Visitor Control Center at 334-255-

0607.

22-Oct-24

Will slides for the brief be provided? Printed slides will not be given during the brief. Read-ahead slides will be posted on

Sam.gov and emailed to those who

RSVP’d for Industry Day NLT Friday 25

October 2024 at 1700 CDT. Update:

Slides posted on SAM.gov

22-Oct-24

Will any portion of Industry Days be broadcast?

The morning session will be recorded and shared on Sam.gov via a link. It will not be live. The tour portion will not be recorded.

Update video link posted on SAM.gov 22-Oct-24

Do participants need to get access to post?

Every individual is responsible for getting their initial access to post and parking their

POV in the designated parking lot on the day of the event. After that you will be on

Government busses for the day. Access to post can be from a dependent ID card, military retired card, as a passenger in the vehicle with one of those individuals

(known as trusted traveler), or from a guest pass. The guest pass can be gained through the online or the day of at the visitor center (see welcome letter in documents).

(https://pass.aie.army.mil/steps/branch_sel ection)

22-Oct-24

UPDATE: RFI Responses are due no later than 1700 CDT on Friday, December

6, 2024. Late submissions will not be accepted or reviewed.

22-Oct-24

UPDATE: RSVPs for Industry Day are due by 23 OCT at 2359 CDT.

22-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

UPDATE: USG is removing the opportunity for requesting an exception to participant number. There will not be room for exception to the 3 participants’ rule.

22-Oct-24

Is there any information available for the

Industry Day at Ft. Novosel?

Yes. See attached document “Flight

School Next Industry Day Welcome

Packet”

22-Oct-24

Is there a page limit for proposals? RFI sections for SOO Response.

a. Cover page: 1 page limit

b. Contact information page: 1 page limit

c. Aircraft Discussion & Recommendation:

20-page limit

d. Aviation Services Discussion &

Recommendation: 20-page limit

e. Contract Type Discussion &

Recommendation: 10-page limit

f. Summary page: 1 page limit

18-Oct-24

I am contacting you regarding U.S. Army

Initial Entry Rotary-Wing Flight Training

Next Generation. Mainly I was wondering if remote training/distance learning will be part of the requirements?

The answer is maybe. The US

Government (USG) has issued a

Statement of Objectives to have industry provide unique and innovative solutions to the ways to train the next generation of pilots. If your firm wants to propose remote training/distance learning, and how it can assist with some of the academic courses, create efficiencies and cut costs, then yes, we will absolutely welcome this type of innovation. The USG is not going to provide a military specification (mil spec). The USG is asking for a solution.

Every company will have a unique recommendation and solution that could meet the mission requirements. However, it is unlikely that remote training/distance learning can substitute for actual hands-on flight training.

17-Oct-24

Could you inform me if this is a new requirement or a follow-on to an existing contract? If the latter, could you provide me with the Contractor Name and Contract

This is a new contract. However, it will take scope from four currently existing contracts to add both efficiency and accountability to the structure. There will be a multi-year phase-in/phase-out process. The contracts impacted by this effort will be:

1. IERW flight training contract

#W9124G17C005/Amentum - Provides

Instructor Pilot and some academic

15-Oct-24

# Question Answer Date

Following up on the subject request for information. Specifically, our company is interested to better understand the extent to which training aids/devices and simulation are anticipated as part of IERW

Flight Training. Additionally, if multiple devices/simulators are anticipated, what level of fidelity are the devices currently in use? If future devices are under consideration, what level of fidelity would those devices likely be? Any additional information you can provide would be extremely useful. Thank you!

Yes. The USG currently uses simulators to include Cockpit Procedure trainers, Instrument Flight Trainers, and

Operational Flight Trainers. The type, number and fidelity are to be proposed by those responding to the SOO. We are seeking innovation and cost savings. For instance, Cockpit Procedure trainers that could also be used to train basic instruments which already exist in the marketplace.

15-Oct-24

Our company is in receipt of the referenced RFI. I wanted to ensure the data in the RFI and attachments are free of restrictions and can be disseminated to foreign nationals.

It is posted on a public website and therefore there are no restrictions on release. 15-Oct-24