DRFP_R10_Q As_01.07.15.pdf

LRDR DRFP: HQ0147-14-R-0002

Industry Questions and Answers Round 10

Number

Sequence

LRDR ES

DRFP Update

Version

Questions/Comments Responses/Answers

DRFPES-063 Element Spec

Section L

Will the Government require the Offeror to propose the optimal array orientation of both faces in the Final RFP or will the government provide the orientations for both array faces in the

FRD and LES as the orientation of the array faces will impact the facility design and overall system cost.

The radar face reference boresights were provided for engineering analysis purposes consistent with the instructions in Section L of the Final RFP.

DRFPES-064 DRFP R9 Q&As Would the Government provide an addendum to the Element Spec which summarizes the responses posted to FedBizOpps on 19

December 2014 as was similarly done with the

DRFP_Element_Specification_Addendum.pdf posted 12

December 2014?

The Element Specification to be provided with the Final RFP will contain all applicable revisions posted to FedBizOpps.

The Government does not anticipate posting a separate addendum via

FedBizOpps.

DRFPES-065 DRFP Element

Specification

LRDR-2410 was added in the 17 November 2014 version of the

LRDR Element Specification, concurrent with the deletion of all

RKV communication requirements. Please clarify the capability required, consistent with the data contained in Table A-13, if

LRDR-2410 is retained in the next LRDR Element Specification update.

This requirement is traceable to the BMD

System Specification and applies to all BMD elements. LRDR-2410 will be retained in the final Element Specification. Reference the

Element Specification in the Final RFP for all communication requirements.

DRFPES-066 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification

Several requirements contain values modified by the indicator

"(TBR)". The Government's response to DRFPES-059, "Per

Section L instructions in the RFP, the Offeror shall provide its design's performance requirements for "To Be Resolved" values in Attachment L-10." suggests that each offeror will select and justify these performance requirements in a table formatted in accordance with Attachment L-10 that will be provided as part of the final RFP. If our interpretation is incorrect, please clarify. Is it the Government’s intention to incorporate our Attachment L-10 responses as a change to the LRDR Element Specification

(making the values in Attachment L-10 threshold requirements, subject to verification)? Since these (TBR) requirements do not contain minimum acceptable values, what is the threshold criteria for evaluation of the proposals? Will the Government clarify, in

Section L and Section M of the final RFP, how Attachment L-10 will be evaluated?

The Government intends to incorporate

Attachment L-10 responses as changes to the

Element Specification; those values incorporated will be subject to verification.

Final RFP will provide final Proposal

Instructions (Section L) and Evaluation

Criteria (Section M).

DRFPES-067 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification, §3.2.10.2

DRFPES-026 references Attachment L-4. Attachment L-4 is the

Past Performance Reference List (PPRL); classified Attachment

04 is the LRDR TPM List. Please confirm the TPM list is the correct reference. In addition, if evaluation of the TPMs is desired please consider updating the appropriate Section L criteria to include "the time window over which each active track will be maintained at the necessary quality, the time window over which discrimination can be performed, and the timeline to complete discrimination for the objective raid scenario", with associated

Section M criteria. Additionally, is it the Government's intent to align each TPM with both Sections L & M?

Section L Attachment numbers have been updated. The Attachment referenced in the

Government's response to DRFPES-026 has been added to the Final RFP package, and is not the same as the TPM list.

DRFPES-068 DRFPES-040 The Government response to a DRFPES-040 question stated, "The electric field limits and types of EME sources will be determined following a final site determination." Since these electric field limits drive performance, receive filter performance

(and the performance of these receive filters must be reflected in the loss budget, which drives aperture size for a given element power) will the Government resolve the final site determination in the final RFP so the site-relevant EME values are reflected in the design (and price) offering by all competitors?

Offerors should assume the RF environment at the final site is compliant with MIL-STD-

464C.

DRFPES-069 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification

The paragraph immediately preceding Table 3-1 states "Both radar faces will be designed to accommodate the antenna hardware necessary to achieve the same, future growth sensitivity." Since this is a significant cost driver, please confirm that it is the Government's intent that both antennas be capable of identical future growth levels (as described in Table 3-1).

Yes, please reference LRDR-1120 and LRDR-

1122.

DRFPES-070 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification

LRDR-2262 specifies a functional requirement for a technique which could be a cost driver. To derive requirements to implement LRDR-2262, additional threat information is required:

emitter ERP, bandwidth, emitter-to-radar range, spatial distribution, and number of emitters. Please provide this information or a clarification of the intent of LRDR-2262.

The Government has reviewed this requirement and has determined that this is a key system functional requirement.

DRFPES-071 DRFPES-032 The Government's response to an ES-032 question includes the statement, "In addition, LRDR-2263 performance value changed to "(TBR)"." If the previously-specified performance value is changed to (TBR), does this change render the LRDR-2263 requirement as "(TBD)"?

The TBR performance value in LRDR-2263 is a tentative metric. The change does not render the entire requirement as TBD.

DRFPES-072 DRFP Element

Specification, Section 3.2.2.7 -

LRDR‐2467

The updated LRDR-2467 states "The LRDR shall incorporate sub‐array based digital beam forming with the digital sub‐array sized so that wideband time delay steering can be performed digitally". Our interpretation is that this requirement prohibits use of analog time delays. This design constraint drives cost, and we believe is unnecessary to meet the performance requirements in the LRDR Element Specification. If our interpretation is incorrect, please clarify.

The Government has reviewed this requirement and has determined that this is a key system requirement.

DRFPES-073 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification

Will additional threat definition be provided for LRDR-1335? For example, the threat parameter space specified in Appendix A.2.1 is for only one object type, while acquisition will be done on the largest object in the threat complex, which is likely to be a different object than the one specified in Table A-6.

The Tables in Appendix A.2.1 and Adversary

Data Packages referenced in Appendix A.2.1 provide the detailed threat data for all objects in the complex.

DRFPES-074 DRFP LRDR

Element

Specification

Please provide the conditions (probability of detection, unknown target range rate extent) under which LRDR-1205 must be satisfied.

LRDR-1205 is a functional requirement and is not subject to any specific conditions.