Attachment_J-4_CHAMP_AoA_Table.docx
DOCX document 20 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Common Hull Auxiliary Multi-Mission Platform (CHAMP) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N00024-18-R-2236
About this file
Attachment J-4
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| CHAMP_RFP_Amendment_0003.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-9__CHAMP_Section_L_CostPrice_Exhibits_Rev2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| N00024-18-R-2236_0002.pdf | ||
| N00024-18-R-2236_0001.pdf | ||
| Industry_Day_Registration_List_-_FINAL.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_J-8_CHAMP_DD254_Scan.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-9__CHAMP_Section_L_CostPrice_Exhibits_Rev1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_J-2_CHAMP_TRL_Table.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-8_CHAMP_Draft_DD254.pdf | ||
| N00024-18-R-2236.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J-6_CHAMP_CDRL.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-3_CHAMP_COR_CHANGE_RECOMMENDATION_FORM.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J-5_IDES_Access_and_PKIIA_Awareness_Attributes.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-7_CHAMP_Deliverables_Schedule.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J-9__CHAMP_Section_L_CostPrice_Exhibits.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 15
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
N00024-18-R-2236 Attachment J-4 CHAMP Analysis of Alternatives Table
| Alternative |
| Acquisition Cost1 |
| Lifecycle Cost1 |
| Mission Areas Addressed |
| Mission Effectiveness over the Lifecycle2 |
Mission Capability Sustainability/ Maintainability Upgradeability
| Option 1 |
| baseline |
| baseline |
| Sealift |
Sub Tender
Aircraft Maintenance
Command and Control
Medical Services
Option 2
Sealift
Sub Tender
Aircraft Maintenance
Command and Control
Medical Services
Option 3
Sealift
Sub Tender
Aircraft Maintenance
Command and Control
Medical Services
Option 4
Sealift
Sub Tender
Aircraft Maintenance
Command and Control
Medical Services
1 For the purposes of this table, Option 1 is the ‘baseline’. Other option costs shall be expressed as % change from Option 1.
2 Mission Effectiveness shall be rated using the definitions and qualitative rating scale on the next page CHAMP Analysis of Alternatives Mission Effectiveness Factor Definition
| Mission Capability |
| Sustainability/Maintainability |
| Upgradeability |
| Extent to which option meets COR values |
| Extent to which option includes features to facilitate sustainment and maintenance of mission capability over the lifecycle, including: common equipment/systems/interfaces; planned access routes for equipment replacement and swap out that eliminate the need to rip out and replace ship structures; highly reliable and/or low maintenance equipment to reduce maintenance burden; etc. |
| Extent to which the option facilitates upgrades and new technology insertion to improve mission effectiveness over the lifecycle, including: system sizing/space to support new technology insertion and planned upgrades beyond standard margins; pre-planned ability to extend the mission capability; open systems architecture; planned access routes that eliminate the need to rip out and replace ship structures during upgrades; etc. |
Mission Effectiveness Rating Scale
| High |
| Design includes extensive capability to support this mission effectiveness area. The option meets all COR threshold values and some objective values. Design includes high levels of commonality and/or open systems architecture. The option is designed to meet or exceed at-delivery capability over the lifecycle with little or no structural modification. |
| Moderate |
| Design includes some capability to support this mission effectiveness area. The option meets all threshold COR values. Design includes some commonality and/or open systems architecture. The option is designed to remain within 20% of at-delivery operational capability over the lifecycle and may require some moderate structural modification. |
| Low |
| Design includes limited capability to support this mission effectiveness area. The option meets more than half but not all COR threshold values. Design includes a low level of commonality and/or open systems architecture. The option is designed to remain within 30% of at-delivery operational capability over the lifecycle and may require possibly significant structural modification. |
| None |
| Design does not specifically address this mission effectiveness area. The option meets fewer than half of the COR threshold values. |
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited.
File details come from the government source that posted it.