N0042117R0036 Question_Answers_ Responses.pdf

Pre-Solicitation Conference Q&As Questions Response

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss.

Aircraft Mission

Profiles What is the notional operational sortie schedule for the PMSR RS&C aircraft during the next 12 months?

The projected RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

Solicitation N00421-17-R-0036, Draft PBWS

Page 6 Section 4.1.2.iii, Table 4-3 Basing Will Government provide basing onboard NAS Pt. Mugu for PMSR RS&C aircraft? No

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. COGO Will the government broaden the scope of acceptable solutions to include a Contractor Owned, Government Operated (COGO) proposal, whereby military or government pilots fly in contractor owned , modified and maintained aircraft?

No, The Government Performance Based Work Statement does not allow for a Contractor Owned Government

Operated (COGO) solution.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Evaluation

Evaluation Criteria: We suggest it might be helpful for the Navy to get the requirements and evaluation criteria stated in number of square NMs that need to be covered per mission, i.e. if we offer up a radar with twice the required detection range, only one aircraft and radar might be needed versus two aircraft/radars. In other words, change the evaluation criteria to performance based on aircraft/radar search area capability by minute. If the Navy wants the option to cover even more of the range, we would need some way to get some evaluation points, i.e. we offer two aircraft/radars but they might only need to order one per event but that would reduce the number of total FHs/FMs flown which would be ok if “ALL” of our fixed costs were covered by the fixed/guaranteed CLINs.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals using the following factors Technical, Past Performance and Price.

Technical elements include understanding of the work, capability verification, aircraft performance requirements, airworthiness data, aircraft support, Aircraft availability, personal resources and Small business utilization plan.

Technical Element #1 Understanding of the work, #2 Capability Verification and #3 Aircraft Performance

Requirements evaluate PBWS requirements and specification including surveillance rate stated in nautical square miles per hour. The evaluated criteria include surveillance rate with specified sea state, target size, PD Range and

PDET(first pass) states the threshold and objective target identification capabilities. The threshold and objective capabilities are stated in this format to match the specified mission requirements.

Recommendations Fixed Monthly Add a “Fixed Monthly” costs CLIN. See above explanations.

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Solicitation N00421-17-R-0036, Draft PBWS

Page 7 Section C, Applicable CLINS Fixed Monthly

This amendment requires an RS&C aircraft be based within 50 NM of NAS PT. Mugu beginning 01 Oct 2022. Other CAS contracts contain a monthly usage CLIN to cover aircraft fixed costs incurred during the month. Beginning 01 Oct 2022, the PMSR aircraft will incur additional monthly fixed costs with no guaranteed flight minutes. Question: Will the government consider adding a monthly usage CLIN (monthly fixed costs shall include labor, meetings with the Government, Contractor hangar space, insurance, training requirements, material, and any other recurring operating costs not attributable to other CLINs) to cover PMSR based aircraft monthly fixed costs?

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Section B, CLIN Structure CLIN structure is variable only for the operational CLINs paid by the minute.

Fixed Monthly

We suggest a Fixed Monthly CLIN: This CLIN should be used for contractor monthly fixed costs to include personnel, insurance, maintenance, facilities, etc. This CLIN is required to support the direct monthly costs associated with the exclusive aircraft operational readiness.

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Section 4.1.2 (ii) Contractor shall base one (1) aircraft within 50NM from Point

Mugu at a facility provided by the Contractor on 1 OCT 2022 until the expiration date of the contract.

Forward Basing Can you please explain why 1 Oct 2022 which is 2.5 years post award (estimated)?

The required need date of 1 OCT 2022 was specified by the requirements owner. The requirement owner determined the date of 1 Oct 2022 in consideration of projected operational aircraft inventory, capabilities and maintenance schedule. Prior to 1 OCT 2022, The Government did not forecast sufficient PMSR Mission Flight hours to justify a

Forward based Aircraft located within 50NM of PMSR. The mission hours for PMSR will be flown under CLIN

0001 RS&C Mission Aircraft prior to this date.

PBWS, Page 5 of 31 Forward Basing Contractor shall base one (1) aircraft within 50NM from Point Mugu at a facility provided by the Contractor on 1 OCT 2022 until the expiration date of the contract. Can you please explain why 1 Oct 2022 which is 2.5 years post award?

The required need date of 1 OCT 2022 was specified by the requirements owner. The requirement owner determined the date of 1 Oct 2022 in consideration of projected operational aircraft inventory, capabilities and maintenance schedule. Prior to 1 OCT 2022, The Government did not forecast sufficient PMSR Mission Flight hours to justify a

Forward based Aircraft located within 50NM of PMSR. The mission hours for PMSR will be flown under CLIN

0001 RS&C Mission Aircraft prior to this date.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Mission Hours C. Over the last 12 months, has any RS&C mission support been provided by assets other than VX-30 air assets? 1. If yes, were these assets government or commercially provided assets?

All assets have been Government Assets

Attachment Mission Hours

The table below articulates the mutual benefit in utilizing fixed and variable CLIN structure versus only variable (per minute) CLINs. The table also demonstrates the excessive inequality to either party (Navy and Contractor) if the predicted hours are not flown. The current solicitation provides an

“all in” per minute CLIN pricing structure for the flight hour services. To address the above inequality problem of fixed and variable costs estimation, and to create an equitable relationship, we recommend a monthly “fixed costs” CLIN in addition to the “Hourly Rate (Minutes)” CLIN.

This allows the Contractor to propose equitable fixed costs which remain constant regardless of actual hours flown. As the Navy uses the flight minutes, they pay incrementally for only those minutes used. In the end, the Contractor must be competitive across all CLINs and the Total

Evaluation Price (TEP) of the CLIN summation to be found in the competitive range, compete for “Best Value” and ultimately win the contract.

Other PMA-226 Solicitations demonstrated a CLIN structure to facilitate a competitive bid environment whereby the Navy and the Contractor are charged and paid, respectively, in equitably terms throughout the contract Period of Performance (PoP).

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Mission Hours TM Services: This service has limited annual hours making it difficult for the contractor to offer a competitive price on an hourly rate. Additional hours would be helpful to improve this challenge or add fixed and start up CLINs.

The contractor shall provide any technical solution set that complies with the requirements of the solicitation.

Solicitation N00421-17-R-0036, Draft PBWS

Page 6 Section 4.1.2.ii, Table 4-3 Mission Hours Will PMSR Pricing (CLINS 0005, 0006, and 0007) be the same for PMSR missions flown prior to October 2022?

No, CLINS 0005, 0006, and 0007 are for the PMSR based aircraft only. Mission flown with Aircraft based from the contractors facility will be flown under CLINs 0001,0002 and 0003.

Questions & Recommendations Mission Hours

Solicitation, Pages 3-6 of 77 – Do the estimated minutes throughout the CLINS reflect the fact that 18 months (or less) will be dedicated to Stand

Up and thus no real flight operations. In other words, are the operational minute CLINs (0001, 0002, 0005, 0006, 0009, 0010) expected to fly the estimated minutes between months 18 – 60 of the contract Period of Performance?

No, the projected hours reflect the total requirement of the 4 year 364 day period. The Government is providing the projected hours by quarter for the total period, the contractor shall provide any technical solution set that complies with the requirements of the solicitation and their proposed standup capability period.

j. Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Mission Hours What is the projected RS&C usage requirements for the next 12 months?

The projected and Historical RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Mission Hours

Flight Hours: In the historical flight data provided by your office for the period 6/1/2014 through 4/21/2019, the mission and ferry hours totaled

1,436 flight hours across the contract period and all services. This is an average of 288 flight hours per year average over the five-year contract across the fleet of aircraft and two ranges. In the latest solicitation, CLINs 1-3 require pricing for 258,000 minutes (4,300 flight hours or 860 per year). This is an increase of three times the historical flight operations. The contract minimum pursuant to 5252.216-9506 is $100,000 in total, which is not a meaningful guarantee. From the contractor point of view, the responsible pricing of hours should be based on historical records (not a

3x increase) when calculating the fixed costs divided by the hours of estimated (not guaranteed usage) to calculate an hourly rate for fixed costs.

The current solicitation requires the contractor to place all costs (fixed and variable) into one rate for flight minutes over the five-year contract.

Under this one rate structure, either the Navy or the contractor will lose money while the other will gain, creating an unequitable relationship. In other words, if the contractor spreads its fixed costs over 4,300 hours estimated, and then actually flies the historical 1,436 hours, the contractor will lose significant money as there will be a deficit in the recoupment of fixed costs. On the other hand, if the contractor uses historical hours to spread its fixed costs over the period of the contract, and then actually flies 4,300 flight hours, the Navy will pay more than it should. Setting a realistic minimum flight hour period, or ensuring the estimates are accurate, are critical for an equitable relationship between the contractor and the Navy.

The projected and Historical RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

PBWS Paragraph 4.1.2.ii Mission Hours

The PBWS Paragraph 4.1.2.ii says the Contractor shall base PMSR RS&C aircraft within 50 NM from Point Mugu. Please provide historical data for RS&C sorties scheduled in support of PMSR missions as follows: B. Over the last 12 months, how many RS&C sorties have been cancelled due to non‑weather related issues (i.e. maintenance aircraft unavailability, operations aircrew unavailability etc.?)

The projected and Historical RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

Solicitation N00421-17-R-0036, Draft PBWS

Page 6 Section 4.1.2.ii, Table 4-3 Mission Hours

If there is no basing fee for PMSR aircraft after 01 October 2022, will the government pay for aircrew to travel in order to support the PMSR aircraft?

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review. The offeror shall provide any technical solution set that complies with the requirements of the solicitation. If Offerors solution set contains aircrew travel in support of the forward based aircraft in PMSR, those cost shall be reflected in the mission minute flight rate.

Section 4.1.2 (ii) Simultaneous presentations requires one (1) aircraft for the Inner

Sea Range and one (1) aircraft for the Outer Sea Range.

Number of Aircraft Can you confirm that a minimum of only one aircraft is required for the PMSR and a minimum of two for PMRF?

The offeror shall provide any technical solution set that complies with the requirements of the solicitation. The threshold for number of simultaneous RS&C aircraft presentations is two (2). For RS&C the contractor must have the threshold capability to provide two (2) simultaneous presentations at a single location or two (2) simultaneous single presentations at multiple locations.

1. PBWS, Page 5 of 31 – Number of Aircraft Simultaneous presentations requires one (1) aircraft for the Inner Sea Range and one (1) aircraft for the Outer Sea Range. Can you confirm that a minimum of two total aircraft are required for the PMSR and a minimum of two for PMRF?

The offeror shall provide any technical solution set that complies with the requirements of the solicitation. The threshold for number of simultaneous RS&C aircraft presentations is two (2). For RS&C the contractor must have the threshold capability to provide two (2) simultaneous presentations at a single location or two (2) simultaneous single presentations at multiple locations.

Section 4.3 Aircraft must be certified, maintained, and operated IAW 14 CFR and its

NAVAIR IFC, with particular attention to the following areas: Part 135 - Air Carrier and Operator Certificate…Additional sections required pilot training and checking in accordance with Part 135.

Part 135 In addition we recommend the DoD CARB certification for mitigation of Navy risk. This provides the Navy with a regulatory, DoD, and safety compliance baseline.

DOD CARB certification is not required.

Section 5.5.2.4.1 Part 135

Contractor should be required to possess the FAA Part 135 certification and DoD Commercial Airlift Review Board (CARB) certification. This provides the Navy with a regulatory, DoD and safety compliance baseline. The draft PBWS seems to require all elements of 135 certification, i.e.

Section 5.5.2.4.1 and many other sections, but does not clearly state that the Operator / Contractor is required to possess the Part 135 certificate with the applicable Operations Specifications necessary to meet the PBWS operational requirements at the time of bidding.

DOD CARB certification is not required.

Section 6.1 Part 135 Section 6.1 mentions 121 and 135 certificate holders yet only states that 121 manuals can be used for GOP and FOP. This should include 135 acceptance as well.

FAA Part 135 GOP and FOP have been added to the amended solicitation

Section 4.3 Aircraft must be certified, maintained, and operated IAW 14 CFR and its

NAVAIR IFC, with particular attention to the following areas: Part 135 - Air Carrier and Operator Certificate…Additional sections required pilot training and checking in accordance with Part 135.

Part 135 Please confirm that the Contractor is required to possess the FAA Part 135 certification. The Offeror should possess an FAA Part 135 certification.

LA-1 CONTENT OF PROPOSALS;PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS; 1.0

VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL, Technical Element #2– Capability Verification; 2.2 –

Proof of Ownership or Lease

Proof of ownership

It is far too high a risk for a commercial business to buy aircraft in advance of the solicitation. If the government expects vendors to possess the aircraft at time of award this would limit competition due to the fix costs associated therein. Consideration should be given to non-incumbents providing proof of bank financing and potential/contingent aircraft in their proposal to substantiate capability. Consideration should be given to non-incumbents providing proof of bank financing and potential/contingent aircraft in their proposal to substantiate capability.

The Government will accept proof of bank financing and potential/contingent aircraft in their proposal to substantiate capability.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Radar GFE

The prohibitive cost of contractors procuring and sustaining a radar system capable of the ARSS Contract requirements will significantly increase the cost to the government. Offeror therefore recommends the radar system being provided by the government as Government Furnished Property

(GFP) for integration into the contractor's aircraft, with sustainment parts able to be sourced through existing government supplies as applicable.

Will the Government include a GFP Radar option in the ARSS RFP?

No, the Government Performance Based Work Statement does not allow for radar system being provided by the

Government as Government Furnished Property (GFP) for integration into the contractor's aircraft, with sustainment parts able to be sourced through existing government supplies as applicable.

Solicitation, Page 62 of 77 – Section 4.2 Reports Solicitation, Page 62 of 77 – Section 4.2 capability verification requires an “aircraft modifications status report”. Can the Navy please describe what their expectations are for this report? What is the aircraft is not modified at proposal submission time?

Paragraph 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 provide the expectations of the Aircraft Modification Status Report. For Aircraft not modified at the proposal submission time Offerors shall submit a modification and airworthiness substantiation plan matching the equipment lead times within 30 days that is compliant with the Standup Capability period.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss.

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

We recommend that LiDAR, EO/IR and other radar or Electro Optical search operations relevant to range search are considered highly relevant, assuming they are similar target identification over land versus over water.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Evaluation (Section M) Scope/Complexity

Magnitude Change the magnitude examples from “annual” contract value to “total” contract value to better reflect the contract size in this type of work.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from industry input, the amended

RFP magnitude examples are planned to be stated in "Total Contract Value".

Part B, Section 2.0 Past Performance Magnitude Examples start at $1.8M per year for somewhat relevant and increase to $5.0 million for very relevant.

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

Change the magnitude examples from “annual” contract value to “total” contract value to better reflect the contract size in this type of work. Even the incumbent cannot meet Very Relevant for existing performance on the ARSS contract.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from industry input, the amended

RFP magnitude examples are planned to be stated in "Total Contract Value".

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss.

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

In light of Commercial Range Support Mission rarity, Offeror recommends redefining relevance of past performance in terms of the functions required to perform the mission, rather than by showing contracts specifically described as "Operating RS&C aircraft in support of subsurface, surface, and air operations with a number of multi-service projects. During operations aircraft may cover a distance of several thousand square miles, whereby surface targets need to be notified for the purpose of clearing the range." From this description, Offeror considers it to be more relevant to have performed aircraft modifications of similar scope and complexity, and to have demonstrated the ability to fly over water on military ranges and to have been in communications with controlling agencies for the purpose of coordination and military mission accomplishment. The

RS&C mission in support of specific operations is subsumed in these broader tasks and the modified relevance description will enable the government to reach a larger supplier base. Will the government accept as relevant, Past Performance examples that include all of the required elements of the required mission without them being specifically contracted R,S&C Aircraft Operations contracts?

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss.

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

In light of Commercial Range Support Missions rarity, Offeror recommends redefining relevance of past performance in terms of the functions required to perform the mission rather than by showing contracts specifically described as "Operating surface, and air operations with a number of multi-service projects. Aircraft shall detect, track, record, and retransmit the TM stream from a long-range, all-weather, subsonic cruise missile."

From this description, Offeror considers it to be more relevant to have performed aircraft modifications of similar scope and complexity, and to have demonstrated the ability to fly over water on military ranges and to have been in communications with controlling agencies for the purpose of coordination and military mission accomplishment. The detection, tracking and recording of telemetry data mission in support of specific operations is subsumed in these broader tasks and the modified relevance description will enable the government to reach a larger supplier base.

Will the government accept as relevant, Past Performance examples that include all of the required elements of the required mission without them being specifically contracted Airborne Telemetry Operations contracts?

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Part B, Section 2.0 Past Performance Scope and Complexity "Description of Work" seems to state "whereby surface targets need to be notified for the purpose of clearing the rang".

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

Suggest the government consider scope and complexity of search, detection and interrogation of surface targets not necessarily on a range. The

Contractor must demonstrate similar work but whether it was completed on a range is not necessarily the only way to have Past performance.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss.

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

Offeror has considerable past performance supporting the Federal Government, both DoD and Federal interagency. While the sensor work is not currently a radar, our LIDAR work is similar. We would like the opportunity to discuss this past performance and welcome queries to our customers on our performance in support of DoD and the interagency.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Questions & Recommendations Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

Solicitation, Page 74 of 77 0 Magnitude examples. Please clarify that the Navy intends to classify a minimum contract value of $5.0 M “annual contract value” versus “total contract value” which seems more appropriate considering the current annual contract value for the existing ARSS contract.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from industry input, the amended

RFP magnitude examples are planned to be stated in "Total Contract Value".

Scope/Complexity

Magnitude

The oceanic crossing and route recency of experience seem excessive. The FAA will most likely want to do proving runs or validation flights with the modified aircraft. These will check that block and should not be required prior to award.

The Government is revising the Scope/Complexity/Magnitude section of the RFP from Industry input. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

Section 4.3.1.2 Section 4.3.1.2 states that “For aircraft with FAA Special

Certificates”.

Special Airworthiness

Certificate

This seems to suggest that the Navy will accept a Special Airworthiness Certificate. Please confirm the aircraft may have a Standard or Special

FAA Airworthiness Certificate plus a Navy IFC certification.

Yes, the aircraft may have a Standard or Special FAA Airworthiness Certificate plus a Navy IFC certification.

Questions & Recommendations PBWS, Page 13 of 31 Special Airworthiness

Certificate

Section 4.3.1.2 states that “For aircraft with FAA Special Certificates”. This seems to suggest that the Navy will accept a Special Airworthiness

Certificate. Please confirm the aircraft may have a Standard or Special FAA Airworthiness Certificate plus a Navy IFC/ Yes, the aircraft may have a Standard or Special FAA Airworthiness Certificate plus a Navy IFC certification.

Section B, CLIN 0004 / 0008 / 0012 Stand Up Capability Are the standup CLINS paid by the month and if the aircraft is delivered early, will the contractor be paid for those months? Suggest the start up

CLINs become a "Lot" with progressive payments (monthly) based on agreed milestones between the Government and Contractor

The Government is reviewing the CLIN structure and the viability of adding a Monthly Fixed Cost CLIN. The amended RFP will contain the results of that review.

j. Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Stand Up Capability

Standup capability: The last solicitation required standup within six months. All radar manufacturers have proposed 12–15 months to deliver the compliant radar(s) upon order and payment. Therefore, we recommend a change of standup period from six months to a bare minimum of 12 months. Our plan would be to have the aircraft modified and operations ready for service immediately once radars are received.

The projected RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

PBWS Paragraph 4.1.2.ii Stand Up Capability

The PBWS Paragraph 4.1.2.iii says the Contractor shall base PMSR RS&C aircraft within 50 NM from Point Mugu. Please provide historical data for RS&C sorties scheduled in support of PMSR missions as follows: A. Over the last 12 months, how many RS&C sorties have been scheduled and flown in support of PMSR missions?

The projected RS&C and Telemetry usage requirements for the contract period will be provided with the issuance of the amended PBWS.

Section B, CLIN structure The CLINS reflect the fact that 18 months (or less) will be dedicated to Stand Up and thus no real flight operations. In other words, are the operational minute CLINs (0001, 0002, 0005, 0006, 0009, 0010) expected to fly the estimated minutes between months 18 – 60 of the contract Period of Performance?

Stand Up Capability Can the government confirm that the standup period is estimated NTE 18 months and the remaining months would be operational CLINS, together not to exceed 60 months.

The standup capability period is NTE 18 Months and the remaining months would be operational CLINs, together not exceeding 4 years 364 days.

Other areas/information that you may wish to discuss. Surge Does the government want contractors to price a surge capability? No, the Government Performance Based Work Statement and CLIN structure does not allow for surge pricing.

PBWS, Page 6 of 31 Tables – Target detection requires Inner Sea Range of 3 NM2 and Outer Sea Range requires 10NM2. Can you confirm the definition of “NM”? Nautical Miles

Table 4-3 Target size in Table 4-3 RS&C PMSR Based Aircraft states N/A for

Threshold and Objective requirements.

Tables Can the government please provide the target size for these categories.

PMSR threshold target sizes are 30 meters squared and 150 meters squared, objective is N/A. PMRF threshold target sizes are 3 square meters for the inner sea range and 10 square meters for the outer sea range, the objective for both is N/A.

Section 4.1.1, RS&C Aircraft Specifications and Requirements Table 4-1

Probability of Detection (first pass) is 90% Threshold and 95% Objective Tables

Can the government provide aircraft altitude, size of target being detected, and sea state for PD accuracy. EXAMPLE - "Detect (at 90% Pdet) a 30

sq. m target within a 3 x 10 NM^2 box at 30NM in Sea State 3 with positional accuracy of 0.5NM"

Detect (at 90% Pdet) a 30 sq. m target at 50NM in a sea state of 3 with Positional Accuracy of Track at Probability of Detection (Pdet) Range of 0.5 NM

RS&C Aircraft Specifications and Requirement Tables Is the target size reference of 3 sq. NM supposed to read sq. meters? And if so, it contradicts the following target size values of 30 and 150 sq.

meters respectively.

Square Meters

Table 4-1 and 4-3 Target detection states 3NM2 and 10 NM2 Tables Please confirm that the target detection should be 3 sq. meters & 10 sq. meters, not 3 NM

& 10 NM

2 Target Detection has been removed from Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Table 4-1 Target detection, Surveillance Rate and SATCOM requirements have two numbers in the Threshold and none in the Objective Tables

Table 4-1: Can the government confirm the target detection. Surveillance Rate and SATCOM specs look like they should be Threshold and

Objective vice both criteria being just Thresholds.

Target Detection has been removed from Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Table 4-1 Target detection, Surveillance Rate and SATCOM requirements have two numbers in the Threshold and none in the Objective Tables

Table 4-1: Can the government confirm the target detection. Surveillance Rate and SATCOM specs look like they should be Threshold and

Objective vice both criteria being just Thresholds.

PMRF surveillance rate is threshold value only. Threshold surveillance sate of 25,000 NM2/hr. at sea state of 3, target size of 30 m2 and a PD Range of 50NM and surveillance sate of 40,000 NM2/hr. at sea state of 3, target size of 150 m2 and a PD Range of 80NM.

Table 4-1 Table 4-1 Target detection, Surveillance Rate and SATCOM requirements have two numbers in the Threshold and none in the Objective Tables

Table 4-1: Can the government confirm the target detection. Surveillance Rate and SATCOM specs look like they should be Threshold and

Objective vice both criteria being just Thresholds.

PMSE has both threshold and objective surveillance rates. Inner Sea Range threshold surveillance rate of 2,700

NM2/hr. at sea state of 3, target size of 3 m2 and a PD Range of 20NM and Outer Sea Range threshold surveillance rate of 4,000 NM2/hr. at sea state of 10m2, target size of 10 m2 and a PD Range of 30NM. Inner Sea Range

Objective Surveillance rate 4,000 NM2/hr. at sea state of 3, target size of N/A and a PD Range of 25NM and Outer

Sear Range Objective surveillance rate of 6,000 NM2/hr. at sea state of 4, target size of N/A and a PD Range of

50NM.

Table 4-1 Table 4-1 Target detection, Surveillance Rate and SATCOM requirements have two numbers in the Threshold and none in the Objective Tables

Table 4-1: Can the government confirm the target detection. Surveillance Rate and SATCOM specs look like they should be Threshold and

Objective vice both criteria being just Thresholds.

SATCOM is Objective only for PMRF and PMSR