NSST_QA_Tracker_Set_2_Ver_1(16FEB2017).xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 62 KB Posted Feb 16, 2017

Attached to: Surface Navigation, Seamanship, and Shiphandling Trainers (NSST) Systems and Support. Site Visit Questions and Answers
Solicitation number: N6134017R0020
Issued by: Department of the Navy Naval Air Systems Command Naval Air Warfare Center

About this file

From the source

Question and Answer tracker set 2 version 1.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
N61340-17-R-002004_NSST_Conformed_Copy.docx	DOCX document	Jun 6, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Amend_0004.docx	DOCX document	Jun 6, 2017
Att_L-8_NSST_QA_Tracker_Set_7_Ver_1(5JUN2017).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jun 6, 2017
Amendment_0003-without_Req_Docs.zip	ZIP file	May 25, 2017
Att_L-1_Price_Attachment_Rev_1.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 9, 2017
N61340-17-R-002002_NSST_Conformed_Copy.docx	DOCX document	May 9, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Amend_0002.docx	DOCX document	May 9, 2017
Att_L-6_NSST_QA_Tracker_Set_5_Ver_1(9MAY2017).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 9, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Amend_0001.docx	DOCX document	May 1, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Final.docx	DOCX document	May 1, 2017
NSST_QA_Tracker_Set_4_Ver_1(27MAR2017).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 28, 2017
NSST_Formal_Solicitation_Release_Information_Rev_1.docx	DOCX document	Apr 28, 2017
Final_RFP.zip	ZIP file	Apr 28, 2017
NSST_Post_Industry_Day_Notice_Rev_1.docx	DOCX document	Mar 16, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Draft_Rev1.docx	DOCX document	Mar 6, 2017
NSST_QA_Tracker_Set_3_Ver_1(1MAR2017).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Mar 1, 2017
NSST_Post_Industry_Day_Notice.docx	DOCX document	Mar 1, 2017
NSST_Industry_Day_Notice_Rev1.docx	DOCX document	Feb 23, 2017
NSS_Site_Visit-Industry_Day_Notice_Rev_1.docx	DOCX document	Feb 23, 2017
NSST_Draft_Req_Request_Rev1.docx	DOCX document	Feb 16, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_Draft_Package.zip	ZIP file	Feb 15, 2017
NSST Industry Day Notice.docx	DOCX document	Feb 15, 2017
Att 2_Data Item Transmittal Form_NAWCTSD_4330.pdf	PDF	Feb 15, 2017
N61340-17-R-0020_NSST_Draft.docx	DOCX document	Feb 15, 2017
Att 3_OAWR Form.docx	DOCX document	Feb 15, 2017

Show all 25

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Notes

Responses are subject to change. Any responses to subsequent question sets shall superceed responses herin.

Nothing in these responses superceeds requirements as stated in the solicitation.

A-RFP

Item #	Subject	Question/Comment/Request/Recommendation	Reference(s)	Date	Government Response	Response Date	A
A-1	IDIQ Budget	<Follow-on questions from QA tracker set 1 question A-4>:

1) The Government's answer implies that the budget is for the entire NSST Program given that it is based on the sum of the potential efforts to be conducted under the IDIQ over 5 years. Or is there an anticipation that the entire NSST program will not be completed within 5 years?

2) We do not understand why the assumption is wrong. The question was related to the entire NSST program and not just DO1. Please clarify? QA TRACKER

SET 1 VER 1

Question A-4	18-Jan-17	Under current plans, this contract vehicle will not exceed the contract ceiling (approx. $49M) or 5 years, which ever comes first. While the Government has internally identified cumulative potential efforts up to the contract ceiling over 5 years, this does not imply or guarantee a budget of $49M. Delivery Order 1 (DO1) establishes a system baseline to be used for the remainder of the IDIQ. Significant work is planned after DO1, however the details of the required work are to be defined and proposed to through follow-on delivery orders.	16-Feb-17	1
	A-2	Government Furnished Equipment list	<Follow-on questions from QA tracker set 1 question A-6>

1) Will the GFE to be re‐used be mandated by the Government for CLIN 004?

2) If the answer to (1) is no, how does the Government plan on evaluating disparate proposals, where the re‐use of GFE is unlikely to be consistent across different offerors. In addition, at a minimum warranties and life cycle costs are going to be disparate as well. Will these be evaluated as part of the offers?

3) CLIN 003 produces the first article NSST. Does the Government have any issues with the hardware being different from that used to produce this device without the GFE to be provided in CLIN 004? In addition, we assume that the First Article will not be delivered to a training site. Can the Government confirm this assumption? QA TRACKER

SET 1 VER 1

Question A-6 18-Jan-17 1) Contrary to the previous response, the Government is no longer intending to offering GFE for the solicitation of DO1. If no GFE is specified in the final solicitation, contractors should submit proposals that meet specified requirements without the use of GFE.

2) Evaluations will be IAW Section M.

3a) Differences are acceptable but should be minimized where practical for technical risk mitigation reasons.

3b) For CLIN 0003, contractors may use any combination of hardware procured at Government expense and contractor owned hardware for first article testing provided the hardware used is adequate to meet performance and verification requirements. Contractors may assume reuse of materials procured at Government expense under CLIN 0003 for the delivery of the systems required in CLIN 0004. Any hardware procured at Government expense under CLIN 0003 that is not reused for the delivery of CLIN 0004 will likely be used by the Government for test beds, spares, and to offset future delivery order costs.	16-Feb-17	2
	A-3		3
	A-4		4
	A-5		5
	A-6		6
	A-7		7
	A-8		8
	A-9		9
	A-10		10
	A-11		11
	A-12		12
	A-13		13
	A-14		14
	A-15		15
	A-16		16
	A-17		17
	A-18		18
	A-19		19
	A-20		20
	A-21		21
	A-22		22
	A-23		23
	A-24		24
	A-25		25
	A-26		26
	A-27		27
	A-28		28
	A-29		29
	A-30		30
	A-31		31
	A-32		32
	A-33		33
	A-34		34
	A-35		35
	A-36		36
	A-37		37
	A-38		38
	A-39		39
	A-40		40
	A-41		41
	A-42		42
	A-43		43
	A-44		44
	A-45		45
	A-46		46
	A-47		47
	A-48		48
	A-49		49
	A-50		50
	A-51		51
	A-52		52
	A-53		53
	A-54		54
	A-55		55
	A-56		56
	A-57		57
	A-58		58
	A-59		59
	A-60		60
	A-61		61
	A-62		62
	A-63		63
	A-64		64
	A-65		65
	A-66		66
	A-67		67
	A-68		68
	A-69		69
	A-70		70
	A-71		71
	A-72		72
	A-73		73
	A-74		74
	A-75		75
	A-76		76
	A-77		77
	A-78		78
	A-79		79
	A-80		80
	A-81		81
	A-82		82
	A-83		83
	A-84		84
	A-85		85
	A-86		86
	A-87		87
	A-88		88
	A-89		89
	A-90		90
	A-91		91
	A-92		92
	A-93		93
	A-94		94
	A-95		95
	A-96		96
	A-97		97
	A-98		98
	A-99		99
	A-100		100

B-SOW

Item #	Subject	Question/Comment/Request/Recommendation	Reference(s)	Date	Government Response	Response Date	B
B-1	Product Baseline Definition	The Government responses related to the product baseline state that CLIN 0002 does require the final design (product baseline) for all sites specified even though only one training site will receive a delivery under this delivery order. CLIN 0003 does require the development and testing of all PRF requirements even though not all features and configurations are delivered to a training site under this delivery order.

Further, in the answer to what the Government expects for CLIN 0002 design in order to arrive in the end to the delivered configurations, the Government response is that the SSDD is required to include all hardware and software items being used to meet system requirements (SSS) which would include all sites and configurations. The Product Drawings and Associated Lists (PDAL) requires data for all specified sites in SOW 3.2.1.2. Note: For CLIN 0003, the software baseline is required to be a single baseline delivery that is scalable and configurable to all configurations.

1) At the site visits in December, when asked these questions the Government verbally stated that site specific hardware and installation designs are NOT required as part of DO#1, with only a common software baseline required across all devices.

2) Given the statements given in the RFP and listed above, please clarify the Government's intended requirements? QA TRACKER

SET 1 VER 1

Questions B-3, B-8, & B-9 18-Jan-17 DO#1 CLIN 0002 requires a complete design package that comprehensively covers all sites listed in SOW 3.2.1.2. (Note: The Government is currently considering reducing the scope of this list to San Diego, CA and Newport, RI systems only)

DO#1 CLIN 0003 requires the development of a first article and development seat that is used to verify all system requirements.

The Government's intent behind this approach is to frontload SETR events, system development, and system testing so follow on delivery orders can be executed with significantly streamlined processes that incorporate lessons learned from the first article testing and first site delivery.	16-Feb-17	1
	B-2	Government Testing Location	In 3.2.7.12.7.1.1 it says that GPI will be conducted within 15 miles of NAWCTSD, where is in 3.2.7.12.7.1.2 it says JFI will be conducted within 25 miles of NAWCTSD. Is the intention for these distances be the same?	DO1 SOW 3.2.7.12.7.1.1 & 3.2.7.12.7.1.2	18-Jan-17	This is an error and will be clarified in the revision. Anticipated distance is 15 miles.	16-Feb-17	2
	B-3	Baseline Configuration Audit (BCA)	The contractor shall conduct a BCA of all the legacy NSS trainers as part of CLIN 002. It would be a very costly and lengthy exercise to visit all sites and conduct a BCA on all trainers. Is the Government concerned that the configuration and/or the operational characteristics of the trainers are vastly different? If not, is there another reason that the Government have proposed to perform a BCA on all trainers at this phase of the contract?	DO1 SOW 3.2.1.2 & 3.2.2.1.1	18-Jan-17	The Government is currently considering alternate language that would reduce the scope of this requirement.	16-Feb-17	3
	B-4	Existing Surface Trainers	The NOTE at the bottom of the list of trainers states that this list is not all inclusive, but provides a good representative set. Does the Government intend to provide a complete list in the final RFP?	Base SOW 1.2.1	18-Jan-17	This is only intended to provide information related to the scope and background of the IDIQ. Specific lists will be established in delivery order SOWs.	16-Feb-17	4
	B-5							5
	B-6							6
	B-7							7
	B-8							8
	B-9							9
	B-10							10
	B-11							11
	B-12							12
	B-13							13
	B-14							14
	B-15							15
	B-16							16
	B-17							17
	B-18							18
	B-19							19
	B-20							20
	B-21							21
	B-22							22
	B-23							23
	B-24							24
	B-25							25
	B-26							26
	B-27							27
	B-28							28
	B-29							29
	B-30							30
	B-31							31
	B-32							32
	B-33							33
	B-34							34
	B-35							35
	B-36							36
	B-37							37
	B-38							38
	B-39							39
	B-40							40
	B-41							41
	B-42							42
	B-43							43
	B-44							44
	B-45							45
	B-46							46
	B-47							47
	B-48							48
	B-49							49
	B-50							50
	B-51							51
	B-52							52
	B-53							53
	B-54							54
	B-55							55
	B-56							56
	B-57							57
	B-58							58
	B-59							59
	B-60							60
	B-61							61
	B-62							62
	B-63							63
	B-64							64
	B-65							65
	B-66							66
	B-67							67
	B-68							68
	B-69							69
	B-70							70
	B-71							71
	B-72							72
	B-73							73
	B-74							74
	B-75							75
	B-76							76
	B-77							77
	B-78							78
	B-79							79
	B-80							80
	B-81							81
	B-82							82
	B-83							83
	B-84							84
	B-85							85
	B-86							86
	B-87							87
	B-88							88
	B-89							89
	B-90							90
	B-91							91
	B-92							92
	B-93							93
	B-94							94
	B-95							95
	B-96							96
	B-97							97
	B-98							98
	B-99							99
	B-100							100

C-PRF

Item #	Subject	Question/Comment/Request/Recommendation	Reference(s)	Date	Government Response	Response Date	C
C-1	Celestial Navigation	Please provide a definition of the required accuracy WRT Celestial Navigation.	PRF 3.1.2.1.b, f, n, & t	18-Jan-17	Per PRF 3.1.3.b & 3.1.4.b, system specifications are to be derived from the scale of a U.S. Navy sextant.

The Government's current understanding of celestial navigation accuracy with respect to the U.S. Navy sextant is that is has a micrometer that reads directly to one minute of arc and a Vernier reading to 0.1 minute of arc. Contractors are expected to conduct a thorough requirement analysis to determine the exact accuracy.

Note 1: Under current requirements, this level of accuracy would only be required for the 3 celestial bodies specified in PRF 3.1.3.3.2, and only when using the virtualized interface specified in PRF 3.1.3.8.6.

Note 2: The Government is currently considering removing or reducing the scope of celestial navigation requirements.	16-Feb-17	1
	C-2	Stadiametric Rangefinding	Please specify the expected tolerances/accuracy WRT Stadiametric Rangefinding.	PRF 3.1.2.2.e	18-Jan-17	Per PRF 3.1.3.b & 3.1.4.b, system specifications are to be derived from the scale of a U.S. Navy stadimeter that has two logarithmic scales (height of object and distance).

The Government's current understanding of tolerance with respect to Stadimetric Rangefinding is that the height of object scale is from 50 to 200 feet and the distance scale is from 50 to 10,000 yards and provides higher resolutions at shorter distances and lower resolution at higher distances. Contractors are expected to conduct a thorough requirement analysis to determine the exact tolerance/accuracy.

Note: Under current requirements, stadimeter accuracy would only need to be achieved in the virtualized interface specified in PRF 3.1.3.8.6.	16-Feb-17	2
	C-3	Other Special Evolution Tasks	1. Please provide an example and description of a Division Tactic (DIVTAC) Exercise?
2. Please provide a definition of ‘plane guard station’ and ‘life guard station’?	PRF 3.1.2.8.c & d	18-Jan-17	DIVTACs, plane guard, and life guard are all forms of station keeping. Station keeping involves a vessel maintaining a designated position or sector in relation to another vessel or group of vessels. Station keeping exercises involve radio and flag hoist communications.

1. Division Tactics (DIVTACs) exercises refer to exercises involving the maneuvering of groups of vessels in assigned formations.

2. Plane guard is station keeping associated with flight operations, life guard is station keeping associated with UNREPs.	16-Feb-17	3
	C-4	VMS	1. Who is responsible to supply the VMS software?

2. Will the VMS require a radar overlay?

3. In PRF 3.1.3.5 b version 9.4 is specified but we believe that the current version of VMS 9.4 runs on Windows XP and we believe that Windows XP cannot be used in the system. Please clarify what VMS version is required? PRF 3.1.2.10 & 3.1.3.5 18-Jan-17 1. Contractors are required to supply VMS software.

2. Yes, per PRF 3.1.3.5.n, both "Radar and contact overlays" are required. (Note: The Government is currently considering requirement language changes to clarify this requirement)

3. VMS 9.4 is currently in final testing and operates on Windows 7. No windows XP based ECDIS is required.

Note: The Government anticipates VMS 9.5 (Windows 10) and future ECDIS software (Linux) will be added as requirements through future delivery orders or ECPs when they become available for integration.	16-Feb-17	4
	C-5	GPS Figure of Merit (FOM)	Who is responsible for providing the FOM protocol from NGC?	PRF 3.1.3.5 k & 3.1.3.8.7	18-Jan-17	Contractors are required to implement a FOM model that simulates the functions and effects of the FOM protocol.	16-Feb-17	5
	C-6	Hand Held Controller	Is the HMD “hand held controller” the shuttle for the visual?	PRF 3.1.4.1.1.1 a	18-Jan-17	No. HMDs don't require a shuttle because they have orientation trackers. The hand held controller provides an input mechanism for the person wearing the HMD. In legacy devices this input mechanism has historically been a joystick that provides features such as zoom, bore sighting, and overlay toggles. (Note: The Government is currently considering alternate language that does not use the term "Head Mounted Display" to allow for alternate technical approaches)	16-Feb-17	6
	C-7	Watch Station Initial Conditions	Please provide a definition of saving ‘watch station initial conditions'. Does this apply to all equipment and systems on the bridge?	PRF 3.1.5.1 c	18-Jan-17	1. Initial conditions set watch station initial states, modes, and input/output values. Saving refers to recording the complete set of initial conditions to be loaded for a given scenario.

2. Yes, but there are some known special cases:

A. Communication configuration is required to be set at the MIOS (PRF 3.1.5.2.b) B. In the unique case of a physical controller that can not receive an initial condition state input from software (e.g. throttle lever) the initial condition for the physical controller input value would be set in software until a watch station operator conducts an action that causes an input value change.

C. The Government is currently considering language to add a special case VMS configuration initial condition.	16-Feb-17	7
	C-8	Entity Model Requirements	Does the periscope need to move and submerge?	PRF 3.1.7.3 aa	18-Jan-17	Yes. It should model the behaviors of a periscope in real life which includes moving and submerging.	16-Feb-17	8
	C-9	Procedural Thresholds	Does this statement apply to full backups or incremental backups?	PRF 3.1.8.1 k	18-Jan-17	It is a threshold requirement that applies to all backup methods.	16-Feb-17	9
	C-10	Ownship models	Will the Government be making the data that was used to generate the current NSST and COVE Ownship models available as GFI?	PRF 3.1.7.2	18-Jan-17	No GFI will be provided. Following award of the contract and during the requirements analysis phase, the Government intends to provide the contractor access to collect information from available data and from U.S. Navy Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).	16-Feb-17	10
	C-11	Electronic Chart Operation	Please specify expected tolerances/accuracy of electronic charts?	PRF 3.1.2.10 & 3.1.3.3.3	18-Jan-17	Per PRF 3.1.3.b & 3.1.4.b, system specifications are to be derived based on the significant digits displayed on the applicable U.S. Navy indicator.

For example, VMS Latitude and Longitude are displayed to the thousandth of a minute. (i.e. DD°MM.MMM').

Contractors are expected to conduct a thorough requirement analysis to determine the exact accuracy.	16-Feb-17	11
	C-12	Weapons	Please elaborate NSST program’s requirements related to simulation of weapons and weapon types and behaviors with regards to ballistics and probabilistic calculations; that is, the weapons functions would be more for “procedural” (decision-making) training versus “operational” training (aiming, firing, ballistics, tactical).	PRF 3.1.3.3.14	30-Jan-17	The intent of this simulation is to provide visual and aural feedback to watchstanders issuing gun control orders (i.e. decision-making). Individual weapon operation training (e.g. aiming weapons, pulling triggers, loading magazines, etc.) is not a current training requirement.	16-Feb-17	12
	C-13	Engagement Orders	This paragraph implies the Weapons Control Station will be voice-operated; is there any other form of interface with the Weapons Control Station, i.e. touch panel, console, etc.?	PRF 3.1.3.3.14.2	30-Jan-17	The current weapon requirements are intentionally written to allow industry to proposal alternate methods of control. The "standard Navy commands" in this requirement applies to weapon states and behaviors.	16-Feb-17	13
	C-14	Weapon Control Stations	The use of the plural “weapon control stations” in the requirement implies more than one weapon control station in the design. Could you please clarify the required number of weapon control stations to control the required port and starboard weapon control systems?	PRF 3.1.4.1.5.6	30-Jan-17	This quantity is potentially dependent on the contractor proposed method. The intent of the requirement is that weapons can be controlled by watchstanders stationed at the port side and the starboard side of the bridge utilizing the contractor proposed method.	16-Feb-17	14
	C-15							15
	C-16							16
	C-17							17
	C-18							18
	C-19							19
	C-20							20
	C-21							21
	C-22							22
	C-23							23
	C-24							24
	C-25							25
	C-26							26
	C-27							27
	C-28							28
	C-29							29
	C-30							30
	C-31							31
	C-32							32
	C-33							33
	C-34							34
	C-35							35
	C-36							36
	C-37							37
	C-38							38
	C-39							39
	C-40							40
	C-41							41
	C-42							42
	C-43							43
	C-44							44
	C-45							45
	C-46							46
	C-47							47
	C-48							48
	C-49							49
	C-50							50
	C-51							51
	C-52							52
	C-53							53
	C-54							54
	C-55							55
	C-56							56
	C-57							57
	C-58							58
	C-59							59
	C-60							60
	C-61							61
	C-62							62
	C-63							63
	C-64							64
	C-65							65
	C-66							66
	C-67							67
	C-68							68
	C-69							69
	C-70							70
	C-71							71
	C-72							72
	C-73							73
	C-74							74
	C-75							75
	C-76							76
	C-77							77
	C-78							78
	C-79							79
	C-80							80
	C-81							81
	C-82							82
	C-83							83
	C-84							84
	C-85							85
	C-86							86
	C-87							87
	C-88							88
	C-89							89
	C-90							90
	C-91							91
	C-92							92
	C-93							93
	C-94							94
	C-95							95
	C-96							96
	C-97							97
	C-98							98
	C-99							99
	C-100							100

D-CDRLS

Item #	Subject	Question/Comment/Request/Recommendation	Reference(s)	Date	Government Response	Response Date	D
D-1							1
D-2							2
D-3							3
D-4							4
D-5							5
D-6							6
D-7							7
D-8							8
D-9							9
D-10							10
D-11							11
D-12							12
D-13							13
D-14							14
D-15							15
D-16							16
D-17							17
D-18							18
D-19							19
D-20							20
D-21							21
D-22							22
D-23							23
D-24							24
D-25							25
D-26							26
D-27							27
D-28							28
D-29							29
D-30							30
D-31							31
D-32							32
D-33							33
D-34							34
D-35							35
D-36							36
D-37							37
D-38							38
D-39							39
D-40							40
D-41							41
D-42							42
D-43							43
D-44							44
D-45							45
D-46							46
D-47							47
D-48							48
D-49							49
D-50							50
D-51							51
D-52							52
D-53							53
D-54							54
D-55							55
D-56							56
D-57							57
D-58							58
D-59							59
D-60							60
D-61							61
D-62							62
D-63							63
D-64							64
D-65							65
D-66							66
D-67							67
D-68							68
D-69							69
D-70							70
D-71							71
D-72							72
D-73							73
D-74							74
D-75							75
D-76							76
D-77							77
D-78							78
D-79							79
D-80							80
D-81							81
D-82							82
D-83							83
D-84							84
D-85							85
D-86							86
D-87							87
D-88							88
D-89							89
D-90							90
D-91							91
D-92							92
D-93							93
D-94							94
D-95							95
D-96							96
D-97							97
D-98							98
D-99							99
D-100							100

E-OTHER

	Item #	Subject	Question/Comment/Request/Recommendation	Reference(s)	Date	Government Response	Response Date	E
	E-1	Equipment Demonstrations provided during Site Visits	1) During the training device demonstrations provided at the Site Visits in December 2016, we noted that the RIB’s appeared to operate in a support role. Has the Government considered utilizing the RIB devices to perform any threat simulation?
2) We also noted during the demonstration that the functionality between the Ownship and a Tug, that there were no audible whistle sound simulation coming from the Tug. Is this normal?		18-Jan-17	1) The system has that capability. Employment or non-employment of those types of capabilities are the decisions of course curriculum managers.
2) The system provides verbal order repeat backs of tug orders rather than whistle acknowledgements.	16-Feb-17	1
	E-2	Simulation Interface Drawing	Please elaborate NSST program’s requirements related to API and source code access interface for all elements (green and blue) shown in the drawing for possible extension by other vendors. Regarding the technical interface for API, the drawing indicates a different interface with the “Commercial Visualization System” from other sub systems (Device Manager(s), Model Manager(s), Console Manager(s), Simulation Control Manager) with API requirements. Why are they not equal (no vendor provided API between the visual system and the Simulation Backbone)?	Industry Site Visit Power Point Slide 17	30-Jan-17	API and source code requirements are as specified in the PRF. The Government's intent behind these requirements are:

1. Reduce barriers to future competition

2. Maximize Government ownership

3. Allow industry to propose solutions that have individually replaceable proprietary software modules.

The drawing is notional and conceptual. The intent was to show one of many potential ways that vendors could incorporate proprietary software and still meet the PRF requirements. (Note: The Government is currently considering minor language updates to PRF section 3.1.1.1 to improve clarity)	16-Feb-17	2
	E-3	Software Architecture	The slide states “The government is looking for an approach that: - Enhances future opportunities for competition without wholesale replacement.” NAWCTSD has stated that it seeks a single database architecture across the entire family of surface warfare training systems; however, each offeror will likely supply a proprietary solution. While there may be some commonality in the peripheral devices across these software architectures, it would be challenging to replace the “core software architecture” with a different, proprietary software architecture. In light of this, could you please clarify your definition of “without wholesale replacement”?	Industry Site Visit Power Point Slide 16	30-Jan-17	Under current requirements, if any proprietary software module is not individually replaceable, then it does not meet the requirement. It is understood that some software modules may be dependent on proprietary runtime database formats. That is why the Government requires database source data in open formats so databases can be recompiled into alternate proprietary runtime formats should these types of modules be replaced in the future. (Note: The Government is currently considering adding language that requires that maritime simulation software used by operators to configure the training device, generate scenarios, and control the execution of scenarios be delivered with source code and Government Purpose Rights)	16-Feb-17	3
	E-4	Software Architecture	The slide states “- Any proprietary/licensed software used in the system would be attached to the simulation interface as severable modules”. Could you please clarify which software modules you would expect to be “severable”?	Industry Site Visit Power Point Slide 16	30-Jan-17	Under current requirements, all proprietary modules shall be individually replaceable. Non-severable components shall be non-proprietary (i.e. delivered with appropriate Government rights and source code)	16-Feb-17	4
	E-5	Tech Refresh	<Follow-on question from QA tracker set 1 question E-3>
When NSST Computers and software are referenced, does this include the 9 COVE 3 devices in San Diego?	QA TRACKER

SET 1 VER 1

Question E-3	18-Jan-17	No, the COVE devices in San Diego are commonly referred to under the acronym BDOC (Basic Division Officer Couse). Information provided was intentionally limited to what is relevant to DO1. Note: There are 9 COVE-1 devices in San Diego and no COVE-3 devices.	16-Feb-17	5
	E-6	Facility Reuse	<Follow-on question from QA tracker set 1 question E-4>

1) The Government state that existing facilities will have to be re-used. Does this apply to all NSST and COVE sites?

2) Since re-use is stated, what training down time will be acceptable to the Government for removing the legacy trainers and installing the new trainers?

3) Whose responsibility will it be to remove and dispose of redundant legacy equipment at each install site? QA TRACKER

SET 1 VER 1

Question E-4 18-Jan-17 1) Under current plans, yes.

2) IAW SOW IRR requirements "The contractor shall present and discuss an installation plan that minimizes fleet training system downtime." No maximum threshold has been established.

3) Current plans are for the sites to be made available to the contractor for device delivery "as-is", therefore contractors should assume responsibility for removal and disposal of unused legacy equipment.	16-Feb-17	6
	E-7		7
	E-8		8
	E-9		9
	E-10		10
	E-11		11
	E-12		12
	E-13		13
	E-14		14
	E-15		15
	E-16		16
	E-17		17
	E-18		18
	E-19		19
	E-20		20
	E-21		21
	E-22		22
	E-23		23
	E-24		24
	E-25		25
	E-26		26
	E-27		27
	E-28		28
	E-29		29
	E-30		30
	E-31		31
	E-32		32
	E-33		33
	E-34		34
	E-35		35
	E-36		36
	E-37		37
	E-38		38
	E-39		39
	E-40		40
	E-41		41
	E-42		42
	E-43		43
	E-44		44
	E-45		45
	E-46		46
	E-47		47
	E-48		48
	E-49		49
	E-50		50
	E-51		51
	E-52		52
	E-53		53
	E-54		54
	E-55		55
	E-56		56
	E-57		57
	E-58		58
	E-59		59
	E-60		60
	E-61		61
	E-62		62
	E-63		63
	E-64		64
	E-65		65
	E-66		66
	E-67		67
	E-68		68
	E-69		69
	E-70		70
	E-71		71
	E-72		72
	E-73		73
	E-74		74
	E-75		75
	E-76		76
	E-77		77
	E-78		78
	E-79		79
	E-80		80
	E-81		81
	E-82		82
	E-83		83
	E-84		84
	E-85		85
	E-86		86
	E-87		87
	E-88		88
	E-89		89
	E-90		90
	E-91		91
	E-92		92
	E-93		93
	E-94		94
	E-95		95
	E-96		96
	E-97		97
	E-98		98
	E-99		99
	E-100		100

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.