Questions_2_20190710_FINAL.pdf

Textron Questions: NAVAIR (AIR 4.0M) Responses (6/12/19):

Does the Navy require a G-meter in the aircraft?

Yes, a G meter is required to assess the load on the aircraft both for fatigue life structural tracking and envelope exceedances, however a G-indicator will not be required if aircraft acceleration is recorded and stored on a flight data recorder or similar device that flags the aircrew and/or maintainers when an exceedance event occurs.

Will PDR and CDR be required for this program? If so, where will they take place?

Program milestones such as PDR and CDR are to be determined based upon the maturity of the identified solution and any modifications required to meet Navy requirements. The current acquisition timeline is based upon a identifying a mature solution. Location is also TBD. Typically, if required, these milestone event are hosted by industry.

Will these aircraft be operated under FAR15 regulations or a different part?

The aircraft will be owned and operated by the Navy as Public Use aircraft under OPNAVINST 3170.

Maintenance will be performed in accordance with 14 CFR Part 43 of the federal aviation regulations and the Naval Aviation Maintenance Program.

Does the Navy require NVIS compatible cockpit installation?

The requirement is that the cockpit and training system be compatible with NVD's.

Does the Navy want:

a. A single jump seat for a single crew member placed behind the pilots with the ability to move between both crew seats?

b. Two crew member seats placed in tandem directly behind the left-hand pilot seat?

c. Two crew member seats, one placed directly behind each pilot and co-pilot seat?

d. Is a third crew member seat required? If yes, does this third crew member seat also need the independent ability to optionally monitor radio and NAVAID, adjust volume of ICS for each civilian and military audio jack?

a-d. Specifications of the seat have not been fully identified. One purpose of the RFI is to inform feasible configurations. There is a desire to have two jump seats with one having the capability to be positioned between the two crew seats. Both jump seats would have the ability to monitor radio/ICS.

This section currently states "Reprogrammable". Please elaborate on what is meant by this term.

The Navy would like to have the ability to reprogram software to fit the evolving needs of the training command.

Does the Navy require INS capability? If yes, will the Navy consider the LCR-100N Inertial Hybrid Navigator to meet this requirement?

https://northropgrumman.litef.com/fileadmin/downlo ads/Datenblaetter/Datenblatt_LCR-100N.pdf

Yes, the Navy requires navigation capability. Specific systems will have to be reviewed.

Requirements include "Reduced Vertical Separation (RVSM)". Is it a requirement that the aircraft be RVSM certified? It is very rare that this aircraft would fly at RVSM altitudes. Obtaining RVSM certification and operational capabilities may not be cost effective. TAI respectfully requests to remove this requirement.

The requirements is written with having a RVSM certified system. Industry estimates relative to cost and time to achieve certification will be considered for removing or modifying the requirement.

The requirement includes "Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (GCAS)". Will GCAS be a threshold requirement or an objective?

GCAS is a threshold requirement. We await industry responses as to the specific method of providing the capability as well as the cost and time estimates required to implement the system.

Is the Navy wanting IFF transponder installation or is a standard FAA Civil transponder sufficient to meet the Navy's requirements?

The requirements are based around having a FAA certified transponder. There is no requirement for classified or military specific modes.

RFI currently states "Wind and tail geometry…" TAI respectfully requests to change this wording to "Wing and tail geometry…"

Concur. Will make update to RFI and re-post with update.

Does the Navy require Angle of Attack (AoA) instrumentation in the cockpit?

Yes.

The RFI requests to provide the trimmed aerodynamic data, such as CL vs α, CD vs CL, L/D vs CL curves, Max CL, and AOA limits. For a commercially certified aircraft, what would be the need for all this data? TAI requests to please provide AOA limits, and for new development aircraft provide the trimmed aerodynamic data, such as CL vs α, CD vs CL,L/D vs CL curves, and Max CL.

The request for trimmed flight data in the RFI would be to model the aircrafts capability in reference to current and future mission needs. Being able to used the commercial aircrafts data allows for the most accurate representation for follow on studies and mission modeling.

Regarding the current Requirements: "Provide EM and HM plots at relevant weight and payload combinations.

Provide for all engines operational and for engine out condition. Provide EM diagrams for a clean configured aircraft at 80% and 50% fuel weights, full thrust, standard day, 15,000’. Diagrams should reflect turn rate, airspeed (Mach number), turn radius, specific power curves, and load factor (Gs). Typically, EM and HM plots are produced for high performance aircraft."

If we are providing a commercially certified aircraft with existing flight manual that does not currently contain those plots, are the EM and HM plots required?

Can this become an objective requirement versus a threshold requirement? Changing this to an objective requirement will reduce the cost of the requirements.

The request for HM and EM plots at different conditions is to help understand the aircraft's speed, altitude and load factor limitations. This can likely be achieved through the flight manual, if provided.

Note: This is an RFI. Commercial data will be used for informational purposes to inform future requirements development in support of an RFP.

There are references in these bullets to feathering the props. Does the Navy require a multi-engine propeller aircraft or will multi-engine jet turbine aircraft be considered?

The current aircraft is a multi-engine turboprop, so there are legacy references to methods for flying single engine. The Navy powerplant requirement for a follow-on to the T-44 is for a Twin- engine, non-centerline thrust configuration, capable of simulating single engine operations; with no specificity given to engine type. We are open to propeller or jet turbine solutions, as long as it meets the air vehicle performance needs defined.

The Navy META sustainment concept also seeks to reduce ownership, operation, and support costs while increasing availability, if possible, when compared to the current T44 fleet. The Navy utilizes three (3) levels of maintenance, Organization, Intermediate, and Depot. The optimal maintenance concept/sustainment strategy will be determined through the Product Support Analysis and the Supportability Analysis process. These processes are outlined in the TA-STD- 0017 Product Support Analysis and the GEIA-HB 0007 Logistics Product Data Handbook. Technical Data to support three levels of maintenance will be required.

"Is it the Navy's desire to move away from the single level maintenance of the current T-44 fleet?

The Navy is interested in optimizing the maintenance concept. Historically, three levels of maintenance have been developed to maintain systems, but the Navy is open to any efforts which provide system availability at reduced costs.

Is the Navy interested in a cost per flight hour sustainment package? If yes, would this be based of the total (54) aircraft using the described rate of effort of 30 RFT aircraft per day, 69 sorties, and 137 flight hours per day, with 237 flight days per year?

Yes, the Navy will be interested in hearing about the costs per flight hour to operate. It would be based on the conditions identified.

Please clarify the specific flight profile for these aircraft, so accurate spares and maintenance calculations can be performed.

The design mission outlined in the RFI should be used.

Based on the conditions outlined in line 18, the average sortie length is 2.3 hours, but each aircraft should be expected to support the design mission identified.

Is there an expectation for motion in the simulator?

The current requirement has identified motion acuity specific to an operational flight trainer (OFT) that provides six (6) degrees-of-freedom simulation of motion experienced in the Design Basis Aircraft.

Will the Navy provide portals between the remote training sites, such as DIS or HLA communications, for interconnectivity?

The Navy will identify needed infrastructure based upon responses from the RFI.

Chart states "5% initial usable fuel (2)". TAI respectfully requests to change this wording to say "5% initial usable fuel (3)".

Noted.

The requirement includes "TACAN II'. Please clarify if that should be simply "TACAN" or if it is intended to be

"TCAS II".

It should be "TACAN".

What is meant by the term "various payloads" since gross weight takeoff weight is specified and there are no varying external payloads specified? Please either delete requirement or change to "Provide Time-on Station (TOS) vs. radius plots for variou Takeoff Weights and a 50% fuel load."

"Various payloads" refers to possible variations in fuel load and internal payload variations. Assuming the aircraft takes off with the maximum amount of fuel possible, there is a concern that this will allow for only a limited amount of non-fuel payload. The most desirable payload would involve being able to achieve the TOS with 3 aircrew on-board. If that is not achievable, we would like to know what can be achieved and under what payload conditions.

Sheet1