SSC Draft RFP Industry Questions Responses_FINAL .xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N6134023R0003
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SSC RFP DRAFT 10-12-22.pdf | ||
| Attachment L-1 _GFI Request Distribution Agreement.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment L-2_Solicitation_QA.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Solicitation - N61340-23-R-0003 | |
| Solicitation Question/Response |
| Number | Topic/Subject | Reference | Page & Paragraph | Specific Question | Government Response | RFP Change Required? |
| To be complete by Offeror | To be complete by Offeror | To be complete by Offeror | To be complete by Offeror | To be completed by Government | To be completed by Government | |
| 1 | GFI | Draft PRF 200053 | N/A | Will the Government supply drawings, photos, videos, and BOMS of the LCAC Family of Trainers? | Yes. Legacy trainer drawings will be provided to the sucessful offeror after award and no later than the Post Award Conference. Legacy Trainer EIR, IUH and O&M manuals will also be provided. Interested offerors are reminded that the information will be provided on an "as is" basis and does not represet the requirement within this solicitation. | No |
| 2 | GFI | Draft PRF 200053 | N/A | Can the Government clarify as to whether the LCAC/SSC software will be provided and its conditions for re-use? | Yes, it can be made available and is not proprietary. | No |
| 3 | References | Draft PRF 200053 | 2.2.2 Other Government documents, drawings and publications | Have the referenced SEAOPS manuals been updated for SSC? Will these manuals be provided at GFI? | Yes. Data will be provided by post Award Conference. | No |
| 4 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.2.7.6 Illumination | What illumination sources are specifically required? | This should be based on Specification reference. Please see PRF 200053 3.5.3.5 |
Different Sun (selectable time of day) angles, Moon (selectable time of night) angles and all selectable Moon phases, ships' navigation lights, illumination to support Night Visual Goggle (NVG) scenes and illumination to support infrared red scenes, craft interior hull and compartment lights, craft deck lights, searchlights. dock lights and navigation lights and buoy lights, Landing Zone Training Area Locations lights, Launching Ship's interior bay and Launching Ship's externals lights, Launching Ship's search light(s), ETC.
| Post Award Database working group meetings will discuss these topics in greater detail and fidelity requirements. | No | ||||||
| 5 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.3.8.3.b Rain | Can the Government please clarify 'discernable raindrops'? | Able to be perceived by a sense (such as sight and sound) | No | |
| 6 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.4.4.2.2 Support ships except the ESD (and other paragraphs) | For these and other ship models, will the Government provide existing support ship models or support data collections trips to capture this type of operational detail? |
Yes
| No | ||||||
| 7 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.4.5 Databases | Will the Government supply the LCAC databases as GFI software? | Yes. Data will be provided by post Award Conference. | No |
| 8 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.4.5 Databases | Do any of the databases have or require features for river operations? | No. Current databases have river style operations available for use if needed. Currently our scenarios do not utilize but they have in the past and may in the future. The capability should exist as it does with current databases. We do have several scenarios that utilize inland and "river-type" areas. | No |
| 9 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.4.5.4 Database imagery resolution | Please clarify 'overland courses' . They are not defined in Draft PRF 200053. | Any of the overland areas that we are able to drive the craft in the various databases and inland CLZ's. | No |
| 10 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.5.4.5.5 Database Height of Terrain (HOT) | The wording 'shall be increased' implies that an existing fidelity requirement is to be improved. Can the Government please clarify? | The HOT Specification reference is describing the specific |
Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED) Level(s) to be used to build a High-Resolution Terrain Information (HRTI) Terrain Database for this trainer to used with SSC ground dynamics math model.
Here are two references to read that discuss poles and terrain fidelity information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTED https://www.mission-planning.com/DTED_Part5.htm
| No | ||||||
| 11 | IOS | ad | 3.6 Instructor Operator Station (IOS) | What does "modernized" mean specifically? | The intent is for the Contractor to develop using the latest tools and methods to create an optimal user experience including but not limited to features such as enabled pop windows, radio buttons, toggles, slide bar, or drop down options with like/related items and characteristics bundled together logically. | No |
| 12 | IOS | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.6 Instructor Operator Station (IOS) | What specifics are required for cold weather operations? | As defined in SEAOPS (referenced in PRF 200053 Section 3.6, PRF 200053-1 (FMT) Section 3.1.1., 3.1.1.2, and 3.1.10) | No |
| 13 | IOS | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.6 Instructor Operator Station (IOS) | Can the Government clarify if the requirements for the stationary fleet are contained in the current LCAC training device IUH? | Using NAWCTSD P-6942 Rev C IUH for LCAC FMT 16Jan2017, pg 2-31, Table 2-2: |
There are 4 different Fleet Numbers that list the different classes of ships in them, and their offsets.
| These should be user configurable as well, so the instructors can design whatever fleet composition/size/offsets they want for particular scenarios. The ship models should all be available for use. | No | ||||||
| 14 | IOS | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.6 Instructor Operator Station (IOS) (and others) | What controls are specifically required? | As described in PRF 200053 Section 3.6, there is a list of the different functionality and controls the IOS needs to be able to select, modify, and save to Initial Conditions (IC) sets or scenarios. | No | |
| 15 | Audio System | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.7.2.b.4 Sound effect | Will the Government provide craft-unique sounds as GFI software? | LCAC SLEP sound files will be provIded but the contractor is to assess if newer or additional sounds need to be captured. |
| No | |||||
| 16 | AAR | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.8.f After Action Review (AAR) system | Is there an average scenario duration or estimate for storage requirements? | Current LCAC: 4 hour standard for a scenario time slot, which includes some breaks (as required), but that the actual operational time is roughly 3.5 |
hours for the longest.
That said, SSC curriculum design should dictate the design of the scenarios utilizing the AEC and FMT devices and figuring out how to train 10 students in the same scenarios and achieve the same performance standards/times for all 10 students.
Since we have no idea how this training will be designed and course layout yet, the assumption is that we have a max of 10 students coming through, and if you double them up, that is 5 "crews". So we are already going to be at a different structure for the FMT and COMS contract time slots of FMT use. If we get 5 crews in a day with 4 hour time blocks, we will be at 20 hours of operation a day, vice the 16 we use now.
| Storage - Bigger is better, would suggest providing expandability capability for future need if required. | No | |||||
| 17 | AAR | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.8 After Action Review (AAR) system | Can the Government clarify as to which devices AAR requirements this apply to? Do all training devices have a debrief requirement? | Please remember, PRF 200053 is the basic specification that applies to all three operational crew |
(i.e., PRF 200053-1, PRF 200053-2, PRF 200053-3) training devices.
| No | ||||||
| 18 | Environmental conditions | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.11 Environmental conditions | What are the specifications of the "existing conditions"? | Trainer contractor to provide BTUH load/heat dessipation , operational temperature and humidity requirements for the trainer. Government will provide for sufficient environmental condition to meet the requirements. | |
| No | ||||||
| 19 | Facilities | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.21.1 Trainer power requirements | Can the Government specify the power load limits not to be exceeded? Are the Site Trainer Facilities Reports (or equivalent) available as GFI? | Trainer contractor to provide the required electrical power for the complete trainer operation. Government will provide main panel to connect the trainer. | No |
| 20 | Facilities | Draft PRF 200053 | 3.21.2 Power Distribution Unit (PDU) | Can the Government please clarify if the intent is that the UPS and Motion System remained powered and operational if the EPO is activated? | "A powered access stairway or ramp shall be provided for personnel entry and exit onto the motion platform." "In the event of total electrical power failure, or activation of an Emergency Power Off (EPO) device, the access device shall automatically move to the cockpit egress position." Clarification: The UPS and Motion System are to remained powered, but not operational if the EPO is activated. This will provide the necessary power for the trainer to be shutdown in an orderly fashion, and placed in a safe condition. This includes the settling of the motion system and the access ramp moving to the egress position. | No |
| 21 | Inspections and Tests | Draft PRF 200053 | 4.3.4 Tactical environment tests | There have been no threat related requirements in the upper level Spec Draft PRF 200053 or in subordinate Specs. Can the Government clarify? | The prior “Tactical environment test set of requirements” have been totally removed from all current SSC Specifications. “Not applicable” is used instead of removing the entire Spec paragraph to keep from numbering the entire Specification document. It makes it easier to review prior spec paragraphs against the latest Spec paragraphs since the number system is still the same. | |
| No | ||||||
| 22 | Inspections and Tests | Draft PRF 200053 | 4.3.9 Thermal survey | Which requirements are being verified with this survey? |
Which trainers does this apply to? Part A: All Contractor developed (or integrated) heat generating training device components.
Part B: All Contractor developed SSC Trainers. Please remember, the basic (PRF 200053) Spec set of requirements applies to all three (i.e., PRF 200053-1, PRF 200053-2, PRF 200053-3) training devices.
| No | |||||
| 23 | Inspections and Tests | Draft PRF 200053 | 4.3.10.3.1 ESD test points | This requirement appears very broad in its coverage of physical test points. Can the Government please clarify the scope of testing needed to meet the requirements? | From PRF 200053 |
Paragraph 4.3.10.3.1 ESD test points
Test points to be considered shall include the following locations as applicable: all conductive or non-conductive points in the control or keyboard area and all other point of human contact such as switches, knobs, buttons, indicators LEDs, and other accessible areas. As a minimum, each face shall be included.
The main point is to properly ground all trainer components so floating voltage does not shock individuals touching any part(s) of the the training device.
| No | ||||||
| 24 | Inspections and Tests | Draft PRF 200053 | 4.3.10.4 Lightning verification | Typically lightning protection, especially lightning rods, are Facility requirements. Can the Government please clarify additional requirements beyond tying trainers to Facility provided ground or bidder providing their own earth ground rod? | Contract should be responsible for connecting to facility ground. They should not have to provide their own earth ground rod. The verification process is through examination per Table I Requirement/Verification Cross Reference Matrix. | No |
| 25 | Performance | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.1 | SSC FMT performance and functional requirements | Are all of the conditions, procedures, and craft dynamics to simulate the operations in this section provided in the SEAOPS manuals? If not, how will those details be provided? | The contractual Order of (Trainer Performance) |
Precedence is the SOW, Basic Spec, the three individual trainer device specs and than supporting technical documentation.
The lastest version the SEAOPS manuals will be provided if requested. Please understand this is platform still in develop, so some technical maybe still marked as DRAFT copy versions.
| No | |||||
| 26 | Performance | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.1 a.14 SSC FMT performance and functional requirements | What land terrain features are required? How do collision detection requirements apply to land terrain features? | What land terrain features are required? |
High fidelity Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED) and High fidelity Digital Feature Elevation Data (DFED) data information being used to create a correlated the visual/sensor and terrain database.
How do collision detection requirements apply to land terrain features?
Geolocation refers to the use of location technologies such as Latitude or Longitude or Data coordinates specific of locations or volumes to identify and track the whereabouts of database objects. For Example: Steep sand dunes (training) locations, mature trees , buildings and surrounding structures, bridge plyons, land barries and steep uneven terrain (Training) locations .
Post Award Database working group meetings will discuss these topics.
| No | |||||
| 27 | Performance | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.1.b.12 | What support ships are required to be simulated? | See PRF 200053 and |
Paragraph 3.5.4.4.2.4 "Support ships"
| No | |||||
| 28 | Required States and Models | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.4.1 Simulation fidelity | Can the Government further define how the 'solution' ,'alogrithms employed' , 'consistent' and 'stable' requirements are distinctly testable per Table 1 Requirement/Verification Cross-Reference Matrix? | See Paragraph 3.1.4.1 |
Using craft dynamics computations with a threshold of 60 Hertz (Hz) and an objective of 120 Hz.
The objective measurements will be based on the following Paragragh criteria:
provide mathematically consistent and stable solutions that are free of discernible stepping, oscillating, jittering, and other erratic behavior.
| No | |||||||
| 29 | Required States and Models | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.4.4 Simulation fidelity | What information will be provided for the specific SSC dynamics and conditions around the plow-in and nibbling special effects? | Craft speed performance, maneuverability, and operational data will provided. A planing hull, when operated at very slow speeds, will cut through the water like a displacement hull. As speed increases, a planing hull will have a raised bow, reducing the operator's vision and throwing a very large wake. Therefore, operators must be aware of putting the craft into a plowing mode, which will affect craft maneuverability and control. | No | |
| 30 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053-1 | 3.1.7.4.3.3 VRDGS specifications | Can the Government clarify the requirement regarding the use of “Latest” on the NVidia graphics processor? As often as graphics cards change, meeting the requirement of “latest” can be subject to interpretation. | |||
| Also can the Government confirm that Nvidia is a Government-directed solution? | Requirements will be updated to latest generations of CPU and GPU processors. It will be up to the contractor to select a solution that will run the software the best. | Yes |
a. Latest generation of CPU processors with minimum of 8 processor cores.
b. Latest generation of GPU processors.
c. 16 GB RAM at minimum.
f. Not degrade performance of VRDGS software requirement
| 31 | Motion Platform system | Draft PRF 200053-1 | B.1.1.9 Motion payload weight | Can the Government please provide specific requirements for provisions for "one addition [sic] student or observer" for the FMT? What maximum weight should be used for the onboard personnel? | "The motion system shall meet the performance requirements at the normal operating weight (cabin, visual system, plus a maximum of four onboard personnel (usually two students, an instructor, and one addition student or observer) and equipment) plus 1,000 pounds." Clarification: The maximum number of onboard personnel is four (two students, an instructer, and one additional student or observer). The maximum weight that should be used for onbard personnel is 200 lbs/each, for a total of 800 lbs for onboard personnel. | No |
| 32 | Environmental conditions | Draft PRF 200053-2 | 3.4 Environmental conditions | If the Contractor is is responsible for meeting the overall PRF 200053 availability and reliability requirements within the existing facilities, can the Government elaborate on what those existing conditions are? HVAC capacities, space, etc.? | Trainer contractor to provide BTUH load/heat dissipation, operational temperature and humidity requirements for the trainer. Government will provide for sufficient environmental condition to meet the requirements. | No |
| 33 | Visual System Performance | Draft PRF 200053-3 | 3.1.5.1.d Visual System specific requirements | What is the distance from the display surface to the C1PEP (Craft First Pilot Eye Point), C2PEP (Craft Second Pilot Eye Point), and DEP (Design Eye Point)? | This is to be determined by the contractor to meet all of the visual requirements of the trainer. | No |
| 34 | Defintion | SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 | Page 14; Section B.2 Acronyms | Should the definition of ADC be "After Date of Contract" instead of "After Data of Contract? | Yes. Section B.2 Acronyms will be updated to reflect After Date of Contract. | Yes, for RFP DRAFT Document: |
SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22
Page 14; Section B.2 Acronyms 35 CDRLS SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 Page 23; Section F Far refers to "C CDRLS" but do not see attachment. Please insert C CDRLS or confirm that they are not applicable and remove reference. Documents were sent directly to Data Custodian listed on the DD2345 via encrpyted zipfile and DoD safe as export controlled data. The Data Custodian is responsible to distribute to their team.
There are two "C" CDRLs and both CDRLs can be found in the following PDF (1423) reference file name:
"C CDRLS - SSC 2022-10-06 SG.PDF"
1) C001 = LOGISTICS PRODUCT DATA (LPD) 1423 CDRL
2) C002 = ENGINEERING DATA FOR PROVISIONING (EDFP)
| No | ||||||
| 36 | Naming Convention | SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 | Page 56; Section L paragraph 3.8 | Solicitation states “The Offeror shall follow the basic structure of the file naming convention in Table G-2 (Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention)”; Table G-2 is entitled “Proposal Structure”; please provide “Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention”. | Information will be updated to be clearer. There is not a Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention to provide. The “Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention” should be the same as identified in Table G-2 “Proposal Structure". | Yes |
| 37 | Anticipated Budget | SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 | Page 74; Section M paragraph 2.4 | What is the anticipated budget for the SSC effort? | Offerors will need to read the final RFP. The anticipated budget for the requirements of this solicitation is set to $39.5 million with the following breakout for both base and option CLINs: FY23-$28.5 million; FY24-$11 million. Should an Offeror submit proposed prices that exceed the anticipated budget amount for the total or the anticipated budget amount for any associated set of CLINs, the proposal is unacceptable for award. Funding does not carry forward to the next Fiscal Year (FY) and each CLIN and associated CLINs cannot be funded over two or more FYs. CLINs not represented in the budget should be priced competitively because all CLIN prices are included in the total evaluated price that is used by the selection official to make his or her selection tradeoff decision discussed previously in Section M. | Yes |
| 38 | Proposal Days | SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 | Page 1; number 9 | What is the number of days for proposal due date? | Offerors will need to read the final RFP. The anticipated set number of days is 45 calendar days. | No |
| 39 | CLINs Structure | SSC+RFP_DRAFT+10-12-22 | Section B | What is the CLIN Structure for the solicitation? Specifically, would the East Coast CLINs be delivered before the West Coast CLINs? | Offerors will need to read the final RFP. The anticipated CLIN structure for this requirements of this solicitation is displayed in Section B. The East Coast CLINs will be delivered before the West Coast CLINs. | Yes |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .