Questions_and_Answers-_-Round_1.docx

Questions in response to Solicitation N68335-17-R-0077, Ballistics Protection System:

Question 1: Does the maximum thickness referenced in the SOW apply to the completely BPS system or just to the ballistic core material? It is in conflict with the assembly drawings (example -reference drawing 60811205) which has the tolerance for the BPS armor panel defined as (0.589 in. to 0.701 in.) and includes the edge trim, environmental/durability coatings and non-skid.

Response: Unless otherwise noted, throughout the specification BPS refers to the fully installed V-22 floor panel only Ballistic Protection System. Therefore, the intent of this requirement is for the entire BPS thickness (including core, trim, hardware, coatings, etc.) to remain at or below the stated 0.625 in. The stowed rails protrude from the cabin floor 0.625 in. As such, any material variation should not exceed 0.625 in. This will permit a margin of 0.250 in from the top of the BPS and the top of roller rail. Maintaining a gap between the floor and the top of the roller is critical to ensure effective cargo handling characteristics.

Question 2: Can it be assumed that the previous third party test reports/government approvals under the CV-22 Advanced Ballistic Stopping System development effort that meet similar SOW requirements would be accepted without additional substantiation or testing, as these test reports were provided to and approvals given by NAVAIR?

Response: Qualification by similarity is an acceptable strategy regardless for which program the data was originally obtained. Whether this strategy will be approved without additional substantiation cannot be stated until NAVAIR has had an opportunity to conduct a full review of the data/reports against the BPS specification. If qualification by similarity cannot be substantiated, verification of BPS requirements will need to be provided.

Question 3: As the OEM for the original CV-22 Advanced Ballistic Protection System (ABSS) can it be assumed that the previous test reports/approvals under the CV-22 ABSS System development effort would be accepted without additional substantiation or testing, as these test report were provided and approvals given by NAVAIR? The reason for the question is that most of the test requirements in the current solicitation are the same as the CV-22 ABSS development effort and determining that the previous efforts would be valid to submit would affect how we would look at our costing structure for the proposal.

Response: See response to question 2.

Question 4: These documents do not contain:

· Drawings of the attachment system (panels to the aircraft) and

· Structural analysis of the panel attachment system and its aircraft supporting structure to substantiate compliance with mission equipment crash acceleration retention, flight design loading, and crashworthiness requirements.

We believe that the government paid TPG for the drawing package, attachment system and structural analysis underpinning the BPS. Since it is all government property and necessary to manufacture the BPS is should be available to qualified bidders.

Our company is known internationally for light weight, low cost, high quality ballistic protection panels.

We need the additional information to offer the U.S. Government a competitive bid.

Response: The retention method (and by proxy the panel attachment system) may vary based on the properties of the proposed material from each vendor. This level of detail was not provided due to the possible variations in material properties from the proposed vendors. The attachment system must be designed to accommodate the material solution, and analysis performed on the proposed assembly.

Question 5: Does the maximum thickness referenced in the SOW apply to the completely BPS system or just to the ballistic core material? It is in conflict with the assembly drawings (reference 60811205) which has the tolerance for the BPS armor panel defined as (0.589 in. to 0.701 in.) and includes the edge trim, environmental/durability coatings and non-skid.

Response: See response to question 1.

Question 6: Is there a minimum and/or maximum size for the armor coupons to be tested by either a government or commercial third party test facility?

Response: Test panel size shall be in accordance with the Ballistic Protection System Statement of Work section 6.2.

Question 7: What is the shot spacing for the two (2) shot ballistic verification resulting in 2 consecutive partial penetrations at a V0 velocity and 25° obliquity? Is it 8 inches like the three (3) shot requirement?

Response: The shot spacing shall be in accordance with Appendix B, BPS Requirements, section 4.1.2.

Question 8: Does the CLIN pricing for each of the individual armor panels (panels #1 through #42) have to be quoted specifically for that panel?

Response: Yes

Question 9: On page 19 of the SOW there is reference to the following document, V-22 Cargo Handling Manual # (A1V-22AB-CLG-0001-V-22(C)B-9). Are you able to provide that document?

Response: The "CARGO HANDLING MANUAL V-22 TILTROTOR" is marked Distribution Statement C. Therefore, it will be distributed to the Awardee.

image1.jpg