E-2_C-2_Landing_Gear_RFI_Posting.docx

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ANNOUNCEMENT

Defense Logistics Agency - Aviation

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE

The E-2 Hawkeye and C-2 Greyhound play critical roles in U.S. Naval operations. The aerial early warning role of the E-2, and the Carrier Onboard Delivery (COD) role of the C-2, are both indispensable in achieving mission success. Interruptions in availability for these aircraft are immediately felt, especially given the small size of the fleet. Of particular concern for both the E-2 and C-2 aircraft is landing gear repair parts availability during Fleet Readiness Center (FRC) Depot repair.

As these aging aircraft continue to be flown longer than intended, engineering analysis is unable to capture all components that will experience failure prior to that failure’s occurrence. Additionally, the Government has procedural and systemic challenges which inhibit timely and reliable supply demand signals and a subsequent appropriate response to demand signals. Some of these unique challenges will require a considerable amount of Government resources and time to correct. Consequently, E-2/C-2 component and aircraft repair and overhaul is frequently plagued by a lack of parts availability to meet production schedules at the Fleet Readiness Center Southwest (FRCSW) in San Diego, California.

Recent material shortages are most prevalent in the component repair line for the E-2 and C-2 landing gear system. Work arounds and short-term efforts are in progress, but these efforts are limited in their effect, costly, and require significant human resources. There is also a diminishing supply of surplus and scrap material for the Government to rely on. When the component line cannot produce the required landing gear components, this causes a line stop (work stop) on the E-2 and C-2 aircraft production lines. Complicating the challenge is the fact that landing gear assemblies, components, and piece parts often have long lead times, include critical safety of flight requirements and have complex engineering and/or manufacturing processes with a limited commercial industrial base to rely on. Many of the piece parts have been reprocessed or manufactured as a “stop-gap” measure in FRCSW’s organic manufacturing center. Engineering intervention and adjudication of specifications, evaluations, and alternative manufacturing and reprocessing techniques is often required.

During the last several months, recovering from a work stoppage has been difficult and is often followed by another similar work stop soon after. Although E-2 and C-2 landing gear components (e.g. struts and drag braces) are causing recent line stop for E-2 and C-2 aircraft at FRCSW, there are other systems on the E-2 and C-2 aircraft such as surfaces and hydraulics which have the same or similar challenges and susceptible to similar delays causing work stoppages.

The purpose of this Request for Information (RFI) is to provide the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), in support of the U.S. Navy, with a comprehensive logistics and engineering management solution.

GOVERNMENT OBJECTIVES

(1) “Zero Line Stops/Work Stops” The Government is seeking a solution from industry which will prevent a production line stop due to lack of material availability [includes both procurement of consumables and procurement of new Depot Level Repairables (DLRs)] as soon as possible. This solution should be sustainable long-term.

(2) “Improve Overall Material Support” The Government is seeking a solution which will improve overall material support for the E-2 and C-2 aircraft. The Government has metrics for unfilled orders (UFOs) and fill rate (sometimes referred to as issue effectiveness). The objective will be to improve these key metrics.

(3) “Leverage Industry Engineering and Material Management Skills” This includes providing technical and engineering support in an effort to maximize efficiency and streamline production and manufacturing processes which will yield accelerated FRCSW repair turnaround time (TAT) and increase component reliability through enhanced repair monitoring and material management support.

(4) “Focus on Landing Gear First” Have a comprehensive, forward looking solution which considers landing gear system first, but the solution should be able to reliably and quickly be expanded to other systems in the future.

(5) “Quick Win” Put in place a solution which will quickly alleviate the current and near-term material shortages with a longer term goal of Zero Line Stops as soon as possible.

(6) “Performance-Based Arrangement” The Government is seeking a solution which includes a performance-based arrangement. It should illustrate a close teaming relationship with frequent on-site collaboration and monitoring. The incentive would achieve cost-wise readiness meaning it would provide the industry partner(s) with the appropriate level of incentive to balance their risks while achieving objectives 1-5.

QUESTIONS

(1) Unexpected demand surges for individual repair parts are possible. In your opinion, what is the best way to supply E-2 and C-2 landing gear parts quickly when they are not anticipated?

(2) Can you quantify the cost impact of ensuring material availability in a rapid manner?

(3) What are your capabilities for supplying E-2 and C-2 landing gear parts? Additionally, what capabilities do you have supplying long-lead time parts where a requirement is not discovered until it is too late but a rapid response is of significant importance?

(4) Forecasting may be difficult and rapid manufacturing may be required. Explain how you could employ the limited commercial industry resources which have specific capabilities such as forging, machining, plating, chemical milling, stretch-forming, grinding, and heat treatment. Scheduling workload through these process houses can be a challenge. How can you maintain a schedule and streamline production process flow when faced with difficult procurements.

(5) How would you recommend collaborating on unknown demands to reduce administrative and production lead times?

(6) What engineering and technical capabilities does your firm leverage and employ, both in general and with aircraft landing gear specifically?

(7) What type of contract do you consider to be best suited for an effort of this magnitude? If an incentive-based arrangement is made, how would your company structure the incentive which would provide the right balance of risk, cost, schedule, and performance?

(8) What experience do you have in satisfying this type of initiative? What do you envision as the risk areas associated with this effort and how would you mitigate those risks?

(9) Describe how your firm manages parts obsolescence and configuration changes, especially as it relates to preventing production line interruptions and assuring continuous weapon system supportability.

(10) Would your company be willing to invest in inventory, tooling, vendor relationships, manpower, etc. necessary to achieve the Government objectives stated above? If not, why?

(11) Describe your capabilities of tracking material end-to-end within the logistics process.

(12) Is there any additional feedback you feel is relevant or some other solution/approach you believe the Government should consider?

POINTS OF CONTACT

Please send your responses to the RFI questions to the following POCs by COB:

Melvin Croll, Contracting Officer, DLA Aviation, melvin.croll@dla.mil Rita Stocks, Program Manager, DLA Aviation, rita.Stocks.ctr@dla.mil

DISCLAIMER

In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), responses to this RFI are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract.

This RFI is issued for information and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation. The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this RFI or to otherwise pay for information received in response to this RFI.

All information received in response to this RFI that is marked Proprietary will be handled accordingly.

Responses to the RFI will not be returned.

Information provided in response to this RFI will be used to assess tradeoffs and alternatives available for determining how to proceed in the acquisition process.

Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.