SUU-72 Ejector Fitting RFI Q and A amend 1.pdf

AFNWC SUU-72 Ejector Fitting Request for Information

Questions and Answers

1. Who manufactured the forging?

ANSWER: Unknown, Boeing used to be the prime contractor.

2. Does any GFE equipment and/or government-provided support exist for the effort. For the former, perhaps an existing Ejector Fitting might be provided to compare to or reverse engineer from (as an example). Perhaps fit-check fixturing exists. For the latter question, is any government testing facilities and/or equipment provided. Does a test stand exists where the final assembly is fit and/or load tested as part of an acceptance process. What acceptance criteria have been defined and what additional criteria are being considered..

ANSWER:

1) Additional GFE – Sample Pi fitting can be loaned out.

2) Fit check – Yes, a sample MAU-12 can be provided for an off-pylon fit check.

The contractor’s initial Pi fitting can be fit checked on a SUU-72 or -67 pylon using a mock-up of the store.

3) Load test – We’ll need to check with the 96 TW at Eglin. This most likely won’t be determined until solicitation.

4) Design criteria – Store mass properties and carriage limits data is available.

3. For clarification regarding capabilities, are advanced manufacturing capabilities considered viable for this effort, or are ejector fittings intended to be manufactured via traditional methods only?

ANSWER: The drawing specifies forging. Any changes will need to be approved by the AFNWC/NDBD.

4. Is the government interested in solutions using additive manufacturing methods instead of forging methods for building the near net shape fitting?

ANSWER: The drawing specifies forging. Any changes will need to be approved by the AFNWC/NDBD.

5. If so, is there additional engineering information available on component loads, vibration profiles, and life expectancy that can be used to verify alternate materials and processes?

ANSWER: Yes. Store mass properties and carriage limit data is available. DADT data is also available.

6. Is there a desired starting delivery date and delivery schedule (assuming not all delivered at once) for these fittings?

ANSWER: We have some schedule flexibility but want to know as part of the RFI request:

e. What would you estimate the schedule to deliver approximately 100 ejector fittings?

7. Is it helpful to the government from a contracting perspective to leverage a SBIR program for this effort to enable sole-source contracting?

ANSWER: We are currently looking at all acquisition avenues for this effort.

Proper market research can be performed by responding with your capabilities, entity status, and any other pertinent information that might help the Government choose the best acquisition strategy.

8. If you release an RFP for this effort do you anticipate direct funding from the government or use of a different approach such as an OTA or IDIQ?

ANSWER: As mentioned, we are still exploring all acquisition strategies. We do not have any anticipated funding stream. A more defined strategy will form once the Request for Information has closed.

9. Is heat treatment necessary after machining operations, or is it only required after forging (reference PL 426-10521 GN 56)?

ANSWER: Heat treatment is required after forging, not after machining.

10. If heat treatment is needed after milling, is the milling print provided specifying the dimensional requirements for pre- or post-heat treat (reference PL 426-10521 GN 56)?

ANSWER: Heat treatment is to be performed before milling. The final dimensional requirements are specified on 426-10110.

11. Is forging mandatory for this project, or is it possible to machine the components from billet/other raw material processes (reference DWG no. 426-10521)?

ANSWER: Forging is mandatory for this project. However, there are two methods that can be used. Drawing 426-10521 calls for a near net shaped forging (-1 config) that is heat treated before machining. Drawing 426-10110 call for a forged block (see zone 1A5) that is heat treated and machined.

12. Can you provide information on the original forging vendor (reference DWG no. 426-

10521)?

ANSWER: We do not have any information regarding the original forging vendor.

13. If original dies are not provided – custom dies will be required to design and manufacture. Is this approach acceptable for the government (reference DWG no. 426- 10521)?

ANSWER: The original dies are not available. Custom die design and manufacture will be required. See the answer for question 11 above regarding forging.

14. Can you provide 3D model that is referenced in assembly drawing provided (reference DWG no. 930-43811)?

ANSWER: A reference model of 930-43811 can be provided at solicitation. This model is currently for reference only/DRAFT and has not been validated using actual fielded hardware.