Industry Questions and Answers 9 July 2012.pdf

Government Responses to Industry Questions

Spider Increment 2 9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

1 When will the detailed technical data be available for the interface between the RCU and the other Spider components (MCU, repeater, and Communications system)?

The Government posted a synopsis to FedBizOpps announcing the documents are available for distribution.

Potential offerors will be required to request a CD that will contain the relevant draft Spider Increment 1 documentation.

The CDs will be provided to cleared potential offerors shortly after request.

2 Since Spider Increment 2 must be backward compatible with Spider Increment 1, will the Government provide a CONOPS or other documents describing the current functionality implemented in Spider Increment 1?

The Government has identified the relevant Spider Increment

1 documentation required for backward compatibility. These documents, to include the CONOPs will be provided to cleared potential offerors that submit a request to procurement in accordance with above.

3 To reduce cost and aid in potential reuse, will the

Government make available the source code currently implemented in the Increment 1 RCU?

Response will be provided at a later date.

4 To aid in planning, approximately when do you expect an RFP to be released and what is the anticipated response time?

The Government anticipates releasing an RFP in the Sep

2012 time frame, with a 45 day response time.

5 For planning purposes, what type of contract do you envision?

EMD will be a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract. The

LRIP option will be Firm Fixed Price (FFP).

6 To aid in integration between the RCU and MCU, is there a GFE emulator of the MCU available (or a MCU interface message generator)?

Response will be provided at a later date.

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

7 Will LRIP for Spider Increment 2 consist of delivering the entire Spider Increment 2 System (RCU, repeater, communications system, and MCU) or only the newly updated RCUs?

For LRIP, the Spider Increment 2 contractor is required to provide the new RCU and any ancillaries as required. The plan for packaging the Increment 2 RCU into the RCS Kit will be worked during EMD.

8 Controller Assessment (GFI). When will the Controller

Assessment be available?

The Government anticipates providing the controller assessment prior to RFP release date to facilitate proposal development.

9 Requirements Model. Is the DOORS requirement model for the whole Spider System or just for the

Increment 2 RCU development?

The DOORS requirements model is for Spider Increment 2.

It will consist of Spider Increment 1 requirements to ensure backwards compatibility.

10 Applicable Documents. When are the TBDs in the applicable document list expected to be resolved?

The Government anticipates resolving the TBDs by the RFP release date.

11 Which fielded AV munitions are planned to be controlled by Spider Increment 2?

Spider can control any AV munition or effect that is initiated with an electric blasting cap. In addition, the Control Station should have an open architecture to enable integration future devices.

12 Is there a requirement for Mil-Std 2525B Map symbology?

In addition to the Spider Increment 1 icon approach, the contractor is required to look to Mil-Std 2525B for guidance in use of shape, color, etc. to represent functionality.

Although there are no exact symbols for any new Spider

Increment 2 components, User Interface approach should maintain consistency with Spider Increment 1 and Mil-Std

2525B. Conflicts and necessary inconsistencies will be worked/resolved in an IPT setting.

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

13 Does the "Reseed" apply to AP? AP reseed is a functionality of Spider Increment 1, and would remain for Spider Increment 2.

14 When will the Performance Requirements Document

(PRD) mentioned in Section 3.0.12 of the SOW be provided to interested bidders?

The Government posted a synopsis to FedBizOpps announcing the documents are available for distribution.

Potential offerors will be required to request a CD that will contain the PRD. The CDs will be provided to cleared potential offerors shortly after request.

15 When will the Controller Assessment mentioned in

Section 3.0.2 of the SOW be provided to interested bidders?

The Government anticipates providing the controller assessment prior to RFP release date to facilitate proposal development.

16 When will the Army’s Common Hardware/Software

(CHS) list mentioned in Section 3.0.3 be provided?

The CHS list will be provided on the CD that contains the

Spider Increment 1 Documentation and PRD.

17 Will the "Remote Control Station" LRU be part of the

Spider Increment 2 Solicitation? If the answer is yes, will the technical and environmental requirements be included in the RFP?

Solicitation includes requirements for the SI2 Remote

Control Unit and any ancillaries (if required), that are part of the Remote Control Station (RCS). The technical and environmental requirements are included in the PRD.

Any other existing components of the SI1 RCS (i.e. antenna, transceiver, cables) are not included in the solicitation, since these components are unmodified from Spider Increment 1.

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

18 Will all KPP, KSA and Attributes be addressed in the

PRD?

Yes with one exception: Attribute 10 Training Aids Devices

Simulations and Simulators (TADSS). This attribute will be addressed by on-going Spider Increment 1 effort. Increment

2 Control Station is required to provide an interface to these devices which will be GFE to the contractor.

19 How strong is the PM requirement for the control station to be on the CHS List?

There is no Army mandate for the SI2 RCU to be on the CHS list.

20 Is the PM Office interested in using the Scorpion AV munitions for Spider 2?

There is no requirement for the Scorpion AV munitions.

21 What are the milestones that lead to the RFP-e.g.

sources sought, requirements document, etc

The Government will not respond to this question.

All potential offerors are advised to monitor FedBizOpps for synopsis and RFP postings.

22 The Government summarized the interoperability trade

(courses of action). 4 COAs was presented, each of which appears to be relevant on the DOD initiatives/programs. Will there be additional interface or guidance associated with this requirement?

There is no requirement to implement any of the 4 COAs presented. They were provided for informational purposes.

If there are any additional GFI requests after receiving the

Controller Assessment and RFP, the Government will entertain those requests.

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

23 Will and when will the OIS be provided? Draft OIS is schedule to be released 1QFY13. Spider

Increment 2 relevant information in the OIS is the Spider

Interface (Message Content Document, RCUT interface, VMF interface), which will be provided to potential offerors in the RFP.

This document is not required for proposal development, and will be formally provided to the Spider Increment 2 contractor.

24 Will training be a SI2 requirement? Yes. SOW and PRD addresses training development effort.

However, Attribute 10 Training Aids Devices Simulations and Simulators (TADSS) will be addressed by on-going

Spider Increment 1 effort. Increment 2 Control Station is required to provide an interface to these devices which will be GFE to the contractor.

25 Are AV Trigger Points (TRPs) based on tripwires/sensors or visual overwatch.

For Spider Increment 2, manual AV engagement will be based on visual overwatch and Techniques, Tactics and

Procedures (TTPs)between the operator and Listening Post

(LP)/Observation Post (OP).

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

26 Do only MIL STD 2525B symbols for unknown and enemy ground vehicles and units need to be supported or will a more complete set of symbology be required

(i.e. display of K04.01 Observation Report).

Any icon rendered as a result of an observation report is to be displayed on FBCB2/JCR/JBC-P only.

There is no requirement to display target icons on the Spider

RCU.

Any or all information in the observation report is to be selectively (manually or automatically) populated based on the latest version of MIL STD 6017.

27 To support any blasting cap initiated munition, does the

RCU need to know munition specific data and logic for the display of range fans and calculation of the safe separation distance and hazard zone?

For effects initiated via blasting cap, the Spider Increment 2

RCU is required to maintain the Spider Increment 1 orientation and direction.

There is no requirement for the Spider Increment 2 RCU to calculate safe separation distance and hazard zone. However, this does not restrict the offeror from proposing mitigations for hazards associated with safe separation distance.

28 Which map formats will be required (i.e. CADRG, CIB)?

PRD and SOW address specific formats and processes for obtaining and distributing these products. The requirement is for standard geospatial formats in accordance with the Army

Geospatial Center and ASAALT COE guidance.

29 Are KPP/KSA/Attributes intended to be exclusively for

Increment 2? Cited KPP/KSA/Attributes appear to be a combination of new requirements for Increment 2 and

Increment 1 requirements (i.e. Attribute 10, KSA 1).

Acknowledged. Reasons for redundancy are: (1) they are important to restate, (2) CDD requires a threshold requirement to be established (even if same as previous increment) in order to state a new objective and (3) the implementation for Increment 2 may be different than

Increment 1.

9 July 2012

Number Question Government Response

30 Please clarify "supports 2-way SA & C2" bullet in charts 48, 49, 50 and 51. It appears from the diagrams that seamless interoperability involves a 1-way flow of information from the RCU.

It depends on the COA proposed. Some COAs will require an initial information exchange (e.g. Self-Descriptive

Situational Awareness (SDSA), or other required network management messages). Requirement for JVMF messages is one-way from RCU to FBCB2/JCR/JBC-P.

31 Will environmental requirements be relaxed such that a trade between fully ruggedized military devices and

"less ruggedized" commercial devices can be performed as shown on chart 54?

The Spider Increment 2 RCU must meet all threshold requirements in the PRD. The requirements are not limited to environmental, and include HFE, Reliability, etc.