Vendor_RFIs_Draft_RFP_Questions_ldl_071217_updated.pdf

Question # Reference Question Question Response

1 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section C,

3.3 GFE

Specification ANVS-DTL-10868B, para 3.5.1.5 calls for M-45 and Joint Service Aircrew Mask (JASM). The GFE list only calls for JASM, and does not include M-

45. Is M-45 still a requirement? Will it be provided as GFE?

M-45 is no longer a requirement and spec will be modified to reflect that it is no longer a requirement.

2 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section M,

3.0 Technical

Performance

If a Contractor’s solution proposes separate day and night display with different fields of view (FOV), will the offer be rated based on the largest FOV or smaller

FOV?

Both FOVs will be rated (if different displays are submitted), but the smaller of the two FOVs will be the ultimate driving factor on the score.

3 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Synopsis

Will there be opportunities for one-on-one meetings with Air Warrior at the pre-solicitation conference?

Yes. One-on-one meetings will be allowed to all whom request. The time for the meeting will be after all the pre-solicitation conference information is discussed.

4 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section M, Para. 2.0

Evaluation factors are further explained in the Appendix D diagram. Can Appendix D be provided to the Contractors?

The diagram will be attached to the RFP.

5 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Section 3.3.4

Section 3.3.4 states that the Horizontal, Vertical and Diagonal Field of View (FOV) requirements for a rectangular display oriented as shown in Figure 5, and measured per Section 4.4.3. Since a circular display will only have a diagonal Field of View (i.e. diameter), should we assume that the Horizontal and the Vertical dimension requirements are not critical as long as the diagonal requirement is met for either the rectangular or circular displays?

The requirement is for a rectangular FOV (22.5̊ V by 30˚H threshold or 30˚V by 40˚H objective) as depicted by Figure 5 of AVNS-DTL-10868B.

Do not assume that the vertical and horizontal requirements are not critical for either a circular or rectangular display. For a circular display the diagonal measurement will be used to evaluate the maximum rectangular FOV that could be fitted inside the circular display.

6 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Sections

3.3.5.1 and 3.3.5.2

Sections 3.3.5.1 and 3.3.5.2 state the luminance ranges for White color, as well as for each of the Red and Green primary colors. The Blue luminance range was not stated. What is the luminance range for the Blue primary color?

Blue was not specified because blue symbology against a blue sky is difficult to read. At present the government does not intend to project blue symbology to the pilot, so a blue luminance range was not specified.

7 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Section 3.3.9

Will meeting the Focus Objective requirement earn more points than meeting the Threshold requirement?

Any requirement meeting the Objective requirement may be scored higher than those just meeting the Threshold requirement. The VATEP table does not list each individual requirement because it was used to emphasis what the government felt were the most important requirements.

8 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Section 4.6.10

Why should the head-worn equipment be tested to the vibration level of aircraft mounted equipment?

paragraph 4.6.10 currently calls out:

" . . . Vibration requirements IAW MIL-STD-810G, procedure I, Category 24 with vibrations levels and durations IAW Fig 514.6E-2 . . . ", which is the man mounted requirement.

Common Helmet Mounted Display (CHMD) Requests for Information (RFI)

Draft Request for Proposal (RFP), Solicitation Number: W58RGZ-17-R-0043

9 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Page v and Section 3.6.7

“Change column” on Page v shows the intention to update Requirement 3.6.7 to allow Analysis for Fungus verification. Why does Table IV still show only “Test” as the test method instead of “Test or Analysis”?

The government will incorporate allowing Fungus Analysis as an alternative to Testing into the specification requirement & verification. The fungus requirement from the Air Soldier AQP (Airworthiness Qualification Plan) that the spec requirement was based off of reads:

The Air Soldier System equipment shall be tested IAW MIL-STD-810G, method 508.6.

Operation of the equipment during the test shall not be required. There shall be no evidence of support fungus growth during or after the 28-day test with environments containing the fungus groups listed in MIL-STD-810G. This approach will facilitate a timely review of the analysis report which, if disapproved, will provide sufficient time to perform the required qualification testing.

10 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Section 3.5.1.5

Section 3.5.1.5 specified that the CHMD shall not interfere with the operation of the ALSE.

(a) What is the Government’s interpretation of “Non-interference”?

(b) What is the difference between “Non-Interference” and “Compatibility” as used in Section 3.5.1.4?

(c) Is the NVG currently compatible with the M-45 mask in terms of eye relief?

a&b) Unless otherwise stated; Non-interference is that both items can be adjusted to it's own unique optimum positioning for performance. Compatibility is be interpreted as that one or both items may have to be adjusted to less than optimal performance.

c) Yes, the NVG is compatible with the M-45 mask in terms of eye relief

11 Detail/Item Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B: Sections

4.3.3 and 4.3.19

Section 4.3.19 specified that the Contrast Transfer Function (CTF) will be verified using grill patterns or square wave grating patterns. The System Resolution in Section 4.3.3 and the CTF are best measured using digital signals.

If the ASDC will be used to test the resolution and CTF of the display, can we get direct digital video or post process the analogue video for characterization of the resolution and the CTF of the display?

Yes, the government can provide digital test patterns to be integrated into the ASDC.

12 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section B, CDRLs A001 through A031

The Contractor requests that the Government provide the Data Item Description (DID) for each of the CDRLs to clearly define the data required to be included in each of the documents.

The Government will not provide Data Item Description as the Offeror may download DIDs from the ASSIST website.

13 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section B, CDRLs A001 through A031

The RFP includes 31 CDRLs that are NSP. The Contractor is typically funded for many of these types of CDRLs under other Army contracts because they require significant time and effort. The Contractor requests that the Government allow contractors to separately price CDRLs that will require new effort under this program.

The cost of CDRLs that are not typical of a production contract are a result of CPFF CLIN activates and the contractor's effort would be reimbursed for those activities. The offeror should cover the cost of developing the CDRLs in the pricing.

14 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section J, Exhibit A and Exhibit B

Section J lists Exhibit A - CHMD CDRLS and Exhibit B - DHMD Document Summary List; however, these exhibits are not included in the Draft Solicitation.

Please provide.

Yes, will be provided in RFP.

15 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section B, CLIN 0009 and Section L, 4.0 b.

Since travel requirements are unknown at this time, can the Government provide an estimated trip schedule that the Contractor can bid to?

Section C paragraph 8.4 states specific travel to be done by the contractor. This travel cost should be provided in CLIN 0009.(reference pg 82 Section L 4.0 Volume III, Subfactor

2) a)). For the activities in Section C 3.2, the contractor may define his own travel requirements as the Government cannot anticipate the travel that may be required to complete integration and qualification of an offeror's CHMD. Section B CLIN 0005AA System Integration Activities/Qualification states "Travel should be priced at cost separately in CLIN 0009." Section B 0005AB Post Production support notes "Travel should be priced at cost separately in CLIN 0009." Travel does not need to be estimated for CLIN 0005AB in the offeror's proposal as you are correct in that travel requirements are unknown at this time. The RFP will be updated to clarify.

16 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section M,

1.2 VATEP

Section M requires the Offeror to identify where in the Offeror’s proposal the VATEP objective is met. What specific proposal volume should address the VATEP requirement? Is it sufficient to explicitly state in the Compliance Matrix that the VATEP objective is met?

Draft RFP pg 83 Section L 4.0 Volume III Price/Cost Factor- Price/Cost Analysis a) iv) states "The offeror shall complete the RFP Attachment 0019 (VATEP (Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price/Cost (VATEP)) Calculations), as applicable, to facilitate the Government review process. The offeror shall provide analysis or supporting data as part of the Technical/System Performance Factor indicating how any VATEP objectives have been met." The offeror will state in Attachment 0019 whether a VATEP requirement is met. The supporting data that demonstrates the VATEP requirement is met is to be provided in the Compliance Matrix in Volume I.

17 Solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043: Section B

CLIN 0007

CDRLs and Section C

Section B CLIN 0007 listed the required CDRLs, however in reviewing against the Statement of Work (SOW) there appears to be a disconnect between the CLIN 0007 and the SOW. Below are 4 examples for reference:

• CLIN 0007 CDRL A004 “Contractor Validation Plan” versus SOW Para 4.0 CDRL A004 Record of Meeting Minutes

• CLIN 0007 CDRL A005 “Test Procedure and Report” versus SOW Paragraph

5.3 CDRL A005 Validation Plan

• CLIN 0007 CDRL A016 “Preservation and Packaging Data” versus SOW Para

6.4 CDRL A016 Configuration Audit Summary Report

• CLIN 0007 CDRL A025 “Instructional Media Packages” versus SOW paragraph

9.12 CDRL A025 System Safety Hazard Analysis (SSHA) Report

The CDRL references will be corrected for the RFP.

18 W58RGZ-17-R-

0043_DRAFT.pdf, Section H, Para.

2.4, page 43

Would a Engineering Change Request (ECR) be acceptable in lieu of submitting a Notice of Revision (NOR)?

The government would be agreeable to allowing the submittal of an ECR in lieu of the NOR, as long as the ECR captures and addresses the basic information contained on the NOR (i.e.; Drawing/Document number being changed, Drawing/Document Title, Revision Letter (Current/New), From/To language. The ECR should also stipulate that a released version of the Drawings/Documents under change will be provided after change incorporation.

19 W58RGZ-17-R-

0043_DRAFT.pdf, Sections A and B

Sections A and B list the CDRLs, but the 1423s (CDRLs) are not available for review. Can the Government please provide the 1423s?

CDRLs will be provided in RFP.

20 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

a) Figure 1 - Is the CDIU government furnished equipment? If so what provision is there for tailoring the CDIU for compatibility with an OEM CHMD?

No, its not GFE. The interface is defined by the spec.

21 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

b) Figure 1 - A more optimized system could allow interface of the OEM CHMD to the ASDC. Will the full and open interface control documents for the ASDC be provided to enable such an optimized system?

The government will only provide the ICD to the CDIU.

22 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

c) 3.1.3.1 - The specification is for a monocular display. What consideration has there been for a binocular display / dual optical channels? Would responses offering a binocular display be considered?

3.1.3.1 requires a right eye monocular display (Threshold) or a switchable to either eye or biocular display (Objective).

Monocular means the HMD imagery is viewed by a single eye from a single sensor (i.e.

the ASDC) Biocular means the HMD image provides two visual images from a single sensor. i.e.., each eye sees exactly the same image from the same perspective.

Binocular means the HMD provides two visual images from two sensors displaced in space. Since we are providing only a single image from the ASDC (i.e., the sensor), a biocular display would be the correct terminology. Note that a Binocular HMD can use a single sensor, if the sensor is somehow manipulated to provide two different perspectives of the same object scene.

23 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

d) 3.4 - Would consideration be given to a systems incorporating digital night vision sensors fitted in place of analog night vision goggles?

Qualifying and procuring a digital replacement for the ANVIS goggle is beyond the scope of this effort. The requirement is to be compatible with the existing ANVIS goggles.

24 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

e) Appendix A - Calculation suggests that the active area specified in the video interface (Table A-III) does not support the objective resolution and field of view requirement. Please clarify.

Concur: The existing ASDC/CDIU video output does not support meeting Objective FOV and Resolution requirements.

Vendors can demonstrate meeting the Higher Objective FOV and Resolution requirements using an alternate video source of their choice.

25 ANVS-DTL-

10868B Detailed Specification Item Specification for the Air Soldier

CHMD

f) Appendix A – Similarly the ASDC video interface does not appear to support the objective requirements for resolution and field of view. Please clarify. This would imply that in order to meet the objective requirements that an updated CDIU and ASDC would be required. If so will full ICDs be made available for these?

Concur: The existing ASDC/CDIU video output does not support meeting Objective FOV and Resolution requirements.

Vendors can demonstrate meeting the Higher Objective FOV and Resolution requirements using an alternate video source of their choice.

26 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043 section L

Is Certified Cost or Pricing Data required? Section L states that certified cost or pricing data is not required with the submission of the proposal, however section I and L include clauses that apply when it is contemplated that certified cost or pricing data will be required from the contractor or any subcontractor

Certified Cost or Pricing Data will not be required. The contract will remove any reference of such requirement with the RFP.

27 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043, Section M, paragraph 3.0) b) pages 89-90

The reference states that the CHMD “Evaluation shall include pilot/user assessments of any fully functional production representative display and drive…” but then goes on to state that “The inability [for an offeror] to provide a production repre- sentative display… will not penalize the offeror for this sub-factor.” It goes on to say, “Absence of a product sample and/or mockup interface to the RWH helmet will result in the offerors proposal being evaluated purely on their technical description of their product and the proposed integration approach.”

1. If offerors do not provide a representative CHMD sample for this NDI program, how can any of the evaluation factors, especially image quality and emergency egress, be fully and properly evaluated by the pilots/users “purely on their technical description”?

2. Shouldn’t the government require a representative sample of the offeror’s CHMD which is, at a minimum, mountable to an HGU-56P helmet and driven by a display generator?

3. Rather than potentially awarding a CHMD production contract based on a written proposal response alone, shouldn’t the government reduce their risks by having a cross-section of US Army pilots evaluate the usability/desirability of the CHMD during operational tests?

4. In support of #3 above, and to further reduce the government’s risk, will the government consider a down-select of vendors for a “fly-off” using US Army pilots to evaluate their CHMD offerings prior to any production contract award?

1), 2), 3) & 4) The Government's intent is to achieve the selection of the candidate solution that has the highest likelihood of meeting the CHMD technical performance requirements and demonstrates a thorough understanding of, and a technically feasible plan for, integrating the proposed solution with the HGU-56/P RWH, associated Air SS equipment, and with the existing ASDC/CDIU video, control, and electrical interfaces. It is the Government's intent to ensure that all potential offeror's have an equal opportunity to compete regardless of their prior involvement or history with the AW or Air SS programs.

The solicitation of a product sample is intended to be an OPPORTUNITY for the vendor to better demonstrate the design features and technical maturity of the proposed solution as it pertains to the established proposal evaluation criteria, but does not replace any other element of the offeror's proposal and will not result in a separate evaluation rating. The product sample should enhance the written proposal and associated technical data in ensuring the most accurate interpretation of the proposed solution avoiding technical uncertainties , which could otherwise impact or delay the completion of the offeror's proposal evaluation. Similar to the way the Government treats a lack of relevant past performance data in any competitive solicitation, the non-submission of a product sample in and of itself will have a "neutral" impact on the proposal evaluation ratings, but increases the Government's dependence on the completeness and the level of technical detail/accuracy provided in the written proposal. Pilot evaluations will be performed utilizing a combination of the product samples, if available, and the technical description of the proposed solution. This input will be a consideration in the offeror's final technical evaluation ratings primarily in relation to the systems integration and testing subfactor as defined in section M of the RFP. Offeror's are cautioned to ensure the highest fidelity possible in the product sample, and to provide a technical description of any planned changes or deviations to ensure that the evaluator has a thorough understanding of how the product sample relates to the offeror's plans to meet the CHMD requirements.

28 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043, The solicitation states that "the offeror is encouraged to provide a CHMD product sample".

1. Why is the government not requiring vendors to submit a CHMD sample for this NDI program?

2. For those vendors electing to do so, what is relative importance and weight of providing the CHMD product sample?

1) The Government did not want a restriction on competition by requiring a CHMD sample. The pilot evaluation is only one piece of the total evaluation

2) The submittal of the CHMD product sample is not weighted separately. The CHMD product sample (if submitted) will be part of the Systems Integration and Test subfactor.

Per Section M, paragraph 2.1 page 89, the Compliance Matrix is more important than System Integration and Test.

29 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043, section M.2

The draft RFP states the evaluation factors and their relative importance to each other but does not state how these factors will be weighted. Can that evaluation factors weighting or scale be provided?

Factor evaluation ratings are only defined in terms of relative importance to each other.

The factors are not weighted.

30 Attachment_0020

_AVNS-PLN-

12635_CHMD_R

EQUIREMENTS_

CATEGORY_TA

BLE.PDF", page

The First Article and Workmanship requirements (3.10 and 3.11) are not listed in this document; Do we need to include first article and workmanship in the Technical/System Performance chapter compliance matrix?

The first article and workmanship was intentionally not included in the priority matrix, but should be included in the Technical/System performance chapter, because they are requirements in the detail specification. Please note that the first article is also required to be covered under the production factor (manufacturing subfactor).

31 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B

The revision table, on page iv, states "Par 4.6.7, add additional verification method (analysis)".

Section 4.6.7, on page 49, was not updated to include this revision.

Can section 4.6.7 be updated to include this revision?

See response to question #9.

32 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B

The verification requirement of 3.5.2 is by demonstration. The CHMD displays the test pattern from the ASDC however, the CHMD plays a critical role in displaying earth‐referenced symbology and inaccurate presentation of the symbols will cause inaccuracy in system performance. Can the following verification method be added? Verification of Requirement 3.5.2 shall be by test to verify that the CHMD performs according to Appendix A Requirements A.2.2 (Electrical ICD), A.2.3 (Video ICD), A.2.4 (Serial Communication & BIT).

Optical properties of the CHMD (distortion, flicker/jitter, refractive power, optical distortion, contrast transfer function, etc.) are tested throughout the specification. The specification requirement of optical properties are tested throughout the specifications.

33 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

Can the contract award estimated date be provided? The estimated award date is January 2018.

34 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.1.3

Requirement 3.3.1.3 defines the CHMD transmittance of at least 75% for the P43.

MIL‐PRF‐49427C(CR), Eye‐piece for ANVIS which is referenced to the ANVIS performance specification MIL‐PRF‐A3279454B (CR) (part of the CHMD specification) allow for no less than 85% (section 3.4.1.6) hence, the ANVIS specifications already allocated all acceptable brightness variance between the two eyes (channels). Shouldn’t the requirement for the CHMD transmittance for the P43 phosphor spectrum be revised to at least 85%?

The spec will not be changed.

35 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 4.5.1.5 & 3.8.3.1

Requirement 3.5.1.5 defines that the CHMD shall not interfere with the operation of the Aviation Life Support Equipment (ALSE) however, the verification requirement (4.5.1.5) states that “a pilot is able to deploy the CHMD without affecting usage” of the ALSE. In addition, 3.8.3.1 calls for a minimum eye relief of 15mm. The NVG eyepiece eye relief was updated years ago from 15mm to 25mm to accommodate prescription eye‐ glasses and protective masks while using NVGs.

1. Shouldn’t the CHMD FOV performance be assessed during the verification of this requirement by displaying an image that marks the outer edge of the display with one or two pixel box thus assuring that the CHMD full FOV capabilities are maintained while operating with the ALSE?

2. Related to question #1, how does the government specifically intend to evaluate the users’ ability to operate the CHMD with ALSE vs. the usability of ALSE with the CHMD, especially in light of the reasons for the modern NVG 25mm requirement?

1. Verification shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.5.1.5.

2. Verification shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.5.1.5

36 Attachment 0001

CHMD

Specification

AVNS-DTL-

10868B, section 3.6.10

The specification verification requirement for vibration is designed to demonstrate the stability of the display during and after exposure to the defined integrity vibration requirements but does not outline any readability requirements.

1. How does the government plan to evaluate the readability of the CHMD during the vibration tests?

2. Does the MIL-STD-810G specification, referenced above, include the known vibrations which are present during Effective Translational Lift (ETL) for UH-60 and CH-47 Aircraft?

3. If “no” to question #2 above, shouldn’t the government insure that the readability of the CHMD during these known vibrations, which can at times be significant, be included in the vibration tests?

1. Readability of the CHMD during vibration will be evaluated during flight tests.

2. No.

3. Readability of the CHMD during vibration will be evaluated during flight tests.

37 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, paragraphs: 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.8.3.1, 4.3.5, 4.3.7, 4.3.8, 4.3.6.1, 4.3.6.2, 4.3.6.3, 4.3.8, 4.3.16, & 4.3.17

According to Paragraph 3.3.5.2, the USG accepts the concept of a CHMD solution where the Day Display Unit is mounted outside the visor. The 25mm +/- 3mm eye relief is essential only when the NVG system is used. As a result, the verification methods in section 4.3 (performance characteristics) need to reflect this design concept and state “For a Day Display Unit which is mounted outside the visor, the eye relief to be used in the test can be greater than 25mm.” The related testing criteria for Day Mode are: FOV Para 4.3.4, Eye Box 4.3.7, Transmittance 4.3.1.1 & 4.3.1.2, Contrast 4.3.6. Can the specification reflect the above criteria?

Spec will be updated.

If a solution includes a day display that is designed to be worn outside the day visor, the FOV, Luminance, etc will be measured at a physical eye relief greater than 25mm. In this case, the physical eye relief will be specified by the manufacturer.

Note: paragraph 3.7, 3.8.3, etc. etc. all call out metrics (Eye Box, that would have normally been measured at 25mm physical eye relief. All these paragraphs will be updated.

38 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.14

Requirement 3.3.14 defines that the CHMD shall be capable of centering within

1.0 degree of the center of the ANVIS field‐of‐view for all tilt adjustments. Can the requirements for the rest of the ANVIS adjustment capabilities be added, such as:

Fore/Aft adjustment range (req. 3.8.3.8.1), IPD Adjustment range(req.

3.8.3.8.2),Vertical Adjustment range( req. 3.8.3.8.3)

No. This specification requirement will not change.

39 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.5.1.6, 3.5.1.7, 3.5.1.8

These sections only identify some of the requirements for compatibility of the aviator’s night vision imaging system. Can the specification be updated to require compliance to all requirements identified in the MIL‐PRFA3279454B (CR), aviator’s night vision imaging system specification?

No. This specification requirement will not change.

40 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 4.3.14

Can procedure “the Optimum Sighting Alignment Procedure (OSAP) (WP 0006 of TM 11‐5855‐313‐10, dated 30 Aug 2014)" referenced in section 4.3.14 be provided?

TM 11-5855-313-10 has a Distribution Statement C which limits distribution to US Govt & their contractors.

CECOM is the release authority for this document. PM AW has requested release of OSAP from CECOM.

41 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 4.3.14

Figure 16, Helmet properly fitted RWH illustrates the height above the observer's pupil, Can the USG provide the nominal Eye position and tolerance with reference to helmet (see red arrow in the figure below)?

No data is available.

42 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

Can all the appendices referenced in the document be provided? All referenced appendices will be provided with the final RFP release.

43 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.5.1.5

Can drawing number 1680‐ALSE‐192 reference in section 3.5.1.5 be provided? Yes, will be provided in the RFP.

44 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.4

All night display systems (NVG, F‐35 HMDs, etc.) use a FOV that is clipped by a circle. In addition, displaying information at the corner edge of the display, such as in the case of a 30° by 40° FOV (i.e 50° diagonal), displays information outside the NVG FOV (on the eyepiece flange) which cannot be used during night operations.

For the above reasons, can the FOV requirement be changed to “22.5° vertical by 30° horizontal clipped by a circle of 30° [T]; 30º vertical by 40º horizontal clipped by a circle of 40° [O]”?

No, our requirement is for a rectangular display. Our Objective requirement is based off of the Apache requirement, not necessarily an ANVIS requirement.

45 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.4

This requirement call for CHMD compatibility with AN/AVS‐6 (V)3, Class A night vision goggles (NVGs) (MILSTD‐3009). Class A refers to ANVIS NVG compatibility. Can the government clearly state that the class A filtration is required during NVG operations only?

Spec will be updated. The government will add the following to the requirement:

Class A filtration is required only during NVG operations.

46 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 4.3.14

The verification method requirement 4.3.14 describes that the technical observer will use a CHMD “test pattern that has a center reticle or other center symbol”, In order to verify that the ANVIS alignment is achieved throughout the CHMD FOV shouldn’t the projected test pattern also include an image that marks the outer edge of the display with one or two pixel box thus assuring that the CHMD full FOV capabilities are maintained while the projected center reticle is aligned with the ANVIS FOV?

No. This specification requirement will not change.

47 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.8.3

The above requirement calls for minimum eye relief of 15mm. However, it is important to note that years ago, the NVG eyepiece eye relief was updated from 15 to 25 to better accommodate ALSE equipment such as gas masks and protective eyewear. Can the government change the minimum eye relief to 15(T);

25 (O)?

No.

48 Follow on to Question #6

Should Blue be removed from the color requirement? No, blue is still required to make white. The spec will not be changed.

49 Not Provided Which helmet should the CHMD be designed to. Legacy HGU-56P or the new

RWH?

the new RWH HGU-56/P paragraph 1.0 Scope states . . . The display will be integrated onto a Rotary Wing Helmet (RWH) HGU-56/P . . .

Section 3 of the spec will be updated to reflect RWH in all references to the HGU-56/P.

50 Section B, CDRLs 1-31, table #13

USG answer states CDRLs should be included in production. This implies amortization. What quantity should offeror amortize over?

Section L Vol II subfactor 1) Manufacturing a) states the best estimated quantity is about 330 CHMDs per year. The Government is not directing the offerors how to price Not Separately Priced CDRLs. The offeror shall decide how his costs will be covered.

51 solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

0043, page 81

The solicitation states that "the offeror is encouraged to provide a CHMD product sample".

1. Why is the government not requiring vendors to submit a CHMD sample for this NDI program?

2. For those vendors electing to do so, what is relative importance and weight of providing the CHMD product sample?

Rewording: How is the risk level, as it relates to solution maturity, assessed in proposal evaluation?

1) & 2) See reply to question 28.

Technical risk is assessed at the "Compliance matrix -Qualifications" and "System Integration and Test" sub-factors levels.

52 Attachment_0020

_AVNS-PLN-

12635_CHMD_R

EQUIREMENTS_

CATEGORY_TA

BLE.PDF", page

The First Article and Workmanship requirements (3.10 and 3.11) are not listed in this document; Do we need to include first article and workmanship in the Technical/System Performance chapter compliance matrix?

Rewording: How is risk assessed for CHMD solutions that are ready for FAI versus solutions that are not mature enough for production?

As far as first article is concerned, there is no impact to the risk rating associated solely on whether or not the offeror has a product that is currently ready for first article. Per Section M, under the Production Factor, Manufacturing Subfactor, risk will be assessed based on an evaluation of the extent to which the offeror's manufacturing plan addresses first article test; the extent to which the offeror's schedule is realistic in the execution of tasks and conduct of testing; and the extent to which the offeror's schedule meets the Government's needs.

53 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B

The verification requirement of 3.5.2 is by demonstration. The CHMD displays the test pattern from the ASDC however, the CHMD plays a critical role in displaying earth-referenced symbology and inaccurate presentation of the symbols will cause inaccuracy in system performance. Can the following verification method be added? Verification of Requirement 3.5.2 shall be by test to verify that the CHMD performs according to Appendix A Requirements A.2.2 (Electrical ICD), A.2.3 (Video ICD), A.2.4 (Serial Communication & BIT).

Rewording: Government Question and Response Worksheet item 26 addresses only Optics. Please address Appendix A Requirements A.2.2 (Electrical ICD), A.2.3 (Video ICD), and A.2.4 (Serial Communication & BIT) as stated in the question above.

No, will not change the verification method from demonstration to test.

54 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.1.3 Reference

EFW009,

Government Question/Respon se Spreadsheet Item 34

Can the spec be updated to :

-D65 the CHMD combiner lens shall have a D65 illuminant photopic transmittance of greater than 20% -Visible spectrum: the CHMD combiner lens assembly shall have a transmittance of greater than 20% for all wavelength between 450 nm and 700nm -P43: The CHMD combiner lens assembly shall have a transmittance of at least 90% for the P43 phosphor spectrum

1 (D65 question): No

2 (Visible spectrum): No

3 (P43 question): No

The spec will not be changed.

55 draft solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

Can the solicitation be changed to allow the use of a customer’s official rating system when the customer’s official corporate policy prohibits them from responding to formal past performance questionnaires like the one for this solicitation?

Past performance responses shall be submitted using the formal past performance questionnaire provided by in the solicitation.

56 draft solicitation

W58RGZ-17-R-

Will there be another round of discussions after these clarifications are submitted before the RFP is finalized?

No, there will not be another round of discussions before the final RFP is released.

However, offerors will have the opportunity to submit additional questions after the final RFP is released.

57 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.4

Can the specification be changed to: The CHMD shall have a field of view, equal to or greater than 22.5° vertical by 30° horizontal clipped by a circle of 30°. [T]

The spec will not be changed.

The verification paragraph 4.3.4 allows for clipping of the corners and defines how the measurements shall be taken.

58 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.9

Can the wording for focus be changed to:

-The CHMD imagery focus shall be fixed at infinity for day operation -The CHMD imagery focus shall be adjustable between +0.5 to -2 diopters for night operation. Means shall be introduced to ensure that the focus difference between the NVG to the CHMD shall not exceed ±0.16 Diopters.

No, the specification will not change.

59 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B, 3.3.7

Can you change the requirement as follows:

CHMD day operation:

-At a physical eye relief equal to or greater than 25mm, the CHMD on-axis exit pupil shall be 15mm.

CHMD night operation:

-The CHMD, while operating with NVG, shall provide a similar exit pupil (size, location and shape) as the NVG display exit pupil (on-axis exit pupil of 14mm at 25mm eye relief) -Under all flight conditions the CHMD exit pupil shall fully overlap the NVG exit pupil.

1. see response to question 37 above.

2. Negative, the spec will not change.

3. Negative, the spec will not change.

60 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B

Can you add a requirement as follows:

-Design shall ensure CHMD shall not be in direct contact with pilot spectacles / NVG optics under all flight conditions.

Negative, the spec will not change.

61 Attachment_0001 _CHMD_Specific ation_AVNS-DTL- 10868B

Can you add a requirement as follows:

-CHMD shall not introduce safety hazard to pilot eye and / or face during crash landing or direct impact to the helmet

Requirement 3.8.3.2 Crash Injury Risk addresses this concern.