RFI III - Section I ARP Due NLT 18May22.pdf

PDF 268 KB Posted

Attached to
T-6A Avionics System Replacement Request For Information (RFI) Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
WLDW1
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Materiel Command Lifecycle Management Center Tinker Air Force Base

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to T-6A Avionics System Replacement Request For Information (RFI), newest first.
File Type Posted
Pre-Soliciation Conference Industry Questions-Responses_Part VII.pdf PDF
T-6A ARP Section M- Evaluation Factors for Award_31 Oct.pdf PDF
T-6A ARP Section L- Instructions to Offerors_31 Oct.pdf PDF
STC Clarification.pdf PDF
RFI_LOI_ACA.pdf PDF
RFI_Incentive Plan.pdf PDF
Pre-Soliciation Conference Industry Questions_Responses_Part V.pdf PDF
Pre-Soliciation Conference Industry Questions-Responses_Part IV.pdf PDF
Pre-Soliciation Conference Industry Questions-Responses_Part III.pdf PDF
T-6A_ARP_SOW_20Sep22_DRAFT.pdf PDF
T6A_ARP_Pricing_Matrix_DRAFT_20Sep22-PROTECTED.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
LIST_OF_ATTACHMENTS_20 Sep 22.pdf PDF
ARP_CDRL_NSP_DRAFT_PACKAGE_14Sep2022.pdf PDF
T-6A_ARP_SectionL_InstructionsToOfferors_15Sep.pdf PDF
FA810622R0004_DRAFT II.pdf PDF
Pre-Solicitation Conference Industry Questions-Responses Part II.pdf PDF
RFI IV - ARP SRD Due NLT 8Aug22.pdf PDF
Pre-Solicitation Conference Industry Questions-Responses.pdf PDF
DRAFT RFP FA8106-22-R-0004_1 August 2022.pdf PDF
ATTACH - List of Attachments Draft (Updated 25 July 2022).pdf PDF
ATTACH - T-6 ARP Section L Draft_25 July 2022.pdf PDF
ATTACH - T-6 ARP Section M Draft_25 July 2022.pdf PDF
DRAFT RFP FA8106-22-R-0004_25 July 2022.pdf PDF
Pre-Solicitation Conferencce 11 July 20 FINAL.pdf PDF
ATTACH - List of Attachments Draft (Updated 12 July 2022).pdf PDF
Pre-Solicitation Conference Registration Form.pdf PDF
DRAFT RFP FA8106-22-R-0004.pdf PDF
APPENDIX A - T-6A ARP SOW Draft.pdf PDF
ATTACH - T-6 ARP Section M Draft.pdf PDF
ATTACH - ARP Incentive Fee Plan Draft.pdf PDF
RFI III - Section II HUD Rev1 Due NLT 18May22.pdf PDF
RFI III - Section I ARP Due NLT 11May22.pdf PDF
T-6A ARP Industry Day Brief 7_Mar_22_Final.pdf PDF
RFI II - Section IV.pdf PDF
Registration Form_ARP Ind_Day_3_7_2022_Final.pdf PDF
RFI II - Section III.pdf PDF
RFI II - Section III.pdf PDF
Nov Industry Questions (Gvt Response Nov 2021).pdf PDF
T-6A ARP RFI II.pdf PDF
Preliminary ARP SRD Industry Survey Matrix v2.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
T-6A ARP RFI II.pdf PDF
2nd T-6A Industry day questions and Answers 7April2021.pdf PDF
CFIT-P SRD T-6A_B 13MAR2020.pdf PDF
ARP hit list of Obsolete components.pdf PDF
ARP Industry Day Contractors.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
T-6A ARP Industry Day 20210319.pptx PPTX presentation
T-6A Questions and Answers 3192021.pdf PDF
T-6A Avionics System (1-on-1 Meetings) signed.pdf PDF
T-6A Avionics Industry Day Registration Form.pdf PDF
T-6A Avionics System Replacement ARP RFI.pdf PDF
Show all 50

T-6A Avionics System Replacement Request For Information (RFI) has more files on GovTribe.

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

1 | P a g e

3 May 2022

Request for Information (RFI) III Avionics Replacement Program (ARP)

RFI III – Section I (Section I responses are due on or before 12:00 pm CST on Wednesday, 18 May 2022)

NOTE: To be considered “capable”, the Government needs assurance the contractor can achieve US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification via Supplemental Type Certificates (STC) and Technical Standard Orders (TSO) compliance and their engineering department has experience with 3D CAD modeling and SysML. Failure to response to these questions will result in a determination that the contractor is not “capable”.

The purpose of this RFI is to request responses to the following sets of questions.

1. Please indicate your company’s past US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Supplemental Type Certificates (STC) experience with Avionics and the Technical Standard Orders (TSO) compliance of proposed solution for the T-6A Avionics Replacement Program (ARP). If your company has no experience or a solution has not been determined at this time, indicate your plan to meet the following two requirements from the SRD:

“The ARP system shall be FAA certified via a Supplemental Type Certificate and meet Military Airworthiness certification requirements for a USG approved MIL-HDBK-516C Military Type Certificate. The FAA certification serves as primary basis for Military certification.

To simplify the Supplemental Type Certification (STC) or Amended Type Certification process, FAA Technical Standard Order Authorization (TSOA) components shall be utilized to support the ARP effort if available.”

2. Does your engineering department have experience with 3-dimensional computer-aided design (3D CAD) modeling and Systems Modeling Language (SysML)?

a. If yes, describe your experience and tools (software, server, storage, infrastructure etc.) used in past developments.

b. If your company has no experience or a solution has not been determined at this time, indicate your plan to meet these capabilities.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT CENTER

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE OKLAHOMA

This is a Request for Information (RFI) only, which, as part of market research, is being issued in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 10 Market Research. This is not a solicitation, no solicitation exist.

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Training Aircraft Section (AFLCMC/WLK) is seeking to identify sources that may be capable of providing Avionics Replacement Program for the T-6A fleet, located at five

(5) CONUS operating locations with a total of 442 aircraft.

With your company’s current understanding of the ARP technical solution for the T-6A aircraft, please answer the following questions (#3 through #8) in regards to what will be required for modifying the T-6A Aircrew Training Devices (ATDs):

Base OFT IFT UTD EPT EST Randolph AFB, TX 3 4 2 1 1 Laughlin AFB, TX 6 7 5 1 1 Vance AFB, OK 5 7 5 1 1 Columbus AFB, MS 6 6 4 1 1 Shepard AFB, TX 3 4 3 1 1 CSO Pensacola, FL 3 1 0 1 1 Totals* 26 29 19 6 6

*Fleet of 26 T-6A Operational Flight Trainers (OFT), 29 T-6A Instrument Flight Trainers (IFT), 19 T-6A Unit Training Devices (UTD), six (6) T-6A Egress Procedure Trainers (EPT) and six (6) T-6A Ejection Seat Trainers (EST)

3. The ATD program has a requirement to keep an optimized retrofit ratio between T-6A

ARP modified ATDs and unmodified ATDs so that the student pilot training pipeline flows smoothly.

a. What is your company’s ability to vary the rate of ATD retrofits over the four year period of retrofit to keep the ratio optimized?

b. What is the maximum number of ATDs your company could modify concurrently?

4. For the retrofit of ATDs with the ARP solution, what is your company’s estimate of the number of team members needed on a retrofit team?

a. How many hours will a retrofit team work each day while retrofitting ATDs?

b. When retrofits first start, how many consecutive work days will it take to complete an ATD retrofit, through Government Acceptance Testing (GAT) completion?

c. How many retrofits does your company estimate it will take before the learning curve for retrofit installs is fully realized?

d. Once the learning curve is fully realized and a steady state retrofit rhythm is established, how many consecutive work days will it then take to complete an ATD retrofit, through GAT completion

3 | P a g e

5. Relative to the start of T-6A ARP technical reviews for the aircraft, what is the earliest that technical reviews could start for ATDs ARP solution while maintaining a:

a. Low schedule risk?

b. Medium schedule risk?

c. High schedule risk?

d. When does your company recommend starting ATD technical reviews relative to the aircraft technical reviews?

6. Describe the risk(s) that would be undertaken and outcome(s) that could result if the ARP technical reviews for ATDs were to start before the aircraft design for ARP was determined at the aircraft Critical Design Review (CDR). What steps could be taken to mitigate that risk(s)?

7. For a. through d. below, comment on the plausibility and schedule risk of the below for elapsed time between ARP ATD technical reviews. In addition, what elapsed time between the same events would your company recommend in order to sustain a low schedule risk profile?

a. Aircraft CDR to ATD SRR/SFR – 2 weeks

b. ATD SRR/SFR to ATD PDR – 3 months

c. ATD PDR to ATD CDR – 3 months

d. ATD CDR to Company Verification Testing (CVT) and Government Acceptance

Testing (GAT) – 7 months

8. What is your company’s estimate for long lead time ATD Kits for the ARP solution?

Please provide responses to RFI III – Section I questions via email to Welth Cooper at Welth.Cooper@us.af.mil and Gale VanDeventer at Gale.VanDeventer@us.af.mil on or before 12:00 pm CST on Wednesday, 18 May 2022.

mailto:Welth.Cooper@us.af.mil mailto:Gale.VanDeventer@us.af.mil

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .