Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF OCTOBER 09, 2002 FBO #0311
MODIFICATION

10 -- AMENDMENT 0002 MINIATURE DAY/NIGHT SIGHT (MDNS)

Notice Date

10/7/2002
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

Contracting Office

N00164 300 Highway 361, Building 2521 Crane, IN 47522-5001
 

ZIP Code

47522-5001
 

Solicitation Number

N0016402R0014
 

Response Due

11/16/2002
 

Archive Date

12/16/2002
 

Point of Contact

DONALD B. ELLISON, CONTRACTING OFFICER, DESK 812-854-5774, FAX 812-854-5095.
 

E-Mail Address

Email your questions to Click here to contact the Contracting Officer
(ellison_db@crane.navy.mil)
 

Description

1. DESCRIPTION: This announcement constitutes the second amendment to Commercial Agency Announcement (CAA) N00164-02-R-0014 originally published on 27 MAR 2002 and amended on 28 JUN 2002. This second amendment is being issued in response to questions received from industry concerning the DRAFT Performance Specification for pending solicitation number N00164-02-R-0014. It is anticipated that the solicitation will be issued on 16 OCT 2002. The formal solicitation has not yet been issued. 2. INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT ANSWERS: References cited in this amendment are from revision Preliminary 10 of the draft Performance Specification dated 21 June 2002. The applicable questions and answers are as follows: QUESTION NO. 1: 3.2.12 Are DL-123 batteries acceptable for Group B Active Miniature Day/Night Sight Subsystems? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 1: The performance s pecification neither requires nor precludes the use of any specific battery; however, any battery chosen must be common and commercially available. QUESTION NO. 2: 3.2.15 Is an ?all in one package? more desirable than the modular approach currently utilized? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 2: Any proposed ?all-in-one? solution must meet all of the KPP?s for each of the subsystems it is combining. APP?s are, by definition, tradable. Combined systems will be evaluated based on risks and benefits that the solution will provide the operator. An all-in-one solution may or may not be more desirable. This is a research solicitation; innovation is encouraged. A best value determination will be made prior to contract award. QUESTION NO. 3: 3.3.2.1.2.8 At what point does the VBL become too bright? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 3: The Operational Requirements Document (ORD) specifies a minimum range of visible illumination, but does not include any specifications for luminosity. Life Cycle Sustainment costs will be considered during the source selection process; therefore, the systems should be designed to be as efficient as possible and still meet the performance specifications. QUESTION NO. 4: 3.3.2.2.2.1 Is the ?double tap? feature of the AN/PEQ-2 Pressure Pad acceptable for a constant on function? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 4: The ORD has not changed since the AN/PEQ-2 was fielded. Improvements on the current design will be considered. A ?double tap? feature may or may not be more desirable. This will be determined by operational and developmental testing. This is a research solicitation; innovation is encouraged. A best value determination will be made prior to contract award. QUESTION NO. 5: 3.3.2.2 Is a high-power illuminating (100 mw output) laser desired for sniper applications? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 5: Sniper applications for infrared pointing, illuminating, and aiming capability are not within the scope of the upcoming solicitation. There is no requirement for a 100mw laser; however, specific applications for pointing out to 5km in limited quantities are anticipated as separated contract line items. The performance specification will be updated to reflect this requirement. QUESTION NO. 6: 3.3.2.2.2.6 Is there a requirement for an IR Illuminator only mode? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 6: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.2.2.6) QUESTION NO. 7: 3.3.2.2.2.8 Are low profile adjusters acceptable/preferred as currently incorporated into the AN/PEQ-2 Model 5000? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 7: Adjusters will be evaluated on several criteria including, but not limited to, ease of operat ion, snag hazards, glove accessibility, etc. Low-profile adjusters may or may not be more desirable. This will be determined by operational and developmental testing. This is a research solicitation; innovation is encouraged. A best value determination will be made prior to contract award. QUESTION NO. 8: 3.3.2.3.24 8a. The laser wavelength of 630 +/- 15nm (Red) is specified. Is Green 535nm acceptable? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 8a: The wavelength specification has been removed from the upcoming performance specification. The performance specification neither requires nor precludes the use of any specific wavelength; however, the visible laser system must meet the other requirements as detailed in the specification. 8b. Is class III b acceptable for high power (+100mw) mode? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 8b: See Performance Specification (Para. 2.1) Tradeoffs will be made between cost, performance, and laser safety requirements. QUESTION NO. 9: This program is based on the SOPMOD M4 Carbine ORD. However, Crane has established numerous other weapons as threshold weapons ( M14, M16, M249,M60, MK11, Mk 43, Mk 46, 5.56 LMG, 7.62 LMG, .300 Win Mag Sniper Rifle, M2.50 cal MG, and .50 cal Sniper rifles). In reviewing the ORD, it would appear these other weapons are not threshold weapons. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 9: The specification is currently under review. We are awaiting feedback from the user community on this issue. On 7 May 2001, USSOCOM broadened the scope of the SOPMOD Program to include all small arms organic to Special Operations Forces. QUESTION NO. 10: With the numerous MDNS announcements, we have noted the anticipated close date as 30 AUG 02, however we are still unsure of the projected solicitation release date. Can you please advise an estimated date accordingly or projected response time. Given the high value of this program does the Government anticipate having a presolicitation conference? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 10 The estimated solicitation open date is 15 October 02 and the estimated solicitation close date is 15 Nov 02. No pre-solicitation conference is planned. INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT ANSWERS CONCERNING THE VISIBLE BRIGHT LIGHT (VBL) FOLLOW: QUESTION NO. 11: What ruggedization improvements in particular are you asking for? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 11: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1 & 3.4); QUESTION NO. 12: What are the make and models of the lights that are currently being used? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 12: Insight Technologies, Inc, Visible Light Illuminator, NSN: 5855-01-448-5464 QUESTION NO. 13: What are the shortcomings tha t you want improved? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 13: See Performance Specification for requirements. (Para. 3.3.2.1 ); QUESITON NO. 14: What weight are you asking for the light to be? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 14: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1.3.2 ); QUESTION NO. 15: What type of weapon is it going to be used on? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 15: See Performance Specification (Para. 6.5); QUESTION NO. 16: The length of time of fire before reload for continuous fire. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 16: See Performance Specification for firing schedules. (Para. 3.4.4). QUESTION NO. 17: What is the variety of amounts of light output from flood to narrow beam, the angle of dispersion that is needed, and the angle to which to confine the beam? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 17: The specification is performance based. Determining design parameters to meet the performance level is the responsibility of the contractor. A best value determination will be made prior to contract award. QUESTION NO. 18: What is the amount of run time required before the light fails, and the run time on current makes and models. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 18: There is no specific requirement for run time; however, a best value determination, with run time being a factor, will be made prior to contract award. No run time data is available for current products. QUESTION NO. 19: Is there a requirement for the number of batteries it takes to operate the light or the types of batteries that are preferred? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 19: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1.2.4) The specification requires the batteries to be commercially available; however, size, weight, and run time will factor into the best value determination. QUESTION NO . 20: What is the required range the light is able to reach out to and the amount of light that the light is to be able to provide. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 20: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1.2.8) QUESTION NO. 21: What are the types of controls that are needed. Is the desire to have variable intensity from low to full bright, or to have preset intensities just click to the desired intensity. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 21: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1.2.2) QUESTION NO. 22: We make an LED light product that can meet military specs are we included in this? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 22: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.1.2.5) The specification that will be published with the solicitation will be updated to replace the word ?bulb? with the words ?light source? to allow industry more flexibility in meeting the performance requiremen ts. INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT ANSWERS CONCERNING THE INTEGRATED POINTER/ILLUMINATOR MODULE (IPIM) FOLLOW: The solicitation was modified and no longer includes an IPIM as a requested system. Proposals for combined functionality systems such as the IPIM will be considered. INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT ANSWERS CONCERNING THE AN/PEQ-2 INFRARED LASER POINTER/ILLUMINATOR (ITPIAL) FOLLOW: QUESTION NO. 23: What is the desired target range and what is the minimum distance needed to cover? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 23: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.2.1) QUESTION NO. 24: What is the target run time that is desired? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 24: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.2.2.5) QUESTION NO. 25: The request is for improved performance/reflectivity on green and black targets. What is the current effective range and what is t he desired practical range the user desires to have. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 25: This requirement is for the visible laser, not the ITPIAL. QUESTION NO. 26: We make green lasers. Are we being included? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 26: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.2.2.4) for IR laser wavelength requirements. There are no specific wavelength requirements for the visible laser; therefore, the specification neither requires nor precludes the use of a particular color visible laser. QUESTION NO. 27: What is the weight and size of the system that is currently being used? What are the size weight targets? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 27: The current system measures 6.4 in x 2.8 in x 1.2 in and weighs 7.5 oz with batteries. No specific targets have been set. The system should be packaged as small as possible to not sacrifice performance. QUESTION NO. 28: What patterns are currently being used? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 28: Square, Cross, Half-Circle, Triangle, and Circle QUESTION NO. 29: How many more are needed? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 29: We are requesting the capability to install interchangeable pattern generators. The number and type of pattern generators is still to be determined. We anticipate quantities of pattern generators to be separate line items in the contract. QUESTION NO. 30: What pulse cycles are being used and what other cycles would be needed? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 30: Currently, no pulsing is used. We are requesting the capability to generate multiple operator-perceptible pulsing frequencies. QUESTION NO. 31: What ruggedization improvements in particular are you asking for? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 31: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.4) QUESTION NO. 32: What are the make and mo dels of the systems that are currently being used? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 32: Insight Technologies, Inc., Infrared Illuminator, AN/PEQ-2, NSN: 5855-01-422-5253 QUESTION NO. 33: What are the shortcomings that you want improved? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 33: See Performance Specification, it describes the objective system. INDUSTRY QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT ANSWERS CONCERNING THE VISIBLE LASER FOLLOW: QUESTION NO. 34: What is the desired target range and what is the minimum distance needed to cover? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 34: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.3.1) QUESTION NO. 35: What is the target run time that is desired? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 35: There is no specific requirement for run time; however, a best value determination, with run time being a factor, will be made prior to contract award. No run time data is available for current prod ucts. QUESTION NO. 36: The request is for improved performance/reflectivity on green and black targets. What is the current effective range and what is the desired practical range the user desires to have? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 36: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.3.3.1) QUESTION NO. 37: What is the weight and size of the system that is currently being used? What are the size weight targets? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 37: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.3.2.3.3.7) The current system measures 2.84 in x 2.54 in x 1.52 in and weighs 3 oz with batteries. No specific targets have been set. The system should be packaged as small as possible to not sacrifice performance. QUESTION NO. 38: What patterns is being used? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 38: Not applicable. This is an ITPIAL specification. Patterns are not required for the visible laser, but w ill be considered, if offered. QUESTION NO. 39: How many more are needed? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 39: Not applicable. This is an ITPIAL specification. QUESTION NO. 40: What pulse cycles are being used what other cycles would be needed? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 40: Not applicable. This is an ITPIAL specification. Pulse capability is not required for the visible laser, but will be considered, if offered. QUESTION NO. 41: What ruggedization improvements in particular are you asking for? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 41: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.4) QUESTION NO. 42: What are the make and models of the systems that are currently being used? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 42: Insight Technologies, Inc., Carbine Visible Laser, AN/PEQ-5, NSN: 5860-01-439-5409 QUESTION NO. 43: What are the shortcomings that you want improved? ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 43: See P erformance Specification, it describes the objective system. QUESTION NO. 44: While the Passive MDNS section makes allowances for providing improvements to the Rail Interface System, the Active MDNS for which we plan to submit makes no allowances for an improved RIS. It would appear to be in the Government's best interests to not limit manufacturers to similarly submit improvements to the RIS under the Active MDNS subsystem as well. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 44: Manufacturers are free to submit proposals on any of the nine subsystems or any combination thereof. The division of subsystems into active and passive groups was for organizational purposes only and was not intended to imply that proposals be submitted for the entire group. QUESTION NO. 45: Section 3.3 SOPMOD Technology Requirements describes "Supplemental specifications" as existing capabilities, however late r under 3.3.2 Group B Active Miniature Day / Night Subsystems the "Supplemental Specifications are termed as minimum performance characteristics, i.e. threshold requirements. This appears to be a conflict. It is our interpretation the Supplemental specifications are not threshold requirements for this solicitation. If these Supplemental specifications contained within the draft solicitation are considered threshold characteristics, they are limiting and overly restrictive. For examples there are numerous supplemental specifications specifying the exact type of switch based on the existing hardware, the exact location of a switch based on the existing hardware, etc. These overly restrictive specifications include but are not limited to sections 3.3.2.1.2.2 Switching Devices, Section 3.3.2.1.2.9 makes no allowances for the desire and ability to combine hardware as specifi ed in the ORD (See Wilcox comment 3), 3.3.2.2.2.3.2 Illumination Laser Beam Divergence, 3.3.2.2.2.6 Mode Switch, 3.3.2.2.2.8 Adjusters, 3.3.2.2.2.11 (makes no allowances for combining hardware as in ORD), 3.3.2.3.2.2 Switching Devices, etc. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 45: The specification that will be published with the solicitation has been updated to include designation of KPP?s. The supplemental specifications not designated as KPP?s are tradable. QUESTION NO. 46: SOPMOD M4 ORD specifically states the visible laser pointer, visible bright light, infrared pointer and infrared illuminator can be integrated into a single active modular aiming device or a visible and an IR module. While we have reviewed the draft solicitation, it does not appear to make allowances for the Enhancement of combining all the devices into one system. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 46: See Performance Specification (Para. 3.2.15) 3. CONTACT INFORMATION: (A) SOPMOD Program Registration: Ms. Paula Pifer, Code 4081, telephone (812) 854-5686, FAX 812-854-1044, email pifer_p@crane.navy.mil. Please update your information with Ms. Pifer if you have had a change since the last update. (B) SOPMOD Technical Point of Contact: Mr. Barry Gatewood, Code 805B, telephone (812) 854-3842, FAX 812-854-3665, email gatewood_b@crane.navy.mil . Please avoid unnecessary communications with the TPOC until the RCO solicitation is published. (C) Contracting Department Point of Contact is Mr. Don Ellison, Code 1162 Bldg. 2521, NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, 300 Highway 361, Crane IN 47522-5001. Mr. Ellison?s telephone number is 812-854-5774, FAX 812-854-5095, e-mail Ellison_db@crane.navy.mil.
 

Web Link

Click here to download synopsis
(http://www.crane.navy.mil/supply/02R0014/02R0014.htm)
 

Record

SN00183818-W 20021009/021007213555 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |