SOURCES SOUGHT
14 -- Request for Information (RFI) from Industry for an Alternative to the Electrostatically Supported Gyro Navigator (ESGN) Aboard the Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs)
- Notice Date
- 4/3/2008
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- NAICS
- 541330
— Engineering Services
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- N0003008I0208
- Response Due
- 4/28/2008 5:00:00 PM
- Archive Date
- 5/28/2008
- Description
- THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION. The purpose of this amendment is to answer questions in reference to the sources sought synopsis. The due date for receipt of information is not changed. 1. Question : Are WS-27813 Inertial Navigation System Requirements Specification and WS-27827 SWS Nav Subsystem Spec for Trident II D5 Backfit (New Nav Update) classified documents? What is the latest revision for NEAN? Answer : WS-27813 INS is an Unclassified Document with a Classified Supplement. WS-27827 is a Classified Document. NEAN is not one of documents we will have on hand for review, but the latest revision is H. 2. Question : What is the revision dates for the RFI library documents? Answer : WS-27813 Inertial Navigation System Requirements Specification (Unclassified Rev B, Dec 10, 2003) (Classified Supplement Apr 8, 2005) WS-20400 Trident II Strategic Weapon System Technical Objectives and Guidelines Document (TOG) (Feb 15, 2007) WS-27827 SWS Nav Subsystem Spec for Trident II D5 Backfit Navigation Subsystem (new Navigator Update) (May 27, 2004) NAVSEA OD 55340 Trident II Weapon Systems Accuracy Models (SSWG) (Nav section only - Dec 1, 2003) 3. Question : The documents listed in paragraph 4 of the RFI do not contain gyro-level requirements referenced in paragraph 2.1. What document do you wish used as a source of those requirements? Or is the intent to flow down requirements from a system-level error budget that would reflect the design proposed by the contractor? Answer : The documents listed in paragraph 4 of the RFI do not contain gyro-level requirements. The INS should be used as the source to flow down both gyro requirements and system-level error budget requirements. 4. Question : The performance requirement for FOGN during its development had been ESGN realized performance. The RFI states that the requirement for the ESGN Alternative is ESGN specified performance. Please confirm that SSP desires the alternative to meet ESGN specified performance rather than realized performance. Answer : SSP desires the alternative navigator meet ESGN realized performance. 5. Question : May we assume that navigation aids substantially identical to those now available to ESGN will be available for the ESGN alternative? May we assume that SSP desires no change to existing SSBN CONOPS or covertness? Answer : Navigation aids currently available to ESGN will be available for the ESGN alternative. Contractors should not assume a restriction to the existing SSBN CONOPS and covertness. 6. Question : Paragraphs 3 and 4 request "available data collected". The data we have collected is voluminous and complex. We can provide both raw data and processed data with analysis. Considering the RFI size limitations, may we submit additional data separately (i.e., on electronic media) from our RFI response so that you may analyze it? If so, do you have a preference as to the types of data you would like to review? Answer : The RFI 100 page limitation applies to each concept proposed. There is no restriction on performance data. Contractors may provide raw data for evaluation separately and on electronic media. We do not have a preference as to the types of data to review.
- Record
- SN01546988-W 20080405/080404000401-7fbbb7d7cd72380f054a24bb4a441e6b (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |