Loren Data's SAM Daily™

fbodaily.com
Home Today's SAM Search Archives Numbered Notes CBD Archives Subscribe
FBO DAILY ISSUE OF APRIL 18, 2010 FBO #3067
SOURCES SOUGHT

99 -- MDA Sensor Model & Simulation Validation, Analysis and Accreditation Support - Figure 1: AN/TPY-2 PFR Process Chart

Notice Date
4/16/2010
 
Notice Type
Sources Sought
 
NAICS
541330 — Engineering Services
 
Contracting Office
Other Defense Agencies, Missile Defense Agency, MDA-DACP, 106 Wynn Blvd, Huntsville, Alabama, 35805
 
ZIP Code
35805
 
Solicitation Number
HQ0147-10-R-0024
 
Archive Date
5/22/2010
 
Point of Contact
William Mills, , Clayton Ahrens,
 
E-Mail Address
Bill.Mills@mda.mil, clayton.ahrens@mda.mil
(Bill.Mills@mda.mil, clayton.ahrens@mda.mil)
 
Small Business Set-Aside
N/A
 
Description
Figure 1: AN/TPY-2 PFR Process Chart 1. GENERAL INFORMATION: The purpose of this Request for Information (RFI) is to aid the government in determining if there is sufficient small business industrial expertise and interest to proceed with a small business set-aside, competitive procurement for the desired capability described below. Only small businesses should reply to this announcement. 2. BACKGROUND The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) director has directed the Modeling and Simulation (M&S) community to develop, enhance or modify current M&S capabilities and to integrate and verify, validate and analyze all element/component level representations. The MDA M&S vision is to apply modeling and simulation to assess and improve the capability of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) to counter any ballistic missile threat, anytime, anywhere in the world. The following seven goals form the cornerstone of the plan that will be implemented by the Modeling and Simulation Directorate to meet this vision. 1.Provide M&S capabilities that can be used to assess and improve the operational performance of the BMDS 2.Provide M&S capabilities that can be used to accelerate engineering and integration of the BMDS 3.Integrate M&S into BMDS operational planning, mission rehearsal, and execution 4.Manage M&S across MDA using systems engineering processes, knowledge sharing, 5.Define M&S metrics, and accomplish Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VV&A) assessments 6.Establish a unity of effort for employing common practices and standards across MDA to improve credibility and performance of models and simulations 7.Synchronize BMDS M&S with other joint, Department of Defense (DOD), and coalition organizations The MDA Sensors Directorate (SN) is responsible for all sensor models participating in BMDS activities. Digital and Hardware-in-the-Loop (HWIL) models will be used in support of the BMDS Performance Assessments (PAs) and the Ground Test (GT) campaigns. These sensors include SBX, AN/TPY-2 Terminal Mode (TM), AN/TPY-2 Forward-Based Mode (FBM), Cobra Dane, and Upgraded Early Warning Radars (UEWRs) located at Beale, Fylingdales, and Thule. Due to the complexity of the BMDS, its behavior can never be fully assessed solely based on testing of the system. M&S must be used to assess the behavior of the BMDS and to help understand how the system will perform against a wide range of potential threats and over a wide range of environmental conditions. In order to do this, MDA simulations must be able to accurately predict results that are observed in test events so that extrapolation to other cases are valid. Missile defense models and simulations are needed to provide analytical underpinnings for system design, development, and operations. To perform this role, the many individual models and simulations need to be more adequately linked and integrated at the system level with appropriate levels of fidelity. The BMDS modeling and simulation capability must represent actual and projected BMDS systems with as much accuracy and precision as necessary to satisfy the objectives of its intended uses. MDA/SN M&S overall goal is to provide Sensor representations that are VV&A'd by leveraging MDA flight test data. 3. REQUESTED CAPABILITY While the X-Band Radar Development contractor will perform M&S Verification, the contractor being sought through this RFI will plan, execute, and document Validation and Analysis of the M&S. In addition, the contractor will help support the M&S Accreditation, which will be performed by a third-party. The contractor will be required to assess the Verification & Vadidation efforts and support the Sensors Directorate’s certification letters to the Accreditation Agents. The essential tasks for Validation under this effort are encompassed in Post-Flight Reconstruction (PFR) and related analyses are described below. Key capabilities embodied in this effort are the ability to set-up and run the various HWIL and Digital Radar/Sensor Models developed for MDA. The Post Flight Reconstruction (PFR) process is depicted in Figure 1. This process consists of four activities: 1.Pre-PFR Analysis 2.Residual Metric and Signature Bias Estimation 3.Conducting PFR runs 4.Analysis of PFR Run Data Tasks required for each activity are detailed in Figure 1, AN/TPY-2 PFR Process (attached), and need to be performed for each sensor of interest represented in the PFR. 1. Pre-PFR Analysis: Pre-PFR analysis involves thorough evaluation of the PFR inputs, including trajectories and RCS models. All trajectories supplied for use in a PFR event must be assessed in terms of how accurately they represent the target scenario presented to the sensor(s) on day of flight (DOF). Trajectories need to be assessed against several requirements: - Trajectories must represent physically realizable target motion (no large instantaneous jumps). - Deployed objects must first appear at a reasonable distance from the parent object. - Component differences must be consistent. For example, point-to-point position differences must be consistent with velocity components and likewise point-to-point velocity differences must be consistent with accelerations. - Event timing reflected in trajectories must be consistent with DOF at times determined by key sensor measurements. RCS models must be assessed to determine if they adequately represent the target(s) as presented to the sensor(s) on mission day. Criteria used will be highly dependent on the sensor functionality exercised on DOF and thus will be provided for each PFR scenario to be assessed. At a minimum, model RCS must be evaluated against flight test RCS as a function of time and as a function of viewing angle. Narrow band signatures must be evaluated. If a sensor collected wideband data during the live collect then wideband signatures must be evaluated as well. Several types of RCS models can be provided for a given PFR scenario including N-Point, Augmented Point Scatterer Model (APSM), and statistical. Execution of this task requires the capability to assess each possible model type. In addition to the tasks outlined above, this activity requires participation in any pre-event meetings, telecons, working groups, and Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM) that are held in preparation for a PFR event. 2. Residual Metric and Signature Bias Estimation: - Metric Bias: Residual sensor bias present on mission day can affect mission day performance and therefore must be accounted for in the reconstruction of a mission. Metric bias can be estimated using data from available pre- and post-flight collections on satellites for which High Accuracy Ephemeris (HAE) is available. A sufficient number of passes to cover the portion of the array face involved in the missions is needed. If this is obtained, the HAE data can be used to estimate U and V bias as a function of UV position on the array face. These bias estimates are then used for the PFR. - Signature Bias: There are fewer signature calibration satellites than HAE satellites and so fewer passes are expected to be available for estimation of residual signature bias. Collections on these satellites are used to estimate the SNR offset between the live collections and runs that replicate these collections. RCS input into the runs is modified until a good SNR match is obtained. The RCS adjustment that yields a good SNR match to the live collect is selected for use in the PFR runs. In addition to the tasks outlined above, this activity requires participation in any pre-event meetings, telecons, working groups, and TIMs that are held in preparation for a PFR event. 3. Conduct Runs Once PFR inputs have been evaluated and bias estimates obtained, the runs can be conducted. Conducting the runs is a multistep process as outlined below. - Set up run area - Verify settings match mission-day (SAPs, environment, radar location, antenna orientation, etc) - Conduct a run - Perform Quick Look (QL) analysis on the run data to check for consistency with mission day - Make adjustments as needed, conduct another run and perform QL analysis - Repeat this last step until the setup has been verified - Document settings, inputs used, etc. - Perform PFR runs - Distribute data Note that runs include integration runs, dry runs, runs for record, and if defined, excursion runs. 4. Analysis Analysis must be performed on data collected during PFR runs, including Integration Runs, Dry Runs and Runs for Record, to assess performance of the sensor models. This analysis includes Quick Look Analysis for reporting at the Executive Quick Look Briefing (EQLB) typically held 1-2 weeks after completion of the PFR runs, assessment of the run data against the OTA timing criteria and the OTA and SN track accuracy criteria, in-depth investigation of any anomalies identified, and root-cause analysis of any instances of failure of criteria. Results of PFR run-data analysis are reported at the Mission Data Review (MDR) and Executive Mission Data Review (EMDR), held 1-2 months after completion of the PFR runs. A briefing for the MDR, including annotated viewgraphs that document the analysis and findings is to be produced. In addition to participation in the EQLB, MDR, and EMDR, participation in post-test meetings, telecons, working groups, and TIMs is required. Note that analysis could encompass analysis of the data recorded on the preliminary runs that are conducted during the PFR set up. This will require close interaction and cooperation with the organization conducting the runs. The Government intends to purchase support for the FY2011 through FY2015 timeframe. 4. RESPONSES It is requested that written responses be submitted within 21 days of issuance of this RFI as an attached Microsoft Word document, limited to 10 pages, via email to Bill.Mills@mda.mil. No additional information is available at this time. There are no other prescribed format requirements for the response to this announcement. Submit detailed capabilities of your firm to meet the requirements listed in the paragraphs above, to include the following information: 1. Detail relevant experience with similar projects Include the following information: a) Government contract number b) Contract value c) Role your company played d) Point of contact and current telephone number 2. Describe the laboratory facilities your company can access to run the models and execute PFRs (must have ability to run classified networks). 3. Describe your concepts for work with the model developers and the accreditation agents. 4. Verify that your company has ability to perform work on classified projects. 5. Provide Contact information with your submission: company name, address, and primary, engineering and program management points of contact (including name, phone number, and email address). 6. Address your company’s resource capacity to support the M&S VV&A effort over the proposed contract period. Include a statement verifying that your firm meets the qualifications to be considered a small business based on NAICS 541330 ($27M size standard). Please indicate any applicable socio-economic status, such as Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), 8(a), HUBZone, etc.). Also please indicate whether your company is interested in participating as the prime contractor or as a subcontractor or whether your company is interested in participating as part of a teaming arrangement. MDA support contractors will assist the Government in the review of your response. MDA support contractors include: DMD, Inc.; DB Research and MIT/Lincoln Laboratory. All of the support contractors and their employees have agreed to protect proprietary information from unauthorized use and disclosure. Unless clearly marked otherwise, submission of a response to this RFI signifies agreement to allow personnel from the above-listed firms and personnel from MDA to use the information to develop the acquisition approach. Failure to respond to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future competition, nor will information provided in response to this RFI be used to exclude anyone from responding to any future Request for Proposals. Communications with MDA with regard to this RFI will only be permitted in writing during the RFI response period. 5. REQUESTED INFORMATION This announcement is published for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a solicitation or request for proposal and shall not be construed as a commitment by the Government. Responses in any form are not offers and the Government is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. No funds are available to pay for preparation of responses to this announcement. MDA will use the responses to the announcement to make an informed decision concerning the strategy it will pursue to meet its objectives and, if MDA elects to proceed with a procurement, to structure the solicitation to maximize commercial sector interest and small business utilization. All firms responding to this announcement will be notified if a requirement is solicited. The results will be utilized to determine small business set-aside opportunities. All types of small business set-asides will be considered. 6. QUESTIONS Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted in writing by e-mail to the Contracting Officer, email address. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. Contracting Office Address: William Mills Missile Defense Agency Building 5222, Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 Point of Contact: William Mills, (256) 450-1437 Bill.Mills@mda.mil
 
Web Link
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/MDA/MDADACP/HQ0147-10-R-0024/listing.html)
 
Record
SN02124395-W 20100418/100416235337-0ad3a174ecd0356b845fbeef750fcef2 (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 |
ECGrid: EDI VAN Interconnect ECGridOS: EDI Web Services Interconnect API Government Data Publications CBDDisk Subscribers
 Privacy Policy  Jenny in Wanderland!  © 1994-2024, Loren Data Corp.