SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Combat Tempered Platform Demonstration
- Notice Date
- 1/13/2012
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- ACC-RSA-AATD - (SPS), ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AA-C, Building 401, Lee Boulevard, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577
- ZIP Code
- 23604-5577
- Solicitation Number
- W911W6-12-R-0015
- Response Due
- 3/15/2012
- Archive Date
- 5/14/2012
- Point of Contact
- hope mcclain, 757-878-2993
- E-Mail Address
-
ACC-RSA-AATD - (SPS)
(hope.a.mcclain@us.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. DESCRIPTION In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2), the Army, using a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process, is soliciting proposals to conduct a 6.3 Advanced Technology Development effort called Combat Tempered Platform Demonstration (CTPD). Proposals are required to be submitted in accordance with the guidelines set forth herein. This BAA constitutes the total solicitation for CTPD. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any BAA amendments. INTRODUCTION High OPTEMPO requirements, asymmetric threats, and harsh operating environments all conspire to affect the operational availability of rotorcraft assets during peace-time and war. While systems are designed to high reliability standards, operational availability is often achieved in-part due to increased inspection and maintenance. Ballistic tolerance is also designed-in by specification, but historically tolerance is defined by short-term survivability with degraded performance and not in terms of true damage tolerance. Stress-life qualification methodology is intolerant of any form of structural damage (FOD, ballistic, fatigue, corrosion, etc.) and while providing extremely high assurance of structural integrity and mission reliability, negatively impacts operational availability. Crew, passengers, and platforms are vulnerable to military threats such as small arms fire, environmental threats such as rain, sand, and corrosive elements, as well as operational threats such as hard and crash landings. These threats, even if survivable, often cause damage sufficient to make the platform and crew unavailable. Wide variability in operational environments and missions has made hard and crash landings occur in a wide spectrum of attitudes, velocities, and impact surfaces, as well as at gross weights not originally anticipated. Most current rotorcraft are designed to attenuate energy caused by nominally level impacts on a hard, flat surface. However, performance decreases in other conditions such as skewed impact angles and soft soil or water landings. Historical data shows that a significant number of crashes occur at impact angles exceeding design specifications. Operationally unavailable, for whatever cause, is effectively an "attrition kill" in a high OPTEMPO environment. Application of traditional durability, crashworthiness and vulnerability reduction point solutions can limit their effectiveness due to real-world variability and are often unpractical from a weight perspective. Aircraft damaged in flight cannot reduce loads, for example, to damaged areas to limit propagation. Similarly, rotor systems cannot adapt to partial blade loss or effectively manage energy during an autorotation. These limitations negatively impact operational availability. Technology is available to increase the durability of the platform, as well as to reduce the vulnerability of the crew, passengers, and platform to threats. These technologies can reside in the airframe, rotors, vehicle management system, and subsystems for an overall system benefit. Through integration of these technologies with each other and with the platform, significant improvements in durability and survivability can be made without negatively impacting mission performance. Ultimately this capability enables the aircraft, crew, and passengers to stay in the fight longer as well as survive, and get back into the fight more quickly. CTPD shall focus on integrating and demonstrating enhanced aircraft and crew/occupant protection, improved battlefield durability, and reduced threat vulnerability. The objective of CTPD is to demonstrate an integrated platform solution that exemplifies both operational durability and total survivability (http://www.aatd.eustis.army.mil/Transfer/CTPD_BAA_Ref_Briefing.pptx) as defined by the Operational Availability; Probability of Kill, given a Hit; and Crashworthiness Index metrics without deleterious effect on Mission Performance. This CTPD BAA is limited to 6.3 Advanced Technology Development. Efforts under this BAA will combine structures, subsystem, vehicle management system, and rotor technologies into a Combat Tempered Platform (CTP) level solution to demonstrate the combined benefits of a complete platform integration and optimization effort. Through this effort, an integrated CTP solution will be matured to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6/7 (system demonstration in a relevant/operational environment) to better enable modernization of a current production Army rotorcraft. Other platforms and next generation systems such as Joint Multi Role (JMR) may benefit from the processes and technologies demonstrated; however, the CTPD will demonstrate system optimized solutions relevant to a currently fielded production platform. Coordination with the appropriate Army Aviation Program Management Office(s) (PMO) is critical in demonstrating a realistic, viable solution as well as enabling technology transition and specification adoption. Testing shall be full-scale, representative of the expected aircraft operating environment, and be of sufficient scope to demonstrate the CTP integrated solution and validate the metric contributions. REQUIREMENTS 1. Technical Description: The Aviation Applied Technology Directorate (AATD) seeks proposals to conduct a Combat Tempered Platform Demonstration. The AATD seeks proposals to demonstrate an integrated CTP solution that exemplifies both operational durability and total survivability. Improvements made during CTPD relative to the current production rotorcraft shall be quantified in terms of the Operational Availability; Probability of Kill, given a Hit; and Crashworthiness Index metrics. Though not traded or used to manage the effort, Cost and Mission Performance shall also be tracked as independent variables to ensure that the integrated CTP solution can feasibly transition. The intent of CTPD is to improve survivability and durability, while ensuring that the aircraft Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) are still achievable. Objective and threshold metric values are not specified, as the optimal solution is platform and mission dependant. The three CTPD metrics are defined as: - Operational Availability (Ao) - Defined as the percentage of time that a system is operationally capable of performing an assigned mission (uptime / (uptime + downtime)). The degree (expressed as a percentage) to which one can expect a system to work properly when it is required, that is, the percent of time the weapon system is available for use. Ao considers the effect of reliability, maintainability, and Mean Logistics Delay Time (MLDT) and is the quantitative link between readiness objectives and supportability. Ao is calculated by dividing Mean Time Between Maintenance (MTBM) by the sum of the MTBM, Mean Maintenance Time (MMT), and MLDT, that is: Ao = MTBM / (MTBM + MMT + MLDT). Note: See https://dap.dau.mil/glossary for definitions of MTBM, MMT, MLDT). - Probability of Kill, given a Hit (P K/H) - Defined as the probability that if an aircraft is subjected to a given threat that it will result in a kill of the aircraft or mission. A mission kill occurs if an occupant is injured by an event or the aircraft is unable to perform a given mission. P K/H is calculated by dividing the Vulnerable Area (Av) by the Projected Area of the aircraft (Ap), that is P K/H = (Av)/(Ap). For CTPD, a composite P K/H will be used that considers the cumulative P K/H for both attrition and mission kills, that is (% Attrition Kill ) * (P K/H Attrition Kill) + (% Mission Kill) * (P K/H Mission Kill). P K/H for each kill level is defined as the summation of the P K/H for a given threat multiplied by the likelihood of that threat, that is (% 7.62 mm hits) * (PK/H 7.62 mm hits) + (% 12.7 mm hits) * (PK/H 12.7 mm hits) + (% 23 mm hits) * (PK/H 23 mm hits) + (% RPG hits) * (PK/H RPG hits) + (% Corrosion) * (PK/H Corrosion) +... + (% N Threat) * (PK/H N Threat). Note: For additional information see Ball, Robert E. The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis and Design, Second Edition. [ed.] Joseph A. Schetz. s.l.: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., 2003. pp. 55-59. - Crashworthiness Index (CI) - Defined as a quantitative measure of a rotorcraft's crash performance across multiple crash environments and conditions over the duration of the crash event sequence. CI is comprised of six factors (crew retention, troop retention, post-crash fire potential, basic airframe crashworthiness, design for evacuation, potential for an injurious environment) and is calculated by adding the score of these factors. Note: For additional information on each main factor and sub-factors see Aeronautical Design Standard 11B "Survivability Program, Rotary Wing, Appendix I" Directorate for Engineering (AED), May 1987 and "Aeronautical Design Standard 36 "Rotary Wing Aircraft Crash Resistance" Directorate for Engineering (AED) July 1993. For additional information on the calculation of the Crashworthiness Index, see "Full Spectrum Crashworthiness for Rotorcraft," Aviation Applied Technology Directorate, Ft. Eustis, VA, December, 2011. A CTP solution that embodies operational durability and total survivability features will include, as a minimum: durability and damage tolerance qualification and life management; protection for critical systems and occupants from environmental, operational, and military threats; full-spectrum crashworthiness; and load alleviation / energy management. Because of funding, time constraints, and risk, technologies below a TRL 4 should not be considered as part of the proposed CTP solution. Offerors are reminded that the intent of CTPD is to advance the TRL to enable transition to a current Army rotorcraft program of record; therefore, new aircraft will not be considered. The objective of CTPD is to demonstrate an integrated platform solution that exemplifies both operational durability and total survivability; therefore, it is expected that Offerors have performed the required trade studies to arrive at an initial CTP solution. Revisions to the proposed CTP configuration and associated metric contributions are expected throughout CTPD as the integrated technology solution matures. Technology transition is critical for the success of this effort, so it is expected that Offerors have already begun to coordinate the initial CTP solution and Technology Transition Plan with the appropriate PMO(s). The main product of CTPD is a fully coordinated revised system specification that represents the operationally durable, total survivable, integrated, and optimized technology suite demonstrated. A fully coordinated Technology Transition Plan and validated metric contributions are essential in obtaining the necessary support to transition this technology and ultimately implement the revised system specification. 2. Deliverable Items: Awards will require delivery of the following data items or deliverables (delivered in the Offeror's format): - Kick-Off Briefing at Offeror's facility - Management Plan - Bi-Monthly Technical Progress and Cost / Business Reports - Test Plans - Briefings and Meeting Minutes - Combat Tempered Platform Conceptual Drawing(s) - Combat Tempered Platform Group Weight Statement - Combat Tempered Platform System Specification - Technology Transition Plan - Final Report - Final Briefing at Fort Eustis 3. Security Requirements: This effort will likely generate technical data that is subject to export control laws and regulations. Offerors who propose performance requiring access to and/or generation of technical data the export of which is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C., Sec. 2751 et. seq.) or Executive Order 12470 must be registered and certified with the Defense Logistics Services Center (DLSC) and have a legitimate business purpose to participate in this Broad Agency Announcement. Contact the Defense Logistics Services Center online at http://www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp/ for further information on the certification process. Offerors must have and provide to the Government a verifiable Joint Certification number or submit a copy of the Offeror's approved DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, with its proposal. Pre-award access to or submission of a classified proposal is not authorized. Performance under the CTPD project is expected to require access to and/or generation of technical data classified up to the Secret level. Offerors must have a facility clearance, storage capability, and the personnel required to perform at the Secret level. Evidence of facility clearance, storage capability, and personnel cleared to perform at the Secret level shall be provided within the proposal. 4. Data Rights: The Government desires, at a minimum, "Government Purpose Rights" as defined by the DFARS, to all technical data, deliverables, and computer software to be delivered, and no limitations on the use of delivered and/or residual hardware (excluding proprietary business information that is furnished to the Government for administrative / management purposes). Offerors are required to clearly identify the proposed data rights for technical data, computer software, and each deliverable. Ambiguities will be negatively construed against the Offeror. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1. Anticipated Period of Performance: The Period of Performance is not to exceed 40 months total (37 technical and 3 for Data / Final Report) and will complete no later than 30 September 2015. 2. Expected Award Date: Expected award date is 3rd quarter of the Government FY12. 3. Government Estimate: Available Government funding for CTPD totals approximately $12.339M distributed by fiscal year as follows: FY12 - $2.843M; FY13 - $3.469M; FY14 - $3.535M; and FY15 - $2.492M. To adequately demonstrate the CTPD prototype, only one award is anticipated. 4. Government Furnished Property and Data: Government furnished equipment, property, and data is not anticipated. Offerors must have access to or be capable of generating the data required to develop and demonstrate the integrated combat tempered platform proposed. It is the Offeror's responsibility to identify, coordinate, and furnish supporting documentation in the proposal for the use of any Government furnished equipment, property, or data. 5. Funding Instrument: A variety of funding instruments are available pursuant to this announcement depending upon the proposed effort, the entity submitting the successful proposal(s), and statutory and regulatory requirements the Government must satisfy. Such instruments include conventional contracts subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, as supplemented, and Technology Investment Agreements (TIA) (Cooperative Agreement under 10 U.S.C 2358) or Other Transaction (OT) for Research (10 U.S.C. 2371), which are more flexible than traditional Government funding instruments. Under TIAs or OTs it is DoD policy to obtain, to the maximum extent practical, cost sharing of at least half of the costs of the project to ensure the recipient has a vested interest in the success of this effort. Cost participation may be in the form of cash or in-kind contributions, where cash is considered of significantly higher quality in demonstrating commitment to the project. Cost participation will be considered in accordance with the DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations, DoD 3210.6-R paragraph 34.13 (Cooperative Agreement) (but also see paragraph 37.530 pertaining to Other Transactions for Research) accessible at the following link: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/32106r_041398/part34.pdf. The Offeror's desired funding instrument shall be clearly stated in the proposal. Award type is a subject for negotiation; however, a TIA is strongly preferred. 6. Size Status: Due to the complexity and technical considerations, this solicitation is not set-aside for small businesses. 7. Notice to Foreign Owned Firms: Participation in this program is limited to U.S. Firms as Prime Contractors; however, Subcontractors may be foreign owned. PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS 1. Proposal Preparation: The proposal shall consist of two volumes, Technical and Cost, and shall take the form of a Management Plan (see DI-MGMT-81117 for general guidance) to be revised, as necessary, based on negotiations. In presenting the proposal material, Offerors are advised that the quality of the information is significantly more important than quantity. Offerors should confine their submission to essential matters providing sufficient information to define their offer. The Government reserves the right to select only a portion of an Offeror's proposal or the total proposed effort. While multiple proposals from an Offeror are allowed, each proposal should comprise a single optimized platform solution relevant to an Army helicopter platform. a. Technical Volume: The technical volume of the proposal is limited to seventy-five (75) pages All text, including tables and figures, shall be no less than Times New Roman 12 point font. The technical volume of the proposal shall include five sections, as follows: - Section 1 shall identify an aircraft baseline, based on a current production manned Army rotorcraft program of record, and define its performance in terms of the CTPD metrics. - Section 2 shall provide a detailed description of the conceptual combat tempered platform configuration (see DI-SESS-81001D for general guidance), as well as an analysis that substantiates the selection of the technologies and the integrated configuration proposed relative to the CTPD objective, the expected benefits in terms of the metrics, and the ability to transition to a current production manned Army rotorcraft program of record. It is important to substantiate that the proposed configuration is an optimal combination of technologies based on the aircraft needs and mission profiles. - Section 3 shall define a proposed approach to demonstrate the integrated CTP. Offerors shall include a Statement of Research Effort (SORE) and the specific technical approach to be pursued; in particular tasks, milestones, schedule, and transition strategy, to both effectively and efficiently demonstrate the integrated technology suite; validate the metric contributions; and document a realistic, well coordinated, CTP system specification. - Section 4 shall identify and describe the proposed deliverables, as well as define the data rights proposed to be asserted to each of the deliverables and the technology to be demonstrated. - Section 5 shall substantiate the capability of the Offeror to effectively execute a meaningful TRL 6/7 technology demonstration in a relevant or operational environment and transition the integrated CTP technology suite through a revised system specification. This includes: the Offeror's explicit knowledge of and intellectual property for the baseline production aircraft; the suitability and availability of proposed personnel / project team, tools, and facilities; and the proposed plan to coordinate a Technology Transition Plan with an Army Aviation PMO. To further substantiate capability, the Offeror shall also include a listing of five (5) recent relevant Government contracts/agreements, specifically the title of the effort, the original cost and period of performance, the completed cost and period of performance, the Government Point of Contact, and the final report number. b. Cost Volume: The cost volume of the proposal shall include the total CTPD cost, the cost per task, the cost per Government fiscal year, and the cost per month. Cost elements (man-hours, labor categories, materials, travel, and other costs) shall be defined for the total CTPD and for each task. All cost element pricing rates used shall be clearly identified. Cost share or in-kind contributions, if proposed, shall be clearly identified. Subcontractor cost proposals, if applicable, including pricing rate details, shall be provided concurrent with the prime Offeror's submission. The proposed funding instrument, intellectual property rights extended to the Government, and validity period of the proposal, shall be identified. Technical information included within the Cost Proposal will not be evaluated or considered in the rating of technical merit. 2. Proposal Submission: Proposals are due by 1300 on 15 March 2012. Proposals shall be marked with the solicitation number and shall be submitted in two paper copies and electronic format (PDF or MS Word) on a disc to the Aviation Applied Technology Directorate, Attn: CCAM-RDT (Hope McClain), 401 Lee Boulevard, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577. Facsimile or electronic proposal submission is not authorized under this Announcement. Proposals submitted after the closing date will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition. Unless otherwise specified, proposals will be considered valid for Government acceptance through 31 December 2012. This announcement is an expression of interest only and does not commit the Government to pay any proposal preparation costs. Offerors can contact AATD to ask for solicitation clarification. All questions must be emailed to the Contract Specialist at hope.a.mcclain.civ@mail.mil. Questions received less than two (2) weeks prior to the proposal due date may not be addressed. Any information given to a prospective Offeror concerning this Announcement, which is necessary in submitting an offer or the lack of which would be prejudicial to any other prospective Offeror(s), will be published as an amendment to this Announcement. Offerors should be alert for any amendments to this Announcement. EVALUATION CRITERIA/BASIS FOR AWARD 1. EVALUATION CRITERIA: The following criteria will be used to determine whether proposals submitted are consistent with the intent of this BAA and of interest to the Government and whether one or more sources will be selected for award. Criteria one and two are more important than three and four. 1. The extent to which the proposed technical solution satisfies the CTPD objective, provides benefit relative to the metrics, mitigates deleterious effect on mission performance, and can logically transition to a current production manned Army rotorcraft program of record. 2. The merit of the proposed CTPD approach, which includes the soundness of the proposed objectives, tasks, schedule, transition strategy, and approach to demonstrate the combat tempered platform. 3. The capability of the Offeror to effectively execute a CTPD, which includes suitability and availability of intellectual property, data, personnel, and facilities as well as past performance and the ability to transition the solution to a current production manned Army rotorcraft program of record. 4. The reasonableness of the Offeror's proposed cost to the Government, which includes the realism of the cost elements, benefit of any proposed cost share, and offered data rights. No further evaluation criteria will be used in selecting proposals. Individual proposal evaluations will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria without regard to other proposals submitted under this BAA. 2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS: The technical and cost proposals will be evaluated at the same time and categorized as follows: a. Category I: Proposal is well conceived, scientifically and technically sound, pertinent to the program goals and objectives, and offered by a responsible contractor with the competent scientific and technical staff and supporting resources needed to ensure satisfactory program results. Proposals in Category I are recommended for acceptance (subject to availability of funds) and normally are displaced only by other Category I proposals. b. Category II: Proposal is scientifically or technically sound, requiring further development and is recommended for acceptance, but at a lower priority than Category I. c. Category III: Proposal is not technically sound or does not meet agency needs.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/7a40ad5ccceaebbe881d92792426a9ad)
- Place of Performance
- Address: ACC-RSA-AATD - (SPS) ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AA-C, Building 401, Lee Boulevard Fort Eustis VA
- Zip Code: 23604-5577
- Zip Code: 23604-5577
- Record
- SN02654637-W 20120115/120113234520-7a40ad5ccceaebbe881d92792426a9ad (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 |