MODIFICATION
69 -- F-16 Image Generator Computer System. Modification 1 to provide questions and answers.
- Notice Date
- 4/15/2005
- Notice Type
- Modification
- Contracting Office
- Minerals Management Service GovWorks (Franchise) 381 Elden Street, MS 2510 Herndon VA 20170
- ZIP Code
- 20170
- Solicitation Number
- 1435-04-05-RP-42527
- Response Due
- 4/22/2005
- Archive Date
- 4/15/2006
- Point of Contact
- Mary J. Carver Contract Specialist 7037871340 Mary.Carver@mms.gov;
- E-Mail Address
-
Email your questions to Point of Contact above, or if none listed, contact the IDEAS EC HELP DESK for assistance
(EC_helpdesk@NBC.GOV)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- Questions and Answers: 1. Paragraph 6.1.3.11. "(It is expected that 30,000 polygons per frame, at 60Hz, is attainable.) Is this a typographical error, and was it intended to be 300,000 polygons per frame at 60Hz? Answer: This was not a typo. We know it is a low number and most contemporary IGs are capable of much more, but we weren't sure what to put for a minimum acceptable performance level, 30,000 seemed a safe minimum. 2. Paragraph 4.3.3: What is the significance of this paragraph? Answer: It was an oversight and should be ignored. Integration tasks were covered in a broad way in the two preceding paragraphs. 3. Paragraph 6.1.3.16: With respect to capture of video images, is this envisioned as a standard windows avi file, or by means of additional hardware to capture a video stream? Answer: This is not a requirement to capture video (not at this time). It is meant to perform a screen capture to get a single image of the screen at 1-second intervals. This also applies to the next paragraph, 6.1.3.17. 4. Paragraph 6.2.2.2.3: Sync on green is not standard on PC graphics cards. Is separate H and V sync acceptable? If not, is an external box that provides sync-on-green acceptable? Answer: Yes, H and V sync is acceptable. 5. Paragraph 6.2.3.9: With respect to paragraph 6.2.3.9, is their a map-size requirement for the referenced moving map capability What is the map resolution, i.e. 1:250? Are the moving map displays centered on the current OTW eyepoint? Answer: The size of the texture map is as large as the hardware will allow (i.e. 1k by 1k, 2k by 2k, etc.) or smaller depending upon the scale/resolution of the particular map being displayed. The scales/resolutions we are currently using are 1:2M, 1:1M, and 1:500K. There are more but it is unlikely we'll use them. Our current moving map capability is a proof of concept effort and only uses one map. We'll be upgrading this to use multiple maps tiled on the display to provide a larger coverage of the database. The greater the scale the lower the resolution is (i.e. for the 1:2M map the texture turned out to be 256x512 (when rounded up to the next larger power of 2) for a 1 degree by 1 degree area around Nellis AFB). If we stay with the same coverage, 1 map over the 1x1 degree area, then we could want up to a total of 10 or so maps displayed at the same time. Typically it'd probably be around 4 maps. We are not going to cover the entire database with these maps, only selected areas. The moving maps are typically centered on the ownship or eyepoint. However, there is a mode that the display can be zoomed in and centered over a pilot selected location. 6. Paragraph 6.4.2: The SOW states: "Other means of producing symbology (e.g. VAPS, DIST, others) will not be utilized at this time." Does this include the use of I-Data? Answer: Correct, I-Data will not be used to produce symbology. 7. Paragraph 6.4.6: Paragraph 6.4.6 references CIGI. Is a particular CIGI revision required? Can other interface standards be used? Answer: CIGI is highly desired. Version 2.0 is the minimum acceptable and 3.0 is preferred. Other interface standards will be considered if they are indeed industry standards, de facto or otherwise. 8. Paragraph 6.4.21: What is a hover lobe rendering? Answer: This was a mistype. It is not required nor supported. Paragraph 6.4.21 should read, "Shall be capable of searchlight and landing lobe rendering" 9. Paragraph 6.5: Are the Litening AT, Sniper, and Mavrick sensors the same waveband? Answer: Use long wave for all three. 10. Paragraph 6.5.6: Are the plumes, referenced in paragraph 6.5.6, exhaust plumes from engines, missiles, etc. or is their some other intent? Answer: Yes, from exhaust plumes engines, missiles, etc. 11. Paragraph 6.5.8: Please confirm that paragraph 6.5.8 does not imply that an independent fly-away eyepoint is required on the missile such that it must page data from a location separate from the launching aircraft. Answer: It is intended that an independent flyaway eyepoint be used for a Maverik missile as a "nice to have" capability. This will only make a difference if ALL other factors of the proposal are equal. 12. Paragraph 6.11.2: Please clarify the required head tracker data. Is the head tracker to adjust just the window attitude ( pitch and heading)? What is envisioned as the required data? Answer: The HMD displays many of the same data that the HUD displays. The host needs to know all 6 pieces if information from the head tracker, xyz and hpr. (As I understand it. It could also be a point and two vectors. In any case, where is the head and where is the pilot looking?) This applies whether the host (initially) or the IG is rendering the HMD. Further, the avionics code needs to know this info. We really haven't researched what data you get from a head tracker. We just assume it's enough to provide location and orientation information, which is what we need. 13. Paragraph 2 & 3: In several places in the solicitation (item 5 in Product Description of Solicitation, SOW para 2. Objectives and SOW para 3. Scope) it is stated "The existing AALCHEMY system will be traded in, with consideration, as part of this contract." Please provide an inventory of items to be traded in, their purchase date, operational status, warranty status and estimated value such as to enable an offeror to place a value on the items to be traded in for consideration. Answer: Inventory: One 4-channel AAlchemy 8264 rack mounted system which contains the following: " 4-dual 933 Mhz PIII, 256 MB, 3DFX graphics cards, 45 GB HD. " 2-800 Mhz PIII, 256 MB, with no graphics, 10 GB HD. Purchase date: Early 2001 Operational status: Operational. Was used only briefly. Warranty status: Expired. Estimated value: Paid ~$90,000 for the hardware, new.
- Web Link
-
Please click here to view more details.
(http://ideasec.nbc.gov/j2ee/announcementdetail.jsp?serverId=MM143501&objId=243751)
- Place of Performance
- Address: Hill Air Force Base, Utah
- Zip Code: 840565840
- Country: USA
- Zip Code: 840565840
- Record
- SN00789586-W 20050417/050415212509 (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 |