MODIFICATION
58 -- Electronic Countermeasure System
- Notice Date
- 2/4/2011
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 334511
— Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing
- Contracting Office
- N00178 NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER Dahlgren Division 17362 Dahlgren Road Suite 157 Dahlgren, VA
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- N0017811Q3902
- Response Due
- 2/11/2011
- Archive Date
- 3/31/2011
- Point of Contact
- Nicole Williams 540-653-7038 Nicole Williams,
- E-Mail Address
-
40-653-6810
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- This RFI is being posted to both the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) page located at http://www.fbo.gov and the Navy Electronic Commerce on Line (NECO) site located at https://www.neco.navy.mil. While it is understood that FBO is the single point of entry for posting of synopsis and solicitations to the Internet, NECO is the alternative in case FBO is unavailable. Please feel free to use either site to access information posted by the Naval Sea Systems Command. This modification to RFI N00178-11-Q-3902 is being issued to answer questions that have been submitted. Clarification Questions 1.[8th bullet]: Given that CTP is a pre-defined synchronization mechanism, what does user-defined timing synchronization refer to? a.System shall provide the capability for an advanced operator (administrator) to program timing synchronizations (one option of which is the Common Timing Protocol), and apply each to a different threat or threat band within the limitations of the system design. 2.[12th bullet]: Is the GUI for finding faults and corrective information a depot-level device, or part of the man-portable or mounted system? a.The GUI shall provide sufficient information for the operator to be able to execute immediate corrective measures, or to refer to higher-echelon for more advanced correction. 3.It is noted that the mounted system is allowed to be 90 pounds heavier than the man-portable system. What additional capabilities are expected to drive this significant weight difference? It is understood that weight difference would include antennas, amplifiers, and power supplies, but the 90-lb difference is surprisingly high. a.The weight allocation is based upon the vehicular load limits, and is not intended to specify a design. Tactically significant suppression ranges for man-portable and vehicular variants are not identical (see answer to question 13, below). Note: The 120lb weight allocation for mounted configuration is exclusive of antennas. 4.[17th bullet]: What is the nature of the monitoring (of the counter ECM device) that existing EOD robots would be doing? Is the monitoring done autonomously by the robot, or remotely, by the human operating the robot? a.The monitoring shall consist of audible and/or visible alerts as detected by the robot and communicated to a human operator (non-autonomous operation). 5.[17th bullet]: What are the relevant constraints (balance, weight, clearance, form factor, etc.) for mounting the device on an existing EOD robot? a.Planned concept of operations (CONOPS) requires emplacement of the ECM by EOD robots without requiring persistent presence of the robot. Weight is same as man-portable configuration. 6.[21st bullet]: Can remote control consist of a wired umbilical connection? a.Yes. 7.[23rd bullet]: What is the intended use of the Ethernet and USB interfaces? Depot maintenance, software download, log upload, failure diagnostics, operational control, etc.? a.The Ethernet and USB interfaces shall be used for maintenance/fault diagnosis beyond GUI capability, programming (loadset/software/firmware) upload/download, memory download, and other functions as determined by design. 8.Are there requirements to include/exclude Anti-Tamper (AT) features? a.Any critical program information (CPI) shall be protected by appropriate AT features including items in volatile and non-volatile memory locations. 9.What are the requirements for performance above/below the horizontal plane? a.Need to be able to suppress +/- 6 meters with respect to performance range. 10.Is there a requirement for continuous performance as the system is being transitioned from its mounted to its dismounted configuration, and vice-versa? a.No. 11.Will there be requirements related to threat density? a.Yes. Evaluation criteria for threat density will be applied to RFI responses, specific density will not be provided due to sensitivity. 12.What is the 30 lbs maximum weight constraint based on? Max. payload of robot? Other? a.Maximum dismounted weight is based upon operational limitations. 13.Will there be a defined minimum/maximum stand-off distance acceptable for the operationally significant distances requirement? a.Yes. Evaluation criteria for stand-off distances for both vehicular and man-portable variants will be applied to RFI responses, specific distances will not be provided due to sensitivity. 14.Could you please define RF Threat Spectrum? i.e.: pass band data. a.Any frequencies in which past, current or future RF threats can operate. Specific threat bands are sensitive and will not be provided. 15.Are there constraints on acceptable antenna patterns? i.e.: to what degree will vertical TX/RX be required? a.The vertical/horizontal pattern constraints are left to the designer to allow for maximum flexibility in achieving performance objectives. 16.Could you please clarify the Selectable power levels specification request. i.e.: will different power levels be required for specific pass bands? a.The selectable power levels are defined as: high-power to provide maximum protection, or at low power to extend operational time . The intent of the low power level is to provide ability to operate for longer durations with the understanding that it may result in reduced protection distances. 17.Could you please clarify the tactically significant timelines specification request, i.e.: what is the constraint of this timing? a.This is the time from when the system is turned on until the time that it is fully operational and providing suppression of RF threats. The specifics of the timing needs are sensitive and will not be provided. 18.What is considered acceptable minimal reconfiguration to man-portable ECM system? a. Minimal reconfiguration to man-portable ECM system is defined as any minor changes to the configuration to the man-portable variant which are required to permit transport by EOD robots (e.g. addition of a carrying point/handle which would otherwise not be present in the man-portable configuration). 19.Please define the provide security of the system to include provisions for both volatile, and non-volatile memory requirement? a.See response 8 above. 20.Please define the parameters/specifications of the one N connection for RF distribution is the intent to be an interface to an in-building distributed antenna system (DAS)? Other? a. N connector is required to provide RF output from the ECM to system antenna(s) 21.Could you please define desired audible alerts? a.Any alerts (e.g. fault, low battery) for which the method of communication is audio-based. Exact implementation is left to the designer. 22.What is the expected IOC date & production quantity for the two variant solution systems? a.IOC dates and quantities are not defined as of this time, the government has not established that a procurement will occur. 23.Could you please clarify CONOPS for this ECM system? a.General operations include use of vehicular, man-portable and EOD robot deployed systems in close proximity providing supportive suppression of threats during an operational event/deployment. Specific CONOPS are sensitive and will not be provided.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N00178/N0017811Q3902/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02373340-W 20110206/110204234125-54a8bb2485bc2d470c8bcb25529c57a5 (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 |