SPECIAL NOTICE
A -- Adaptive Vertical Lift Engine Conceptual Design and Analysis Program - TIA TEMPLATE
- Notice Date
- 2/18/2016
- Notice Type
- Special Notice
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, ACC - RSA (W91215) FT EUSTIS - (SPS), LEE BLVD BLDG 401, Fort Eustis, Virginia, 23604-5577, United States
- ZIP Code
- 23604-5577
- Solicitation Number
- W911W6-16-R-0008
- Archive Date
- 4/19/2016
- Point of Contact
- Renata Y. Ellington, Phone: 757-878-0086, Laurie Pierce, Phone: 757-878-2071
- E-Mail Address
-
renata.y.ellington.civ@mail.mil, laurie.a.pierce2@civ.mail.mil
(renata.y.ellington.civ@mail.mil, laurie.a.pierce2@civ.mail.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Technology Investment Agreement (TIA) Template for proposed TIA(s) 1.0 INTRODUCTION: Recently, the Department of Defense (DoD) has concluded that the rotary wing aviation fleet is aging and upgrades to current fleet aircraft will not provide the capabilities required for future operations. The current fleet of DoD rotorcraft cannot continue to be incrementally improved to meet future operational requirements. Significant improvements in vertical lift, range, speed, payload, survivability and, reliability are all required to meet future concept of operations for Army Aviation and can effectively be achieved through the application of new engine architectures and designs. Operational costs must also be addressed with emphasis on reducing the logistical footprint associated with Army Aviation. The Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Working Group, a joint DoD activity led by the Army Aviation Center of Excellence, has developed an Initial Capabilities Document (ICD) to describe the requirements for a fleet of next-generation rotorcraft known collectively as the FVL family of systems. The capabilities defined in the ICD include combinations of ambient condition hover, speed, range, fuel efficiencies and troop/payload capacities beyond any current rotorcraft. Additionally, capability sets have been formulated covering the major missions currently envisioned for the FVL family of systems. These capability sets are looking for significant platform speed and mission range increases compared to current rotorcraft. In short, specific mission requirements for future Army aviation platforms are still in development. Possible scenarios may include hover operations at sea level to around 10,000 ft altitude in hot/cold climates and high speed cruising at altitudes possibly up to 30,000 ft. With such a wide array of missions under consideration for future rotorcraft / vertical lift platforms, a robust, adaptive propulsion system design is necessary to provide the versatility needed. Moreover, a significant technological advancement in engine/power systems is envisioned to affordably and efficiently provide the needed performance capability (effective vertical lift, speed, range) of these future platforms. In order to meet envisioned leap-ahead platform speed and range capabilities, the Army is anticipating the development of new engine/power system concepts. These concepts must provide the capability to effectively adapt from vertical lift/hover conditions to high speed forward flight. The adaptive propulsion concepts will need to provide significant airframe propulsive efficiency improvements while minimizing the impact to traditional rotorcraft vertical lift capability. These innovative propulsion concepts will also need to remain affordable and exhibit design characteristics consistent with engine life /durability requirements for operations in the harsh environments associated with Army rotorcraft. Call W911W6-16-R-0008 solicits proposals for the conceptual design and benefits analysis of an Adaptive Vertical Lift Engine (AVLE) under the Engines & Drive Trains Research Opportunity of the Master Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911W6-16-R-0004 which is posted to Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) at https://www.fbo.gov. 2.0 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION: The objective of this call is to conduct a research and development effort to complete conceptual design/trade analyses of one or more adaptive vertical lift engine/power system architectures to determine the most promising configuration and suite of technologies to enable the capability to adapt from vertical lift/hover conditions to high speed (greater than 300 knots) forward flight while providing significant airframe propulsive efficiency improvements and maintaining high levels of durability, reliability, and maintainability for future Army Aviation platforms. It is recognized that different technologies/configurations may be more effective/optimum for a given engine/power system size class. Therefore, conceptual design analysis of technologies/configurations may be performed for different engine/power system size classes, ranging from 2,000 shaft horsepower (shp) to 10,000 shp (i.e., scout, attack/utility, or cargo sized engine/power systems). Offerors may select/defend their most advantageous scale in this horsepower range or assess designs for multiple sizes/applications. Multiple architectures have the potential to help meet the program objectives including, but not limited to, convertible engine architectures, such as those analyzed in the NASA Rotorcraft Convertible Engine Study dated September 1982 (NASA CR-1 68161), and/or distributed propulsion architectures. As the Government has recently funded multiple studies of hybrid engine concepts (engine power augmentation through the use of fuel cells or batteries), conceptual design/analysis of this type of configuration should not be proposed in response to this call. As part of this effort, the offeror shall develop adaptive vertical lift engine/power system conceptual design(s) that will seek to significantly improve Army aircraft mission capability (speed, range, time on station, etc.) across the full spectrum of ambient conditions (high hot, high cold, etc.). While improved mission performance (speed, range) is a priority, the offeror's AVLE concept(s) must also consider system level trades that optimize engine/power system weight, cost, durability, maintainability, and reliability. As such, the offeror shall present well-defined methodologies and analysis techniques to be utilized in their system trades to demonstrate a rationale for why the down-selected AVLE concept is the best total system architecture in terms of all design aspects. The offeror shall provide a detailed analytical data set for ambient conditions around the operational envelope (possible missions may include operating in hover at sea level to around 10,000 ft altitude in hot/cold climates and cruising at altitudes possibly up to 30,000 ft) to substantiate design and off-design performance of the proposed adaptive vertical lift engine/power system conceptual designs and how each of the key identified component technologies support the overall engine/power system level performance. Certain key identified technologies may also leverage other key technologies in an integrated approach that will yield specific engine/power system level performance benefits. It is important that these integrated performance benefits be clearly identified to substantiate the benefits of, and the emphasis for, development of the key identified integrated component technologies. This effort shall seek to analyze the quantitative benefits of adaptive vertical lift engine/power system conceptual designs over traditional engine design approaches to show a clear business case for investing in AVLE concepts. This will include an assessment of airframe configurations that can best take advantage of the AVLE concepts investigated and the resulting airframe level benefits. Therefore, the proposed effort shall clearly substantiate the proposed benefits and results of trade analyses relative to an identified baseline engine/power system/aircraft for the DoD relevant aircraft class being addressed (examples include RR 250-C30R3/OH-58D baseline for scout/attack; T700/UH-60 baseline for utility; and T55/CH-47 baseline for Cargo class). Offerors should also identify how well the proposed propulsion system fits with other vehicle configurations (i.e. is it vehicle configuration dependent, or potentially suitable to a range of vehicles?). AATD encourages teaming arrangements with aircraft designers/manufacturers in order to attain verification that the engine concepts have application to future vertical lift aircraft configurations with high payoff and good transition potential. This effort shall also include an assessment of the current technology readiness level (TRL) of the identified critical technologies to enable the down-selected AVLE architecture along with assessments of when each of these technologies would be sufficiently developed to warrant applied research and advanced development funding. An additional objective of this call is that the offeror shall generate a detailed technology maturation roadmap for their AVLE conceptual design in order to support transition to Army FVL family of systems (FOS) aircraft as part of the proposed effort. The technology maturation roadmap shall include detailed component/subsystem level development plans that successfully mature critical component/subsystem technologies to a TRL 4. TRL 4 is defined as: Basic technological components are integrated to establish that they will work together. This is relatively "low fidelity" compared to the eventual system. Examples include integration of "ad hoc" hardware in the laboratory. Technology development roadmaps should also depict planned internal research and development (IRAD) or other internal/external funded efforts that support the development of a full suite of AVLE relevant component/subsystem technologies to TRL 4. In order to obtain cost effective technology maturation to TRL 6, offeror should discuss potential validation plans to perform engine/power system level demonstration of the technologies through the use of existing demonstrator assets in addition to new centerline demonstrators. TRL 6 is defined as: Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond that of TRL 5, is tested in a relevant environment. TRL 6 also represents a major step up in a technology's demonstrated readiness. Examples include testing a prototype in a high-fidelity laboratory environment or in simulated operational environment. Offeror's identified detailed technology maturation plan shall be accompanied by a set of recommendations relative to the need for specific component/subsystem technology development efforts to enable the offeror's AVLE conceptual engine/power system design to transition to Army FVL FOS aircraft. The recommendations should prioritize the critical component/subsystem technology development needs to meet the technical objectives of the offeror's AVLE conceptual design. The prioritization process should clearly identify the associated risk and payoffs of the candidate AVLE technologies and the criteria used to recommend future investments. 3.0 Call Specific Instructions This call will use the Proposal Submission Process as described in 5.2 of the Broad Agency Announcement, as further supplemented below: 3.1 Proposal Instructions Specific instructions pertaining to the content format and structure of proposals are provided in BAA W911W6-16-R-0004, paragraphs 5.2.2 and 5.2.3. Offerors are advised that the quality of the information in the proposal is significantly more important than quantity. Offerors should confine the submissions to essential matters providing sufficient information to define their offer and establish an adequate basis for the Government to conduct its evaluation. In addition to the content provided in the BAA, W911W6-16-R-0004, paragraph 5.2.3, the offeror shall provide the following: Technical Volume: The technical volume of the proposal shall address all of the requirements discussed in Paragraph 2.0: Technical Description, of this Call. The offeror shall describe proposed engine/power system concept(s) and component/subsystem technologies to extend beyond targeted baseline engine/power system/platform capabilities in order to meet the program objectives. Technical risks and gaps associated with the design should also be identified. The offeror shall define a thorough, complete and clear approach to conducting component/subsystem level technology trade analyses and system level conceptual design trade analyses with respect to program objectives. The offeror shall include discussion of how any identified technical risks will be analyzed/addressed in the conceptual design effort and any follow-on recommended component/technology development efforts. The offeror shall substantiate the extent to which the developed data will convey to the Government the benefits of the candidate engine/power system concepts/technologies. The proposed Statement of Research Effort (SORE) or Statement of Work (SOW) shall utilize the following general task outline: 1) Task I - System Level Conceptual Design; 2) Task II - System/Subsystem Level Trade/Benefits Analysis; 3) Task III- Technology Maturation Plan and Component Development Plan Recommendations; 4) Task IV - Management and Reporting. Technical proposals shall be limited to 30 pages. In addition to page count exclusions listed in the Master BAA, section dividers, list of figures/tables, glossary of terms, and cross-referencing indices will also not count as part of the 30 page limit. Fold-out illustrations required for reader ease are allowed, however, illustration shall be counted in 8 inch x 11 inch increments (e.g., an 11 inch x 17 inch document will count as two pages). Pages in excess of the page limitation will not be read or evaluated. Cost Volume: As part of this volume, Offeror's who proposes the use of a Technology Investment Agreement (TIA) shall include the draft TIA provided by the Government with proposed changes clearly marked to facilitate Government evaluation. If a foreign entity is participating as part of a prime's team, the cost volume shall clearly identify such participant and the Offeror's planned compliance with U.S. export controls, including any required export licensing. 3.2 Period and Place of Performance Offerors should clearly depict their proposed schedule and place of performance. The period of performance for the effort shall not exceed 24 months (21 months for the technical effort and 3 months for the final reporting). 3.3 Funding: Any award made from this call will be subject to availability of funds. The Government anticipates two (2) awards beginning in the 4th quarter of the Government FY16. Anticipated Government funding is approximately $1.3M total for all awards. Government fiscal year distribution is as follows: FY16 $150k, FY17 $550k, FY18 $600k. Proposals that are significantly out of alignment with anticipated funding profile may risk not being selected. Due to commercial application of this development effort, at least 50% cost share is anticipated and Technology Investment Agreements are desired. 3.4 Required Government Facilities, Property, and Data Government furnished data will not be provided. Offerors must have access to or be capable of generating the data required to perform the proposed conceptual design and analysis effort. 3.5 Data Rights The Government desires, "Unlimited Rights", but requires at a minimum, "Government Purpose Rights" as defined by DFARS Part 227, to all technical data, deliverables, and computer software developed under this program, and no limitations on the use of delivered and/or residual hardware, exempting background data assertions. It is the Offeror's responsibility to clearly define the proposed data rights for technical data, and each deliverable. Ambiguities will be negatively evaluated against the Offeror. 3.6 Order of Precedence Any inconsistency in this Call and the Master BAA (W911W6-16-R-0004) shall be resolved by giving precedence to the language stated in this Call. 4.0 Required Reporting and Deliverables All awards under this call will require a kickoff meeting following award. In addition, all agreements will require delivery of the following data items: (1) Program Plan (delivered 45 days after award), (2) Briefing Charts, (3) Bi-Monthly Progress, Cost and Performance Reports, and a (4) Final Report. (Note: Each of these items shall be delivered in Contractor's format). All awards under this Call will also include a requirement to present the results of the work in a Final Briefing at Ft. Eustis, Virginia upon completion of all technical effort. 5.0 Evaluation Criteria Evaluation criteria are stated below and are listed in descending order of relative importance. The selection of proposals will be based on a peer/scientific review of proposals (both technical and cost as it relates to technical effort).Proposals will be evaluated on their own merit without regard to others submitted under this call. Criterion I: The extent to which the proposed effort satisfies the Army research need by use of innovative, efficient, affordable, and suitable solutions to the stated technical objective. This includes the degree to which the proposed concepts and/or technologies extend beyond targeted baseline engine/power system and platform capabilities in order to meet the program objectives. This includes the extent of the substantiation of the performance capability enabled by the proposed concepts and/or technologies along with their durability, reliability, and maintainability. Criterion II: The merit of the proposed approach (including reasonableness of the proposed tasks and schedule) to accomplish the scientific and technical objectives. This includes the thoroughness, completeness and clarity of the proposed approach to conducting component/subsystem level technology trade analyses and system level conceptual design trade analyses with respect to program objectives. This also includes the extent to which the developed data will convey to the Government the benefits of the candidate engine/power system concepts/technologies. Criterion III: The capability of the Offeror to accomplish the proposed effort, which includes suitability and availability of personnel, facilities, and any necessary data, as well as past performance. Criterion IV: The reasonableness of the Offeror's proposed cost to the Government, which includes the realism of the cost elements (labor hours, labor categories/mix, subcontracts, travel, materials, and any other direct costs), any proposed cost share, and offered data rights. 6.0 Proposal Submission Instructions Proposals shall be valid for a period of six months from the closing date of this call. Technical and cost proposals shall be provided in one paper copy and one electronic copy (CD ROM disk format). The cost proposal shall be provided in Excel format for cost verification purposes. Proposals shall be submitted to AATD, Attn: CCAM-RDT, Renata Ellington, Bld. 401 Lee Blvd., Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577. Questions may be submitted in writing via email to Renata Ellington, renata.y.ellington.civ@mail.mil. All questions must be submitted within 7 days prior to the call closing date to ensure a response. All questions and responses will be posted to FedBizOpps as an amendment to the call. Proposals shall be received no later than April 4, 2016; 1400 Eastern time.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/67b2cb7bed58083c2869b648b22693cb)
- Place of Performance
- Address: Bldg 401 Lee Blvd, Ft Eustis, Virginia, 23604, United States
- Zip Code: 23604
- Zip Code: 23604
- Record
- SN04024080-W 20160220/160218235044-67b2cb7bed58083c2869b648b22693cb (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 |