REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) MH-60 MISSION REHEARSAL TRAINER INTEGRATED TRAINING FACILITY, FALLON, NEVADA 1.0 Description 1.1 The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD) is conducting market research in support of a Mission Rehearsal Trainer (MRT) for the MH-60 aircraft, to be located at the Integrated Training Facility (ITF) in Fallon, NV. The MH-60 Training Systems (TS) Program encompasses a full spectrum of training systems used to develop the knowledge, skills, and abilities of sailors to operate and maintain the MH-60R and MH-60S helicopters. The ITF at Fallon may require a rotary wing trainer to support the Carrier Air Wing (CVW) mission sets. The MRT will be used for tactics development in the CVW environment, and must contain highly accurate MH-60R/S mission system capabilities, with the ability for experimentation and upgrades. This device must be Special Access Program (SAP)-capable as it will be operating in a full-time common security environment at the TS-SCI level. The MRT must operate under the same standards as the other CVW platforms currently planned for inclusion in the ITF in order to ensure a seamless integration into the ITF training missions. Additionally, the MRT must have the ability to expand to Navy Continuous Training Environment (NCTE) in the future. The MRT will be used to ensure the Government’s approach to ensuring aircraft concurrency, readiness, relevance to training systems, support of integrated warfare requirements, managing baseline software configurations, and cyber compliance of operational systems. The proposed action is to solicit those listed under the TSC IV MAC only. 2.0 Requirements 2.1 The burgeoning contract actions described herein are new, and are aimed at supporting CVW missions. Specifically, the MH-60 MRT would support: 2.1.1 Physical Characteristics 2.1.1.1 Two simulation devices capable of switching between MH-60R and MH-60S configurations 2.1.1.2 Crew stations for Aircraft Tactical Officer (ATO), Sensor Operator, Pilot (or control station capable of positioning aircraft in simulation environment) 2.1.1.3 Crew input devices that physically match those in the aircraft (i.e. keypad, trackball, mission display bezel keys, etc.). 2.1.1.4 Mission Display presentation that matches the size and appearance of the aircraft. 2.1.1.5 Ability to maneuver the aircraft through the simulation environment. High-fidelity flight characteristics similar to an Operational Flight Trainer (OFT) are not sough – control functions should be sufficient to correctly position the aircraft in the simulation environment for tactical execution and sensor performance. For example, this might include a generic cyclic and collective that might be used in a desktop flight simulator. 2.1.1.6 Small footprint device to accommodate limited space in the ITF. The MH-60 MRT will likely be physically placed in a 24 ft x 11ft room. This room will plan to include up to two MRT’s and two simulators from a different platform (similar in size to the MH-60), for a total of four simulators in the room. A separate server room will house all computing devices for each simulator, so only crew stations, crew input devices, and MRT control station will need to be co-located in the same room. 2.1.1.7 MRT computers shall be in a rack-mounted form factor for placement in the server room, as mentioned in requirement 2.1.1.6. 2.1.1.8 OFT-like visual systems are not sought. One or multiple computer monitors are sufficient for out-the-window visuals. Emphasis for the MRT is mission execution through the crew input devices, as detailed in requirement 2.1.1.3. 2.1.2 Sensor Characteristics 2.1.2.1 The device must represent all onboard sensors and data links employed by the MH-60 in Electronic Warfare and Surface Warfare missions. 2.1.2.2 Simulation of surface surveillance sensors and related information, to include radar (all modes of APS-147 and APS-153), electronic warfare (ALQ-210), APR-39, Multi-Spectral Targeting System (MTS), Automatic Information System (AIS) and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF). 2.1.2.3 Accurate, physics-based modeling of included sensors, except for MTS. For example, radar performance modeling should include all available environmental effects, target radar crosssection true to aspect, and true-to-life Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR) imaging. ALQ- 210 detections should display representative variability in detection ranges and parameter measurement. It is important that the sensors be modelled as accurately as possible to properly integrate the MH-60 MRT into ITF integrated mission scenarios. Conversely, MTS modelling similar to current OFT devices, which relies just on image generators, is sufficient. 2.1.2.4 All internal and external communication systems and data links, to include Internal Communication System (ICS), HAWKLINK, Link 16 and Satellite Communication (SATCOM) should be modelled and operate with true-to-life performance. All communication systems that are currently supported by the ITF, that are also a capability of the MH-60 platform, shall be implemented. All other communication systems capabilities in the MH-60 platform not currently supported by the ITF should be architected so as to allow room for expansion in the future. 2.1.3 Integration 2.1.3.1 Simulation devices should be integrated into the overall simulation environment and be interoperable with all other simulation devices in the ITF using the Distributive Interactive Simulation (DIS) standard. 2.1.3.2 The simulation device in this environment must integrate with simulation devices from other vendors. 2.1.3.3 Mission playback and other post mission analysis tools and capabilities should include accurate sensor information to permit detailed performance assessment and feedback. 2.1.3.4 Device must operate in an open building with a common security classification system, currently planned for the Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information and Special Access Program levels. 2.1.3.5 Device must have ability to expand into Navy Continuous Training Environment (NCTE) in the future. 2.1.4 Software 2.1.4.1 Current with deployed System Configuration Set (SCS). 2.1.4.2 The simulation devices must have the ability to load mission planning data on the same removable drives as the actual aircraft and developed on the same mission planning system. 2.1.4.3 SCS and other software should be upgradable and changeable in advance of fleet introduction to enable to analysis of software performance and Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) development. 2.1.4.4 Cyber compliance. 2.1.4.5 Ability to adapt to evolving Cyber standards through the device’s entire life cycle. 3.0 Responses 3.1 Interested parties are requested to respond to this RFI with a white paper. 3.2 White papers in Microsoft Word for Office 2010 compatible format are due no later than October 8th 2020 by 1700 EST. Responses shall be limited to three (3) pages and submitted via e-mail only to
[email protected]. Please be advised that all submissions become Government property and will not be returned. 3.3 The white paper shall provide administrative information, and shall include the following as a minimum: 3.3.1 Name, mailing address, phone number, fax number, and e-mail of designated point of contact. 3.3.2 Recommendation on how to meet all or part of requirements listed in section 2.1. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes – it does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. This request for information does not commit the Government to contract for any supply or service whatsoever. Further, the Navy is not currently seeking proposals and will not accept unsolicited proposals. Responders are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this RFI; all costs associated with responding to this RFI will be solely at the interested party’s expense. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future RFP, if any is issued. If a solicitation is released, it will be synopsized on the appropriate Government-wide Point of Entry (GPE) in accordance with FAR Subpart 5.2. It is the responsibility of the potential offerors to monitor these sites for additional information pertaining to this requirement. 4.0 Questions Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted in writing by e-mail to the Contract Specialist, Shaan A. Charran, at
[email protected]. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. Questions will be answered via an email response. The Government does not guarantee that questions received after (October 8th 2020 by 1700 EST) will be answered.