SPECIAL NOTICE
99 -- Integrated Terminal Program (ITP)
- Notice Date
- 1/30/2002
- Notice Type
- Special Notice
- Contracting Office
- 4301 Pacific Highway Bldg OT4 Code 02, San Diego CA 92110-3127
- ZIP Code
- 92110-3127
- Solicitation Number
- USN-SNOTE-020130-001
- Archive Date
- 2/28/2002
- Description
- 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. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR), San Diego is interested in obtaining industry?s perspective on a key initiative for improving satellite communications (SATCOM) capabilities. SPAWAR will be pursuing an Integrated Terminal Program (ITP) that is intended to reduce total ownership cost, increase readiness, improve flexibility, and ease transition to new technologies. The responses to this RFI will assist the government in determining a cost and fielding schedule for the ITP. The ITP concept was introduced to industry at the recently held SPAWAR Industry Day conference. The ITP concept centers on a single terminal capable of receiving and transmitting to at least 3 satellites simultaneously, operating over some combination of the bands Q, X, Ka, Ku and C. The ITP envisions equipping each ship with 5 parabolic antennas, each able to switch bands instantaneously in response to loss of satellite visibility due to superstructure blockage. Constellations of interest include Advanced Extremely High Frequency, Advanced Wideband Satellite (AWS), and commercial satellites. Although the ITP concept is centered on 5 parabolic antennas, the government is open to receiving alternative ship integration designs including phased arrays or a combination of parabolic and phased array antennas. The government has identified several technical challenges that it believes would need to be overcome to achieve the ITP concept. The challenges are not necessarily all-inclusive and are not in priority order. Industry is encouraged to identify additional technological challenges or risks associated with the ITP concept. The government-identified challenges are: (1) Five Band Antenna Feedhorns. Under the ITP concept, each parabolic antenna would require a five-band feed. The dishes would need to maintain the size and weight of existing antennas with comparable performance to existing single-band feeds. Multi-band power amplifiers would have to be developed and installed at the antenna and the increased heat accounted for to prevent component failure and minimize thermal distortion to LNA/LNB components. If five-band feeds are deemed impractical or excessively risky, suggest alternative schemes using single and multi-band feeds, mechanical switching, phased array antennas or any other innovative concept that helps reduce topside requirements. (2) Certification. Each antenna is required to meet all applicable space segment certification requirements. Performance degradation resulting from multiple-band feeds could affect the certification process. Certifications include DISA, commercial standards such as INTELSAT, and any future certifications not yet known. (3) RF Switching and Handover Strategy. A seamless antenna handover process needs to be developed to switch bands instantaneously in response to satellite availability changes due to topside blockage. Current antenna handover techniques assume a non-prime antenna slaved to a prime antenna in anticipation of a handover event to mitigate non-prime acquisition time. The ITP concept envisions three simultaneous bands on five antennas and therefore current antenna handover techniques are inadequate. ITP requires an innovative antenna handover and scheduling strategy to ensure uninterrupted service in the three on-line bands. A modem independent solution is preferred. However, any innovative solutions for multi-band handover are desirable. (4) Radome Radar Cross Section (RCS) and Overpressure Requirements. Radomes would need to be optimized for 5Ghz to 44Ghz operation while meeting RCS and overpressure requirements. If radomes covering this entire frequency range are impractical or risky, industry alternatives are encouraged. (5) Electromagnet ic Interference (EMI). Currently even single band antennas are difficult to place due to in-band and out-of-band Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) issues. A new antenna design accommodating five bands presents a much more difficult set of EMI issues. Mitigation techniques such as side and back lobe suppression or noise cancellation techniques are of interest. (6) Remote Access. Under the ITP concept, the terminal needs to include the capability of remote access, from the shore or another platform, to perform maintenance, tech assist and monitoring. Paths for remote access may include in-band signaling, out-of-band signaling, or a baseband path such as through the shipboard IP network. (7) Open Systems Architecture. Under the ITP concept, a highly flexible terminal architecture using an open systems architecture, defined interfaces, and modular procurement is highly desirable. The government would like industry?s comments on overcoming these challenges with an integrated terminal design. Include a brief synopsis on the issues, and a rough order of magnitude cost and schedule needed to produce a working prototype or a proof of concept to overcome these challenges. Those interested in supporting the government with the development of the ITP concept shall submit a white paper to the Contract Specialist: Sandra Jones by February 28, 2002. Electronic responses shall be submitted via e-mail only to jonessj@spawar.navy.mil. Interested parties must limit their electronic response to no more than twenty (20) pages. Please include the name, phone number, fax number and e-mail address of your company's designated point-of-contact. Questions should be submitted to Sandra Jones via e-mail to jonessj@spawar.navy.mil. The Navy and support contractors will review the information submitted. Proprietary information, if any, should be minimized and must be marked. To aid Navy planners, please segregate proprietary information. Prospective offerors are encouraged to execute proprietary data agreements with Navy support contractor, Maxim Systems, Inc. but such agreements are not required. If a prospective offeror does not execute such an agreement, Maxim Systems and its employees will not be given access to that company?s proprietary data. POC for Maxim is Mr. Kurt Fiscko, (619) 574-2304, kfiscko@maximsys.com. Please be advised that all submissions become government property. The information provided in the RFI is subject to change and is not binding on the Government. The Navy has not made a commitment to procure any of the items discussed and release of the RFI should not be construed as such a commitment or as authorization to incur cost for which reimbursement would be required or sought. It is emphasized that this is a Request for Information. It is not a Request for Proposal (RFP) of any kind and is not intended to guarantee procurement of these items/services. Further, the Navy is not at this time seeking proposals and will not accept unsolicited proposals. Respondees are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative cost 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.
- Web Link
-
Click on the link to view the special notice
(https://e-commerce.spawar.navy.mil/command/02/acq/navhome.nsf/homepage?readform&db=NAVgenint.nsf&whichdoc=406F5E58E089651988256B51006C4768&editflag=0)
- Record
- SN20020201/00020709-020130210352 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(will not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |