A -- Request For Information For Foward Based Radars (FBR)

This announcement is a Request For Information (RFI) only; it is not a notice of solicitation or Request for Proposal (RFP). The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has identified a potential requirement for Forward Based Radars (FBRs) to provide tracking and discrimination. Such radars must be capable of sea or land basing. This Request For Information (RFI) is being issued to determine the capability of industry to provide a radar to meet this potential requirement. No proprietary data should be submitted in response to this RFI; responses may form the basis for a future Request for Proposal to develop and build a FBR. RFI submissions will be reviewed by non-government personnel. The MDA Systems Engineer Directorate and a team from the Missile Defense National Team, comprised of personnel from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, TRW, Raytheon, and General Dynamics, as well as participating FFRDCs and SETAs will review RFI responses. The Missile Defense National Team is currently supporting MDA?s System Engineering Directorate to design a layered Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The Government will not pay for any materials provided in response to this Request for Information. Responses will not be considered as proposals nor will any award be made as a result of this RFI. Respondents will not be notified of the results of this review. All information contained in the RFI is preliminary as well as subject to modification and is no way binding on the Government. Potential technical requirements, scenarios for exploring sensor laydown and system capacity issues, and threat missile parameters are in a SECRET/NOFORN addendum to this RFI. These requirements are minimums and respondents may describe and provide rationale for systems with greater capabilities. To establish the feasibility of FBRs, MDA developed a concept based on a mechanical ?dish? type radar with a phased array feed to provide very limited electronic scan. Responses describing fully filled and sparsely filled (i.e., limited scan) phased array alternative approaches and other systems that provide the desired capabilities are of interest. High risk or unproven technologies are not desirable for this application. The system should be ready for test as early as September 2004. Incremental improvements through 2008 may be considered; responses should provide information on evolution/upgrade. Respondents should direct requests for the addendum, questions, and responses regarding this RFI to Lt Col Greg Juday, +1 (555) 000-0000. Respondents need to verify their security clearance and facilities before receiving these scenarios and parameters via secure fax. If secure fax is not available, arrangements may be made to physically pick up or mail the scenarios and parameters. Contact Mr. Art Tyson (primary), +1 (555) 000-0000 or Mr. Gene White (alternate), +1 (555) 000-0000 for security verification. Respondent cage code number, home office location, and point of contact are required for verification. Responses are due by September 04, 2002. Responses shall be submitted in MS Office 2000 Word. Provide one hard copy and an electronic version on 250 Meg ZIP Disk. E-mail responses are not permitted. Individual responses shall be properly marked, be no more than 20 pages, and should address the following: 1) Basic description, including: o Mechanical/electrical configuration o Legacy hardware (if any) o Software functionality and SLOC estimate o Legacy software (if any) o Weight estimate o Mechanical slew rates and accelerations (in all applicable axes) o Blake chart type sensitivity calculation using the parameters specified in the classified addendum. 2) Discussion of FBR system (or system capability growth) concept for handling ballistic missile raids. Provide this discussion in the context of the scenarios described in the classified addendum. Assume the offense knows the location and mechanical and electronic scan limits of all FBRs, and structures their attack so as to provide maximum stress to the tracking and discrimination system. 3) ROM cost for development plus first system (radar, installation in facility or ship, integration and test, but excluding facility or ship costs) and ROM cost for total system to address raids of various sizes for the scenario outlined in the classified addendum. 4) FBR unit cost is expected to increase with both sensitivity and electronic scan making the trade among electronic scan, sensitivity and cost particularly critical. Respondents should discuss why they believe their described approach to the affordability-sensitivity-electronic scan trade represents the best choice for a capability-based Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). 5) Discuss facility and ship requirements for land and sea basing (general concept, ROM cost, size, weight, power, etc.). 6) Discuss operations and maintenance crew requirements for 24x7 operation. 7) For sea-based systems, describe the beam stabilization approach and estimate the maximum operating sea state (for each platform considered, if applicable). At this worst operating condition, how much of the available electronic scan is dedicated to residual stabilization?