NASA Broad Agency Announcement: Constellation Lunar Lander Development Study- EXCERPTS
OMB Approval Number 2700-0087
Broad Agency Announcement NNJ08ZBT001
BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT
Constellation Lunar Lander Development Study
PROPOSALS DUE
February 11, 2008
Issue Date: January 11, 2008
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
INTRODUCTION
This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation (NFS) Part 1835. A formal Request for Proposal (RFP), solicitation, and/or additional information regarding this announcement will not be issued. Request for same will be disregarded.
NASA will not issue paper copies of this announcement. NASA reserves the right to select for award all, some, or none of the proposals in response to this announcement. NASA provides no funding for direct reimbursement of proposal development costs. Technical and cost proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will not be returned. It is the policy of NASA to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose their contents only for the purposes of evaluation.
Potential offerors may submit questions regarding this BAA in writing via e-mail to Herb Baker, Contracting Officer, at herb.baker-1@nasa.gov, not later than 4:30 p.m. on January 25, 2008.
This BAA is soliciting proposals for two study areas. The first, core study (Study Area 1), is titled Design Evaluation and Safety Improvements. Study Area 1 is broken into parts 1a and 1b. 1a seeks to gain industry input/evaluation on the technical solution and viability of the Lunar Design Analysis Cycle 1 (LDAC-1) design and 1b seeks to develop and submit innovative approaches to improve the safety and reliability of the LDAC-1. The second, incidental study (Study Area 2), is titled Industry/Government Partnering Arrangements and seeks innovative approaches to project management and the government – industry relationship leading up to the prime contractor effort, with the goal of minimizing Design, Development, Test, and Evaluation (DDT&E) and life cycle costs. Study Area 2 is hardware design related, in the sense that it seeks industry input relative to the teaming and implementation/execution of the technical design referenced in Study Area 1.
Given that Study Area 1 is the core emphasis of the BAA, offerors may propose solutions for Study Area 1 or Study Areas 1 and 2, but not Study Area 2 exclusively. Proposals that only address Study area 2 will not be accepted/evaluated.
III. BACKGROUND
The mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is to achieve the Vision for Space Exploration by implementing a sustained and affordable human and robotic space program; extending human presence across the solar system and beyond; and developing supporting innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures. The Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) team initially defined the Lunar transportation system. The ESAS study is available at http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/news/ESAS_report.html.
The Constellation Lunar Lander Project Office (Cx LLPO), also known as the Altair Project Office, is conducting an in-house Lander design and performing design analysis and system definition using a small team of NASA engineers. This in-house effort will result in the development of the system specifications and requirements that will form the technical basis for the procurement of the Lunar Lander.
The LLPO’s first design analysis cycle (LDAC-1) for the Lander was based on a minimum set of requirements, three design reference missions, and the concepts of minimum functionality and minimum implementation. This initial design is not intended to be a flyable vehicle. This design is intended to provide as close to a minimum configuration as reasonable to evaluate in order to conclusively buy down risk through a deliberate “add back” process. Minimum functionality means that the LDAC-1 Lander design does not incorporate any additional capabilities beyond those required to perform the reference missions. Additionally, the LDAC-1 Lander design does not protect for contingency situations (except delays as specified in the mission timeline). Minimum implementation means a ‘minimum mass’ design that does not incorporate redundant strings to protect for system failures. Basic safety features and accepted standards for sub-system design were implemented in LDAC-1 (e.g. primary structure designed to a 1.4 factor of safety, the use of pressure relief valves, electrical fuses or circuit breakers, etc). For the purposes of this BAA, additional functionality is not being addressed for either the LDAC-1 design or the safety and reliability upgrade. All intentional deviations from the minimum mass design were tracked and approved by the LLPO Vehicle Integration Team. The LDAC-1 requirements set, design reference missions, and mission timelines are available on the LLPO Public Data Windchill site.
The LDAC-1 minimum functional design provides the foundation vehicle for safety and reliability trade studies and analysis, that are being performed in LDAC-2. By using a minimum functional design as a starting point, the cost (e.g. mass, volume, development, test, life cycle cost) and benefit of each proposed safety / reliability improvement can be clearly identified. The LLPO is seeking input from industry on the minimum functional design and the safety and reliability upgrade approach/process that leads to a flyable design (Study Area 1). The LDAC-1 minimum functional Lander design details are available at the LLPO Public Data Windchill site.
As part of Study Area 1, to support the LDAC-2 (Safety Upgrade) analysis cycle, NASA is seeking innovative approaches to the safety upgrades of the vehicle design. The LLPO is looking to avoid safety solutions that blindly follow the multitude of safety requirements to the letter of the law and may or may not actually create a safer system. Instead, LLPO is attempting to foster a safety environment that uses creative engineering solutions to solve the problem in the most cost (monetary or mass) efficient manner, while resulting in a design that meets an acceptable risk level.
In Study Area 2, the LLPO is exploring alternative and innovative approaches to the overall development of the Lunar Lander design and mission. Recent examples of NASA procurements for major human spaceflight systems include the Orbital Space Plane, Constellation Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Orion, Delta Clipper Experiment (DC-X) and the Constellation Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) Ares I. Each of these projects utilized different approaches to the formation of the government-industry team and the transition to a prime contractor. One of the options NASA is considering is to maintain an in-house design team through PDR and then transition to a prime contractor. This may incorporate a variation of the logic implemented in the Ares Upper Stage procurement where the prime contractor is in a support role on the front end of the design effort. LLPO does not intend to create a design exclusive of industry participation and then issue a build to print RFP. This approach described is merely an example of the options within the trade space. The LLPO is seeking industry ideas on this type of approach, as well as others, and how to make a successful transition and an effective handoff of design responsibilities from the Government to Industry.
