Status Report

Request for Information on an Upper Stage Engine Technology Effort

By SpaceRef Editor
February 4, 2003
Filed under , ,

  • Document Type: Special Notice
  • Solicitation Number: F04611-03-RFI
  • Posted Date: Jan 31, 2003
  • Original Response Date: Mar 03, 2003
  • Original Archive Date: Mar 18, 2003
  • Current Archive Date:
  • Classification Code: A — Research & Development

Contracting Office Address

Department of the Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command, AFFTC – AF Flight Test Center, 5 S WOLFE AVE, Edwards AFB, CA, 93524-1185



The Government does not intend to award a contract or any other type of agreement on the basis of this synopsis or to otherwise pay for the information solicited under this synopsis. This is NOT a request for proposal or an invitation for bid. The intent of this RFI is to obtain market research. Responses will not be considered as proposals nor will any award be made as a result of this synopsis. The Integrated High Payoff Rocket Propulsion Technology (IHPRPT) program continues to be a vital Department of Defense / National Aeronautics and Space Administration (DoD/NASA) and industry effort. IHPRPT was established to strengthen the technology base of the DoD and commercial rocket propulsion systems through the development of advanced, innovative rocket propulsion technology. The Air Force and NASA are considering a new upper stage engine technology effort. It will be managed jointly with an Air Force program manager and NASA deputy program manager. The objective of this effort is to pursue the IHPRPT upper stage engine goals through improved computational design tools. This will be achieved in a three part approach consisting of tool improvement/development, implementation, and validation. The first part will be to improve/develop computational design tools as they relate to LOX/LH2 expander cycle upper stage engines. The government anticipates these tools to correspond to the conceptual, preliminary, and critical design levels. The conceptual design tools will include engine and component (turbopump and thrust chamber) tools. The preliminary and critical design tools will include only turbopump and thrust chamber tools. The government intends for these computational tools to be available to U.S. Government Agencies and their contractors. The second part will be to implement engine and component designs using the updated tools. As each set of tools is completed, the appropriate design work will be initiated (i.e. when the conceptual design tools are ready conceptual design will begin, etc?). Thrust level will not be specified. At the completion of this part there will be an upper stage engine conceptual design and turbopump and thrust chamber critical designs. In order to focus on expanding the component technology, the cycle requirements defined in the conceptual engine design will not be strictly enforced during the component designs. Risk reduction activities relating to the component development may be identified as options. The third and final part will be to fabricate and test key components. The government will choose which components will be tested. These tests will primarily be used to validate the tools and secondarily to satisfy IHPRPT goals. Testing will be provided by the government.

An RFI Supplemental Package containing a DRAFT schedule, DRAFT funding profile, and IHPRPT goals and baselines is available. Only U.S. contractors who are registered and certified with the Defense Logistics Services Center (DLSC), Federal Center, Battle Creek, Michigan 49017-3084 (800-352-3572) that have a legitimate business purpose or who are teamed with one of the registered contractors will have access. If you are registered with the DLSC, you must submit a copy of the approved DD Form 2345, Military Critical Technical Data Agreement, with your request for the supplemental package. To receive a copy of the RFI Supplemental Package contact 1Lt Daniel Wright (661-275-5583).

Please respond to the following questions as they relate to this plan. 1) Is the approach of integrated tool improvement and implementation sound? 2) Are there any additional tasks the government should consider? 3) If only one component is targeted for design and test which component should that be? 4) How much of the work can realistically be performed with the DRAFT funding profile shown in the RFI Supplemental Package? 5) If you disregarded the DRAFT funding profile, what would your Rough Order Magnitude fully burdened cost for this effort be? 6) Has adequate time been scheduled for each task? If not, what is a more realistic schedule? 7) What is your current computational design tool capability? 8) What is your current upper stage LOX/LH2 expander cycle engine capability? 9) What contract type do you think is most appropriate and why? THREE copies of each response must be submitted to 1Lt Daniel Wright, AFRL/PRSE, 4 Draco Drive, Edwards AFB, CA 93524.

Electronic responses are acceptable (email address Any company proprietary information contained in the response shall be separately marked. Responses shall be limited to TWO pages per question and are due not later than 30 days from the publication of this notice. Companies may contact 1Lt Wright for clarification. The information provided through the responses will be used to aid in requirements definition for future acquisitions.

Original Point of Contact

Patricia Henningham, Contract Specialist, Phone 661-277-9569, Fax 661-275-7835, Email – Barbara Barcelona, Contract Negotiator, Phone 661-277-3524, Fax 661-275-9613, Email

SpaceRef staff editor.