Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: TDP

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    0
    Pay close attention to what AC130 is saying. I work on the opposite side of the fence in that I wear a green suit to work and do the contract prep work and tech eval in a limited purview (IT), AC130 is pointing out a lot of key points that a business must take into consideration to be competitive.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,039
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    I see what both of you are saying. I was under the impression, possibly mistakenly, that the physical sample had to be run through its paces and torture tests especially if the sample has changes or improvements. This is the reason I figured they had to allow bidders access to the package so the sample could be up to spec and compete on a level playing field.

    Believe me, I know this is an uphill battle but, without saying too much about future product plans, we have some improvements that we think are worthwhile and have not been offered before (to our knowledge; it's not the standard stuff).

    So if I understand y'all correctly, this process has gone to a paper/electronic bid process only based on projections, numbers and cost and the winner gets the package. This being the case, how do they consider improvements? Or do they?
    "An opinion solicited does not equal one freely voiced," Al Swearengen, Deadwood 1877.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky5019 View Post
    I see what both of you are saying. I was under the impression, possibly mistakenly, that the physical sample had to be run through its paces and torture tests especially if the sample has changes or improvements. This is the reason I figured they had to allow bidders access to the package so the sample could be up to spec and compete on a level playing field.

    Believe me, I know this is an uphill battle but, without saying too much about future product plans, we have some improvements that we think are worthwhile and have not been offered before (to our knowledge; it's not the standard stuff).

    So if I understand y'all correctly, this process has gone to a paper/electronic bid process only based on projections, numbers and cost and the winner gets the package. This being the case, how do they consider improvements? Or do they?
    The other thing to take into consideration is that there are steps to the process and there are differences in the process depending if it's a new or existing product. Go to fedbiz like ac130 recommended, but also Go to ARDEC like I recommended and click their "Buisness oppurtunitys" tab. Look at what is going on with the Modular Handgun program and what happened with the MARINES IAR. Then compare it to the bidding process for the M4. You will notice differences.

    Here is some additional reading:

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...etition-06942/

    http://gearscout.militarytimes.com/2...ld-this-be-it/
    You will notice that Crane released the TDP to 21 vendors, an issue only arose when one vendor refused to sign COLT's NDA.

    www.gao.gov/new.items/d06839.pdf
    Last edited by cd228; 07-03-15 at 16:05.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NW FL
    Posts
    86
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky5019 View Post
    So if I understand y'all correctly, this process has gone to a paper/electronic bid process only based on projections, numbers and cost and the winner gets the package. This being the case, how do they consider improvements? Or do they?
    For a contract to supply more M16s or M4s that is correct. Basically you bid and if you win the USG tells Colt to license the TDP to you and tells you "We want you to make these rifles EXACTLY as specified in the TDP, no more, no less." Otherwise it would not be an M4, as the TDP defines exactly what an M4 is and that is what was solicited.

    To try to pitch improvements or new features you would have to somehow get a demonstration in front of the military and get someone that can actually effect change to see an added value of your product to champion it as a requirement. Not only must you address a deficiency in the current design but you must convince the powers that be that your change is significant enough to justify the cost of not only your product on new purchases, but also how will the implementation of your product affect the logistics tail and if it is truly a requirement, is it even possible to incorporate into the existing inventory of weapons and at what cost. Keep in mind that if your product is seen as a requirement it would likely be solicited as an RFP and you may not even win the contract.

    The other options you have are to search FBO.gov for a Request For Information (RFI) that matches a possible requirement or feasibility study looking into more information on something that is the same or similar to your product. That is another way to get your product seen or possibly evaluated. Other than the contracting venues your only other options are advertising and trade shows.

    In the end, the military must have a requirement for what you want to sell them before you can try to sell them your product.

    The only other opportunity I could think of to sell modifications or improvements to a weapon system is if the military is looking to replace an existing weapon system and they have a "shoot off" or test and evaluation program to select a new or modified platform. Again though, selection would be based not only upon performance, but initial cost, life cycle cost and ultimately how well it fulfills the requirement. For small arms there usually has to be a very significant delta across several areas to justify the expense, along with a marked increase in capability to fulfill the requirements.
    "You can run...but you'll only die tired." - Spooky


  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,039
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    The T&E was what I was thinking. I was also figuring since it was not a completely new weapon system that it could be designated as an improvement (i.e. M4A2 etc).

    I'll do this leg work and see where that takes things. THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH!! this was a very helpful dialogue and EXACTLY what I was looking for. Have a safe and happ 4th!!

    Spencer
    "An opinion solicited does not equal one freely voiced," Al Swearengen, Deadwood 1877.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    0
    Actually you can send in an unsolicited proposal, but good luck with that.

    Also, I am pretty sure that the down select vendors (the final few) had to undergo some manner of technical screening that involved hard products.

    The RFIs that AC130 mentions are a good place to look, I had forgotten them. Take a look at the recent Rail solicitation and the M110C for more info/examples of that.

    Whatever you do, make sure you do a cost benefit analysis. Don't pull an H&K and wind up owned by BAE after the G11 wasn't adopted.
    Last edited by cd228; 07-03-15 at 16:23.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,039
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Roger that. Good advice. Thanks again so much!
    Last edited by Sparky5019; 07-03-15 at 16:32. Reason: Spelling
    "An opinion solicited does not equal one freely voiced," Al Swearengen, Deadwood 1877.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    0
    Say, what outfit are you with anyway?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NW FL
    Posts
    86
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky5019 View Post
    The T&E was what I was thinking. I was also figuring since it was not a completely new weapon system that it could be designated as an improvement (i.e. M4A2 etc)
    Whatever you have cooking, get it patented or at least apply for a patent. Next step is to get the military to identify your offering as a requirement. In which case, they would likely go to Colt to implement the necessary change to the TDP and of course, Colt, in turn, would need to license your intellectual property from you to incorporate the new requirement into the TDP for the "M4A2".
    Last edited by ac130usnsr; 07-03-15 at 17:04.
    "You can run...but you'll only die tired." - Spooky


  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,039
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Understood. That was the path we had planned for the most part. Thanks again!
    "An opinion solicited does not equal one freely voiced," Al Swearengen, Deadwood 1877.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •