RFP Addenda 6

by Kristian,

Please see the following questions and answers comprising Addenda 6.

ID

Question

Answer

1.

Schedule 1 – Statement of Requirements Section 5.2 – In-Field Trial Part (f) – Trial Site Question 1 – Is Air Services Australia responsible for selecting the trial site?

Airservices is responsible for selecting the trial site. This will be determined in conjunction with our Test & Evaluation (T&E) provider in the coming months.

2.

Question 2 – Is the equipment listed in the table in this section provided by Air Services Australia?

Yes. Airservices will provide all equipment listed in the table in section 5.2.

3.

Part (g) – Traffic Density Question 3 – Will Air Services Australia provide the UAS operations including the 100 UAV’s if required, along with the pilots, support staff and operating expenses to conduct this testing?

No. Airservices will provide a small fleet of UAS in conjunction with the T&E provider (~5 UAV). The remainder UAV to exercise in-field testing at a dense traffic level are expected to be simulated by the UTM developer. Correctly implemented, whether a UAV is simulated and actual should be invisible to the FIMS.

4.

Requirement: RM09

What noise propagation model should be attributed to a custom drone?

The noise propagation model applied to all UAV should be a free field acoustic propagation model using the UAV acoustic parameters (which will vary per UAV model) to calculate the A-weighted sound level (dBA) at ground level.

For the purpose of the FIMS Prototype, a custom drone should still be assigned acoustic parameters to use in the propagation model.

5.

Requirement: SU16

Could Airservices clarify the scope of “…any off-nominal conditions that cannot be contained/managed by the USS.”. The requirement is slightly ambiguous.

The intent of this requirement is that the Airspace Administrator should only be notified of off-nominal conditions where the outcome of that condition cannot be wholly managed by the applicable USS.

An off-nominal situation such as a non-conforming UAV has potential to be wholly managed by the applicable USS.

Airservices is open to proposals to meet this requirement. There are many conditions/scenarios that are yet to be explored.

6.

If our company intends to become a USS when the UTM ecosystem is formally established in Australia, do we need to go this or any future RFP?

The formal establishment of a complete UTM ecosystem (FIMS, USS, SDSP, etc) is not specifically the subject of the FIMS Prototype RFP. While our efforts will inform that ecosystem, there is no requirement for potential future USS to respond to the FIMS Prototype RFP.

Instead, broader ‘whole of Australian government’ activities are expected to more formally establish requirements for USS and corresponding integration into the UTM ecosystem.

7.

Is Airservices negotiable on the co-funding percentage (50% of total cost) and/or the commercialisation arrangements of Foreground IP (section 6.2.c of the draft agreement).

Airservices will not fund more than 50% of the project cost.

It is Airservices expectation that the Agreement is in a form that is commercially reasonable and able to be signed by Developers without amendment. Airservices will not consider material departures from the content of clause 6.2.c of the draft agreement. Minor changes may be considered.

The RFP has concluded

<span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.projects.blog_posts.show.load_comment_text">Load Comment Text</span>