DoD awards $42.3M for flight training devices, with delivery expected by January 2028

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $42,291,951 ($42.3M)

Contractor: BY Light Professional IT Services LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-04-01

End Date: 2028-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,400 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: PROCUREMENT OF 2 CABIN FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICES

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $42.3 million to BY LIGHT PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES LLC for work described as: PROCUREMENT OF 2 CABIN FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICES Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the specialized nature of flight training equipment. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 3. Potential risks include contractor performance and the long duration of the contract. 4. This contract supports critical pilot training within the Department of the Army. 5. The procurement falls within the broader defense sector's investment in simulation and training technologies.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $42.3 million for 1400 days of delivery for flight training devices appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized defense equipment. Benchmarking against similar procurements for advanced simulators would provide a more precise assessment, but the fixed-price nature suggests cost control was a consideration. The absence of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes a definitive value assessment challenging, but the competitive award process is a positive indicator.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on pre-defined criteria. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' nature generally implies a robust competitive process, which should lead to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down prices through market forces.

Public Impact

Pilots within the Department of the Army will benefit from enhanced training capabilities. The contract will deliver two cabin flight training devices, improving simulation fidelity. The geographic impact is primarily within military training installations where these devices will be deployed. This procurement supports the aviation workforce by providing essential training tools.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (1400 days) could lead to technology obsolescence if not managed proactively.
Dependence on a single contractor for delivery and potential support raises concerns about future flexibility.
The specific exclusion of sources in the competition, though potentially justified, warrants scrutiny to ensure fairness and maximum competition.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive market for these devices.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The procurement addresses a clear need for advanced pilot training equipment.

Sector Analysis

This procurement falls within the broader defense industry's focus on simulation and training technologies. The market for flight simulators and training devices is specialized, with a few key players dominating. The value of this contract, approximately $42.3 million, is moderate within the context of large defense procurements, but significant for the specific niche of cabin flight training devices. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within other military branches or allied nations investing in similar training infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Given the specialized nature of flight training devices, it is possible that the primary contractor is a larger entity, and the extent of small business involvement would depend on their subcontracting plans, which are not detailed here. Further analysis would be needed to determine the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the Firm Fixed Price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver specified devices within budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance monitoring and Inspector General involvement would depend on specific program oversight protocols and any identified issues.

Related Government Programs

Pilot Training Programs
Aviation Simulation Technology
Defense Training and Education
Military Flight Simulators

Risk Flags

Potential for technology obsolescence due to long contract duration.
Contractor performance risk over an extended period.
Limited competition if source exclusions are not well-justified.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical training assets.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $42.3 million to BY LIGHT PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES LLC. PROCUREMENT OF 2 CABIN FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BY LIGHT PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $42.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-04-01. End: 2028-01-31.

What is the track record of BY LIGHT PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES LLC in delivering complex defense simulation equipment?

Information regarding BY LIGHT PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES LLC's specific track record in delivering complex defense simulation equipment is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance on similar contracts, including on-time delivery, adherence to specifications, and overall customer satisfaction ratings from sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Their general business profile and financial stability would also be relevant factors in evaluating their capability to execute this $42.3 million contract successfully over its duration.

How does the cost per training device compare to industry benchmarks?

The total contract value is $42.3 million for two cabin flight training devices, implying a cost of approximately $21.15 million per device. Without specific details on the complexity, fidelity, and features of these particular training devices, a direct comparison to industry benchmarks is difficult. However, advanced flight simulators, especially those with high-fidelity motion systems and realistic cockpit replication, can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. This price point suggests a sophisticated system, and further investigation into the technical specifications would be needed to ascertain if it aligns with or deviates significantly from market rates for comparable technology.

What are the primary risks associated with the long performance period (1400 days)?

The 1400-day performance period (approximately 3.8 years) presents several risks. Technological obsolescence is a significant concern; aviation technology and simulation capabilities evolve rapidly, and devices delivered early in the contract might be less advanced by the end. Contractor performance risk is also elevated due to the extended duration, increasing the chance of delays, quality issues, or financial instability impacting delivery. Furthermore, maintaining consistent oversight and ensuring the contractor remains responsive to evolving training needs over such a long period can be challenging for the government.

How effective are cabin flight training devices in improving pilot proficiency compared to traditional training methods?

Cabin flight training devices, often referred to as simulators, are highly effective tools for improving pilot proficiency. They allow for the safe and cost-effective practice of a wide range of scenarios, including emergency procedures, complex maneuvers, and adverse weather conditions that might be too dangerous or expensive to replicate in actual aircraft. Studies have consistently shown that simulator training significantly enhances pilot decision-making, situational awareness, and procedural accuracy. By providing repeatable training environments and objective performance feedback, these devices contribute to a higher overall standard of pilot competency and safety.

What has been the historical spending trend for flight training devices within the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending trends for flight training devices within the Department of the Army would require access to comprehensive procurement data over several fiscal years. This specific contract for $42.3 million represents a significant investment in simulation technology. Understanding the trend would involve identifying whether spending in this category has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining relatively stable, and how this procurement fits into the broader context of the Army's aviation training budget and modernization efforts. Fluctuations could be driven by new aircraft introductions, changes in training doctrine, or budget allocations.

What is the significance of the 'after exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain potential sources were explicitly excluded from bidding. This exclusion must be justified by the agency, often based on factors like national security, proprietary technology, or specific capabilities not met by other vendors. While it allows for competition among the remaining eligible sources, it inherently limits the pool of bidders compared to a truly unrestricted 'full and open' competition. The justification for exclusion is critical to ensure that the government is not inadvertently limiting competition and potentially increasing costs or reducing innovation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing › Other Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W900KK20R0013

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8484 WESTPARK DR STE 600, MCLEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $43,226,619

Exercised Options: $43,226,619

Current Obligation: $42,291,951

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W900KK20D0014

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline