Attachment_2_Proposers_Day_Q_A.pdf

HR001122S0036

Attachment 2

Glide Breaker Phase 2 Proposers’ Day Questions and Answers

Question: Have computational fluid dynamics (CFD) studies of test articles with (jet interaction) JI [effects] been considered [with respect to physical constraints of the facility]? How much of the plume needs to be in the wind tunnel core to get it right?

Answer: We have begun blockage calculations with respect to the required size of the wind tunnel model.

Additionally, the CUBRC facility could likely support a full-size test article with the installation of its “top hat.”

Question: Please provide a definition and/or example of fundamental research.

Answer: Fundamental research is defined at National Security Decision Directive 189 as “basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.” In practice at DARPA, this means 6.1-funded research performed by any performer, or 6.2-funded research performed on campus by a university.

Question: Will there be work done on seeker and window technology during Phase 2? If not, are there follow-on plans to address this (possibly a DARPA or Missile Defense Agency (MDA) program)?

Answer: There is a potential for a “ride along” with any given proposal to propose additional work the proposer thinks is necessary or warranted, but DARPA is not specifically asking for work in this area at this time. A proposed “ride along” should not distract from the main focus of the Phase, which is exploring JI effects. There is no follow-on work in this area planned by DARPA at this time. However, MDA is leading the Glide Phase Interceptor program, which is a parallel but separate effort.

Question: Is the John’s Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory’s (JHU/APL) study report available? Can it be requested by proposers?

Answer: The report is not available to proposers. However, JHU/APL summarized the report in their presentation at the Proposers’ Day. Slides from the Proposers’ Day can be requested using the instructions provided in the BAA.

Question: Do you have an estimated duty cycle duration for the operation system (OS) divert and attitude control system (DACS)?

Answer: Government derived objectives for the DACS (including duty cycle length) are included in the SECRET Proposers’ Day slides, which can be requested using the instructions provided in the BAA.

However, these objectives are only intended as a reference. Proposers are expected to derive their own performance objectives for the kill vehicle (including propulsion duty cycle length) from their OS concept.

Question: Will the Phase 1 final reports be available?

Answer: We are not planning to provide these reports, as Phase 1 is still ongoing. Prospective Phase 2 proposers are encouraged to engage directly with Phase 1 performers to understand Phase 1 designs and progress.

Question: If JI is outer mold line (OML) dependent, won’t the demonstration system (DS) need to have the same OML of the OS? Won’t this impact the desire to maintain minimally restrictive data rights of the

DS?

Answer: This will be a challenge in maintaining traceability. The OML could be classified but it would be more desirable for it to be unclassified in order to support unclassified model development efforts in the future.

Question: What about large wind tunnel availability? The wind tunnels of most interest are likely booked out 18 months to 2 years due to [increased] activity in hypersonics. Will DARPA be responsible for wind tunnel scheduling?

Answer: This is a known risk for Phase 2. To help mitigate the risk, DARPA has scheduled a time slot for Phase 2 testing at the Von Karman Gas Dynamics Facility (VKF) Tunnel B in late Q1 of CY2024.

Proposers seeking to utilize VKF Tunnel B should still coordinate with VKF on the specific testing they intend to execute to ensure VKF can support. Proposers seeking to utilize other facilities will need to coordinate availability directly with those facilities.

Question: Are proposers responsible for range reservation, vehicle certification, and pricing within proposals, or should [we] provide a military interdepartmental purchase request (MIPR) placeholder assumption?

Answer: Range selection is up to the performers, including price and availability trade-offs. If desired, it could be proposed as government furnished equipment (GFE).

Question: Will this program have a DX rating?

Answer: DARPA anticipates that the Phase 2 contract will be given a DX Defense Priorities & Allocations System Program (DPAS) rating.

Question: If the state of the forebody boundary layer is so critical for modeling JI and JI-induced separation, has any examination of unsteady shock-grid alignment (or mis-alignment) been considered?

Answer: Bow shock alignment isn’t an issue, but embedded shock is worth focusing on with respect to mesh alignment. Re-gridding has not been necessary so far.

Question: What are the key measurements desired from sounding rocket tests? Force and moment from the inertial measurement unit (IMU)? Any thought to flow measurements beyond just pressure, temperature, and heat flux?

Answer: We are not specifying any desired measurements at this time and are leaving it to proposers’ discretion. Ultimately, the measurements must sufficiently support a CFD model. This could include pressure, temperature, force, moment, and/or optical measurements.