Data_Call_003_-_Q&A_10Dec18.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C5ISR 2018 BAA (Formerly S&TCD) Rev 16
- Solicitation number
- BAA-18-R-STCD
About this file
This document contains Government responses to Industry questions concerning White Paper Call 003 associated with BAA Topic #S1802
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
50 files listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Solicitation: BAA-18-R-STCD Data Call 003 Topic #: S1802
ADDENDUM 001
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS
3 December 2018
Q-1: Is there a specific center frequency that the government is interested in?
USG RE: No, but spectrum allocation and availability should be taken into account, as well as the suitability of any given spectrum to the desired range, throughput, and AJ/LPI/LPD characteristics.
| Q-1a: | If so, would it be considered a negative to propose support for multiple or alternative frequency bands? |
| USE RE: | Support for multiple or alternative frequency bands would be seen as a positive, all other factors being equal. |
Q-2: On pg. 3, paragraph 2, it states that "line of sight is assumed" (LOS). What is meant by this?
USG RE: A non-LOS solution is not required in meeting the stated threshold requirements, however any fielded Army solution will have to deal with the practical reality of an imperfect environment (e.g., foliage, dense urban terrain).
Q-3: Does LOS imply an unrestricted path, i.e., no forest, vegetation, obstacles?
USG RE: We recognize that there are tradeoffs in different operating environments. The more that can be overcome via the waveform, frequency, and other design choices the better, however there is no expectation that the solution will work in particularly challenged environments. The primary considerations remain AJ/LPI/LPD.
Q-4: In this context, does LOS apply to intrasquad comms only, or also for dismounted reachback?
USG RE: Reach-back is the threshold goal and squad to squad (inter-squad) is the objective goal. LOS is generally assumed between squad members but the impact of intermittent obstructions should be considered.
Q-5: If intrasquad comms only, is LOS assumed for beamforming comms only, or all intrasquad comms?
USG RE: Intra-squad communications is not the main emphasis of the D2TBS program but is likely required in many technical approaches. We expect that technical approaches may implement an intra-squad network in order to demonstrate distributed beamforming. LOS can be assumed between squad members but the impact of intermittent obstructions should be considered.
Q-6: Regarding the operating environment / CONOPS, can you provide ranges for the transmitter power, carrier freq, and bandwidth?
USG RE: Ranges are dictated by doctrine. Typically a dismounted squad will not exceed a distance from their platform greater than the coverage of its main gun (e.g., 25 mm M242). Range and bandwidth requirements are listed in the addendum, which is also posted on FBO. There are no specific requirements for frequency.
Q-7: What is the geographical distribution of dismounted nodes in a squad? How far apart could they be, and how far could they be from the base station?
USG RE: Ranges are dictated by doctrine. Typically a dismounted squad will not exceed a distance from their platform greater than the coverage of its main gun (e.g., 25 mm M242). Typically squad members will not disburse farther than the range qualification of their nearest “neighbor,” and usually far less. Range and bandwidth requirements are listed in the addendum, which is also posted on FBO.
Q-8: Could the base station (e.g., vehicle) employ an antenna array?
USG RE: Yes, the base station could employ an antenna array.
Q-9: Regarding the demonstration activity at Fort Dix, NJ - is the objective to support multiple concurrent communications sessions between squads and the base station? For example, one 11-node squad beamforms to the base station and at the same time another squad also communicates with the base station? Presumably the two squads would use some multiple access method, such as TDMA or FDMA?
USG RE: At the end of the contract period it is assumed that any effective solution will have a strategy for dealing with concurrent communications. However, we are not constraining that solution space, which might fall anywhere between real-time concurrency and serialization through queuing.
Q-10: Is the Government interested in demonstrating beamforming on platforms other than currently used/fielded communication radios?
USG RE: Yes, the Government is interested in demonstrating beamforming on platforms other than currently used/fielded communication radios.
Q-11: Does the Government already have a communication platform in mind to implement the beamforming as a new capability?
USG RE: No, although solutions should take into account the Army’s path toward NGCV.
Q-12: Do offerors have to use the platform from Q-11 in the proposed solutions, at least for near-term test?
USG RE: No, offerors do not have to use the platform from Q-11 in their proposed solutions.
File details come from the government source that posted it.