C-sUAS RFI Final.pdf

Request for Information U.S. Air Force Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft

Systems

Table of Contents

1. Introduction/Purpose

2. Background and Objectives

2.1. Mission Overview

2.2. Current Status of System

2.3. Future System Description

2.4. Key Technical Objectives

3. Support Needed

3.1. Software Related Work

3.2. Procurement, Integration & Fielding

3.3. Test and Evaluation

3.4. Sustainment

4. Contractor Capabilities and experience 3 Submission of Information 4 Points of Contact 5 Disclaimer

1. Introduction/Purpose The United States Air Force (USAF) is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) to improve USAF understanding of market capabilities and identify qualified vendors capable of providing Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) integration, development, purchasing, fielding, training, and sustainment services. These activities will support C-sUAS systems that are capable of Detecting, Tracking, Identifying, and Defeating sUAS located globally. Responses to this RFI will help support the USAF strategy for this acquisition and identify businesses that are capable of successfully providing C-sUAS support to the USAF.

All interested and qualified businesses (i.e., Small Business, Other than Small) are encouraged to respond to this notice in accordance with the instructions addressed herein.

2. Background and Objectives

2.1. Mission Overview

The C-SUAS mission for the USAF is the defense of critical assets from threats which includes but is not limited to personnel, bases, flight lines, storage areas, and equipment while in transit. Due to the widespread use of UAS technologies both for recreational and military use, the AF is tasked with protecting these critical assets from a diverse range of threats.

These threats are classified as groups 1-3 UAS that vary drastically in capability (range of characteristics can be found below).

Characteristics for Group 1-3:

- Size: <1,320 lbs

- Speed: <250 knots

- Operating altitude: < Flight Line 180 or < 3500 ft AGL

These threats range further in capability from commercial or hobbyist to military UAS. This poses a diverse and ever evolving threat. The operators of these UAS and their intent can also range quite drastically. They could be a commercial hobbyist who have interest in the DoD and their activities or a nefarious actor(s) who wish to cause harm to personnel, gather intelligence about, or destroy military assets.

Overall, the AF is tasked with protecting a diverse range of assets from a wide and ever evolving threat.

2.2. Current Status of System

The USAF currently has a diverse set of systems fielded world-wide to combat the threats. These systems were fielded in rapid response to an urgent threat. The equipment fielded was purchased from multiple vendors, each bringing unique capabilities to the field in support of these requirements.

Locations that have multiple systems operate as a System-of-System (SoS) and utilize an existing Government Owned Command-and-Control (C2) system to integrate the SoS that allows operators to view data from all sensors and control effectors from one display.

Dependent upon location there will be required installation of communications, Information Technology (IT), and other ancillary pieces of equipment. This will include but is not limited to mounting of equipment, network switches, communications fiber, ethernet, power, and other related peripherals.

This equipment performs the core functionality of the SoS, including the ability to detect, track, identify, and defeat potential UAS threats. Each of these functions perform a key role in enabling the operator to effectively work through the kill chain to exert a reasonable amount of force. These functions are further defined below:

• Detect - Ability for system or SoS to discover an object in the airspace.

• Track – Ability for system or SoS to provide locational data of the object detected in the airspace throughout its flight.

• Identify - Ability for the system or SoS to provide confirmation that an object in the airspace is a potential threat (e.g., UAS vs. Bird).

• Defeat – Ability for the system to act upon and successfully mitigate a threat in the airspace.

Each of these functions can be performed by the following or a combination of the following systems. Each of these systems are currently used in the SoS:

• Electronic Warfare (EW) System - Utilizes RF frequencies to deter, deny, manipulate, or jam

UAS.

• Radar (Active) – Utilizes an active RF signal to detect objects within the airspace and provide a location.

• UAS RF Sensor – Utilizes UAS RF signals in the air to detect potential UAS and give a location or Line-of-Bearing.

• EO/IR – Provides video imagery of potential UAS, provides Lines of Bearing (LOBs) and acts as a positive identification mechanism of UAS within the air.

• Acoustic Sensor - Utilizes acoustic signatures of UAS (e.g., propellers) to provide a Line of Bearing (LOB).

• Command-And-Control (C2) – Software that integrates all associated technologies into a singular system allowing operators to utilize information provided by the sensors and to potentially act against a threat utilizing an effector.

In addition to the core functionality of the system there are several different form factors that are required to meet AF specific missions. Each of these different form factors do not have to be the same solution but do need to meet their specific mission needs.

These form factors are dismount, mobile, fixed site, and expeditionary. These form factors do not necessarily need to be met by that same solution and can be met by multiple configurations or combinations of systems. Each is unique in what it’s used for and some can be used in multiple different roles.

• Dismount – Systems that can be used, setup, and taken down by a single user. These are typically handheld, can be carried by a single user, and operated by a single user.

• Mobile – Systems that can operate on the move or in a stopped position.

• Fixed Site - Traditional use case where the system is installed at a base and persistently operates.

• Expeditionary - Can be rapidly deployed to a site, setup and operate for duration of mission.

Must be able to be transported via trailer or aircraft.

The USAF currently utilizes a palletized solution for detect, track, identify, and defeat requirements.

This allows for a relatively compact and rapidly deployable solution in support of the expeditionary desires of the USAF.

Overall, the suite of systems deployed meets a diverse range of capabilities to meet the unique requirements of the AF.

2.3. Future System Description

The USAF is looking to modernize the System of System currently deployed. This modernization would focus on further development of an existing Modular Open Command-and-Control (C2) system that would allow for the AF to meet the rapidly evolving threat. This C2 would need to achieve the following:

- SOSA Compliance for rapid integration of sensors and effectors

- MOSA compliance for rapid integration software modules, external links, and third-party services

- Continuous development with rapid incremental deliveries to meet mission needs

(minimum of 2 per year)

- Continuous integration as needed to meet the threat.

- Persistent cyber patching and cyber security baked into the development process.

- AI/ML for object detection, ROE suggestions, operator workload reduction, and automation of the kill chain

To achieve this, a DevSecOps Pipeline (DSOP) will need to be established and maintained. This will allow for rapid updates, automation of certain test aspects, and development to be run in parallel throughout the lifecycle.

The system of systems will require capable sensors and effectors. The sensors/effectors used will be existing Commercial Off the Shelf or Government Off the Shelf (COTs or GOTS) equipment. This will require sensors to be tested, integrated, and fielded periodically. The software will enable rapid integration of new sensors/effectors as old ones become obsolete (end of life or operationally ineffective).

• Radar (Active) – Utilizes an active RF signal to detect objects within the airspace and provide a location.

• Radar (Passive) – Utilizes RF signals within the air to detect potential UAS and give a general location.

• EO/IR – Provides video imagery of potential UAS, provides Lines of Bearing (LOBs) and acts as a positive identification mechanism of UAS within the air.

• Acoustic Sensor - Utilizes acoustic signatures of UAS (e.g., propellers) to provide a line of Bearing (LOB).

• Command-And-Control (C2) – Software that integrates all associated technologies into a singular system allowing operators to utilize information provided by the sensors and to potentially act against a threat utilizing an effector.

• Kinetic Defeat - Destroys or knocks the intended target out of the air.

• Directed Energy Weapon – Uses a high-powered microwave or laser to destroy or knock intended target out of the air.

• Electronic Warfare (EW) System - Utilizes RF frequencies to deter, deny, manipulate, or jam

UAS.

2.4. Key Technical Objectives

The following are key technical objectives for the AF:

• Cloud Computing

• Modular Open Systems Architecture (MOSA)

• Agile Software development (DevSecOps)

• Machine Learning

• Digital Engineering

• Reduced operator workload

3. Support Needed

3.1. Software Related Work

The following is the basic outline of the C-sUAS development effort:

• Software development to include following:

o Correlation and fusion algorithms o Machine Learning Algorithms o Threat Prioritization Modules o User Interface o Camera slew-to-cue and tracking

• Integration of COTs/GOTs products

• Test and Evaluation execution and support (assist government in test events and generation of test reports or supporting documentation)

• Cyber patching

• Bug fixes

• Feature development

3.2. Procurement, Integration & Fielding

Interested companies must be able to show experience with efficient execution of aggressive fielding schedules. The following is a basic outline of the C-sUAS Fielding effort:

• System Procurement

• Fielding at CONUS and OCONUS locations

• Warehousing and shipping

• Program Management (Risk Management, Financial Management, Schedule Management, etc.)

• Earned Value Management (EVM)

• Reporting and metrics

• System checkout testing

• Installation at site

• Site surveys and evaluations

• As-Builts

• Documentation support for training, manuals, and guides

3.3. Test and Evaluation

• Writing test plans and procedures

• Tracking and resolving deficiencies

• Working with DoD (or other government equivalent) independent developmental and operational test organizations

• Requirements development and test method determination (e.g. formal test, analysis)

• Planning and conducting test events, specifically with live UAS flights.

3.4. Sustainment

Support and sustainment for the following types of systems is required as part of this effort until the systems are deemed obsolete or “end of life” (EOL) by the USAF. Additionally, any ancillary critical components including but not limited to masts, mounts, communications infrastructure (fiber), and other similar items. Upon which time the USAF may request for a replacement(s) to be found:

• Electronic Warfare (EW) System - Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Radar (Active) – Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Radar (Passive) – Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• EO/IR – Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Acoustic Sensor - Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Kinetic Defeat - Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Directed Energy Weapon – Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the system.

• Low Collateral Effects Interceptor - An interceptor that captures, deters, or mitigates the threat while causing minimal collateral damage.

• Command-And-Control (C2) – Provide installation, field maintenance, and repairs for the systems associated hardware (server stack). Additionally provide maintenance of the software including but not limited to bug fixes and cyber patches.

Support and sustainment services required for this effort will include the following:

• 24/7 telephone Help Desk

• Fly-out support

• Full time on-site Field Service Engineers (FSE’s)

• Access to Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) vendors for support, repairs, and sparing

• Repairs of equipment on site, movement of equipment, and As-Built updates

These requested services will be supplemented by an organic Government Depot Source of Repairs (DSOR). The extent to which is unknown currently. However, support will still be needed to generate, acquire from OEMs, or supplement documentation for the DSOR.

4. Contractor Capabilities and experience The purpose of this RFI is for USAF to improve its understanding of market capabilities and identify vendors capable of providing C-sUAS integration, development, fielding, & sustainment services.

Interested vendors shall identify their capabilities to meet the requirements and questions detailed below. The total response to these questions shall not exceed 20 pages total.

1. General Information

1.1. Name and Address

1.2. Point of Contact for company (Name, Title, Email, and Phone Number)

1.3. List project names that were worked with government. Please provide POC(s).

1.4. Identify your business size – Other than small, small, small disadvantaged, 8(a)-certified small disadvantaged, HUBZone small, woman-owned small, very small, veteran-owned small, service-disabled veteran-owned small.

1.5. Applicable GSA Schedule Contract No.

1.6. Other contract vehicles the USAF may consider for this requirement for which you are an awardee (e.g., Government Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs), GSA Schedules, DHS Strategic Sourcing Contract).

1.7. Recommended North American Industry Classification Code (NAIC) best suited for the requirements within this RFI.

1.8. Provide a summary description of your company’s experience with C-sUAS as it relates to the information in this RFI. Limit response to 1 page.

2. Contractor Proficiencies (Limit below responses to 2 pages)

2.1. Please provide a brief overview of your company's understanding of USAF C-sUAS requirements as presented in this RFI.

2.2. Describe briefly the capability and experience in providing programmatic and technical management/support of a similar program including, but not limited to cost control strategies, and quality processes.

2.3. Describe resources and technical proficiency as it relates to the scope of effort to include the labor mix available and expertise.

2.4. Describe capability and experience of providing training program development services.

3. Technical

3.1. Have you worked with refining, integrating, and sustaining government owned software?

3.2. Have you developed a software which follows a Modular Open System Architecture

(MOSA) or Sensor Open System Architecture (SOSA)? Please list out software or program names.

3.3. Have you worked Agile processes? Please put preferred methodology.

3.4. Have you ever setup a DevSecOPs pipeline?

3.5. Have you ever worked in a government owned cloud (e.g., CloudOne)?

3.6. Have you ever continued developing a software from some third party?

3.7. What types of machine learning models have you worked with?

3.8. What were these models built for (e.g., Image Recognition, Natural Language AI, etc.)?

3.9. What types of digital engineering tools have you used?

3.10. Have you implemented a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) design? Attach example or provide POC.

3.11. Have you ever built a full Technical Data Package?

3.12. Have you worked a JF-12 Process?

3.13. Have you worked an RFA process?

3.14. Have you worked an EA process?

3.15. Have you worked with a government test organization?

3.16. Describe experience working with MBSE tools, creating/maintaining a DSOP, and experience being the main integrator for a C2 software. Limit response to 2 pages and provide any necessary diagrams, or drawings as an attachment.

4. Cyber

4.1. Have you ever maintained compliance for systems, networks, and applications to approved cybersecurity standards?

4.2. Have you ever assessed security controls, conducted audits, continuous monitoring and proposed/implemented measures to address vulnerabilities or non-compliance issues?

4.3. Have you ever conducted vulnerability scanning of the information systems using approved

DoD industry tools?

4.4. Have you ever conducted compliance scans of the information systems per the NIST-800-

53 security technical implementation requirements using approved DoD industry tools?

4.5. Have you ever performed vulnerability scans on the static code deliverables?

4.6. Have you ever implemented the concept of least privilege to ensure that systems operate securely and efficiently without sacrificing capabilities?

4.7. Have you ever developed an Identity and Access Management system?

4.8. Have you worked with PKI authentication and implementation.

4.9. Have you ever worked with 802.1x implementation on layer 2 and layer 3 network devices?

4.10. Describe your experience and knowledge of verifying system compliance with cybersecurity requirements. This should include a high-level Cybersecurity plan to ensure supported systems are up to date and in compliance with Authority to Operate (ATO) requirements. Please limit response to 2 pages.

5. Logistics

5.1. Have you worked with managing Government approved ILS databases for inventory control?

5.2. Have you worked with Government Depot Source of Repair (DSOR)?

5.3. Have you worked with multiple warehouses located both CONUS and OCONUS?

5.4. Have you worked with OEM Supply chain management?

5.5. Have you worked developing related training programs for personnel, civilian or military?

5.6. Have you worked with incorporating related OEM training, scheduling or implementing?

5.7. Have you worked developing a tiered system of training, 3 levels or higher (Maintainer, Operator, Administrator?

5.8. Have you dealt with handling, storage, and disposal of HAZMAT?

5.9. Have you worked handling USAF PHS&T standards to include up to classified storage and transportation?

5.10. Have you worked handling large scale inventories (10,000+)?

5.11. Do you have experience with handling lost, damaged, or destroyed equipment?

5.12. Have you worked with maintaining Reliability, Availability and Maintainability Data?

5.13. Do you have experience with DRMO capabilities?

5.14. Please describe experience working with a DSOR, supply chain management, PHS&T, and

RAM data. Limit response to 2 pages.

6. Installation

6.1. Have you installed equipment in foreign countries?

6.2. Have you installed equipment on a DoD location before?

6.3. Have you shipped equipment to foreign countries for installation?

6.4. Have you ever made a technical order (TO)?

6.5. Have you ever made a TO using a COTs manual?

6.6. Have you performed a site survey to include spectrum interference, line of sight, and infrastructure assessment?

7. Contacts

7.1. List out other Government agencies you have worked with along with a Point of Contact for each.

7.2. This project requires working with other manufacturers and companies. Please list out other manufacturers and companies that you have worked out.

8. Other and General Statement(s).

8.1. Please use remaining pages to describe additional thoughts, approaches, or other information that you deem relevant to this RFI submission.

3 Submission of Information The information requested in support of the Capabilities Statement must be submitted in writing. The submitted Capabilities Statement shall not exceed twenty (20) pages, in addition to a one (1) page cover letter, for a total submission not to exceed twenty-one (21) pages.

Your submission should be organized in accordance with the instructions in this document to permit a thorough and accurate review and evaluation by the USAF. Responses to this RFI must be submitted to the USAF via electronic mail no later than August 23, 2024 at 10:00AM, EST to the following:

Mr. Robert Gill at Robert.Gill.12@us.af.mil

Ms. Kristen Rienzo at kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil

Ms. Ciabha Kelleher at ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil

4 Points of Contact All comments, inquiries and responses should be directed to the following individuals:

Ms. Kristen Rienzo Contract Specialist kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil

Ms. Ciabha Kelleher Contract Specialist ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil

Mr. Robert Gill Procuring Contracting Officer robert.gill.12@us.af.mil mailto:Robert.Gill.12@us.af.mil mailto:kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil mailto:ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil mailto:kristen.rienzo@us.af.mil mailto:ciabha.kelleher@us.af.mil mailto:robert.gill.12@us.af.mil

5 Disclaimer

THIS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IS SOLELY FOR INFORMATIONAL AND

PLANNING PURPOSES AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SOLICITATION. In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract, nor do they affect a potential offeror's ability to respond to any future synopsis/solicitation, which may or may not follow or restrict the Government's eventual acquisition approach. The Government will not provide reimbursement for any information that may be submitted in response to this notice, and no basis for a claim against the Government shall arise from a response to this notice or Government use of any information provided. Respondents are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.