ACTUV Industry Day Slides.pdf

ACTUV

ASW Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel

Industry Day

Rob McHenry Tactical Technology Office

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

DARPA-BAA-10-43@darpa.mil

16 February 2010

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Cases 14990 & 15051.

ACTUVThe ACTUV Concept ASW Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel

• An independent unmanned surface vessel optimized to provide continuous overt trail of threat submarines –Propulsive overmatch against next generation diesel-electric submarines with air independent propulsion –Novel ASW sensor applications to maintain contact on quiet submarines –Maintains close trail over entire months long target deployment –Not an ASW search capability- relies on our hunters to hunt and find the submarine, but frees them from being tied down in asset intensive continuous trail

• A disruptive approach to the submarine threat –Unmanned, low cost platform redefines operational risk calculus to allow new approaches –Creates a relative force structure advantage by negating

SSKs at 1/10th their cost –Sends an important strategic message about our capability and willingness to counter the submarine threat Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Case 14990.

ACTUVACTUV Program Objectives

1) Build and demonstrate an X-ship with beyond state-of-the-art platform performance

2) Demonstrate the technical viability of an independently deploying unmanned naval vessel

3) Transition a game changing operational capability to address the quiet submarine threat

The key to the ACTUV program is deriving unique system characteristics from unmanned vessel design space to deliver fundamentally new operational capability

Preliminary assessments show that an optimized UNV can outperform a submarine 10 times its size, and the innovative application of ASW sensors offers robust performance against quiet submarines

Verifies design closure within parameter space and served as a baseline for preliminary performance assessments – it is not intended to define or limit the ACTUV solution space in any way

Undersea Warfare UNV Exploratory Concept

4.3 m

19.1 m 5.8 m

10.1 m

Full Load Displacement 157 tons Length 19.1 m Beam 5.8 m Draft 10.1 m Height Above Water 4.3 m Max Speed 27 kts

• 3000 km on station mission radius (unrefueled)

• 30 day loiter, followed by 30 day max energy trail mission (unrefueled)

• Speed advantage

• Turn rate advantage

• Acceleration / deceleration advantage

CODAG electric propulsion plant

Aluminum hull

ASW sensor suite

SA sensor suite Communications systems

Active buoyancy and fin control

Fuel tanks

Ballast tanks

ACTUVACTUV Key Technologies

• Platform performance –High performance hullforms and propulsion systems for speed, maneuverability, endurance, and seakeeping –Robust closed loop control over wide range of operational conditions

• Autonomy –Operations under sparse remote supervisory control model –Sensors and sensor fusion to support accurate, high fidelity world model –Adaptive executive control architecture –High fidelity internal state monitoring and optimization

• ASW sensors –Capability to track quiet submarine targets through all mission phases and environments

• System –Reliability and recovery for long duration unattended missions

– Innovative system architectures and fabrication processes to achieve disproportionately low construction cost

ACTUV technical risks are well aligned with the DARPA TTO system integration mission

• Sub-system technology risks are moderate

• System integration is unique and challenging

• Disproportionate capability is created from the sum of the parts

ACTUVACTUV Operational Impact

•Trailing a deployed submarine is extremely challenging and can consume significant force structure

•As the number and capabilities of foreign submarines continue to accelerate, their operational impact becomes more significant

•ACTUV offers a fundamentally new approach to take on the submarine threat

ACTUV tactical and strategic application has been endorsed by key Navy stakeholders

Program Plan

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Case 15051.

ACTUVMission Based Program Approach

•UNV studies lead from platform characteristics down to ACTUV mission characteristics

MissionSensorsPlatform

PlatformSensorsMission

•The ACTUV program approach is to explore the ACTUV mission space and derive optimal sensor and platform characteristics

Proposers are encouraged to define innovative study approaches and follow them to unique system concepts

Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Case 15051.

ACTUVDesired ACTUV Characteristics Mission & Sensor Requirements

•Optimized for quiet diesel electric submarine track and trail; not a wide area ASW search system

•Ability to close datum quickly to target cue location in order to minimize area of uncertainty growth

•Ability to localize target within area of uncertainty of handoff cue •Ability to track target through its entire operating envelope in adverse environmental conditions

•Ability to maintain target trail over submarine operational deployment length

•Ability to provide continuous target location and activity reporting •Resilience to foreseeable countermeasures and countertactics •Leveraging of platform and sensor performance to safely maneuver within surface traffic while maintaining target track

•Minimized exploitable signatures

Platform Performance

•Size optimized for mission requirements with disproportionate performance for displacement relative to conventional surface platforms

•Sufficient range for independent theater or global deployment •Extended loiter endurance to support forward operational prepositioning

•Speed, maneuverability, and endurance advantage over target set •Seakeeping sufficient to maintain mission effectiveness through high sea states

•Advantaged sensor support

ACTUVDesired Operational Characteristics Autonomy

• Independently deployable unmanned system •Sparse shore-based remote supervisory command and control model •Capable of autonomous risk-based mission continuation through command and control interruptions

•Adaptive constraint set based on strategic context, mission phase, internal state, and external conditions

•Compliance with the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) and maritime law

•High fidelity surface navigation and situational awareness sensors •High fidelity internal state awareness and dynamic performance assessment

Integrated System

•Clean sheet design based on no person stepping aboard at any point in its operating cycle

• Innovative application of unmanned platform performance and operational risk tolerance to achieve mission objectives

•Operations from a shore base •High system reliability for long duration missions in the harsh maritime environment without opportunity for underway human maintenance or repair

•Architected to support low unit production cost, such as functional modularity, and non-traditional fabrication methods and facilities

•Architected to support efficient inter-deployment turnaround and low lifecycle cost

•Capable of near-term transition to operational employment •Adaptable system architecture capable of responding to future threats and missions

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

• Hull construction

• Platform / payload integration

• System shakedown

• Sea trials

• Military utility demo

• Concept studies

• Technology survey

• CONOPS development

• Performance specification

• Concept design

• Preliminary operational performance assessment

• Construction plan

• System preliminary design

• Critical technology development

• Critical technology demonstration

• HWIL barge integration

• System detail design

• High fidelity operational performance assessment

ACTUV Program Plan

Phase 1 Studies (6 Mo)

Phase 2 System Design & Risk Reduction

(18 Mo)

Phase 3 Construction

(18 Mo)

Phase 4 Demo (6 Mo)

SRR PDR CDR TRR Transition

SO

LI

C

IT

AT

IO

N

SO

LI

C

IT

AT

IO

N

Multiple Awards

CPFF

Single Award

CPFF

Contract Option

FFP

Contract Option

CPFF

FFP construction option established prior to system design

B es t o f b re ed

S R

R s fe ed s ol ic ita tio n

ACTUVPhase 1 Objectives

•Broad concept input to maximize probability of capturing innovative approaches –Multiple awards for competing concept studies –Actively seeking non-traditional performers and team members –Scalable scope definitions to accommodate specialized contributors

•Mission exploration under high level objectives –CONOPS and wargaming –Concept design and assessment –Technology exploration, selection, development, and demonstration

•System specification support –System architectures –Preliminary performance specifications –Construction plans

Defining what is possible, effective, and executable

ACTUVPhase 2 Objectives

• Government best-of-breed system specification based on Phase 1 results

• Traditional system engineering goals

–Preliminary design through detail design activity

• Non-traditional approaches desired

–Innovative teams, management approaches, and design environments

• Focus on low system production cost

–Phase 3 FFP construction option submitted with phase 2 proposals –Intended to be a significant driver within the design process

• Effective risk reduction –Systematic allocation of resources for supporting technology development and test –Hardware in the loop barge configuration for in-water preliminary testing

• High fidelity operational performance assessment –Data validated simulation

Designing the ACTUV solution and developing confidence

ACTUVPhase 3 Objectives

•System build –All design activity complete in Phase 2 –Platform construction and system integration –Willing to invest in innovative construction architectures, approaches, and team members to establish low production costs

•Functional shakedown –Builder’s trials to demonstrate integrated system functionality

Building the system

ACTUVPhase 4 Objectives

• Incremental capability demonstration –Preliminary controlled data collection –Intermediate controlled exercises –Final free-play operational exercises –Events designed to stress both safe independent deployment of unmanned vessel, and operational submarine trail effectiveness

•Navy military utility assessment •Navy system certification activity

Demonstrating capability and completing transition

CMO

BAA Process

DARPA

Contracts Management Office (CMO)

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Case 15051.

BAA Process

• Description contained in FAR Part 35

– For the acquisition of basic and applied research

– Shall only be used when “meaningful proposals with varying technical/scientific approaches can be reasonably anticipated”

• Instructions are detailed in the BAA (follow closely)

• Following the proposal instructions assists the evaluation team to clearly understand what is being proposed and supports a timely negotiation

BAA Process

• Evaluation / Award

– Government reserves the right to select for award all, some, or none of the proposals received and to award without discussions

– No common Statement of Work - Proposals evaluated on individual merit and relevance as it relates to the stated research goals/objectives rather than against each other

– Only a duly authorized Contracting Officer may obligate the Government

BAA Process

• Be aware:

– Organizational Conflict of Interest &

Procurement Integrity (IPA, SETA/Performer, Other)

– Central Contractor Registration (CCR), Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), & Wide Area Workflow (WAWF)

– Export Control language (ITAR, EAR)

– Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Requirements

BAA Process

• Communications

– After Issuing the BAA – ALL questions to

DARPA-BAA-10-43@darpa.mil

– After Receipt of Proposals – Government

(PM/PCO) may communicate with proposers to understand the meaning of some aspect of the proposal that is not clear or to obtain confirmation or substantiation of a proposed approach, solution, or cost estimate

– Informal feedback may be provided once selection(s) are made

BAA Process

• Subcontracting Research and Development

– “Since the selection of R&D contractors is substantially based on the best scientific and technological sources, it is important that the contractor not subcontract technical or scientific work without the contracting officer’s advance knowledge.”

– All subcontractor supporting cost documentation to be provided at the same level as that of the prime

Applicant Eligibility

• All interested/qualified sources may respond

• Foreign participants/resources may participate to the extent authorized by applicable Security Regulations, Export Laws, etc.

• Government agencies/labs, FFRDC’s, are subject to applicable direct competition limitations

Applicant Eligibility

• Government agencies/labs, FFRDCs cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity, UNLESS they can clearly demonstrate the work is not otherwise available from the private sector AND they also provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant, contractual authority) establishing their eligibility to propose to government solicitations.

• Data Rights Assertions - Assert rights to all technical data & computer software generated, developed, and/or delivered to which the Government will receive less than Unlimited Rights

– Assertions that apply to Prime and Subs

– Use defined “Basis of Assertion” and “Rights

Category”

– Justify “Basis of Assertion”

– This information is assessed during evaluations

Intellectual Property

Intellectual Property

• Include documentation proving your ownership of or possession of appropriate licensing rights to all patented inventions (or inventions for which a patent application has been filed) that will be utilized under your proposal for the DARPA program.

• i-Edison – All patent reports and notifications must be submitted electronically

Publication Approval

• Pre-publication approval may be required depending on type of funds appropriated. Final decision will be made prior to release of BAA.

• Keep in mind when considering university participation on teams.

Cost Proposal

• Address all cost elements required by the

BAA

• Not a price competition, cost realism is assessed

• Supporting information to substantiate the proposed cost elements must be provided

• Certification of cost and pricing data required for proposals > than $650K

BAA 10-43

Review

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited. DISTAR Case 15051.

ACTUVBAA Overview

•BAA 10-43 is for ACTUV Phase 1 awards only –Subsequent phases will be executed through a follow-on solicitation

–Phase 1 performers do not need to be able to execute subsequent phases, and phase 1 award is not necessary to compete for subsequent phases

•Multiple awards are anticipated

•Scalable scope and award values –All Phase 1 activity must directly support subsequent integrated system design, construction, and fabrication

–Seeking both integrated system design teams and limited scope specialized performers

–Award values expected to range from ~$500K for limited scope studies, to $2M for full system concept design and operations analysis

•Cost sharing encouraged, but not required

ACTUVSupporting BAA Annexes

•Unclassified (export controlled) and classified (secret) annexes will be available upon request to DARPA-BAA-10-43@darpa.mil

•Unclassified (export controlled) annex:

–UNV Study Final Report –DARPA New Start Security Classification Guide (DARPA-CG-201 Rev 1) –Draft ACTUV Security Classification Guide (DARPA-CG-662) –ACTUV Industry Day slides

•Classified annex –Select published intelligence reports with more detailed threat information –ACTUV classified sidebar slides

•See BAA 10-43 Section 1.2 for what information must be included in each type of request –Recipients of the classified annex will receive a DD Form 254 which can be flowed down to subcontractors

•Requesters of the classified annex will receive the unclassified annex on a separate disk in the same mailing, and need not make a separate request

•Organizations may request separate mailings for different locations as long as the required information (e.g. technical and security POC info) is appropriate for each location

•Volume I: Technical, Management, and Resourcing –Section I: Administrative –Section II: Summary of Proposal (15 page limit) –Section III: Detailed Proposal (no page limit)

• WBS (≥ level 4)

• Integrated SOW, deliverables, technical support, and BOE

• IMS

–Section IV: Additional Information •Volume II: Cost Proposal •Alternative white paper submissions accepted –15 page technical summaries for those that choose not to or can’t submit full proposals

–No guarantee of any formal comment nor guarantee funding opportunities will result

Proposal Format

1. ACTUV

1.1. Platform

1.1.1. Hull Structure

i. SOW

ii. Deliverables

iii. Technical Support

iv. BOE

1.1.2. Propulsion Plant

i. SOW

ii. Deliverables

iii. Technical Support

iv. BOE

ACTUVEvaluation Criteria

•Section 5.1 identifies the following evaluation criteria, in equal order of importance:

–Technical Merit of the Concept –Quality of the Concept Study Plan –Viability to Complete System Development –Cost Realism –Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

ACTUVEvaluation Criteria (cont.)

•Technical Merit of the Concept –Objective is to assess quality of the underlying system or architecture concepts that are the basis for the detailed proposal

–Includes

• Consistency with the BAA objectives

• Innovativeness in leveraging unmanned system characteristics to achieve beyond state-of-the-art performance

• Robust autonomy implementation approaches

• Effective mission specific sensors and tactics

• System adaptability to future threats and missions

• Novel approaches for construction to achieve low production cost

•Quality of the Concept Study Plan –Objective is to assess the quality of the specific tasks and integrated effort in their ability to achieve program objectives

–Includes:

• Completeness in addressing all or a logically defined subset of elements necessary to effect program success »e.g., threat analysis, concept exploration, technology survey, performance specification, concept design, operational effectiveness analysis, risk assessment, and construction plan

• Innovation in study process or management

• Unique leveraging of resources

• Sufficient allocation of effort

•Viability to Complete System Development –It is the objective of the program to directly leverage Phase 1 activity to support and enhance the design, construction, demonstration, and transition of an operational ACTUV system in subsequent program phases

–Objective of this criterion is to assess the viability and quality of consideration of subsequent system development in the underlying concepts and proposed effort

–Includes:

• Realism and achievability of the concepts

• Technical risks to implementing proposed concepts

• Robustness of risk reduction activity

• Unique capabilities or facilities to support the program

–A particular emphasis will be placed on innovative architectures, teaming arrangements with non-traditional fabricators, and management approaches that minimize demonstration system construction cost and unit procurement cost

•Cost Realism –Objective is to establish that the proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach offered, as well as to determine the proposer’s practical understanding of the effort

–Proposal will be reviewed to determine if the costs proposed are based on realistic assumptions, reflect a sufficient understanding of the technical goals and objectives of the BAA, and are consistent with the proposer’s technical approach (to include the proposed Statement of Work)

• At a minimum, will involve review, at the prime and subcontract level, of the type and number of labor hours proposed per task as well as the types and kinds of materials, equipment, and fabrication costs proposed

–It is expected that the effort will leverage all available relevant prior research in order to obtain the maximum benefit from the available funding

–For efforts with a likelihood of commercial application, appropriate direct cost sharing may be a positive factor in the evaluation

–The evaluation criterion recognizes that undue emphasis on cost may motivate proposers to offer low-risk ideas with minimum uncertainty and to staff the effort with junior personnel in order to be in a more competitive posture – DARPA discourages such cost strategies

•Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission –The potential contributions of the proposed effort with relevance to the national technology base will be evaluated

–Specifically, DARPA’s mission is to maintain the technological superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from harming our national security by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and their application

ACTUVSecurity

•An ACTUV specific SCG is in the approval process (DARPA-CG-662) –Within Phase 1, intent is to offer latitude for unclassified analyses in areas such as unmanned system architectures, platform concept design, autonomy, or low cost production methods while allowing full-scope proposers to incorporate classified data

–Subsystem technologies could be classified if based on classified sources

• In the interim, the DARPA New Start Security Classification Guide (DARPA-CG-201 Rev 1) may be used where applicable –Otherwise use the NISPOM Paragraph 4-105 “Classification Determination Pending” clause

• In cases where other SCGs apply, default to highest level of classification

•No limit on classification of proposals that DARPA can receive

ACTUVSecurity (cont.)

•Due to security requirements associated with submarine targets and specific sensor performance, only U.S. contractors cleared for export controlled and classified information are eligible for awards that cover the full scope of BAA 10-43 –Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate as subs or consultants

• Must comply with any necessary NDAs, security regulations, export control laws, ITAR regulations, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances –Implementation of applicable agreements and licenses is the responsibility of the proposer

•Entities not cleared for export controlled or classified information may still propose limited scope efforts associated with innovative unmanned system architectures, platform concept design, autonomy, and low cost production methods –It is not envisioned that such performers can include submarine sensor subsystems, concept of operations development, and operations analysis on system effectiveness without access to classified information

ACTUVSecurity (cont.)

•For information that a contractor develops in responding to this BAA, which they feel should be classified, the provisions of Paragraph 4- 105 of the NISPOM apply –The information shall be protected and marked at the level that the contractor feels is appropriate and submitted to the government for a security determination

–If the information was previously identified as classified, it shall be classified in accordance with an appropriate Contract Security Classification Specification, SCG, or source document and marked appropriately

–If the information was not previously classified, but the contractor believes the information may, or should, be classified, should protect and mark as though classified at the appropriate level

• In such a case, the following marking, or one that clearly conveys the same meaning, may be used: CLASSIFICATION DETERMINATION PENDING – Protect as though classified (TOP SECRET, SECRET, or CONFIDENTIAL)

•DD-254 not required to submit classified proposals

ACTUVITAR

•Proposers are expected to comply with all U.S. export control regulations including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)

•Program areas DARPA expects to not fall under ITAR restrictions for Phase 1 concept studies –General platform concepts and HM&E technologies which do not fully submerge or otherwise qualify as a submersible under ITAR Category XX

–Low cost production architectures, processes, and techniques –General unmanned system architectures and autonomous approaches

ACTUVITAR (cont.)

•Particular ITAR areas expected to be applicable to ACTUV include:

–Category VI - Vessels of War and Special Naval Equipment

• “...and any vessels specifically designed or modified for military purposes”

–Category XI - Military Electronics

• “Underwater sound equipment to include active and passive detection, identification, tracking, and weapons control equipment...”

• “Radar systems, with capabilities such as search, acquisition, tracking, MTI, imaging radar systems…Any experimental or developmental electronic equipment specifically designed or modified for military application...”

• “Electronic systems or equipment specifically designed, modified, or configured for intelligence, security, or military purposes for use in search, reconnaissance, collection, monitoring, direction-finding, display, analysis and production of information from the electromagnetic spectrum...”

–Category XII - Fire Control, Range Finder, Optical and Guidance and Control Equipment

• “Lasers specifically designed, modified, or configured for military application including those used in...target detection systems...”

• “Infrared focal plane array detectors specifically designed, modified, or configured for military use... this does not include any military system comprised of non-military specification components.”

ACTUVITAR (cont.)

•Particular ITAR areas expected to be applicable to ACTUV include (cont.):

–Category XIII - Auxiliary Military Equipment

• “Cameras and specialized processing equipment...which are specifically designed, developed, modified, or configured for military application...”

– Category XX - Submersible Vessels, Oceanographic Equipment and Associated Equipment

• “Submersible vessels, manned or unmanned, tethered or untethered, designed or modified for military purposes, or powered by nuclear propulsion plants.”

• “Equipment, components, parts, accessories, and attachments specifically designed or modified for any of the articles [in this category]” –Category XXI - Miscellaneous Articles

• “Any article not specifically enumerated in the other categories of the U.S. Munitions List which has substantial military applicability and which has been specifically designed, developed, configured, adapted, or modified for military purposes.”

ACTUVBAA 10-43 Schedule

–Industry Day 16 Feb 2010 –BAA Release 02 Mar 2010 –Deadline for Questions 02 Apr 2010 –Initial Proposal Deadline 30 Apr 2010 –Evaluation Complete May 2010 (est.)

–Negotiations & Awards Aug 2010 (est.)

http://www.darpa.mil/tto/solicitations.htm

For this BAA, please correspond with us via:

DARPA-BAA-10-43@darpa.mil

Rob McHenry Tactical Technology Office

Defense Advanced Research Project Agency

DARPA-BAA-10-43@darpa.mil