DARPA-BAA-15-22.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement 100 Gb/s RF Backbone (100G) Phase 2 and 3

STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY OFFICE

DARPA-BAA-15-22

March 12, 2015

DARPA-BAA-15-22, 100G Phase 2 and 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

1.1 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

1.1.1. PHASE 1 GOALS AND RESULTS SUMMARY

1.1.2. PHASES 2 AND 3 SUMMARY

1.2 100G PROTOTYPE SYSTEM

1.2.1 100G Node Design and Configurations

1.3 PHASE 2 PROGRAM AND TESTING

1.4 PHASE 3 PROGRAM AND TESTING

1.5 PHASE 3 AIRBORNE PLATFORM SELECTION, INTEGRATION, AND TEST

OPERATIONS

1.6 100G SYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES

1.7 100G SYSTEM PERFORMANCE PREDICTION FOR PROPOSAL

1.8 TRANSITION PLANNING

1.9 OTHER PROPOSAL INFORMATION

1.10 TECHNICAL DELIVERABLES

1.11 PROGRAM METRICS

2. AWARD INFORMATION

2.1 Fundamental Research

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

3.1 ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

3.1.1 Federally Funded Research And Development Centers (FFRDCs) And Government Entities

3.1.2 Non-U.S. Organizations

3.1.3 Applicants Considering Classified Submissions

3.2 Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest

3.3 COST SHARING/MATCHING

4. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

4.1 ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE

4.2 CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION SUBMISSION

4.2.1 Security And Proprietary Issues

4.2.2 Proposal Information

4.2.3 Restrictive Markings on Proposals

4.3 FORMATTING CHARACTERISTICS

4.3.1 Proposal Format

4.4 SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES

4.4.1 Full Proposal Submission Deadline

4.5 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

4.6 OTHER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

5.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.1.1 Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

5.1.2 Cost Realism

5.1.3 Plans and Capabilities to Accomplish Technology Transition

5.1.4 Proposer’s Capabilities and/or Related Experience

5.1.5 Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

5.2 REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS

6. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

6.1 SELECTION NOTICES

6.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

6.2.1 Meeting And Travel Requirements

6.2.2 Human Subjects Research

6.2.3 Animal Use

6.2.4 Export Control

6.2.5 Subcontracting

6.2.6 Electronic And Information Technology - Not applicable

6.2.7 Employment Eligibility Verification

6.2.8 System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier Requirements

6.2.9 Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards

6.2.10 Updates of Information Regarding Responsibility Matters

6.2.11 Representations by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law

6.2.12 Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Notices and Certification

6.2.13 Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) on Non-DoD Information Systems

6.2.14 Safeguarding of Unclassified Controlled Technical Information

6.3 REPORTING

6.3.1 Reporting Deliverables

6.4 ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS

6.4.1 Representations and Certifications

6.4.2 Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

6.4.3 i-EDISON

7. AGENCY CONTACTS

8. OTHER INFORMATION

8.1 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

8.1.1 PROCUREMENT CONTRACT PROPOSERS

8.2 NONPROCUREMENT CONTRACT PROPOSERS – NONCOMMERCIAL AND

COMMERCIAL ITEMS (TECHNICAL DATA AND COMPUTER SOFTWARE)

8.3 ALL PROPOSERS – PATENTS

8.4 ALL PROPOSERS-INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REPRESENTATIONS

8.5 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT (GFE)

9. APPENDIX 1: PROPOSAL SLIDE SUMMARY

10. APPENDIX 2: VOLUME 1 COVER SHEET TEMPLATE

11. APPENDIX 3: VOLUME 2 COVER SHEET, CHECKLIST AND SAMPLE

TEMPLATES

12. APPENDIX 4: SPATIAL MULTIPLEXING IN LONG-RANGE, HIGH-

CAPACITY, MILLIMETER-WAVE LINKS

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Strategic Technology Office

Funding Opportunity Title – 100 Gb/s RF Backbone (100G) Phase 2 and 3 Announcement Type – Initial announcement Funding Opportunity Number – DARPA-BAA-15-22 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) - Not applicable Dates o Posting Date: March 12, 2015 o Proposal Due Date: April 28, 2015 o BAA Closing Date: September 14, 2015 o Proposer’s Day: March 17, 2015

Concise description of the funding opportunity– DARPA is soliciting innovative research proposals for developing a 100 Gb/s airborne RF communications link capable of distances exceeding 100 km and 200 km for air-to-ground and air-to-air, respectively, within a single radio frequency channel. The proposed program, 100G, seeks innovative approaches for using high-order modulation together with spatial multiplexing to achieve those goals by attaining spectral efficiencies greater than 20 bits-per-second-per hertz.

Total amount of money to be awarded– $27,000,000 is currently available for Phase 2 and 3

Anticipated individual awards – Up to two awards are anticipated for Phase 2 and 3 Types of instruments that may be awarded - Procurement contract or other transaction Any cost sharing requirements - Not Required Agency contact o Points of Contact The BAA Coordinator for this effort may be reached at:

DARPA-BAA-15-22@darpa.mil.

DARPA/STO

ATTN: DARPA-BAA-15-22

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 mailto:DARPA-BAA-15-22@darpa.mil

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

1. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This BAA is being issued, and any resultant selection will be made, using procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 35.016.

Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA. Proposals received as a result of this BAA shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a scientific review process.

DARPA BAAs are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website, https://www.fbo.gov/. The following information is for those wishing to respond to the BAA.

DARPA is soliciting innovative research proposals under this BAA for the performance of research, design, integration, and testing to support the 100 Gb/s RF Backbone (100G) Program.

Phase 1 was previously conducted under DARPA-BAA-13-15; DARPA plans to contract Phase 2 as the base effort under this BAA, with Phase 3 as a priced option. Proposed efforts should incorporate innovative approaches with the potential to produce revolutionary advances in airborne data links. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

1.1 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The goal of the 100 Gb/s RF Backbone (100G) program is to design, build, and test an airborne-based RF communications link with fiber-optic equivalent capacity and long reach capable of propagating through clouds and providing high availability. The system will provide 100 Gb/s capacity at ranges of 200 km for air-to-air links and 100 km for air-to-ground links when installed in a high-altitude (e.g. 60,000 ft) aerial platform. Additionally, the system will provide an all-weather (cloud, rain, and fog) capability while maintaining tactically-relevant throughput and link ranges. Figure 1 shows a 100G link connecting a high-flying aircraft with a ground terminal.

The program is structured into three phases. Phase 1 was previously conducted to establish the technology base required to achieve 100 Gb/s at long ranges. It specifically invested in approaches for high-order modulation and spatial multiplexing. Phases 2 and 3—solicited in this BAA—will develop and test an integrated prototype airborne datalink system that leverages state-of-the-art advances in high-order modulation, spatial multiplexing, and other power and spectral efficiency technologies to achieve program goals. System design, integration, and ground-based testing will be conducted in Phase 2. Phase 3 will encompass a series of flight tests to evaluate and demonstrate system capabilities and performance as an air-to-ground datalink.

1.1.1. PHASE 1 GOALS AND RESULTS SUMMARY

The 100G Phase 1 program explored two fundamental ways of achieving high data rates.

Technical Area 1 (TA-1) used high-order modulation at millimeter-wave frequencies to achieve data rates of 25 Gb/s on a single carrier and 50 Gb/s with dual polarization from a single aperture. TA-2 explored spatial multiplexing from multiple apertures at millimeter-wave https://www.fbo.gov/ frequencies and long link distances. Specifically, it experimentally investigated the effect of Rayleigh range and a receiver’s ability to maintain independence between multiple data streams operating on a common frequency. A collection of engineering investigations were conducted under TA-3 to evaluate novel technologies related to the program’s goals.

Figure 1: 100G Uses High-Order Modulation and Spatial Multiplexing of millimeter-wave signals to achieve 100 Gb/s

Several TA-1 efforts for high-order modulation were conducted in Phase 1:

An Indium Phosphide (InP) modulator demonstrated direct RF signal modulation at data rates in excess of 25 Gb/s within a 5 GHz bandwidth for spectral efficiencies exceeding 5 b/s/Hz.

Nyquist Cyclic Modulation with 32-QAM and 64-QAM demonstrated significant reduction in the power backoff (from saturation) over other common modulation schemes.

Photonic approaches to generate millimeter-wave signals with high-order modulation were demonstrated using laser diodes, electrooptic modulators, optical filters, and photodiodes.

Commercial grade analog-to-digital converters and digital-to-analog converters, with sample rates in excess of 10 G samples per second were shown to be capable of both modulating and demodulating the high-order-modulated signals.

TA-2 efforts in Phase 1 focused on spatial multiplexing of millimeter-wave signals:

Analog and digital spatio-polarimetric equalization schemes having four 1 Gb/s data streams were successfully developed and tested. All four streams were operating within the same 750 MHz of bandwidth for a total spectral efficiency of 5.33 b/s/Hz.

Several multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) algorithms, including single-stream demapping and group-wise demapping, were shown to maintain multiple data streams even at distances well beyond the Rayleigh range.

Several TA-3 efforts were conducted in Phase 1. These efforts explored novel approaches with the potential to greatly increase system performance.

Waveform synthesis was shown to efficiently generate high-order waveforms using far-field superposition of simpler signals.

Outphasing of two millimeter-wave signals was shown to allow power amplifiers to operate closer to saturation power and increase the system power efficiency.

Single sideband modulation at millimeter-wave frequencies was shown to double the spectral efficiency of an eight-state phase modulation signal. The technique demonstrated the ability to achieve the equivalent of 64-QAM modulation in half the bandwidth and with a simpler, 8-PSK modulation.

Orbital Angular Momentum was studied as a means of achieving spatial multiplexing from a single aperture.

The technologies developed and evaluated in Phase 1 demonstrate the potential to achieve data rates of 100 Gb/s at ranges exceeding 100 km. Phase 1 has resulted in a number of lessons learned:

1. The computational complexity of the millimeter-wave MIMO processes required between 100 and 2500 operations per information bit. As 100G moves to full rate, efficiency in spatial multiplexing computations is required to achieve program goals for throughput as well as size, weight, and power (SWaP).

2. Maintaining timing among multiple computing processes and subsystems operating on parallel data streams at these high data rates pushes the state of practice. Phase 2 programs should establish development and testing plans that address these risks and greatly reduce them early in the development cycle.

3. Transmitter power amplifiers and receiver signal processing power will likely be significant drivers for power consumption. Power efficiency for transmitter RF generation and receiver signal processing will require system-wide trades.

4. Scintillation at millimeter-wave frequencies were shown to cause received signal strength fluctuations as much as 15 dB over a 20 km link. System designs must incorporate mechanisms for link reliability in the event of scintillation.

5. Rayleigh range determination can be used as a good indicator of computational complexity for millimeter-wave spatial multiplexing algorithms. Mobile systems such as the 100G prototype may use an awareness of the effective Rayleigh range to maximize computational efficiency.

1.1.2. PHASES 2 AND 3 SUMMARY

Phases 2 and 3 will develop and test an integrated prototype airborne datalink system that uses advances in high-order modulation and spatial multiplexing to achieve 100 Gb/s to ranges of 100 km for air-to-ground links and 200 km for air-to-air links. Phase 2 will focus on system design, development, and the platform integration activities needed to evaluate performance and achieve flight certification for the equipment. The 100G prototype system capabilities and associated performance will be tested in ground field test environments, envisioned to be mountain-to-ground and/or mountain-to-mountain testing to allow clear line of sight for the point-to-point link. Phase 3 efforts will focus on final equipment integration onto the test aircraft followed by a minimum of two (2) flight test periods. The prototype will be updated with any necessary modifications resulting from Phase 2 test findings and installed onto the air and ground test platforms. Multiple flight test periods are envisioned for Phase 3 with sufficient time between them to allow for minor system updates to correct issues uncovered in the prior flight test.

1.2 100G PROTOTYPE SYSTEM

The prototype 100G system developed and tested in Phases 2 and 3 will include an airborne and a ground node. The airborne node SWaP will be compatible with high-altitude unmanned air vehicles (UAVs), as specified in Table 2 of Section 1.11. The ground node will be designed to allow installation and operation at a forward operating base. The 100G airborne and ground systems each require the integration of spatial multiplexing and high-order modulation capabilities; pointing, acquisition, and tracking (PAT); autonomous node discovery and link formation; link reliability mechanisms for reliable data exchange; and network interfaces.

The 100G prototype will operate in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz bands, using high-order modulation and spatial multiplexing. Use of the millimeter-wave frequencies enables high signal power gain from compact apertures to overcome modest weather impairments on the signal. It also enables the system to take advantage of spatial multiplexing due to the relationship between wavelength and Rayleigh range [See Appendix 4]. High-order modulation further increases spectral efficiency, potentially enabling a 5 b/s/Hz signal in the 5 GHz channel bandwidths to attain 25 Gb/s between each pair of transmit and receive apertures. Thus a 100G prototype with two (2) transmit and two (2) receive apertures, with each aperture transmitting or receiving two orthogonally polarized signals, would create four (4) independent streams and attain a spectral efficiency of 20 b/s/Hz.

System operation and the range of potential operating environments drive much of the requisite system capabilities. In particular, the system must be able to adapt to channel capacity changes resulting from aircraft orientation changes, sudden signal attenuation, and atmospheric scintillation effects. Aircraft maneuvers (e.g., flat or banked turns) will cause aperture blockages and changes in correlation among the spatially multiplexed signals at the airborne and ground nodes. Furthermore, changes in weather conditions affect channel capacity and scintillation near the ground station could cause significant received signal power fluctuations. These phenomena will cause channel effects that may be predictable at times (e.g., aperture array aspect changes during steady flight) but unpredictable at others (e.g., transmission through a localized rain storm or scintillation). Finally, the system must be able to operate at reduced data rates and extended link ranges where a 100 Gb/s link is beyond the system design.

These operational factors similarly influence the design of the spatial multiplexing algorithms, modem, and network interface. The spatial multiplexing algorithms must autonomously adapt to changes in signal strength, signal correlation, and number of available apertures to achieve optimal channel capacity given the link conditions. The modem must be able to support a 100 Gb/s data rate—not including any coding overhead needed to achieve a bit error rate of 10-8 —at the objective ranges while also supporting variable data rates based on link conditions. Finally, the 100G system must be robust against link disruptions and compatible with airborne networking protocols.

While the 100G program is focused on developing data link technologies rather than airborne networking technologies, it is still important that the prototype provide a reliable link that is compatible with airborne networking protocols. Link reliability mechanisms need to ensure that the link can adapt to the impediments described previously. The system must also provide or support network reliability protocols that allow intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) payloads or hosted networks to adapt traffic flows to prevailing link conditions. It is important that the 100G system incorporate or demonstrate mechanisms (e.g., outage prediction and detection, local queuing, retransmission, and flow control) to allow ISR payloads and networking protocols to adapt to rapid changes in link conditions.

1.2.1 100G Node Design and Configurations The airborne and ground nodes share many common elements, but the resulting system designs are likely to vary based on differences in constraints. Both node designs must also be adaptive to a range of configurations and should make prudent design trades that improve system performance, reduce SWaP, and increase transition potential.

The airborne node must fit within the SWaP and antenna placement constraints of the chosen air platform. This BAA does not specify a specific UAV that drives the design, but Table 2 in Section 1.11 provides SWaP constraints that enable the prototype to be hosted on a range of UAVs and manned aircraft. Each UAV, however, has different locations where antennas may be placed and electronics equipment can be installed. Thus, there should be a single design proposed for the air node that can be adapted to meet various installation configurations.

Similarly, a single ground node design should be proposed that can be adapted to a range of ground station installations. Ground node SWaP constraints shown in Section 1.11 are not as stringent due to greater flexibility in available installation configurations and power. Thus, the ground node should be able to take advantage of a greater range of antenna separations and power availability than an air node. Program metrics provide a greater range of aperture quantity and separation to enable design trades, which must be balanced against other factors such as SWaP and unit production cost.

The prototype design and performance metrics, summarized in Section 1.11, provide some trade space for the airborne and ground nodes. Of particular note is the threshold air-to-ground data rate providing for an asymmetrical data rate, with the uplink rates set at 10% of the downlink rates. This is indicative of 100G operation as air-to-ground data link for airborne sensor data.

The objective air-to-ground goal is to establish a symmetrical data link enabling the 100G system to support a two-way backbone networking capability.

The 100G prototype will operate in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz bands. The channel bandwidth and emissions must meet regulations governing these bands as specified by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management. Maintaining compliance with relevant spectrum management regulations is vital for enabling test operations as well as transition to an operational system.

1.3 PHASE 2 PROGRAM AND TESTING

The prototype airborne and ground node systems will be developed and ground tested during Phase 2. The performer will work with the Government to ensure the system meets program goals, can be integrated onto the platform, and meets flight safety requirements for Phase 3 flight testing. Testing during Phase 2 will establish the air worthiness of the airborne node hardware as well as performance characterization of the airborne and ground nodes.

Phase 2 performance testing is envisioned as a series of interim developmental and risk reduction tests in a laboratory environment followed by end-to-end system testing in laboratory and mountain-to-ground and/or mountain-to-mountain tests. Field testing will characterize the data link under various aperture configurations (quantity and relative spacing) and link distances. It will also evaluate performance of other components and functions such as PAT and recovery from link disruptions. Proposals should include a comprehensive test approach description for characterizing and demonstrating their system’s readiness for Phase 3 flight testing. Field testing is expected to occur at a Government test facility such as China Lake.

In addition to performance testing, tasks that lead to flight test readiness must be completed in Phase 2. The airborne components must undergo flight airworthiness testing and aircraft integration plans must also be completed in Phase 2 to minimize risk of significant design changes during Phase 3. Phase 2 concludes with a Test Readiness Review, indicating that the system can meet program goals, is ready for final installation onto the aircraft, and flight test plans and preparations are completed. A list of the requirements for successful completion of Phase 2 is shown below.

Phase 2 completion requirements:

Development and integration of air and ground prototype systems Prototype systems tested and characterized in lab and mountain-to-ground environment System performance demonstrates ability to meet performance specifications Demonstration of node discovery and pointing, acquisition and tracking in ground testing Air platform integration planning and fit checks completed Prototype air worthiness testing complete Test Readiness Review (TRR), including flight test plan review

1.4 PHASE 3 PROGRAM AND TESTING

Phase 3 will begin upon the successful completion of the Phase 2 tests and a Test Readiness Review. Proposers are responsible for selecting and proposing a suitable test aircraft for Phase

3. The aircraft chosen should enable system evaluation relative to metrics, may be manned or unmanned, and may be owned and operated by either the Government or a private entity. The proposal should demonstrate how the aircraft is suitable for use in this program and how it will be used in Phase 3 testing. Phase 3 will comprise of at least two (2) multi-week flight tests at a Government testing range and will include one (1) aerial node and one (1) ground node as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Notional View of Phase 3 Testing

The design goal of the 100G prototype is a system that is capable of operating on a high-altitude (i.e. 60,000 ft), long-endurance platform. To facilitate cost-effective testing, Phase 3 flight tests will use a lower altitude threshold of 12,000 ft or above. The reduced altitude provides greater flexibility for test aircraft selection, less time spent climbing to altitude, potentially more total test time, and greater cost effectiveness. Testing at the lower altitudes, however, can reduce the achievable link ranges due to increased atmospheric attenuation and decreased line-of-sight. The Phase 3 test results at reduced altitudes will be evaluated against performance prediction models to projected performance for 60,000 ft.

While testing requirements are relaxed relative to the design goals, proposals in response to this BAA are expected to include analysis plans that evaluate the design at the stated performance metrics (100 Gb/s to a range of 100 km for air-to-ground links and 200 km for air-to-air links) if the system were operated at the design points (i.e., the atmospherics of a high-flying aircraft with antennas separated at both the transmitter and receiver end by 10 meters). Proposals are also expected to show predicted range performance when flying with the degraded atmospheric conditions of a test flight at the proposer-selected altitude and within the proposed aerial test vehicle and proposed ground node (see Section 1.7).

The final test effort will include plans for engineering tests as well as an operationally-oriented exercise and/or demonstration. The Government will assist in the creation of the test plans for the Phase 3 flight tests. Phase 3 test and demonstration events are expected to progress in complexity across a minimum of two (2) test periods. Each test period should include a sufficient number of flights to characterize system performance. The individual flight tests and associated test periods should also be scheduled with sufficient time between them for system updates to address any issues discovered during tests.

Test data collection and analysis are essential elements of the test and evaluation effort. For the purposes of the DARPA program, test data collection on the 100G ground and aerial nodes should be possible regardless of their connectivity to the 100G network. Thus, telemetry data for evaluation purposes should be recorded locally at the platform and/or sent via a dedicated telemetry network. The performer must also develop the capability to conduct rapid analyses of test evaluations in a manner that enables preliminary performance evaluation, discovery of any notable anomalies, and development of modified plans for subsequent flight tests to address test findings.

Phase 3 testing should evaluate system performance under a range of different test conditions and ground-node antenna array configuration. Proposers may specify antenna configurations ranging from two (2) to four (4) airborne apertures and two (2) to six (6) ground apertures to enable characterization of spatial multiplexing. As shown in Section 1.11, an objective goal of the program is to achieve system performance goals using only two (2) apertures for the airborne node. However, proposers may choose to use up to four airborne apertures to increase Rayleigh range diversity. The ground node antenna quantities and locations should be varied as needed to test at ranges less than, equal to, and greater than the Rayleigh range. Tests should also include multiple flight altitudes and link ranges to validate system and atmospheric models used for projecting system performance. Testing should also evaluate the ability to support variable data rates and associated maximum link ranges.

The Phase 3 final demonstration will culminate in a one-day demonstration to relevant Government-invited visitors. The scope of this demonstration will remain within the capabilities of the Phase 3 system and test aircraft. An effective demonstration will provide the audience with appropriate real-time visualization capabilities of the mission and system performance.

1.5 PHASE 3 AIRBORNE PLATFORM SELECTION, INTEGRATION, AND TEST

OPERATIONS

The Phase 3 test requirements are designed to provide significant flexibility to the contractor for test aircraft selection while enabling effective prototype characterization. As previously stated, the program seeks to test the prototype system to the greatest extent possible while maintaining a cost-effective test and evaluation effort.

A number of factors must be considered in test aircraft selection. The top criteria are that the aircraft can support the air node system in the test configurations and have sufficient flight characteristics to fly above 12,000 ft. (AGL) for sufficient test durations. While UAVs provide demonstrations that are closer to the envisioned goal of the program, factors such as availability for integration and flight operations, cost and schedule impacts of potential airframe modifications, and potential operational costs must be balanced against overall benefits.

Conversely, using a manned aircraft may be less costly but impose potential flight limitations (e.g., altitude, durations) that restrict interesting test scenarios. Privately-owned aircraft can also be used, but proposers must address whether they can be used at Government Test Range airstrips or need to use public/private airstrips. Regardless of aircraft selection, proposers must indicate the types of air worthiness requirements that would need to be obtained given any expected airframe modifications needed to fly the prototype. Finally, proposers must also address any requirements for thermal management in the pressurized or unpressurized cargo bay that will house the electronics.

Proposers must account for all aircraft costs associated with payload integration and flight operations. These tasks and activities include any rental fees, airframe modifications, flight safety or airworthiness certification, crew costs, and fuel. Proposals should provide sufficient detail for aircraft costs to demonstrate a sufficient understanding and appropriateness of anticipated costs. Test range support is provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) under this BAA as specified in Section 8.

1.6 100G SYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES

Technologies proposed for the effort should be sufficiently mature as to allow for system integration and testing with minimal high-risk component development. The level of performance of the proposed 100G system and key components should be specified and clearly characterized. Any data presented should indicate whether it was derived from calculations, simulations, estimations, laboratory testing, or field testing. Technologies developed in TA-3 of Phase 1 of the program or those developed outside of the 100G program are welcome to be included as part of the proposed Phase 2/3 100G system provided they can be shown to be beneficial to the overall 100G program with an acceptable degree of risk.

Proposers may include “high risk” technology alternatives to their baseline program as separately priced options. These technology options should seek to enhance the design, performance, program plan, and/or military utility of the 100G system. Proposed options should be clearly described, including their risk factors and mitigation; technology development and integration;

and test and evaluation during Phase 2 and Phase 3. Options may be proposed either as alternatives for some or for all of the baseline program, or as additional effort to the baseline program. Claims of enhanced benefits to the system, program, and technology transition should be fully supported with clear qualitative and (where appropriate) quantitative analyses.

1.7 100G SYSTEM PERFORMANCE PREDICTION FOR PROPOSAL

Proposals submitted to this BAA are expected to provide substantial discussion of design trades and decisions as well as quantitative support for design and performance characterizations relative to program goals. Proposers are to provide performance predictions of their proposed designs using the two (2) performance scenarios and the link budget format provided below in Table 1. The first scenario is the 100G “Transition Scenario”, which evaluates the predicted performance of the prototype at the design metrics of 60,000 feet and with configurations of two

(2) to four (4) aerial apertures separated as shown in Figure 3. The second scenario is the 100G “Evaluation Scenario”, which evaluates the predicted performance of the prototype with the proposed test aircraft flying at the proposed test altitudes and with two (2) to four (4) transmit apertures. Proposers may provide additional aperture configurations if desired. Both scenarios may use up to six (6) ground node apertures that must remain within a 40x40 m area as shown in Figure 4. The number of ground apertures chosen for the two scenarios should be the same.

Figure 3. Air Node aperture positions that are available for the Transition Scenario

Length 40 m

Length 40 m

Figure 4. Antennas can be placed anywhere within the notional ground node area

The 100G Transition Scenario shown in Figure 5 consists of an aircraft flying in two specified patterns relative to a ground station. Pattern 1 is a “racetrack” pattern with the ground station in the middle. In pattern 2, the aircraft flies out beyond the link range and returns to approach the ground station at a 25km offset. Proposers should assume, for simplification, a level aircraft flight with no banking or platform blockage and predict system performance as the aircraft moves within the flight patterns.

Figure 5. 100G Transition Scenario CONOPS

In the Evaluation Scenario, the aircraft flight altitude is chosen by the proposer based on the capabilities of the chosen Phase 3 test aircraft. The patterns analyzed in the Evaluation Scenario will include racetrack and linear patterns similar to the Transition Scenario; the distances and altitudes, however, should be scaled based on aircraft flight altitude capabilities, anticipated 100G prototype link range capabilities, and atmospheric attenuation.

Atmospheric loss will play a significant role in determining system performance. For purposes of this proposal, the atmospheric loss shown in Figure 6 should be used in completing the link budget below for both the Transition and Evaluation scenarios. Proposers should use the atmospheric loss corresponding to their planned testing scenario and adjust for the slant ranges for which they propose to test. The loss given is atmospheric loss only and does not include loss due to beam divergence or scintillation. Analyses in the proposal are expected to show the predicted data rate, link range, Rayleigh range, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as a function of aircraft location along its flight path.

Figure 6. Atmospheric loss as a function of altitude (at nadir)

To estimate air-to-air performance, performers can assume that the atmospheric loss at 60,000 feet is 0 dB/km and the signal loss is dominated by signal divergence. Air-to-air predictions should assume that the antenna separation in the transmit and receive nodes are limited to the aerial-node configurations shown in Figure 3. Although the air-to-air configuration will not be tested during Phase 3, proposals are expected to predict air-to-air performance (data range and link margin) for the Transition scenario to ranges of 200 km.

Using the data from the above analyses, proposals should include a set of scenario-independent performance curves. For example, the throughput for a given link can be shown to be a function of the Rayleigh range factor (ratio of the link distance to the Rayleigh range) and SNR. This data can be plotted as notionally depicted in Figure 7 to provide an estimate of the performance characteristics of the proposed system. The configurations (i.e., aperture quantities and locations) and assumptions used to generate the data created for these analyses should be clearly specified.

Figure 7. Example graph of 100G system throughput as a function of link SNR and link range to Rayleigh Distance ratio

Table 1. 100G Link Budget 100G Transition Scenario

Design Link Budget Parameter

Air to Ground Air to Air

100G Evaluation Scenario

Notes

Number of Transmit Apertures *Note A Number of Receive Apertures *Note B Transmitter Aperture Spacing (m) 10 5 Receiver Aperture Spacing (m) 20 20 Rayleigh Range (km) 100 50 See Appendix 4 Transmit Frequency (GHz) Channel Bandwidth (GHz) Modulation Type FEC Type

System Characteristics

Data Rate (Gb/s) Transmit Antenna Aperture (in)Transmit

Antenna Transmit Antenna Gain (dBi) Saturated Power per Transmitter (W) After combining Output Backoff (dB)Transmitter Total Transmitter Losses (dB) List other losses EIRP (dBm)

DC Power of Transmitter

Total DC Power Consumption of Transmitter (W) Attenuation at 100 km at 60k ft (dB) 189 189 Attenuation at 200 km at 60k ft (dB) 178Losses

(Path Loss + Atmospheric)

Attenuation at test distances at (dB) Note test distances as well as losses Total Loss (dB) Receive Antenna Aperture (in)Receive

Antenna Receive Antenna Gain (dBi) Received Power (dBm) After antenna Receiver Noise Figure (dB) Receiver Noise Power (dBm)Receiver Total Receiver Losses (dB) Coding Gain (dB) SNR Required, Coded (dB) Receiver Sensitivity, Coded (dBm)

Required SNR

Link Margin, Coded (dB) DC Power of

Receiver Total DC Power of Receiver (W)

Data Rate at 100 km @ 60k ft (Gb/s) Data Rate at 200 km @ 60k ft (Gb/s) 100

Data Rate Data Rate at test km @ test alt (Gb/s)

Note the test distance and altitude *Note A: The number of transmit apertures should be the same for all three scenarios *Note B: The number of receive apertures should be the same for all three scenarios

1.8 TRANSITION PLANNING

To assist in transition evaluation and planning, proposals must include an assessment of expected system changes needed to transition from the DARPA research effort to a system that can be flown on an operational UAV. While specific design changes may not be known at the time of proposal submittal, the proposal should describe (quantitatively and qualitatively) the expected maturity of the 100G prototype to be tested in the DARPA effort and additional investments required to produce a fielded system. Factors include the scope of the required changes and additional testing and demonstration on a UAV at 60,000 ft. Further, proposals are to provide the expected unit costs for limited quantity acquisitions of 10, 100 and 250 airborne and ground systems. The model and associated assumptions for the cost estimates are to be included in the proposal.

1.9 OTHER PROPOSAL INFORMATION

Proposals are to include a complete program plan and cost proposal for Phase 2 and optional Phase 3. The proposed program plan will include all tasks to be performed by the proposer and their subcontractors. The Statement of Work (SOW), associated schedule, and costs provided with the proposal will account for all tasks to be performed. Activities and costs associated with each task should be clearly presented.

1.10 TECHNICAL DELIVERABLES

System quantities and descriptions to be developed, tested, and delivered at the end of the program are as follows:

- One (1) airborne node o 1 E-band transceiver with 2 to 4 steerable antennas o Modem and signal processor o Antenna pointing, acquisition and tracking system (including node discovery) o Data interface

- One (1) ground node o 1 E-band transceiver with 2 to 6 steerable antennas o Modem and signal processor o Antenna pointing, acquisition and tracking (PAT) system (including node discovery) o Data interface

- Sufficient systems or subsystems should also be developed to be used as spares and test articles as appropriate.

1.11 PROGRAM METRICS

In order for the Government to evaluate the effectiveness of a proposed solution in achieving the stated program objectives, proposers should note that the Government hereby promulgates the following program metrics that may serve as the basis for determining whether satisfactory progress is being made to warrant continued funding of the program. Although the program metrics are specified, proposers should note that the government has identified these goals with the intention of bounding the scope of effort, while affording the maximum flexibility, creativity, and innovation in proposing solutions to the stated problem.

Proposals should cite the quantitative and qualitative success criteria that the proposed effort will achieve by the time of each Phase’s program metric measurement.

Table 2: 100G Design and Performance Metrics Metric Threshold Objective

Frequency Range

- Uplink

- Downlink

71-76 GHz 81-86 GHz

Channel Bandwidth

- Uplink

- Downlink

5 GHz 5 GHz

Air-to-Ground Downlink Range

- Design Altitude of 60,000 ft

- Test Altitude of > 12,000 ft

100 Gb/s at 50 km 100 Gb/s at 20 km

100 Gb/s at 100 km 100 Gb/s at 25 km

Air-to-Ground Uplink Range

- Design Altitude of 60,000 ft

- Test Altitude of > 12,000 ft

10 Gb/s at 50 km 10 Gb/s at 30 km

100 Gb/s at 100 km 100 Gb/s at 25 km

Air-to-Air Link Uplink/Downlink

- - Design Altitude of 60,000 ft 100 Gb/s at 100 km 100 Gb/s at 200 km

Weight

- Airborne system

- Ground system

400 lbs 500 lbs

200 lbs 300 lbs

DC Power

- Airborne System

- Ground System

1.5 kW 2 kW

500 W 1 kW

Aperture Size

- Airborne System

- Ground System

18 in.

24 in.

12 in.

12 in.

Aperture Spacing

- Airborne Transition System

- Airborne Evaluation System

- Ground System

≤ 10 m as required

≤ 40 m

≤ 5 m as required

≤ 20 m Number of Apertures

- Airborne System

- Ground System

≤ 4 ≤ 6

≤ 2 ≤ 4

2. AWARD INFORMATION

DARPA anticipates up to two awards for Phase 2 with an Option for Phase 3. The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. Funding in the amount of $27,000,000 is currently available for Phase 2 and 3. As noted in the evaluation criteria, proposed efforts are expected to demonstrate realistic schedules based upon the work to be performed.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed below (see section labeled “Application Review Information”, Sec. 5.), and program balance to provide overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications. The Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information. Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental Research, and other factors.

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. Proposers are advised that regardless of the instrument type proposed, DARPA may select other award instruments, as it deems appropriate. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include a requirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.

2.1 FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 established the national policy for controlling the flow of scientific, technical, and engineering information produced in federally funded fundamental research at colleges, universities, and laboratories. The Directive defines fundamental research as follows:

'Fundamental research' means 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.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, the Government expects that program goals as described herein either cannot be met by proposers intending to perform fundamental research or the proposed research is anticipated to present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Therefore, the Government anticipates restrictions on the resultant research that will require the contractor to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. Appropriate clauses will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research being performed by the prime contractor is restricted research, a subawardee may be conducting contracted fundamental research. In those cases, it is the prime contractor’s responsibility to explain in its proposal why its subawardee’s effort is contracted fundamental research.

The following statement or similar provision will be incorporated into any resultant non-fundamental research procurement contract or other transaction:

“There shall be no dissemination or publication, except within and between the contractor and any subawardees, of information developed under this contract or contained in the reports to be furnished pursuant to this contract without prior written approval of DARPA’s Public Release Center (DARPA/PRC). All technical reports will be given proper review by appropriate authority to determine which Distribution Statement is to be applied prior to the initial distribution of these reports by the contractor. With regard to subawardee proposals for Contracted Fundamental Research, papers resulting from unclassified contracted fundamental research are exempt from prepublication controls and this review requirement, pursuant to DoD Instruction 5230.27 dated October 6, 1987.

When submitting material for written approval for open publication, the contractor/awardee must submit a request for public release to the DARPA/PRC and include the following information: (1) Document Information: document title, document author, short plain-language description of technology discussed in the material (approx.

30 words), number of pages (or minutes of video) and document type (e.g., briefing, report, abstract, article, or paper); (2) Event Information: event type (conference, principal investigator meeting, article or paper), event date, desired date for DARPA's approval; (3) DARPA Sponsor: DARPA Program Manager, DARPA office, and contract number; and (4) Contractor/Awardee's Information: POC name, email and phone. Allow four weeks for processing; due dates under four weeks require a justification. Unusual electronic file formats may require additional processing time. Requests may be sent either via email to prc@darpa.mil or by mail at 675 North Randolph Street, Arlington VA 22203-2114, telephone (571) 218-4235. Refer to the following for link for information about DARPA’s public release process:

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Public_Release_Center/Public_Release_Center.aspx.”

mailto:prc@darpa.mil

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government’s needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.

3.1 ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

3.1.1 Federally Funded Research And Development Centers (FFRDCs) And Government Entities

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unless they meet the following conditions: (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector; and (2) FFRDCs must provide a letter on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and their compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement and terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposing to be prime contractors or subawardees.

Government entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations. At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. § 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility.