Albatross Proposers Day Questions and Answers.pdf

Question # Question Answer

1 Will practice test events be at the same location as the test events?

For each test cycle the intent is that the practice test event will be held at the same location as the test event.

2 Are external dependencies acceptable? Such as in-flight weather update, changes to airspace conditions, traffic density, etc.

External dependencies are acceptable. A well-defined interface that can be provided to the government is strongly preferred.

3 What is the representative sUAS/sUAS class in the government reference example?

No specific vehicle was intended by the reference examples.

4 Who is the intended transition audience?

Aircraft operators throughout the Defense community.

5 Is platform recovery a consideration of interest and/or a concern?

Yes, as a development cost savings measure. The desire is for low-cost platform support to the key soaring development objectives. Aircraft recovery should be considered as teams will be asked to test these systems in a variety of different conditions. The easier it is to handle launch and recovery, the easier the systems will be to test.

6 Can we change UAS design between TE programs?

Changing UAS designs between TE is possible, however we are seeking the mostly widely applicable soaring platforms and techniques in the program.

7 Will you release any of the slides or list of the references? What technical references is DARPA using to understand state of the art capabilities in autonomous soaring?

A list of relevant resources is provided as an appendix to this Q&A.

8 Are references/citations included in the 5-page abstract limit?

No, but any material beyond the 5-page limit is unlikely to be reviewed.

9 Is there a recommended long-range communications system that satisfies the comms rate requirement?

DARPA is not defining the communications rate and is not trying to dictate those solutions. We are asking teams to review the best options and outline the constraints of communications they bring.

10 Is the program open to other range options?

We haven't settled on range locations yet.

We are open to new options.

11 How many teams will be selected for oral presentation?

We are allocating a couple of days for reviews.

12 When is the expected start date? We are aiming to have awards by Spring 2025.

14 Are there any range approved COTS systems that may be appropriate?

Can DARPA provide a list of approved RC/UAV aircraft?

Generally, each range must approve UAS independently. As ranges have not been finalized, we are not able to offer a list of approved COTS systems. We are seeking teams that have experience obtaining necessary range approvals.

15 What is the size of the boat for launch & recovery?

A small commercial vessel, about 50' is assumed.

16 How long will each test event be? Each test event will plan for weeklong durations (M-F), with 3 specific flight days.

17 Will performers all fly at the same time?

Ideally yes, but this will take additional coordination once the program starts.

18 Will you consider partial bids? Will awards cover TC-1 & TC-2 together?

Is providing and developing a standalone preflight planning platform, by itself, an outcome that might be considered? (and other similar questions)

Given our interest in demonstrating full capabilities, we consider partial bids less desirable and recommend building full teams. The government's preference is to award solutions that address TC-1 and TC- 2 collectively. Teaming is encouraged where only partial capabilities are offered.

20 Is there a maximum setup time we should consider? Platform setup constraints?

By providing the range for a week, it is possible to plan for up to a day, but we are hopeful that it does not take this long to set

up. The government wants to encourage teams with different solutions, but minimizing set-up constraints is ideal and offers more flexibility in testing.

21 Do we need to consider GPS- Denied? What about Comms-denied? Can we have reach-back while in-flight to fetch updated weather data/plan or are we expected to be “fire and forget”?

RF denied operations is not a focused effort in the program. However, general loss of link and degraded RF should be assumed due to environmental and other external factors. From a safety standpoint range operations will require the necessary loss of link and GPS behaviors in the platform and those need to be addressed in order to support range approval. Uplink to the platform is allowed, and there is a need to provide downlink from the aircraft to the ground to identify the location of the aircraft.

22 When stating DARPA will provide a site for flight test. Does it refer to the competition at the end of each phase, or does it also refer to a standard test site that each team can access throughout the program period?

DARPA intends to provide access to the test sites for PTE and TE events. It is highly recommended the performer have access to additional contractor-provided sites for development and test readiness outside of the PTE and TE.

23 Do we have a target distance (to within an order of magnitude) for the flight test? As well as the size and weight of the drone that can be utilized. 2km? 5km? or 10km+?

50-150km generally with the possibility for excursions. It is recommended to size aircraft to be able to fly 50 miles without exploiting soaring effects.

24 During the discussion of UAS characteristics it was stressed that sUAS should be approved for flight on military ranges. This requirement is largely the result of Chinese technology on quadcopter drones.

However, for Albatross, it's quite clear that sensing will be paramount to success, perhaps even visual sensing of lift and/or terrain. This requires use of a camera. Many military ranges preclude the use of cameras, even in many cases for the flight testing of sUAS. Are we assured that the flight test range will allow the use of cameras for the purpose of evaluation?

Use of cameras can be assumed to support Albatross development. Use of cameras may require some process by which video is reviewed before removal from the test site.

25 Assuming power consumption can be monitored accurately, will liquid fueled/internal combustion systems still be considered?

Assuming, we can measure power output of generator at a high rate – are liquid fuels of interest?

There is a preference against ICE due to cost and complexity of handling, but they are not precluded.

26 Is there an anticipated number of aircraft systems desired? Or should planning simply take into account what will be required for testing with anticipated consumption?

It is up to the proposer to define the number of vehicles needed to support the program.

27 Is there a threshold for flight speed requirements? Only range and endurance minimums were discussed.

There is no threshold for flight speed, but the system will still be asked to complete missions which will require an ability to efficiently move through the environment.

Vehicles will expect to traverse 50-150km in a test day.

28 Readiness review and performers must record power draw at 100 HZ – included in the link data. Telemetry is typically bandwidth constrained;

thus, priority for UAS command and control and other critical data streams may be required during operations. Note power data could be recorded at 100 Hz for analysis after the flight, if needed. Is it acceptable for the data be recorded at 100 HZ and sent via the link data at 10 HZ?

Yes, onboard recording of data is allowed.

Certain safety of flight data must be telemetered in real time.

29 Can the Ground Control System send flight profile updates to soaring glider during mission or does the soaring glider have to complete the mission with no new information from the ground? In other words, can the mission flight path computation be computed on the ground rather than inside the onboard flight computer?

Two-way communications are allowed.

30 Need more clarification on the baseline flight demo. Is the purpose of the baseline flight to measure the total energy consumed by aircraft to fly 50 miles without any type of soaring? Can the baseline demo flight distance be less than 50 miles…say 10 miles, so that power per distance traveled can be recorded?

DARPA is open to proposals for how baseline energy consumption can be established. Ideally it will be flying in the same environment over the same mission, but a variety of constraints may result in test events measuring baseline energy consumption using different approaches.

32 Given the program's desire for conducting many tests, test flexibility and test locations, would offering Detect-and-Avoid capability for BVLOS operations and even faster FAA Part 107 approval for flight tests?

The program seeks proposers who will achieve program metrics through flight testing. Systems like this should be submitted and considered if they help achieve the program metrics. However, the solicitation does not request systems like these to assist with general test event support.

33 If we are proposing as a Prime to Albatross, can we also be a sub on another team? We were approached for a potential teaming opportunity and would like to be sure.

Please clarify the management of performance on multiple teams in Abstracts and Proposals. While the PS does not prohibit such approaches, the Government does not desire to fund identical efforts across multiple performers. In addition, proposing identical key personnel to multiple teams may raise the question of how support could be offered to both, if selected.

34 Could there be a bit more focus on over water operations?

Please see the PS for the flight test concept. We desire concepts that address the full program concept.

35 When does the planning part of the test events happen?

A test plan will be developed in the months leading up to each test with sufficient time for range approval prior to flight. It will be an iterative process.

36 Baseline aircraft is identical in weight? Does the mass of any sensors plan to the metrics of 75%?

The baseline vehicle would not include soaring payloads or sensors. The added mass of that equipment would be a detracting factor to reaching the soaring goal.

37 Any Requirements against using an open-source interface? Any Requirements on interfaces providers should use?

There are no requirements against using open-source interface. For example, MAVLINK packets for aircraft position updates are mentioned in PS. Open-source options are not the only options.

Performers should recommend what they think is best to achieve program metrics.

38 Payload constraints? Payloads should not interfere significantly with vehicle safety of flight.

39 Group 2 UAS. Is it a dealbreaker and how do we make sure it buys its way onto the program? What are key considerations to think about?

The key drivers for group 1 sUAS are cost and safety. Addressing how a group 2 UAS can provide low-cost, safe operations is desired. Additionally, outlining how the aircraft can handle the logistics of testing.

Does the system require special launch and landing considerations?

40 Permissible to use multiple small distinct UAS’s? Do you anticipate a single aircraft conducting these missions?

Nothing precludes use of a variety of UAS for different test events, but the desire is for techniques to be widely applicable. Niche solutions are less desirable.

41 Are you really pushing for ‘Albatross’ dynamic soaring?

Our primary goal is mission success.

Achieving a wide array of soaring techniques is key to supporting missions across many weather conditions and operating environments.

42 Would the use of ground effect over water be considered baseline or enhanced efficiency capability that can be integrated into the final product?

Ground-effect exploitation would be an enhancement.

43 Preflight planning tool – importance of user interface of that?

DARPA is primarily interested in function with lesser attention to form. A key consideration for users is reliability.

44 If the deliverables have all the capabilities in it, can we use that to enhance our scientific research purposes – is there anything against one doing that?

The CUI guide will be provided to performers. There is leeway for releasing research after processing through DARPA DISTAR review.

45 Is the energy onboard being used to run compute/ run algorithms, count against or part of the energy use of the metrics/baseline?

Yes. Energy usage for soaring above baseline will be a negative effect included in the assessment.

46 Is there anything with the metrics in terms of which soaring type is used the most?

No. However, the performers should expect varying conditions that may necessitate a need for a wide range of soaring techniques.

47 Loss of UAS and it is not the performer’s fault? How are we handling scenarios like that? Are there any number of quantities desired for the aircrafts to support testing?

Loss of aircraft will likely require explaining the cause. If the cause is not a safety concern, testing will likely resume. If a safety concern is raised, then that item will likely need to be mitigated before resuming testing. Performers are responsible for providing backup sUAS sufficient for program attrition. Each test will include multiple flights to allow for acts of nature.

48 Will the performers be flying multiple times throughout the weeklong TEs? Are you assessed during your performance overall during the week?

Yes. Performance depends on what kind of results performers are getting. The expectation is that performers will have a few chances to show what is achievable. If the results are easy, DARPA will adjust accordingly. There is flexibility to make adjustments to how we are measuring success.

49 Given flight tests are over different domains/conditions/locations, as performers are improving their algorithms, would there be a need to retest at some point?

The purpose of the three flight test events is to provide many opportunities for incremental improvements.

50 Night ops? Tests will occur only during the day.

51 Is there a preference for a fixed

UAS?

Assume the meaning is "fixed wing." No.

52 Can we do multiple aircraft coordination or is it truly only a solo mission? Would you be open to an approach that used a group of platforms which collectively meets mission objectives/mission, but perhaps individually may not?

Based on this, would metrics be based on the platform that succeeded the metric?

The PS leaves this open as a technical approach that may be considered.

However, proposers should justify why the group of platforms is superior and what that means in terms of the scope of developing and operating the entire group for the duration of the program. If a swarm/team approach is chosen, we would like to understand how single vehicle performance would be anticipated and measured as well.

53 Is sensor development something you are looking for as well?

The preference is for sensor adaptation and integration over full sensor development due to cost and time constraints. The desire is for any sensor development to be proportional to the benefit provided.

54 Is this something that is a good fit for universities? With potential for partnerships.

We believe so. Partnerships support universities that are only interested in specific technological needs of the entire Albatross program.

56 Do we need to have an immediate transition partner involved? What kind of transition opportunities exist for this program?

While DARPA always emphasizes transition, it is not necessarily outlined as one of the major program elements for performer work. We are actively engaged with potential transition partners and will invite them out to TEs.

57 Is there a reason you are asking for under a 55lb payload?

Risk aversion and ease of testing - The key drivers for group 1 sUAS are cost and safety. Aircraft under 55 lbs. have more latitude for testing outside of the specific government supported test cycle as it has a better opportunity to meet Part 107 operating rules. Addressing how a group 2 UAS can provide low-cost, safe operations is desired.

58 What do you see of the interaction between the TA1 & TA2 components?

Albatross outlines two technical challenges, TCs. It is anticipated that both will need to be addressed to meet program metrics. The program is not split into separate technical areas, TAs – each prime performer is responsible for meeting all program metrics.

59 Are there any transition partners you have talked to that know if it is better to use a specific platform to better help with the transition path?

There are discussions with transition partners working with DARPA who are open to multiple solutions. No specific vehicle has been identified at this time.

60 Are aircrafts that have direct tactical relevance interest to the program or focus on programmatic performance goals?

Both. The program's key metrics are performance focused. The ability to transition is a key consideration for all DARPA programs.

61 Can we land near boat and retrieve out of the water?

We are open to a wide array of launch and retrieval methods that meet safety and attrition considerations.

62 Are pre training and pre surveys allowed before the flight test?

That is one of the purposes of the PTEs.

63 How do we integrate all of these components together to achieve the objective? Is this the main challenge?

We outlined the technical challenges and how to operationalize them. An integration step is necessary to put everything together and demonstrate in flight. This is not necessarily the key technical challenge, but there is work/scope that needs to be addressed.

68 Is there a model/notional mission that the aircraft should be built around?

The PS outlines a general desire for a baseline range and endurance and outlines loiter and range oriented notional missions.

We are using a test-driven development model, and test details will be generated in the months leading up to test events.

69 How interested are you in bringing in other government folks?

Additional information within abstracts is needed in order to adequately respond to this question.

70 In terms of flight testing, the location that will be used must have certain atmospheric properties – how involved is DARPA planning to be in acquiring a range?

Or is that something the performer would do on their own?

We are looking to partner with other government agencies that conduct these flight test activities. We are selecting a government team that would support all the testing, which would include scouting, range control, approvals, etc. It is intended they would have responsibility to select locations, but DARPA is providing guidance on the specific atmospheric properties of interest.

71 Would indoor testing be something of interest?

Given the need for performer testing between PTEs/TEs, this may be a viable approach for a team to use to verify their techniques.

72 Is it okay to do flight testing in public view?

Albatross's CUIG does not identify any sight-sensitive elements.

73 Is this going to be an MVP? DARPA does not discriminate programs in that way.

74 Is there a particular plan for open architecture framework?

DARPA is interested in seeing proposals for architectures that allow wide application across defense.

75 What is the weight of evaluation of teams you are looking for?

Please see the PS for how proposals will be evaluated.

77 For the 5pg abstract, do we need to provide a ROM? Is there a specific template? Do we need to provide PI bios?

Please see the PS for instructions on what to include in the 5-page abstract.

78 The various soaring modalities require slightly different types of aircraft. For example, dynamic soaring over ocean AND the ability to land on ship deck is probably the most challenging condition to meet. Is DARPA’s goal to have a team select one and only one aircraft by the 6-month System Checkout with the assumption that this selected aircraft must perform in all the tests?

The PS does not specify this example case.

There is a preference to develop a single aircraft configuration and explore its ability to take advantage of different soaring conditions. However, the PS does not prohibit changes to the aircraft between test events.

79 What types of items/areas cannot be change for the baseline aircraft.

For example, could we fly our selected RC glider without VTOL capabilities and then only add the VTOL capability for the dynamic soaring (take off and land from a ship) flight test?

The concept of the baseline is a configuration of the vehicle that is as similar to the Albatross soaring configuration as possible except for any specific soaring added equipment. The concept is to compare a vehicle baseline to a configuration that best enables soaring.

In the context if this question, it is advantageous to add the VTOL system to the baseline system.

80 By asking for an overall 75% improvement, could the baseline aircraft that is selected, be only currently capable of 29 miles range under powered (baseline condition). This assumes that successful Albatross modifications/algorithms would increase this baseline range to 50miles (~29x175%).

Test event planning is most effective with an established baseline capability of the aircraft. The PS outlines the desired s-UAS performance at system checkout. System checkout is performed prior to soaring test events.

81 Can you confirm non-traditional defense contractor definition? Is there is a specific metric or criteria to assess the "significant extent" participation of a non-traditional contractor in the project?

Please see PS for definition of nontraditional defense contractor and related statutory and regulatory references.

Significant extent does not have a particular metric and varies based on the contribution of the proposed nontraditional contractor. Does their contribution cause a material reduction in the cost or schedule, or increase the performance of the prototype? The Government expects to see, in the prime contractor's attestation, how the proposed nontraditional contractor is responsible for a key component, technology, or process without which the prototype cannot be successfully developed (i.e. on the critical path).

82 Can we extract electrical energy from wind and take credit for it in our total energy reduction?

Perhaps. We would appreciate a description of any alternate techniques in the abstracts/orals.

83 Does the focus on group 1 / group 2 aircraft indicate the technical area of greatest interest going forward or is it a decision made to have a manageable program scope?

This class of UAS was best suited for managing cost and safety while being suitable for low altitude flight. Albatross technologies are envisioned for application across many classes of aircraft.

84 Roughly to what degree can time or distance be traded for energy savings? That is, if a naïve non-soaring mission takes 2 hours, what would the time cap likely be for a soaring mission?

Please see the solicitation for a description of possible soaring mission types. One type focuses on range/endurance, while the other focuses on achieving a goal at a particular time. For a range mission, there may not be a specific time cap, other than range operational times, but for other types of missions, meeting a timed waypoint may be critical.

85 What kinds of limits will be placed on the mission altitude?

We have identified potential test sites that allow flight at any altitude within the NAS.

If vehicles are selected that can obtain those higher altitudes, those ranges will be prioritized.

86 Minimum sink rate and L/D significantly affects ability to capitalize on lift sources – will airframe performance be separated from algorithm performance in a rigorous way or is the basic interpretation from the PS of simple power reduction from baseline the correct one?

Program metrics are provided in the PS.

More rigorous methods of measuring performance may be indicated in the abstracts or oral presentations.

87 Does total energy reduction include autopilot/radio/avionics power or just propulsive power? Is there an expectation that we’ll be optimizing for avionics power within the scope of this program (e.g. compute efficiency)?

Any increase in onboard power consumption should be accounted for as a negative effect towards the soaring benefit.

88 Can a human operator modify the plan, such as being presented with new optimal plans and selecting during flight based on online planning model updates?

Yes. Communications with the vehicle are allowed. Highly autonomous capabilities are desired but alerting the operator to degradations and providing alternative means of accomplishing the mission are encouraged especially where this function is supervisory in nature.

89 Do we have internet access for the GCS at the site? What kind of connectivity will be available at the practice and formal test events?

We are currently planning to provide internet access at each location but cannot guarantee access or bandwidth at this time.

90 Are there any limitations on the total onboard energy storage capacity?

We are not currently anticipating particular limitations in total onboard energy storage capacity.

91 Will we receive accurate DTED terrain maps of the test sites ahead of time? If so, to what accuracy and resolution?

DTED data can be requested. We cannot guarantee specific data at this time. DTED level 2 may be available if qualifying conditions are met.

92 The solicitation references 5 required Appendices that must be submitted with the Oral Proposal. Please provide a copy of the Model OT Agreement for initial organization review.

DARPA intends to release appendices only to organizations selected for Oral presentations.

93 Re: Readiness review and performers must record power draw at 100 HZ – included in the link data. Telemetry is typically bandwidth constrained; thus, priority for UAS command and control and other critical data streams may be required during operations. Note power data could be recorded at 100 Hz for analysis after the flight, if needed. Is it acceptable for the data be recorded at 10 HZ and sent via the link data at 10 HZ?

Yes. A combination of telemetry data and onboard recording is anticipated and encouraged. There is a need for it to be frequent enough to measure the power profile in flight accurately.

94 Re: recording power draw/consumption recording, these sensors add unnecessary complication to the overall avionics. A simpler and common UAS method is to track voltage drop over time. This can be converted to power consumption, as needed.

Please confirm measuring voltage drop (at 10 HZ) will be accepted as a proxy for measuring power consumption.

It is up to the proposer to show that the measurement method is sufficient to accurately measure the program goals/metrics. If there is not a specific onboard measurement, then a justification is recommended on the level of accuracy that can be obtained. Please note lithium battery discharge curves have a long flat region where voltage is pretty constant, and the state of charge can vary greatly.

95 Can you please confirm if a transitioning and commercialization plan should be included in the proposal?

As noted in the PS, these details are desired.

96 What is the technical background of the audience for the abstract proposals?

Government and direct support subject matter experts in one or more technical areas associated with the program.

97 Does FAA Regulatory Compliance need to be addressed in the abstract proposal?

Yes, proposer must state compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and rules or the method by which exemptions will be obtained.

98 Can teams use their own platform to set a baseline for comparison during test events? Will DARPA release specifications on their own sUAS for forming a baseline per test event?

DARPA expects teams to use their own platform, or an identical surrogate, for baseline measurements prior to modification. All sUAS in the program will be performer provided.

99 Are any performance metrics more heavily weighted in terms of desired outcome (Metrics: 75% energy reduction, 15% prediction accuracy, 100% mission completion)?

No. All metrics are equally desired.

100 Will the efficiency of the UAS’s communication systems (e.g., data transmission, latency, range) be tested, and how will this impact overall efficiency scores?

No.

101 What are the conditions on modification or refinement for the UAS’s design between testing phases, or is the design fixed once submitted for IOT&E?

DARPA expects regular and continuous updates throughout the program. Vehicles must be presented as safe for flight before each flight. Performers should expect that any modifications made during a test must be documented with range safety and their implications for safety addressed.

102 Are there logistical or support resources DARPA offers to help with UAS transport, setup, or testing during the evaluation?

DARPA intends to provide the range and interface to the range. Transport, setup, and operations will be the responsibility of the performer.

103 On p. 1, the program solicitation estimates Oral Proposals to be around December 5th, which is three weeks from the Abstract due date. However, p. 18 states "Oral Proposals will take place approximately three weeks after notification from the government that an Oral Proposal is requested."

These statements seem inconsistent. Clarification is requested on the estimated oral proposal due date.

DARPA intends to respond to abstracts quickly. Updated submission dates and requirements will be provided to selectees.

104 Is the energy consumption from sensing and flight controls related to the soaring capability included in the "baseline energy usage" or only the "actual energy usage" calculation? In other words, are the sensing components present and powered during baseline flight (even if not altering flight operations)?

If the instruments are inherent in the baseline configuration, they will not count against the usage. If the instruments are added for soaring, they will be counted.

The "grey area" here will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. While metrics are critically important, teams will be evaluated on the totality of progress made to program objectives.

105 Please provide more clarity and details on the resource loaded Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

(p. 21) to be provided with the Oral Proposal. Is the expectation that a Microsoft Project file is to be included in the submission? What is the expected level of granularity to be detailed in the Work Breakdown Structure (i.e., WBS level 2, 3, or 4). Can the Government provide a template for the desired IMS format?

IMS format can be contractor-created, no template will be provided. The desire is for a reasonable IMS down to Level 4/Activities. The IMS should capture the individual tasks the proposer believes are the critical elements of reach the program objectives. No specific resource or duration limits are placed on these items, rather the focus should be on critical items in terms of technology advancement and cost.

106 Please confirm that if an Oral Presentation Package does not include answers to some or all the questions in Appendix (5) Value Base Assessment (p. 22), that this will not affect the evaluation of the Oral Proposal?

Correct, proposers are encouraged, but not required to provide answers to some, all, or none of Value Based Assessment questions.

107 Since DARPA plans to provide High Performance Computing Access as a GFE (p. 25), should performers still budget for internal high performance computing resources (e.g., GPU-enabled servers, cloud compute) in the cost estimate and cost volume?

The performers may use either the USG HPC resources, their own, or both.

108 Should the platform (sUAS) be included in the deliverables or just the s/w + docs…. If yes, does the commercialization plan include the platform (s/w + sUAS), or could it be just the s/w?

Items developed under this effort and their interfaces to existing state of the art are critical outputs of the effort. This may include software, firmware, hardware, designs, and other documentation.