Tab 1. AMM Industry Engagement RFI.pdf

PDF 102 KB Posted

Attached to
A5/7 Affordable Mass Munitions
Solicitation number
FA701426xxxxx
Issued by

About this file

This document is a vendor engagement questionnaire template designed to assess industrial capabilities for Affordable Mass Munitions (AMM) production—low-cost (~$300K target), mass-producible (1,000+ units/year) long-range precision strike systems for Great Power Competition.

The questionnaire collects detailed information across ten sections: (1) Production Capacity—current rates, maximum existing capacity, surge capacity with 24-month investment, and timeline to achieve 1,000+ units/year; (2) Cost Data—unit cost estimates at production volumes of 1,000, 5,000, and 10,000 units/year with confidence levels and alignment to $300K target, cost element breakdowns (airframe, propulsion, guidance, warhead, avionics, software), primary cost drivers, cost reduction opportunities, and learning curve slope; (3) Schedule Data—milestones from contract to first flight, first flight to full-rate production, and contract to full-rate production; (4) Technical Performance—range (≥250 NM), speed (≥Mach 0.6), payload capacity, accuracy (CEP ≤10m), GPS-denied navigation approach and TRL, autonomy level (1–5), payload modularity, and platform integration; (5) Manufacturing—approach type (traditional, additive, hybrid, digital), distributed production feasibility, and single points of failure; (6) WOSA/GRA Compliance—Weapon Open System Architecture and Government Reference Architecture alignment, modular subsystem integration, integration capability with Quicksink (maritime strike) and FALCO (C-UAS) systems; (7) International Cooperation & ITAR—export status, exportability design, international program experience, allied co-production potential, and interest in ERAM-type collaboration; (8) Mobility & Contested Logistics—in-theater and mobile production feasibility, containerizable equipment, forward assembly capability, flat-pack shipping, assembly time and skill requirements, inventory depth, and alternative supplier availability; (9) Qualitative Assessment—barriers to cost targets and recommendations for government; and (10) Follow-Up—contact information, recommended actions, and recommendations for RFI inclusion, prototype solicitation, and international partnership. The appendix provides definitions of key terms including AMM, WOSA, GRA, ERAM, Quicksink, FALCO, ITAR, and contested logistics concepts.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Tab 2. Specialized Questions.pdf PDF
RFI Solicitation Text.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

UNCLASSIFIED

ENGAGEMENT INFORMATION

Field Entry

Vendor:

Weapon/Mission System(s) or Sub- System(s):

Vendor POC:

POC Email:

POC Phone:

Alternate Contact Information:

SECTION 1: PRODUCTION CAPACITY

Question Response

Current production rate (units/year):

Maximum capacity (existing facilities):

Surge capacity (with 24-mo investment):

Can achieve 1,000+ units/year in 24 months:

☐ Yes ☐ No Timeline:

Primary production constraints (top 3): 1.

2.

3.

Investment needed to increase capacity: $

SECTION 2: COST DATA

Production Volume Unit Cost Estimate Confidence Meets ~$300K Target?

1,000 units/year $ ☐ High ☐ Med ☐ Low ☐ Yes ☐ No

5,000 units/year $ ☐ High ☐ Med ☐ Low ☐ Yes ☐ No

10,000 units/year $ ☐ High ☐ Med ☐ Low ☐ Yes ☐ No

Cost Element % of Unit Cost

Airframe/Structure %

Propulsion %

Guidance/Navigation %

Warhead/Payload %

Avionics/Software %

Other %

Primary cost drivers (top 3): 1.

2.

3.

Cost reduction opportunities (50%):

Learning curve slope: %

SECTION 3: SCHEDULE DATA

Milestone Timeline (months)

Contract to first flight:

First flight to full-rate production:

Contract to full-rate production:

Long-lead items:

Schedule acceleration opportunities:

SECTION 4: TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE

Parameter Value Meets AMM Requirement?

Range: ☐ ≥250 NM

Speed: ☐ ≥Mach 0.6

Payload capacity:

Accuracy (CEP): ☐ ≤10m

GPS-denied navigation approach:

GPS-denied TRL:

CEP in GPS-denied environment:

Autonomy level (1–5):

Payload modularity:

Platform integration (# platforms):

SECTION 5: MANUFACTURING

Manufacturing approach: ☐ Traditional ☐ Additive ☐ Hybrid ☐ Digital

% Additive manufacturing: %

Distributed production capable: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ With investment

Single points of failure:

SECTION 6: WOSA/GRA COMPLIANCE

Question Response

WOSA Compliance: ☐ Compliant ☐ Adaptable ☐ Not compliant ☐ Unknown

Standardized logical message constructs: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

WOSA interfaces implemented:

Modular subsystem integration ("plug-and-play"):

☐ Yes ☐ No

Worked with AFRL on WOSA: ☐ Yes ☐ No

GRA Compliance: ☐ Compliant ☐ Adaptable ☐ Not compliant ☐ Unknown

Standardized interfaces/data models: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

Can integrate Quicksink (maritime strike): ☐ Yes ☐ No Timeline:

Can adapt for FALCO (C-UAS): ☐ Yes ☐ No Modifications:

SECTION 7: INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION & ITAR

ITAR status: ☐ Export-friendly ☐ ITAR-controlled ☐ Significant restrictions

Designed with exportability in mind: ☐ Yes ☐ No

International program experience: ☐ Extensive ☐ Some ☐ Limited ☐ None

Allied co-production potential: ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Low

Identified allied partners:

Primary barriers to int'l cooperation:

Interest in ERAM-type int'l collaboration: ☐ Yes ☐ No

SECTION 8: MOBILITY & CONTESTED LOGISTICS

Question Response

In-theater production feasibility: ☐ Feasible ☐ With investment ☐ Not feasible

Mobile production feasibility: ☐ Feasible ☐ With investment ☐ Not feasible

Containerizable equipment: ☐ Yes ☐ Partial ☐ No

Minimum facility footprint: sq ft

Forward assembly feasibility: ☐ Feasible ☐ With investment ☐ Not feasible

"Flat-pack" shipping possible: ☐ Yes ☐ No

Assembly time per unit (forward): hrs

Skill level for assembly: ☐ Specialized ☐ Trained tech ☐ General

Inventory depth (critical components): weeks/months

Alternative supplier availability: ☐ Yes ☐ Partial ☐ No

Timeline to qualify alt suppliers: months

Contested Logistics Scenario Response: ƒHow.difficult.would.it.be.to.establish.in‗theater.

production.if.CONUS.supply.chains.are.cut‽ƒ

Response

SECTION 9: QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT

Biggest barrier to ~$300K/unit at 1K+ units/year:

#1 recommendation for government:

Vendor questions for A5/7:

SECTION 10: FOLLOW-UP

Item Details

Follow-up POC (name/email/phone):

Requested follow-up actions:

Materials to be provided by vendor:

Recommended for RFI inclusion: ☐ Yes ☐ No

Recommended for prototype solicitation: ☐ Yes ☐ No

Recommended for international partnership:

☐ Yes ☐ No

Appendix: Key Definitions

Term Definition

Affordable Mass Munitions (AMM)

Low-cost (~$300K target), mass-producible (1K+ units/year), long-range precision strike systems for Great Power Competition.

Weapon Open System Architecture (WOSA)

AFRL Munitions Directorate technical standard defining a modular open systems approach (MOSA) for weapon systems.

Mandates standardized logical message constructs, enables "plug-and-play" subsystem integration, and breaks vendor lock through subcomponent-level competition.

Government Reference Architecture (GRA)

Government-owned framework providing high-level principles, practices, and common standards for specific domains (e.g., Weapons GRA for weapon subcomponents). Defines standardized interfaces, data models, and communication protocols.

Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM)

USAF program for affordable, mass-producible, long-range precision munition. Co-developed with Denmark and

Netherlands. Target: 500-lb class, ≥250 NM range, Mach 0.6+, CEP ≤10m, GPS-denied capable.

Quicksink AFRL-developed dual-mode (radar/IR) seeker for precision maritime strike. WOSA-compliant, designed for modular integration.

Fixed Wing Air- Launched Counter- Unmanned Aircraft Systems Ordnance

(FALCO)

Modular concept based on the AGR-20 for air-air engagements against UAS.

International Traffic in Arms Regulations

(ITAR)

U.S. regulations controlling export/import of defense articles and services on the USML.

Mobile Production Manufacturing capability that can be relocated or transported, potentially including containerized or deployable production equipment.

Forward Assembly Final assembly operations conducted at forward or expeditionary locations with minimal infrastructure requirements.

Contested Logistics Operating environment where supply chains are disrupted, degraded, or denied due to adversary action.

In-Theater Production Manufacturing or assembly operations conducted within the operational theater, reducing dependence on CONUS-based supply chains.

Surge Capacity Maximum production rate achievable with additional investment and 12–24 months preparation time.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .