CSS-FD Market Survey.pdf

Market Survey Announcement for CSS-FD

April 2, 2021

MARKET SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT

COMMON SUPPORT SERVICES – FLIGHT DATA (CSS-FD)

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

I. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this Market Survey/Request for Information (RFI) is to obtain a better understanding of Industry interest and capabilities to meet the Common Support Services –

Flight Data (CSS-FD) program objectives. This Market Survey/RFI will assist the FAA to:

Obtain feedback on the Initial Program Requirements

Obtain high-level schedule and Rough Order of Magnitude estimates

Determine if there are solutions that are Flight Information Exchange Model (FIXM) compliant

Determine the quantity of potential offerors

Determine if the requirements can be met by small business

The information will be used to assist the FAA to better assess its technical alternatives and refine the program’s acquisition strategy and preliminary requirements.

The FAA will also offer interested vendors the opportunity to demonstrate their FIXM compliant solutions. Interested vendors must express their interest to the FAA Contracting

Officer, Jorge R. Martell, Jorge.R.Martell@faa.gov, at the time of their RFI response.

This market survey announcement is issued in accordance with the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) Acquisition Management System (AMS) Policy at 3.2.1.2.1.

This is not a Screening Information Request (SIR) or Request for Proposal (RFP) of any kind.

The responses to this Market Survey will be used for informational purposes only. The FAA is not seeking or accepting unsolicited proposals. Responders are advised that the FAA will not pay for any information received or for administrative costs incurred in preparing a response to the Market Survey. Any costs associated with responding to this survey are solely at the interested vendor’s expense. The FAA does not intend to publish the results of this Market

Survey. The Initial Program Requirements included in this Market Survey are not final documents and are intended for informational purposes only. The FAA reserves the right to revise the Initial Program Requirements based on comments received. All subsequent revisions to the aforementioned documents remain solely at the Government’s discretion.

II. LEGACY ENVIRONMENT

Currently there are disparate ways to plan and file a flight plan and share flight data in the

National Airspace System (NAS) management. Flight planning directly with the FAA is limited to Airspace Users (AUs) that are Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) participants. These participants include a set of aviation community stakeholders that participate in increased information exchange to improve air traffic flow management. They use dedicated Internet

Protocol (IP) connections to exchange data with the Traffic Flow Management (TFM) System

(TFMS) to support FAA management of traffic flows. Other AUs plan using internal or third-party systems.

Flight plan filing is done through multiple avenues. In general, high-volume AUs use the

National Airspace Data Interchange Network (NADIN) Messaging Rehost (NMR) for exchange of flight plan data with NAS Air Traffic Control (ATC) automation. Other AUs submit flight plans in a variety of means: third-party vendors, Flight Service Stations (FSS), or the Operational and Supportability Implementation System (OASIS) in Alaska. For flight data sharing, data consumers receive most data through one or more System Wide Information Management

(SWIM) flight data services (e.g., SWIM Flight Data Publication Service (SFDPS), Traffic Flow

Management Data Service (TFMData)). However, some FAA systems and other governmental systems receive data through legacy data feeds.

The FAA has identified current shortfalls to the flight planning, flight plan filing, and flight data sharing infrastructure and processes. Addressing these shortfalls will improve situational awareness between NAS users, systems, and operators. In addition, the current environment will not meet the needs of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Global ATM

Operational Concept and Flight and Flow – Information for a Collaborative Environment (FF-

ICE). The shortfalls are categorized into two areas—Flight Planning and Flight Plan Filing and

Flight Data Sharing – as described below.

1. Flight Planning and Flight Plan Filing

The current NAS flight planning and flight plan filing environment has limitations that reduce efficiency and predictability. It does not provide the infrastructure to support key

FAA initiatives, such as Trajectory Based Operations (TBO). Specific shortfalls include:

Lack of needed information exchange during flight planning

– Inability for NAS users to determine the impact of some constraints on a flight

Disparate methods and mechanisms for collaborating and applying flight plan information between airspace users and the FAA

– Lack of a standardized set of data sources and methods for airspace users and FAA automation systems to predict the constraints relevant to a flight

Inefficient processes and procedures for flight plan handling

– Unclear exceptions to rules for submission of flight plans for domestic and international flights

– Inefficient process for revising filed flight plans

– Inability to determine the flight plan to be cleared

Difficulty in transitioning to contingency operations

– Inability to redirect flight plans during contingency plan operation

2. Flight Data Sharing

Existing Air Traffic Management (ATM) systems (NAS and external) historically share data with other systems through point-to-point interfaces. Each point-to-point communication typically has its own data formats, communications protocol, and physical connection. To move away from this paradigm, SWIM has made flight data from a number of important

NAS systems available in a loosely coupled interface using a Service Oriented Architecture

(SOA). The SWIM infrastructure allows a wide variety of consumers to get access to the flight data. Although it is easier for a system to get access to the various types of flight data through SWIM, there are still many problems in processing the flight data, including:

Lack of complete, correct, and timely data about flights, limiting the amount, quality, and usefulness of functionality that is provided to the end user

– Systems publish inconsistent data

– Flight data is difficult to match, resulting in data updates being applied to the wrong flights

– Each source system provides its own reconstitution service (or may not provide one), leading to varied and limited capabilities for reconstitution for consumers

It is more costly to develop, operate, maintain, and enhance systems that use and exchange flight data than it needs to be

– Flight data consumers must implement redundant processing

– Bandwidth is wasted due to the publication of redundant and inconsistent data

– Flight data is published using different formats

– Systems that exchange flight data are tightly coupled

– Reconstitution of flight data by consumers requires the development of multiple processes and increased complexity

III. FUTURE ENVIRONMENT

CSS-FD will provide modernized, flexible, consistent, and robust services for the exchange of flight data among internal and external NAS users through a standard interface to enable a common view of flight information. CSS-FD will utilize Flight Information Exchange

Model (FIXM) international data exchange standards and facilitate use of richer, more detailed flight information for Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) and better-informed

Collaborative Decision Making (CDM).

The flight planning function is based on international standards and provides early intent or preliminary flight information that is shared between the Airspace User (AU) and the FAA.

Flight planning also includes a pre-departure trajectory negotiation process through the use of Trial Requests (TRs) or Preliminary Flight Plans (PFPLs) which enables the AU to receive consistent, aggregated feedback on Traffic Flow Management (TFM) and Air

Traffic Control (ATC) constraints applicable to the flight. By enabling the AUs to address constraints during the planning phase, the need to change the flight plan when the flight is airborne is reduced, increasing predictability while also reducing crew and controller workload.

Flight plan filing includes the actions of filing a flight plan in the National Airspace System

(NAS), as well as any subsequent updates to or cancellation of the filed flight plan. CSS-FD will facilitate coordination of needed changes once the flight plan is filed. CSS-FD enhancements will enable users and FAA systems to have a consistent view of a flight’s route or 4-Dimensional Trajectory (4DT) and flight-specific applicable constraints. Users’ flight planning accuracy will be improved by CSS-FD-provided flight-specific feedback with applicable Traffic Management Initiatives (TMIs), NAS automation-applied ATC

Adapted Routes, and static airspace constraints described in Standard Operating Procedures

(SOPs)/Letters of Agreement (LOAs), which will increase the likelihood that flights will be cleared as filed.

The capabilities that support flight data sharing make flight data available to systems that use that data to perform operational and analytical functions throughout the entire life cycle of a flight (i.e., from pre-departure to arrival). This will be done through a modern, standards-based flight data exchange mechanism that will simplify global, national, and inter-agency data sharing and will consolidate and reconcile values for flight data. Flight data will be published in an expandable and machine-readable format that has been filtered according to data access policies established by the FAA and criteria specified by the CSS-

FD consumer. CSS-FD will provide the following services to users:

The provision of a common access method to exchange flight data between the NAS user and the core NAS systems during flight planning and flight plan filing.

– CSS-FD will improve the exchange of early intent (pre-flight plan filing) data, NAS constraint checking, and flight plan submission. CSS-FD will streamline the transition from early flight planning coordination to the actual flight plan filing event by consolidating these processes, which today involve disparate interfaces.

– The automated collaboration and negotiation of trajectory information will be supported by a consistent view of static constraints (e.g., ATC adapted routes), dynamic constraints (e.g., TFM constraints), and early intent information; the exchange of four-dimensional trajectories; and the identification of detailed performance capabilities (e.g., area navigation/required navigation performance capabilities).

The distribution of flight data to systems that use flight data to perform operational and analytical functions throughout the entire life cycle of a flight. CSS-FD will implement a modern, standards-based flight data exchange mechanism that will simplify global, national, and inter-agency data sharing. CSS-FD will produce consolidated, reconciled values for flight data. CSS-FD will publish flight data in an expandable and machine-readable format that has been filtered according to data access policies established by the

FAA and criteria specified by the CSS-FD consumer.

The FAA is exploring alternatives for development and deployment to achieve the objectives of

CSS-FD. Currently, the FAA is exploring two alternatives, both of which develop CSS-FD utilizing the FAA’s Enhanced SWIM Cloud Service (ESCS) messaging service to facilitate message exchange between CSS-FD and users, hosted in the FAA’s Cloud Services (FCS) infrastructure, using Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) principles and allow for microservices for some functions (i.e. GUFI management, data validation). CSS-FD will ingest flight data from users and other relevant sources, enhance the flight data to meet system requirements, and then publish the flight data to NAS and non-NAS systems. One alternative includes implementing

Capabilities 1 through 4 listed below as new services. The other alternative considers the use of

SFDPS for some of the CSS-FD functions based on the current capabilities available in SFDPS today.

Table 1 provides a high-level description of the CSS-FD capabilities to support flight planning, flight plan filing and flight data sharing services.

Table 1: CSS-FD Capabilities

Capability

Number Capability Description

1 Data Management and Security Framework: Enables flight planning, flight plan filing and flight data sharing to include global flight data management functions including standardization, translation, reconciliation, and validation along with reconstitution, as well as security elements required for identity and access management. One part of the Data Management & Security

Framework (reconciliation) capability is Globally Unique Flight Identifier (GUFI) management. A

GUFI is a single reference for FF-ICE information pertinent to a flight.

2 Flight Planning and Flight Plan Filing: Supports the ingestion and routing of appropriate responses to submitted filing of a flight plan by AUs and enhanced AUs (eAUs) via both the legacy method and the FF-ICE method, respectively.

3 Evaluation of Constraints/Restrictions: Provides information on airspace constraints or other restrictions for flight plans in the filing status or for trial requests.

4 Flight Specific Feedback: Provides a flight with applicable Traffic Management Initiatives, NAS automation-applied ATC Adapted Routes, and static airspace constraints, in order to increase the likelihood that the flight will be cleared as filed.

A general overview of the system design for the two alternatives is provided in Figure 1 and 2.

Figure 1: Alternative A, CSS-FD System Diagram

Figure 2: Alternative B, CSS-FD System Design with SFDPS

NAS Op-IP Network

NEMS

NADIN/

NMR

NAS Systems

ERAM

STARS

TBFM

TFMS

NAS ATO Cloud Services

Publicly Accessible Cloud NAS Ops

Cloud

FAA Cloud Services

ESCSeUsers

Legacy Users

Security Controls/

Virtual

NESG

Equinix

SWIM Services In/ Going To the Cloud

CSS-FD ...

ESCS

API Gateway

Messaging Bus

User Portal

Subscription Management

N

EM

S- En ab le d N

ES

G

CSS-FD Orchestration Engine

Core Services

Data Mediation Microservice

Data Validation Microservice

Security Management

GUFI

Microservice

Flight Object Management

Data Reconstitution

Data Conversion Microservice

Data Conversion Microservice

Data Conversion Microservice

Business Rules Microservice

Business Rules Microservice

Business Rules Microservice

Data Reconciliation Microservice

Business Rules Engine

Flight Object Data Store

Event/Service Mesh

Microservices Data Store

Microservices Data Store

Microservices Data Store

FPF

Flight Plan Filing

Flight Planning

Trial Request

FDM

Pub/Sub Management

Data Tagging/ Filtering

Data Fusion

NAS-Side SWIM Services

TFMData

ACS

TBFM

CSS-Wx

SFDPS

STDDS

ESCS

API Gateway

Messaging Bus

User Portal

Subscription Management eUsers

Legacy Users

SFDPS

CSS-FD

Program

Scope

CoordinationCSS-FD

Orchestration Engine

Core Services

Security Management

Core Services

Business Rules Engine

Data Mediation Microservice

Data Validation Microservice

Security Mangement

GUFI

Microservice

Flight Object Management

Data Reconstitution

Data Conversion Microservice

Data Conversion Microservice

Data Conversion Microservice

Data Reconciliation Microservice

Flight Object Data Store

Event/Service Mesh

Microservices Data Store

Microservices Data Store

Microservices Data Store

FPF

Flight Plan Filing

Flight Planning

Trial Request

FDM

Pub/Sub Management

Data Tagging/ Filtering

Data Fusion

NAS Op-IP Network

NEMS

NADIN/

NMR

NAS Systems

ERAM

STARS

TBFM

TFMS

N

EM

S- En ab le d N

ES

G

NAS-Side SWIM Services

TFMData

ACS

TBFM

CSS-Wx

STDDS

NAS ATO Cloud Services

Publicly Accessible Cloud NAS Ops

Cloud

FAA Cloud Services

ESCS

Security

Controls/ Virtual

NESG

SWIM Services In/ Going To the Cloud

CSS-FD ...

Equinix

SFDPS

IV. REQUESTED INFORMATION / QUESTIONS TO INDUSTRY

The FAA requests that vendors provide feedback on the FAA’s Initial Program Requirements using Attachment 2, Comment Form. Vendors responding to this market survey should also complete Attachment 3, Business Declaration Form.

1. The FAA requests that vendors provide a Capability Statement and responses to the items below that demonstrates your capability to meet CSS-FD initial program requirements. 1.

Describe your capability and experience to meet the requirements identified in

Attachment 1, Initial Program Requirements. Discuss any significant risks associated with satisfying the Initial Program Requirements. How would you mitigate the identified risks?

2. Describe your experience in developing high availability software applications using

DevOps and/or SecDevOps in a cloud-based environment.

3. Describe your experience with FIXM international data exchange standards and compliance with respect to flight planning and explain any issues or challenges that might be faced in implementations with respect to data standards.

4. Describe your software development approach (e.g., Agile, Waterfall or Hybrid) and why it is the best approach to satisfy the requirements identified in Attachment 1, Initial

Program Requirements. Discuss lessons learned with your experience using other software development approaches.

5. Describe your configuration and quality management approach to support your software development methodology. Discuss how your approach ensures the integrity of the deployment.

6. Discuss your experience with the FAA’s test and evaluation process. Discuss any lessons learned from your experience.

7. Discuss the level of automation used with your test & evaluation approach. What kind of efficiency percentage gains have been achieved through the automation of your processes?

8. What industry standards would you recommend the FAA consider as minimum requirements to ensure qualified vendors?

9. The FAA’s current strategy is to utilize a SOA for the development of CSS-FD capabilities. The FAA is also exploring the feasibility of utilizing a Microservices architecture for the development CSS-FD. Provide an assessment of the feasibility of satisfying CSS-FD requirements using Microservices including any pros and cons. If you believe that Microservices is a feasible approach, please include an architecture diagram and description to support your assessment.

10. Discuss estimated staffing levels and skill mix associated with your program management and development approach. When providing your estimates, please consider program management and control, development of technical documentation, software development, test & evaluation, and deployment.

11. Provide Rough Order of Magnitude cost estimates associated with your program management and development approach. When providing your cost estimates, please consider program management and control, development of technical documentation, software development, test & evaluation, and deployment. Identify any impact to your cost estimate if the FAA selects the alternative that includes the re-evaluation process

(Capability 5).

12. Provide a high-level schedule estimate associated with your program management and development approach. When providing your schedule, please consider program management and control, development of technical documentation, software development and test & evaluation and deployment. Identify any impact to your high-level schedule estimate if the FAA selects the alternative that includes the re-evaluation process (Capability 5).

13. Discuss the contract type(s) you would recommend that best aligns with your software development approach. What program requirements (e.g., Earned Value Management) would you recommend to ensure cost, schedule, and performance control and accountability?

V. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Interested parties must provide responses in writing. Responses must be in common electronic readable format (Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or PDF), single-spaced, in Time New

Roman 12 Font. Please limit company background information to one page.

Responses must be submitted electronically no later than 4:00 PM EST on May 28, 2021 to the

Contracting Officer, Jorge R. Martell at Jorge.R.Martell@faa.gov. The responses to this Market

Survey will be used for information purposes only and will not be released, except as required under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Any proprietary or confidential information contained in the Market Survey submissions must be appropriately marked. Proprietary information that is appropriately marked will be protected in accordance with FOIA.

Additionally, providing a response to this Market Survey neither qualifies respondents for, nor excludes respondents from, responding to a resulting SIR, if any.

Questions regarding the Market Survey must be emailed to the CO. The inquiry and any subsequent response will not be considered part of the market survey response. Phone calls will not be accepted.

VI. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Initial Program Requirements document

Attachment 2: Comment Form

Attachment 3: Business Declaration Form