NGAM DRAFT SOO Prime Concept Exploration Contract V100902

Draft RFP HQ0147-10-R-0027

Next Generation Aegis Missile (NGAM)

Concept Definition and Program Planning

DRAFT STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

2 September 2010

1.0 Background

The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) will acquire the next generation interceptor for fielding in 2020 as an element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) Phased Adaptive Approach. The Next Generation Aegis Missile (NGAM) will be designed to provide early intercept capability against longer range Short Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBM), Medium Range Ballistic Missiles (MRBM), Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBM) and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) from forward-based locations using the Aegis Weapon System (AWS) infrastructure including the Aegis BMD 5.1 and Mk-41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) ashore.

The first phase of this acquisition is the Concept Definition and Program Planning Phase beginning in 2011, to be followed by competitive product development in FY13. The purpose of the Concept Definition and Program Planning contracts are to: 1) bound the capability required, 2) conduct trades to meet that capability, and 3) optimize trades to reduce the cost.

2.0 Next Generation Aegis Missile (NGAM) Concept Definition and Program Planning

2.1 Objectives

2.1.1 The contractor shall develop a missile design concept within the Government provided system context and constraints.

2.1.2 The contractor shall ensure the concept is compatible with the Aegis BMD 5.1 weapon system configuration, MK41 VLS, and the BMDS architecture concepts defined by the Government. The Government prefers designs that require no modifications to the MK41 VLS; however, the contractor may explore changes that do not impact the external interfaces to meet performance guidelines. The Government will provide the VLS modification constraints on the missile. The Government prefers that the developed concepts require no modification of the AWS interfaces however, modifications which provide significant performance benefit versus cost may be considered.

2.2 Systems Engineering

2.2.1 Systems Engineering Process: The contractor shall have a disciplined Systems Engineering approach and do the following: analyze operational capabilities, and assess the impact of the BMDS constraints; develop missile and missile component concepts; conduct feasibility assessments and trades among component concepts; assess missile concept trades and verify missile concept performance; and develop recommended missile concepts.

2.2.2 Systems Engineering Trades: The contractor shall conduct missile system engineering trades and analysis to ensure feasibility within the BMDS operational constraints and adherence to the Government’s Operational Guidelines document. Additionally, the contractor shall identify missile configuration and system integration and recommend strategies to achieve the balance between system performance, schedule, technology development and integration risks, and costs.

2.2.2.1 System/Weapon System Attributes Trade Space shall include but is not limited to:

System performance (defended area/launch area denied/probability of engagement success (Pes), battle space) versus missile velocity, divert capability, and seeker capabilities at varying levels of engagement support quality (sensor track quality, covariance, latencies, timeline, and discrimination state-of-the-threat objects).

Maximum potential performance against the ICBM threat of the NGAM while retaining capability for the IRBM and MRBM. The Government prefers use of only solid propellants to ensure compatibility for future shipboard integration. The contractor shall thoroughly document the rationale for any alternative propulsion concepts and assess the full logistics and life cycle cost implications of any alternative concepts, and include as part of the trades.

The benefits and costs of varying shot doctrines such as shoot-look- shoot or missile salvos from single and multiple interceptor launch sites.

The performance impact and mitigation concepts for intercept debris and spent booster keep-out zones.

The ability to accomplish earlier intercepts, if the interceptor is launched during the boost phase of the threat missile. The contractor shall consider alternative BMDS architectures to assess the benefit of low latency fire control concepts (e.g., direct sensor-to-shooter) as stated in the Weapon System Modeling Assumptions and External Sensor Data documents. The benefits of earlier intercepts and the associated missile costs will be clearly identified and traded.

The performance sensitivities to threat characteristics including signature, separation rate, acceleration, trajectory type, debris, and countermeasures.

2.2.2.2 Missile Attributes Trade Space: The contractor shall trade missile attributes to achieve maximum system performance against the threat cases provided by the Government. The contractor shall recommend concepts based on a balance of achieved performance versus development and integration risks, and cost, including:

Missile communication concepts to ensure robust, low latency communication capabilities in the raid scenarios as outlined in the Reference Missions document. This includes the ability to mitigate communication link countermeasures and takes into account the impact of worldwide operational frequencies on guidance and communication concepts. The benefits and costs of a communications capability in different frequency bands (e.g., L, S, X) are to be traded versus alternative surface and air communications terminal locations provided in the Reference Mission document.

Missile structures, propulsion architectures, and light weight components to maximize Vbo (velocity burn-out).

Estimate of lethality against the threat payloads defined in the Threat Data Package versus KV concept.

Impact of countermeasures versus kill vehicle (KV) concept, fire control concept, and off board discrimination capabilities described in the External Sensor Track Data Package.

Impact to weapon system ability to support hit/kill assessment.

Ability of KV seeker to perform on-board discrimination versus off-board discrimination capability assumptions provided in the External Sensor Data document.

Anticipated structural loads and applied safety factors.

Control concepts versus weight, and control authority and responsiveness.

Guidance and navigation concepts.

Seeker concepts.

Nosecone shape, deployment, and thermal protection.

Concepts for HEMP/HAENS (High Altitude Electromagnetic

Pulse/ High Altitude Exo-atmospheric Nuclear Survivability) core standard compliance.

Concepts for anti tamper core standard compliance.

Concepts for tactical flight termination/command destruct, to include plug-in Flight Termination Systems.

Concepts for tactical telemetry.

Missile reliability, including production tolerances and minimizing single point failure.

Concepts for reliable cables and connectors, including wireless options.

Concepts for light weight, reliable batteries.

Inertial Measurement Unit concepts.

Supply chain concepts.

Impacts to logistical baseline (maintenance, supply, transport, and storage).

Safety, including but not limited to insensitive munitions and use of liquid propellants.

Development costs, life cycle costs, and Average Unit Production

Costs.

2.2.3 Performance Analysis: The contractor shall develop and use simulations at varying levels of fidelity to assess both the feasibility and performance of the developed concepts. These simulations include but are not limited to those needed to evaluate kinematic fly-out, defended area, fire control loop guidance performance; end-game performance; high fidelity specialized simulations for guidance, navigation, and control design;

aerodynamics prediction; thermal and mechanical design; propulsion design;

seeker design; and performance prediction. The contractor shall analyze the performance of proposed concepts for the scenario cases defined in the Reference Missions document plus any additional threat cases from the Threat Data Package to illustrate performance of the developed concepts or to support trade studies, as proposed by the contractor and approved by the Government.

2.3 Concept Definition Models and Simulations

2.3.1 The contractor shall develop and deliver models and simulations for the interceptor with the Simulink model-based simulation and software development environment and compliant with the Open Architecture Simulation Interface Specification (OASIS) Simitar simulation framework in accordance with the Advanced Technology Algorithm, Software and Simulation Directive and Standard. OASIS Simitar will provide near-term compliance with MDA’s Digital Simulation Architecture (DSA) and Single Stimulation Framework (SSF).

2.4 Product Development Planning and Definition

2.4.1 The contractor shall define a qualification, hardware in the loop (HWIL), and flight test program to verify capability and validate the models and simulations which describe missile performance. The contactor shall define test objectives for key verification events, and identify the key parameters for verification that will be the basis for defining Critical Engagement Conditions (CEC) and Empirical Measurement Events (EME).

2.4.2 The contractor shall define a modeling and simulation approach for tools to support all MDA element and system level modeling and simulation use cases including: Performance Assessment (PA), Ground Test (GT), Element Integration (EI), Exercises (EX), Training (TR), Wargames (WG), Concept Analysis (CA). Simulation tools for Performance Assessment, Exercises, Training, and Element Integration use cases shall federate with the DSA framework, using the Optimistic Modeling Framework (OMF) interface. Hardware-in-the-loop drivers for GT shall federate with the Single Stimulation Framework through the Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) protocol interface. The plan shall identify tools, their supported use cases, and development schedules. The plan shall provide for consistent representation across use cases and modeling and simulation verification and validation including metrics, performance levels of each use case and planned anchoring or benchmarking data sources. The approach shall describe how modeling and simulation tools developed for this Statement of Objectives will be transitioned to Product Development.

2.4.3 The contractor shall develop an event-based Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and Integrated Master Plan (IMP) for the Product Development Phase with clearly defined knowledge points that includes risk mitigation activities and critical path(s).

2.4.4 The contractor shall develop estimates of development, production, and life cycle costs for the concept, consistent with the assumptions the government provided in the Operational Guidelines document.

2.4.5 The contractor shall develop a concept of operations for the tactical employment of the NGAM for land-based and sea-based operations.

2.5 Technology Readiness Assessment

2.5.1The contractor shall assess the technical maturity of proposed missile concepts in accordance with the MDA provided Technology Readiness Level (TRL) definitions. The contractor shall provide the data justifying the assessed TRL.

2.6 Risk Assessment

2.6.1 The contractor shall identify the risks associated with developing the proposed missile concepts. Risk assessments shall be presented in accordance with the MDA Risk Management Instruction. The contractor shall also assess manufacturability risks of proposed concepts.

2.6.2 The contractor shall assess the potential risk reduction or performance improvements to their concepts from MDA technology investments.

2.6.3 The contractor shall identify potential technology investments that would mitigate risks, lower production costs, and raise the maturity level of key technologies to TRL 5 or higher, prior to entering product development in FY13.

2.7 Technology Risk Reduction

2.7.1 The contractor shall propose and execute component testing to increase maturity and reduce risk for key technologies expected to be used in their NGAM concepts. Technology areas that may be considered include, but are not limited to: seeker, guidance, and navigation components; HAENS survivability; missile controllability; propulsion; structures; avionics;

cabling; and power.

2.8 Mission Assurance and Safety

2.8.1 For the concept definition the contractor shall consider mission assurance and safety requirements in concept trade studies and assessments.

Concept descriptions shall include an explanation of how missile concepts facilitate meeting mission assurance and safety requirements during product development.

The contractor shall perform a Failure Modes Effect Criticality Analysis (FMECA) on recommended concepts. Safety and Reliability Critical Items (RCIs) shall be identified by the FMECA.

2.8.2 For the technology risk reduction in Section 2.7.1, the contractor shall implement the MDA-QS-001-MAP MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) Rev. A, and MDA-QS-003-PMAP-REV A MDA Parts, Materials and Processes Mission Assurance Plan (PMAP), on the program, consistent with the Requirements Applicability Matrix (RAM) submitted by the contractor and approved by the government.

2.8.3 For the product development planning and definition in section 2.4, the contractor shall plan a mission assurance (MA) and safety program that integrates these requirements into missile design, manufacture, and test.

Plans shall include implementation of the MDA-QS-001-MAP MDA Assurance Provisions (MAP) Rev. A, and MDA-QS-003-PMAP-REV A MDA Parts, Materials and Processes Mission Assurance Plan (PMAP), on the program, consistent with the Requirements Applicability Matrix (RAM) proposed by the contractor for product development and approved by the government.

3.0 Program Management

3. 1 The contractor shall establish a program office and shall implement the policies, methodologies, processes, range and depth of personnel, systems and resources to ensure successful integrated cost, schedule, and technical performance management. The contractor shall manage and track data and related correspondence and support interface/integration activities.

3. 2 The contractor shall implement, document, and use an earned value based management system compliant with the contractor’s Earned Value Management System (EVMS) for integrated cost, schedule, and technical performance management.