CDMaST_Phase_2_QA_for_posting_09292017.pdf

DARPA-BAA-HR001117S0046

CDMaST Phase II Questions and Answers

Platforms and System Integration

1. What platforms and systems are included in Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)? For example, ACTUV (Sea Hunter); ONR Large Diameter Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (LDUUV); Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR systems); or Link 16 systems?

A: Refer to section 1.2.7 of the BAA for the list of GFE that will definitely be provided. Per section

1.2.5 of the BAA, proposers should identify the necessary platforms and surrogates for their experimentation plan. Regardless of source (commercial or Government), proposers should estimate the cost of acquiring or using that equipment as part of their effort. In cases of Government-owned or controlled assets, the Government will assist in making arrangements to obtain and use the system when feasible; however, Performers should not assume that specific types of GFE will definitely be available beyond that listed in section 1.2.7. The exception is weapons systems and manned military platforms (e.g., DDG, SSN), if they are available. These will be handled and budgeted by the Government.

2. Are live equipment elements (radios, etc.) intended to be supplied to the Government at the end of wave 4?

A: In general, CDMaST is not procuring materials and platforms; however, certain elements of the architecture may be procured as the most efficient means for executing the program. These items will be handled in accordance with standard end of contract procedures and regulations.

3. Is anti-tamper a consideration during Phase 2?

A: Anti-tamper should at least be considered philosophically for unmanned systems.

4. Will the BAA specify information assurance (IA) and security requirements for all types of integration?

A: The BAA does not directly specify these requirements because they are governed by other existing regulations. The Government and the Performer will operate in accordance with those rules.

5. Q: Will the Performer need to be concerned about weapons and/or GFE system safety requirements?

A: The Government will manage the safety requirements for weapons. All systems will need to comply with safety procedures to operate on ranges.

6. You stated that industry can assume that waypoint navigation for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) works. Should industry also assume that Command and Control (C2) between the UAV and the host platform works?

A: No. C2 between UAV and host platform is part of the architecture and should be addressed in experimentation commensurate with the technical risks.

Testbed

7. Is the Government or the Performer providing the constructive simulator in the testbed?

A: The Government is providing the constructive simulator.

8. How much of the testbed toolboxes are already built and how many have yet to be built?

A: The testbed has demonstrated a baseline capability and it continues to evolve.

9. Will Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command – Pacific (SSCPAC) facilitate documentation approval for the Secret Defense Research and Engineering Network (SDREN) connectivity?

A: The Government will support the Performer to obtain SDREN connectivity if it is required.

10. Is Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA) used within the testbed infrastructure?

A: Yes. Refer to the supplemental materials in the proposer CD for additional information.

11. Do you have a methodology for emulating System of Systems (SoS) software (e.g., track correlators) or is that expected from the Performer?

A: The Government does have a process to emulate SoS software. The Performer will support the Government in the emulation of these systems as part of TA2. In addition, the Government anticipates using actual SoS software, both Performer-provided and Government-provided.

12. Can you provide further information about how red forces will be implemented? Do you anticipate Performer responsibilities in red force implementation?

A: The Government will provide the baseline capability for red forces; specifically, constructive, virtual, and live targets for experimentation.

Architecture Construct

13. How much effort/focus should be applied to robust communications?

A: The Performer should use their judgment as to the risks in the architecture and allocate resources accordingly.

14. Are SATCOM and SATCOM denial part of the CDMaST scenarios?

A: Refer to the CDMaST scenario document, which is included on the proposer CD, for details on

SATCOM.

15. Why did you call out data fusion separate from C2?

A: Within the CDMaST context, C2 refers to sending and receiving orders to carry out mission functions. Data fusion refers to a consistent, coherent representation of objects from one or multiple data sources. Note that proposers are encouraged to group things as they believe is most useful.

16. Should we anticipate that Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW) CDMaST architecture constructs will be constructively modeled in the 2A period or will that be deferred until the 2B period? Will it be important to show/describe how experimentation in waves 1-4 are needed/leveraged to 2B ASuW demonstrations?

A: Yes. It is of interest to constructively model ASuW constructs in the base period. The focus within the waves should follow section 1.2.5 of the BAA and the classified addendum. The ability to leverage architecture concepts for the service pillars for both ASuW for Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) is of interest.

17. The described approach to ASW was a specific set of components, tactics, and deployment strategies. Are we free and/or encouraged to work with alternate or additional components, tactics, or deployment strategies?

A: Refer to sections 1.2.3.1 and 1.2.3.2 of the BAA classified addendum, which identify innovation opportunities within the identified construct.

Programmatic

18. The cost inversion metric can be interpreted in multiple ways. Can you provide a formula and/or example for how you would like us to deal with capital and operational costs, and what assets and platforms are covered?

A: Section 1.3 of the BAA classified addendum provides the cost ratio that should be used when calculating cost exchange from blue to red.

19. Is $45 million for just the base period or for both the base and the option?

A: $45 million is for the full phase 2 program – both phase 2A and phase 2b.

20. Why isn’t there a tactics workshop in evolution 1?

A: The schedule provided is notional. There may be a tactics workshop in evolution 1, depending upon the proposed wave structure.

21. Should proposers indicate the type of contract? Is there an advantage of proposing one type of contract over another?

A: Refer to sections 3 through 8 of the BAA for contract-related questions.

22. Will a list of industry day contacts and attendees be released?

A: No.

23. Will you mix and match capabilities from multiple proposers to encourage new teams post-selection?

A: Refer to sections 3 through 8 of the BAA for contract-related questions.

24. Are the mission scenario and CONOPS classified and, if so, should proposals be classified?

A: Refer to section 4.2 of the BAA and security classification guide (SCG) on the classified CD for classification questions.

25. Waves are standalone, fully priced entities. Are the fully priced entities only applicable to TA3? Or do they apply to all three TAs?

A: Yes, the standalone wave pricing applies to TA3. TA1 and TA2 should be priced for the duration of the base period.

26. Do overhead costs, in particular security for labs, need to be broken up per wave?

A: Section 1.2.5.3.3 of the BAA states, “Proposers should propose each wave as a standalone, fully priced item, including program management, security, and other support function costs.”

27. At CDMaST Phase 2 Industry Day, it was stated that there would be no investment in developing and integrating payloads as part of the Phase 2 effort. Instead, surrogates would be used whenever possible to demonstrate the desired capability while minimizing program costs. Would DARPA be willing to consider payload development/integration efforts outside of CDMaST Phase 2 (advanced design concepts, detailed design, build/test, etc.) that could be used in future CDMaST Phase 2 demos or as part of other related DARPA demonstrations? If so, what method should industry utilize to propose payload development opportunities?

A: The Performer should identify what risks need to be retired through experimentation and attempt to obtain the necessary hardware through the most efficient means possible. If appropriate existing assets or surrogates are not available or are cost prohibitive, Phase II could include modifying and integrating payloads.

28. The travel table has two trips of 2-week duration associated with wave 1. Should that be one trip or two separate 1-week trips?

A: In section 6.2.1 of the BAA, the ‘Duration’ column refers to the duration per trip. Therefore, section 6.2.1 shows four separate 2-week trips to San Diego, CA, one for the operational experiment in each wave.

29. The travel table does not list experimentation / demonstration planning meetings. Will the

Government coordinate working with Navy ranges for those, or should we cost out additional travel supporting experimentation / demonstration planning meetings with Navy range personnel?

A: The Government will work with ranges to coordinate testing. However, the Performer should identify their plan for executing the experimentation campaign including travel and meeting requirements. Performers should clearly identify their assumptions regarding responsibilities and attendance and provide costing to support their plan.

30. In the supplemental material provided, the Testbed Overview, Section 1.2.1 says “BMC2 is the primary System Under Test (SUT) for CDMaST efforts.” This is not mentioned explicitly in the BAA, nor the classified addendum, as a primary focus or a deliverable. Are there plans to revise the BAA on this point or should we propose toward BAA focus areas and tasks as written?

A. The BAA alone governs focus areas, tasks, and deliverables for CDMaST Phase 2. All supplemental information, including the referenced Testbed Overview, was provided for guidance and understanding. No changes to the BAA are planned.

Administrative

31. In the classified addendum, should the 3rd bullet on page 6 read, “…automatic target recognition…” instead of “…automatic target…”?

A: Yes.

32. In the classified addendum, should the first metric have a single asterisk (*) instead of two asterisks

A: Yes.