Simulator Industry Day Q and A.docx

AIR PMO Group 1 and Group 2 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems Industry Day Questions and Answers

Question 1. Does Air PMO anticipate the follow-on RFI and any resulting competitive procurement being full and open, or is a small business set-aside (e.g., SDVOSB, 8(a)) under consideration for any portion of this requirement?

Response to Question 1. The Government has not yet determined the acquisition strategy, to include whether any future procurement will be a full and open competition or set aside for small businesses (e.g., SDVOSB, 8(a)). As indicated in the Special Notice, this announcement is "for planning and market research purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation or commitment by the Government." This Special Notice is being utilized "IAW FAR Part 10 Market Research to determine the availability and capability of industry... and to inform potential future acquisition strategies." The information gathered during this "first phase of Air PMO's market research effort" will be used to support "future capability development, acquisition planning, and procurement strategies." Any future acquisition decisions, including set-aside determinations, will be based on the analysis of all market research results.

Question 2. For companies without direct Group 1/2 UAS training/simulation past performance but with relevant adjacent capabilities (AI/ML, systems integration, cloud, DevSecOps), is teaming with a prime encouraged for this effort, and will the Government provide guidance on documenting teaming arrangements during the RFI phase?

Response to Question 2. The Government encourages participation from all interested parties, including those possessing relevant adjacent capabilities. Decisions regarding teaming, partnerships, or subcontracting arrangements are entirely at the discretion of industry. Please refer to the Special Notice for information regarding the overall market research process.

Question 3. Is Air PMO anticipating a single integrated training/simulation system award, or is the Government open to a modular, best-of-breed approach integrating solutions from multiple vendors?

Response to Question 3. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy or contracting structure. However, as outlined in the "System Integration and Interoperability" capability areas of interest, the Government is specifically seeking to understand industry capabilities regarding "open architecture solutions," "modular system design," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals." This market research is being utilized "IAW FAR Part 10... to inform potential future acquisition strategies."

Question 4. What level of NDAA/SRA compliance documentation, if any, will be expected at the RFI white paper stage versus later phases of this market research effort?

Response to Question 4. Please refer to the "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" section of the Special Notice, which outlines the Government’s interest in these areas. Specifically, in the anticipated RFI white paper phase, the Government is "interested in understanding the current NDAA compliance status of commercially available solutions, as well as any planned pathways to achieve compliance where applicable" regarding applicable provisions (including NDAA FY20 Section 848, FY23 Section 817, FY19 Section 889, and the American Security Drone Act of 2023). To support this, "interested parties may, at their discretion, leverage the Navy's Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) framework to document system components, supply chain attributes, and applicable security controls." However, "use of the SRA framework and associated tools is not required... and is provided for awareness and informational purposes only." Doing so may "facilitate review of compliance artifacts during future market research activities," such as potential subsequent technical demonstrations.

Question 5. Does Air PMO anticipate future market research or acquisition activities that would allow participation by companies developing critical UAS subsystems (such as propulsion systems, electronic speed controllers, sensors, or other aircraft components), or are future activities expected to be limited to complete UAS platforms and training/simulation providers?

Response to Question 5. Please refer to the Special Notice, "Introduction" section, which describes the market research scope as "Group 1 and Group 2 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems.” To support ongoing market research in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 10, the Air PMO is interested in understanding commercially available capabilities and is willing to accept information and responses that extend beyond the current scope to include Group 3 UAS Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems; as well as other unmanned training domains (such as ground vehicles, surface vessels, or other UxS domains). However, physical aircraft and other robotic system components (such as propulsion systems, electronic speed controllers, and physical sensors) remain outside the scope of this effort.

Question 6. From the standpoint of mission simulators, are you interested in assisted debrief capabilities, such as scoring and analysis?

Response to Question 6. Yes. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" capability areas of interest in the Special Notice. Under this section, the Government is specifically seeking information regarding "student performance tracking," "automated grading and evaluation," and "after-action review and debrief capabilities."

Question 7. Does the Government envision a common, platform-agnostic training, simulation, and qualification-management architecture capable of supporting multiple Group 1 and Group 2 UAS, with platform-specific aircraft models and training content integrated as modular components?

Response to Question 7. Please refer to the "Background" and "System Integration and Interoperability" sections of the Special Notice. The Government's objective is to "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms." To that end, the "System Integration and Interoperability" capability areas of interest explicitly seek information on "support for multiple aircraft types," "open architecture solutions," "future aircraft integration," "Government-configurable aircraft libraries," and "modular system design."

Question 8. Does the Government anticipate Training and Qualification Management being evaluated as a separable capability area in subsequent market research or acquisition activities, or does the Government currently envision an end-to-end solution encompassing aircraft-specific simulation, mission planning, mission rehearsal, and qualification management?

Response to Question 8. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy, evaluation criteria, or contracting structure. The current "first phase of Air PMO's market research effort" is assessing capabilities across all five areas: "Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems." Information gathered throughout this effort "may be used to support future capability development, acquisition planning, evaluation of commercially available solutions, and procurement strategies."

Question 9. For platform-specific simulation and training development, what Government- or OEM-furnished technical data does the Government anticipate making available to industry, such as aircraft models, performance data, interface-control information, payload characteristics, emergency procedures, training syllabi, or qualification standards?

Response to Question 9. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet determined what specific Government-Furnished Information (GFI), technical data, or OEM data will be provided for any potential future procurement. However, under the "System Integration and Interoperability" capability areas of interest, the Government is evaluating "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals."

Question 10. How does the Government anticipate defining and validating the level of simulation fidelity required for familiarization, procedural training, mission rehearsal, emergency-procedure training, proficiency assessment, and qualification credit?

Response to Question 10. Please refer to the "Unmanned Aircraft Simulation and Flight Fidelity" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet defined or finalized specific validation standards or fidelity levels. However, as outlined in the "Unmanned Aircraft Simulation and Flight Fidelity" capability areas of interest, the Government is seeking information regarding "Unmanned Aircraft-specific flight models," "realistic flight characteristics and handling qualities," "Unmanned Aircraft performance modeling," "payload effects on aircraft performance," and "environmental and weather effects" to safely practice "emergency procedures," "lost-link procedures," and "degraded system operations."

Question 11. How important is the Government's ability to rapidly onboard a new Group 1 or Group 2 UAS into the training, simulation, and qualification environment without procuring an entirely new platform-specific training system?

Response to Question 11. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government is interested in training solutions that support scalability. As outlined in the "Background" section, simulation-based training is intended to "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms." To assess this, the "System Integration and Interoperability" capability areas of interest specifically seek information regarding "support for multiple aircraft types," "open architecture solutions," "future aircraft integration," "Government-configurable aircraft libraries," and "modular system design."

Question 12. Does the Government envision mission rehearsal capabilities incorporating high-fidelity modeling of the RF/spectrum environment, including communications coverage, interference, jamming, and GPS-denied/degraded conditions along planned UAS routes?

Response to Question 12. Please refer to the "Contested and Tactical Environment Training" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Yes. Under the "Contested and Tactical Environment Training" capability areas of interest, the Government is specifically seeking information on industry's capabilities to simulate "GPS-denied operations," "GPS-degraded operations," "electronic warfare effects," and "communications degradation."

Question 13. Would the Government consider modular RF/digital-environment simulation capabilities that integrate with third-party UAS mission-planning, Ground Control Station, or training systems through an open architecture?

Response to Question 13. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Under this section, the Government is seeking information regarding "open architecture solutions," "modular system design," "integration with operational Ground Control Stations (GCS)," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals."

Question 14. What is being done to create a Joint SUAS Simulation program?

Response to Question 14. Please refer to the "Introduction" section of the Special Notice. This market research is being conducted specifically by the "Aircraft Project Management Office (AIR PMO), under the Portfolio Acquisition Executive Robotic Autonomous Systems (PAE RAS)" and NAVAIR to support program-specific requirements. Broader joint-service program integration or DoD-wide simulation programs are outside the scope of this specific Special Notice.

Question 15. With the establishment of the DRPM and the proliferation of the same SUAS platforms across the DoW services, a joint program would save significant funding and allow for more ROI. Is there potential for the DRPM to trump the services and use the DAWG to fund SAUS simulation at a DoW level?

Response to Question 15. Please refer to the "Introduction" section of the Special Notice. Broader Department of War (DoW) organizational authorities, joint-service funding decisions, and the roles of the DRPM or DAWG are outside the scope of this Special Notice. This announcement is issued by the "Aircraft Project Management Office (AIR PMO), under the Portfolio Acquisition Executive Robotic Autonomous Systems (PAE RAS)" and is limited to "commercially available and emerging Group 1 and Group 2 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems."

Question 16. Does AIR PMO envision the future capability as a blended training architecture in which simulation-based instruction progresses into live-aircraft qualification, mission-specific training, sustainment training, and TTP development using representative or operational Group 1 and Group 2 UAS?

Response to Question 16. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "Training and Qualification Management" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government seeks to understand how simulation-based training can "enhance operator proficiency, improve training availability, increase training throughput, reduce operational risk, and provide realistic Mission Planning and Mission Rehearsal capabilities." While simulation allows operators to safely practice "degraded system behaviors that may be impractical, unsafe, or cost-prohibitive to execute using live aircraft," the Government seeks information regarding "initial operator qualification training," "refresher and sustainment training," and "student training records and qualification management" to "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms."

Question 17. Does AIR PMO currently envision one contractor providing the complete training, simulation, mission-rehearsal, and qualification-management capability, or is the Government considering a modular architecture in which specialized capabilities can be integrated under a common training framework?

Response to Question 17. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy or contracting structure. However, the Government explicitly seeks information regarding "open architecture solutions," "modular system design," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals" to support "multiple aircraft types."

Question 18. To what extent does AIR PMO anticipate live-aircraft operations being incorporated into initial qualification, advanced training, sustainment, mission rehearsal, and technical demonstrations associated with this effort?

Response to Question 18. Please refer to the "Background" and "Market Research Process" sections of the Special Notice. This market research effort is focused on simulation-based training to "reduce operational impacts associated with range availability, airspace restrictions... and logistical constraints." Live-aircraft flight operations are not being procured under this effort. However, "following the Government's review of submitted white papers, selected vendors may be invited to participate in technical demonstrations to further assess the maturity, suitability, and applicability of proposed solutions."

Question 19. Is AIR PMO's objective to establish a training architecture capable of supporting a changing inventory of Group 1 and Group 2 UAS, rather than developing independent training solutions around individual aircraft platforms?

Response to Question 19. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Yes. The Government's objective is to "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms." To assess this, the Government specifically seeks information regarding "support for multiple aircraft types," "open architecture solutions," "future aircraft integration," "Government-configurable aircraft libraries," and "modular system design."

Question 20. What level of aircraft-specific fidelity does AIR PMO anticipate for the eventual training environment?

Response to Question 20. Please refer to the "Unmanned Aircraft Simulation and Flight Fidelity" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet defined or finalized specific validation standards or fidelity levels. However, the Government is seeking information regarding "Unmanned Aircraft-specific flight models," "realistic flight characteristics and handling qualities," "Unmanned Aircraft performance modeling," "payload effects on aircraft performance," and "environmental and weather effects."

Question 21. Is the primary objective operator proficiency and tactical decision-making, or does the Government anticipate validated modeling of aircraft performance, payload effects, environmental conditions, degraded-system behavior, and aircraft-specific handling characteristics?

Response to Question 21. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "Unmanned Aircraft Simulation and Flight Fidelity" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Both objectives are of interest. The simulation-based training is intended to "enhance operator proficiency... and provide realistic Mission Planning and Mission Rehearsal capabilities." Additionally, the Government explicitly seeks information regarding "Unmanned Aircraft-specific flight models," "realistic flight characteristics," "Unmanned Aircraft performance modeling," "payload effects on aircraft performance," "environmental and weather effects," "emergency procedure training," "lost-link procedures," and "degraded system operations."

Question 22. Does AIR PMO envision the future training capability supporting continuous incorporation of emerging UAS TTPs, threat observations, lessons learned, and changes in operational aircraft configuration?

Response to Question 22. Please refer to the "Introduction" section, as well as the "System Integration and Interoperability," "Instructor and Evaluation Capability," and "Terrain and Synthetic Environment" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Yes. The Government is seeking to "better understand commercially available technologies, emerging capabilities, and industry trends that may inform future capability development, requirements refinement, and acquisition planning." The Government is exploring "future aircraft integration," "Government-configurable aircraft libraries," "scenario creation and modification," and "user-generated scenarios."

Question 23. If so, how important will curriculum and scenario-update speed be in evaluating potential solutions?

Response to Question 23. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" and "Instructor and Evaluation Capability" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy or evaluation criteria. However, to understand industry's ability to support scalable and adaptable training, the Government is seeking information regarding "training syllabus management," "Instructor Operator Station (IOS)," and "scenario creation and modification."

Question 24. For vendors selected following the anticipated white-paper review, does AIR PMO currently envision technical demonstrations focused primarily on simulation-system functionality, or could demonstrations evaluate an end-to-end training progression incorporating simulation, mission planning, live aircraft, tactical employment, instructor evaluation, and after-action review?

Response to Question 24. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" and "Industry Day" sections of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized the specific guidelines or evaluation criteria for the technical demonstration phase. However, "following the Government's review of submitted white papers, selected vendors may be invited to participate in technical demonstrations to further assess the maturity, suitability, and applicability of proposed solutions." As noted in response to Question 18, live-aircraft operations are outside the scope of this simulation-focused effort.

Question 25. Can this effort post the industry day use information and data from a CRADA looking to take place through the DAF.

Response to Question 25. Please refer to the "Disclaimer" and "Market Research Process" sections of the Special Notice. Under this market research effort, "any information submitted by respondents is strictly voluntary." Regarding follow-on RFI white papers, the Government anticipates using information submitted directly in response to the RFI to support "future capability development, acquisition planning, evaluation of commercially available solutions, and procurement strategies." Information or data derived from external mechanisms, such as a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the Department of the Air Force (DAF), is outside the scope of this specific Special Notice.

Question 26. Will the RFI have an open topic, for technologies that don't cleanly fall within one of the topics outlined in the preliminary list of areas of interest?

Response to Question 26. Please refer to the "Capability Areas of Interest" and "Industry Day" sections of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized the structure of the anticipated RFI. However, the capability areas of interest "are provided solely for market research purposes... They do not constitute final requirements or imply any future procurement strategy." The RFI is intended to "obtain additional information regarding commercially available capabilities and assess industry's ability to satisfy potential future Government requirements" for Group 1 and Group 2 UAS training and simulation.

Question 27. The Notice groups training, mission planning, mission rehearsal, simulation, and qualification management as one capability set. Does Air PMO anticipate acquiring these as a single integrated system, or as separable capabilities that a systems integrator would tie together across more than one vendor?

Response to Question 27. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy or contracting structure. However, the Government is seeking information regarding "open architecture solutions," "modular system design," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals."

Question 28. For qualification management specifically, does Air PMO expect the eventual capability to hold the authoritative operator qualification record, or to feed an existing Navy system of record such as Fleet Training Management and Planning System? If the second, is a defined interface specification available for planning purposes?

Response to Question 28. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet determined the authoritative data-hosting architecture or specific interface requirements for integrating with existing Navy systems of record. However, under this section, the Government is seeking information regarding "student performance tracking" and "student training records and qualification management."

Question 29. What learning-content interoperability standards does Air PMO expect the training capability to support, for example SCORM 2004, xAPI with a learning record store, or cmi5? Is the Government intending to retain rights to courseware developed under a resulting effort?

Response to Question 29. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Specific learning-content interoperability standards and data rights provisions have not been finalized. However, under this section, the Government is seeking information regarding "open architecture solutions" and "modular system design."

Question 30. Does the Government intend a Section 508 conformance requirement, and if so will Air PMO evaluate conformance at proposal through an Accessibility Conformance Report, or at delivery through Government testing?

Response to Question 30. Please refer to the "Disclaimer" and "Introduction" sections of the Special Notice. Conformance and evaluation criteria, including Section 508 accessibility requirements, have not yet been determined. This announcement is "for planning and market research purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation or commitment by the Government."

Question 31. The Notice raises NDAA compliance and the Small UAS Reusable Architecture framework. Where a vendor's scope is training, courseware, and qualification data, does Air PMO expect an SRA self-assessment, and at what system boundary?

Response to Question 31. Please refer to the Special Notice, "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" section. The Government is seeking information on the voluntary use of the SRA framework to "document system components". However, the execution of training, courseware development, and associated training qualification data are outside the scope of this effort.

Question 32. What hosting impact level does Air PMO anticipate for the training and qualification data, and does the Government anticipate the capability being delivered as a Government-hosted system, a vendor-hosted service, or both?

Response to Question 32. Please refer to the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized data hosting impact levels or deployment architecture (Government-hosted versus vendor-hosted). However, under this section, the Government is seeking information regarding "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals" and "modular system design."

Question 33. Does Air PMO have a target for training throughput or time-to-qualification that industry should design against, or is that figure still being developed?

Response to Question 33. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "Training and Qualification Management" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Specific throughput and time-to-qualification design targets have not been finalized. However, the Government's objective is to "increase training throughput" and "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms." Under this capability area, the Government is seeking information regarding "student training records and qualification management" and "training syllabus management."

Question 34. Will the anticipated Request for Information seeking industry white papers carry a page limit, a required outline, and a stated evaluation basis? A stated basis lets a small business decide early whether to invest in a full submission.

Response to Question 34. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" section of the Special Notice. The specific layout, page limits, required outlines, and evaluation criteria for the subsequent RFI have not yet been finalized. These instructions will be provided in the formal RFI package when released. The RFI is intended to "obtain additional information regarding commercially available capabilities and assess industry's ability to satisfy potential future Government requirements."

Question 35. Will Air PMO consider capability submissions from firms addressing one portion of the scope, such as courseware and qualification management, without a simulation hardware offering?

Response to Question 35. Please refer to the Special Notice, "Capability Areas of Interest" section. The Government is seeking information on individual "Training" or "Simulation" capability areas, and respondents may submit capability information addressing "one or more of the capability areas." However, courseware development is outside the scope of this market research effort.

Question 36. Does Air PMO anticipate competing the follow-on acquisition on an existing multiple-award vehicle, and if so which one?

Response to Question 36. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy or selected a specific contracting vehicle. Information gathered throughout this "market research effort may be used to support future capability development, acquisition planning, evaluation of commercially available solutions, and procurement strategies."

Question 37. Does Air PMO anticipate a single acquisition covering all five capability groupings (training/qualification management, simulation/flight fidelity, mission planning/rehearsal, terrain/synthetic environment, instructor/evaluation), or separate procurements by capability area?

Response to Question 37. Please refer to the introductory paragraph of the "Capability Areas of Interest" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet determined the acquisition strategy, including whether capabilities will be acquired under a single contract or through separate procurements. However, the capability areas of interest "do not constitute final requirements or imply any future procurement strategy." To help inform this decision, the Government is seeking information regarding "modular system design" and "open architecture solutions."

Question 38. Is the Government's primary interest a Government-owned open-architecture training system, a commercial/COTS turnkey solution, or a hybrid, and does that preference vary by capability area?

Response to Question 38. Please refer to the "Introduction" and "Background" sections, as well as the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government's objective is to "better understand commercially available technologies, emerging capabilities, and industry trends." While specific system ownership or data rights models have not been finalized, the Government's capability areas of interest emphasize "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware," "open architecture solutions," and "modular system design" to "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms."

Question 39. Will the future effort be structured as a small-business set-aside, full-and-open, or through an existing contract vehicle (e.g., SeaPort-NxG, an OTA, or a training-systems IDIQ)?

Response to Question 39. Please refer to the "Disclaimer" and "Introduction" sections of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its acquisition strategy, including small business set-asides or specific contracting vehicles (such as SeaPort-NxG, OTAs, or IDIs). This announcement is "for planning and market research purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation or commitment by the Government." This effort is being conducted "IAW FAR Part 10 Market Research... to inform potential future acquisition strategies."

Question 40. What is the anticipated timeline from RFI/white-paper submission to any technical demonstration and to a potential solicitation?

Response to Question 40. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" and "Industry Day" sections of the Special Notice. A specific timeline for the release of an RFI, subsequent technical demonstrations, or a potential future solicitation has not been finalized. This "Industry Day represents the first phase of Air PMO's market research effort." Subsequent phases "are anticipated to include issuance of a Request for Information (RFI)... Government review of submitted white papers, and selected technical demonstrations." Final event details and follow-on timelines will be provided as an "amendment or attachment to this Special Notice" on SAM.gov.

Question 41. What evaluation weight, if any, does the Government expect to place on prior manned-platform training-system past performance versus UAS-specific experience?

Response to Question 41. Please refer to the "Introduction" and "Market Research Process" sections of the Special Notice. Evaluation criteria and past performance weights have not yet been determined. This Industry Day is "intended for representatives from industry with commercially available or emerging capabilities applicable to Group 1 and Group 2 UAS Training, Mission Planning, Mission Rehearsal, Simulation, and Qualification Management Systems." Information gathered throughout this effort "may be used to support future capability development, acquisition planning, evaluation of commercially available solutions, and procurement strategies."

Question 42. Roughly how many Group 1/Group 2 UAS platforms and variants are in scope, and are specific platforms already identified or expected to be Government-furnished?

Response to Question 42. Please refer to the "Background" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The specific number of platforms and variants has not been finalized, nor has the Government determined which elements will be Government-furnished. However, the system must "support standardized, repeatable, and scalable training across multiple UAS platforms." To assess this, the Government is seeking information regarding "support for multiple aircraft types," "Government-configurable aircraft libraries," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals."

Question 43. Which training standards, instructions, or syllabi (e.g., service-specific aircrew training manuals, AETC/CNAF-equivalent guidance) will govern operator qualification and currency for these UAS platforms?

Response to Question 43. Please refer to the Special Notice, Capability Areas of Interest section, Training and Qualification Management paragraph, and the "Initial operator qualification training," "Refresher and sustainment training," and "Training syllabus management" subparagraphs. The Government is seeking information on industry capabilities to support the training management functions detailed in those sections.

However, the specific governing instructions, service-specific aircrew training manuals, or command-specific qualification standards (e.g., AETC/CNAF guidance) are outside the scope of this market research effort.

Question 44. For qualification management, does the Government intend to use an existing Government training management system (e.g., a GTIMS-type system), or is a vendor-provided TMS/electronic gradebook and records solution desired?

Response to Question 44. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" and "System Integration and Interoperability" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet determined whether it will utilize an existing Government training management system or procure a vendor-provided solution. To inform this, the Government is seeking information regarding "student performance tracking," "student training records and qualification management," "automated grading and evaluation," "modular system design," and "open architecture solutions."

Question 45. What emergency-procedure and degraded-system scenarios are considered highest priority for Group 1/Group 2 operator training?

Response to Question 45. Please refer to the "Unmanned Aircraft Simulation and Flight Fidelity" and "Contested and Tactical Environment Training" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not prioritized specific emergency scenarios. However, the Government is seeking information on industry's capability to simulate "emergency procedure training," "lost-link procedures," "degraded system operations," "GPS-denied operations," "GPS-degraded operations," "electronic warfare effects," "communications degradation," and "adverse weather operations."

Question 46. What data rights posture does the Government expect (Government-purpose vs. unlimited rights) for software, flight models, and terrain/scenario databases?

Response to Question 46. Please refer to the "Market Research Process" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not yet finalized its data rights posture for software, flight models, or terrain databases. However, to support future flexibility, the Government is seeking information regarding "open architecture solutions" and "modular system design." Information gathered during this market research "may be used to support future capability development, acquisition planning, evaluation of commercially available solutions, and procurement strategies."

Question 47. What terrain/imagery source data (DTED, NGA products, satellite imagery) will be Government-furnished versus vendor-procured, and are there required correlation tolerances across visual/sensor/radar channels?

Response to Question 47. Please refer to the "Terrain and Synthetic Environment" and "Mission Planning and Mission Rehearsal" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not finalized the specific Government-Furnished Information (GFI) packages, source data, or technical correlation tolerances. However, the Government is seeking information on industry's ability to integrate "global terrain databases," "satellite imagery integration," "digital elevation models," and the "import and export of mission plans, geospatial data, and mapping products."

Question 48. Are urban and maritime synthetic environments in scope, and are there priority AORs or geographic areas the Government wants replicated for mission rehearsal?

Response to Question 48. Please refer to the "Terrain and Synthetic Environment" and "Mission Planning and Mission Rehearsal" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Yes, both urban and maritime environments are in scope. Under these sections, the Government is seeking information regarding "urban environments," "maritime environments," "custom training area generation," "Area of Responsibility (AOR) development," "user-generated scenarios," "real-world geographic mission rehearsal," and "operational environment replication." The Government has not prioritized specific geographic regions or AORs at this stage. Comment by Ivy, Kendrick J MSgt USMC AVIATION (USA): Good addition of maritime.

Question 49. Will future requirements mandate demonstrated NDAA compliance (FY2020 Sec. 848, FY2023 Sec. 817, FY2019 Sec. 889, and the American Security Drone Act) at proposal submission, and how will compliance be verified?

Response to Question 49. Please refer to the "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" section of the Special Notice. Specific verification and proposal submission requirements have not been finalized. However, "interested parties should be aware that future Government requirements may include compliance with applicable National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) provisions" including but not limited to NDAA FY20 Section 848, FY23 Section 817, FY19 Section 889, and the American Security Drone Act of 2023. At this market research stage, the Government is "interested in understanding the current NDAA compliance status of commercially available solutions, as well as any planned pathways to achieve compliance where applicable."

Question 50. Is use of the Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) framework expected to become a requirement, or will it remain optional for documenting compliance and supply-chain attributes?

Response to Question 50. Please refer to the "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" section of the Special Notice. The SRA framework is currently optional. "Use of the SRA framework and associated tools is not required for participation in this Industry Day and is provided for awareness and informational purposes only." Future procurement requirements have not been finalized. However, interested parties may leverage the SRA framework "at their discretion" to "document system components, supply chain attributes, and applicable security controls" which can "facilitate review of compliance artifacts during future market research activities."

Question 51. What is the anticipated security classification and hosting/accreditation posture (e.g., unclassified, CUI, RMF/ATO expectations) for the training systems and their data?

Response to Question 51. Please refer to the "Industry Day" and the "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" sections of the Special Notice. The Government has not finalized the security classification, data hosting, or Risk Management Framework (RMF)/Authority to Operate (ATO) accreditation posture for the eventual training systems. The upcoming Industry Day "will consist of an unclassified Government presentation." For documenting "applicable security controls," "interested parties may, at their discretion, leverage the Navy's Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) framework." Additionally, questions submitted by industry "shall not include proprietary, competition-sensitive, or Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)."

Question 52. For vendors without an existing NDA with the Government support contractors, what is the recommended process and timeline to establish one before the RFI/white-paper phase?

Response to Question 52. Please refer to the "Proprietary Information" section of the Special Notice. Government Support Contractors supporting this effort "have executed Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) with the Government that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of proprietary information obtained during this Industry Day and associated market research activities." Should a vendor require a separate NDA, "the vendor may submit its NDA, together with any associated instructions, to the points of contact identified in this notice for review" via email at FoSUAS_Industry_Day@us.navy.mil. Timelines for review will be determined upon receipt.

Question 53. Will the consolidated Q&A and Industry Day presentation materials be posted to SAM.gov after the event for firms unable to attend the virtual session?

Response to Question 53. Please refer to the "Industry Day" and "Proprietary Information" sections of the Special Notice. Yes. "Responses may be provided during the event or, as appropriate, published in a consolidated Question and Answer document on SAM.gov following the Industry Day." Follow-on information and presentation materials will be provided "through an amendment or attachment to this Special Notice," and "it is the respondent’s responsibility to monitor this site for the release of any follow-on information."

Question 54. Will the slides be provided via Sam.gov Response to Question 54. Please refer to the "Industry Day" and "Proprietary Information" sections of the Special Notice. Yes. Final event details, presentation materials, and follow-on information will be provided "through an amendment or attachment to this Special Notice" on SAM.gov. Interested parties are advised that "it is the respondent’s responsibility to monitor this site for the release of any follow-on information."

Question 55. What is the software plan in the future to track operators, training, qualification, designation, etc? Is AIR-PMO willing to fund a tool like M-SHARP to track this data?

Response to Question 55. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not finalized future software architecture plans or funding decisions regarding specific tools (such as M-SHARP) for tracking operator qualifications. However, under this section, the Government is seeking information regarding commercially available capabilities for "student performance tracking," "student training records and qualification management," and "training syllabus management."

Question 56. Can you confirm the industry slides will be released and if so through SAM.gov?

Response to Question 56. Please refer to the "Industry Day" and "Proprietary Information" sections of the Special Notice. Yes. Final event details and presentation materials will be made available "through an amendment or attachment to this Special Notice" on SAM.gov. Respondents are responsible for monitoring the site for any follow-on releases.

Question 57. For qualification management, does the Marine Corps want the system to automatically generate a score or proficiency assessment based on operator performance during a scenario, or should the system primarily capture the performance data for an instructor to review and grade?

Response to Question 57. Please refer to the "Training and Qualification Management" and "Instructor and Evaluation Capability" subsections under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Both automatic and instructor-led grading capabilities are of interest to the Government. Under these capability areas, the Government is seeking information regarding "student performance tracking," "automated grading and evaluation," "student training records and qualification management," "Instructor Operator Station (IOS)," "student monitoring," "instructor evaluation tools," and "real-time scenario control."

Question 58. How will proposed systems be evaluated, and what are the Government’s anticipated key performance parameters, evaluation criteria, and minimum threshold requirements for training effectiveness, simulation fidelity, interoperability, scalability, and qualification management?

Response to Question 58. Please refer to the "Disclaimer" section, the "Background" section, and the introductory paragraph of the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. Proposed systems will not be formally evaluated during this market research phase, and key performance parameters (KPPs) and threshold requirements have not been finalized. This "Industry Day announcement is for informational purposes only. This is not a Request for Proposal (RFP), Request for Information (RFI), or solicitation." The capability areas of interest "do not constitute final requirements or imply any future procurement strategy." They are provided to "gather information that may assist in refining future capability objectives, training requirements, and acquisition strategies."

Question 59. Will there be a CMMC Level requirements?

Response to Question 59. Please refer to the "NDAA Compliance and Small UAS Reusable Architecture (SRA) Awareness" section of the Special Notice. Specific Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) requirements have not been finalized for any potential future procurement. However, "future Government requirements may include compliance with applicable National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) provisions" and other security controls. Interested parties may leverage the SRA framework "at their discretion" to "document system components, supply chain attributes, and applicable security controls" which can "facilitate review of compliance artifacts during future market research activities."

Question 60. Does the government desire a government owned simulation architecture or are they open to a commercial simulation framework?

Response to Question 60. Please refer to the "Introduction" section and the "System Integration and Interoperability" subsection under the "Capability Areas of Interest" section of the Special Notice. The Government has not finalized its acquisition strategy, to include preferences for government-owned vs. commercial simulation frameworks. However, the Government "seeks to better understand commercially available technologies, emerging capabilities, and industry trends." Under this capability area, the Government is seeking information regarding "open architecture solutions," "modular system design," and "compatibility with commercially available and Government-furnished simulation hardware, controllers, and peripherals."

Question 61. Will these questions and answers be published? If so, where?

Response to Question 61. Please refer to the "Industry Day" and "Proprietary…