25CS001_SPECNOTE_0005_Q and As.pdf

Q&A – Responses for MKLD CSO N0016426SCA005 28 May 2026

Is the expectation that the MKLD is at TRL6/7 prior to the start of the contract/development process, or is TRL 6/7 certification part of the delivery?

TRL achievement by final delivery of system.

Does the government desire us to propose a "family of systems" to meet the requirements of the MKLD Nano, Micro, and Mega or only to address one of the echelon 0 systems categories?

The intent is a singular solution that met one of the echelon 0 system categories while meeting the other requirements on the AOI. However, GOV would likely welcome a “family of systems” to evaluate if proposed.

The AOI describes solutions as low-cost FPV UAS. Does the CEP requirement contemplate an FPV platform achieving sub-1.5-meter accuracy through operator-guided terminal flight to target, or through the release of a guided modular payload from a recoverable platform?

The answer materially affects payload and airframe design scope across all three echelons.

Either option is valid as long as it’s recoverable.

The AOI states "MKLD weaponized payloads shall have CEP under 1.5 meters." Please confirm whether CEP is measured at the payload impact point relative to the target, or at the platform's position at the moment of release. For unguided payloads, environmental factors will affect impact accuracy independent of platform positioning.

Confirming that GOV considers CEP measured at the payload impact point relative to the target.

Does a minimally viable submission need to meet the threshold, while the ultimate end user desire is the objective distance?

Correct – this is the intended interpretation.

Is there a standalone CSO document for N0016425SC001, or is the text listed in SAM.gov considered the CSO itself?

Yes, there is a standalone posting. The formal AOI can be found on SAM.gov by scrolling to the bottom of the CSO.

Before we submit a formal proposal, I would appreciate feedback on whether a white paper proposing a standalone modular payload integration layer—absent a specific OEM platform or munition—would satisfy the requirements of this AOI. We want to ensure our approach aligns with the Navy's objectives without submitting a proposal that is deemed non-responsive.

For any white papers considered partial, Government observes the right to combine solutions to create a full solution the meets the desired requirements.

If you intend to post the Q&A and need a more formal question to respond to I understand, just let me know and I can rework.

Can confirm that Q&A to be posted to ensure fair, open competition.

Also can you confirm that all munitions must be release from the drones prior to detonation and the drones must return to base/or commanded location after detonation? That was not that clear.

As the GOV is seeking a recoverable solution, requesting solutions that release prior to detonation and return to designated location.