Questions_and_Answers_4.pdf

SBIR 2017-1

Questions and Answers #4 November 29, 2016

REMINDER: DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS IS THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2016 AT

2:00 PM EASTERN. NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER

THE DEADLINE

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, could you clarify “docking station” requirement mentioned in the solicitation?

A: A docking station is the “home base” for the vessel. Associated with a buoy, the docking station would allow the mobile vessel to dock with associated benefits, analogous to the space station or the robot vacuum cleaner. Benefits would be such as docking after the vessel completes programmed transects, if a storm was predicted to “secure” the vessel, while docked continue taking data using the payloads in its compartments at a fixed position, using the docking to upload / transmit data, etc.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, is the mobile coastal monitor desired to be tethered to another NOAA structure/vessel or is the intention to have a payload tethered to the coastal monitor?

A: The mobile coastal monitor (vessel) is not tethered, it is an autonomous surface, programmable vehicle. The vehicle will have compartments where the payloads would be installed, a plug-n-play design.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, would utilizing Automatic Identification System information (AIS) suffice for collision avoidance?

A: The innovative nature of this program enables the successful proposer the freedom to design appropriate subsystems. There is a plethora of information on autonomous underwater vehicle collision avoidance systems, with the notable difference is that the mobile coastal monitor is a surface vessel. The primary function of the vessel is to house optical sensors to be used to calibrate / validate optical (visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum) satellite instruments.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, what endurance between service intervals is NOAA looking for?

A: Not specified, since the payloads within the vessel compartments are unknown. The primary function of the vessel is to house optical sensors to be used to calibrate / validate optical (visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum) satellite instruments. Additional sensors / sampling subsystems utilizing the plug-n-play compartments would have varying needs for service.

Service intervals may be a function of biofouling, which would be related to the water masses the vessel is deployed.

joan.e.clarkston Highlight

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, what maximum sea state survivability is required?

A: The sea state is an important factor, especially since the mobile coastal monitor is a surface vessel, however the degree of turbulence is not specified to enable the freedom for innovation.

As possible examples, it is envisioned that the docking station would provide a modest level of protection, the programmable vessel could be sent to a safe harbor and upon approach of higher degree of sea state, the vessel could be retrieved.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, is there a minimum transit speed desired?

A: No, there isn’t a minimum speed of the vessel.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, in complying with the “designed for ease of maintenance and retrieval” requirement, is the vehicle to be man-portable? If so, how many personnel for launch/retrieval?

A: The vessel will probably be too large to be man-portable and it shouldn’t be needed to be retrieved very frequently, being programmable it could navigate to a dock or shipyard. The sentence was added to be a reminder during the innovative design for lift points and possible retrieval from a boat/ship, etc.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, what is the required size for the largest payload module envisioned?

A: A good question, the compartmentalized, plug-n-play design would enable expandable external sub-systems. Such as a large module would attach to the mobile coastal monitor at a compartment and then would have its own support system.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, does the 24-hour endurance threshold need to be met by continuous operation, or can the UAS perform autonomous land, refuel, and take-off during the 24 hour mission?

A: The mobile coastal monitor was envisioned as an ocean surface vehicle, with some properties of an autonomous underwater vehicle, not an unmanned aerial vehicle. A solar powered UAS could fulfill many of the desired functions, with the notable exception of taking water samples.

Q: On Subtopic 8.2.1, if refueling/recharging would be acceptable, would NOAA consider a solution with an autonomous UAS/USV team, in which the UAS operates from the deck of the USV and performs repeated launch, flight, landing, and refuel/recharge autonomously?

A: The mobile coastal monitor was not envisioned as an unmanned aerial vehicle, rather an ocean surface vehicle with multi-function capability not requiring routine intervention.

In order to ensure fair competition, all communication must be routed through the CO to ensure all potential offerors receive the same information.