RPRD SOFTWARE Q_A Final.docx

RPRD SOFTWARE Q&A SUMMARIZED

1. Question: Does the autonomy solution include a simulation capability for development, allowing industry partners to simulate desired operational concepts?

Answer: Existing model-based simulation capabilities are used in development and test the software, although the type is a mix of virtual and hardware. This effort is relatively new and the government is interested in developing out the Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) to create a virtual model platform of future small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS) for training, testing and faster integration pipeline of subsystems, though without specific requirements yet.

2. Question: Which specific autopilot types (e.g., PX4, Autopilot) are planned to be supported?

Answer: Currently there are no specific autopilot types that are being targeted currently but do interface with MAVLink. Eventually, the Air Force wants to define a standard interface protocol that meets the needs of the autopilot and autonomy integrations.

3. Question: Given the need for different integration methods and command protocols for various autopilots (e.g., for closed-loop vision-based navigation in GPS-denied environments), are there any specific autopilots already instantiated that can be targeted initially for development?

Answer: No, there are no specific autopilots already instantiated but does interface with MAVLink. Eventually, Eventually, the Air Force wants to define a standard interface protocol that meets the needs of the autopilot and autonomy integrations.

4. Question: Will interfacing specs for the Air Force's mission/autonomy control software be published, and are there existing Group 1-3 UAS compatible with it?

Answer: The Air Force specs will be published for the software stack that is to be integrated into sUAS platform via SDK. Software stack integration is in progress, and there are only early development and so existing compatible sUAS yet.

5. Question: What origin restrictions will be placed on sUAS parts/components given to the diverse global supply chain, particularly for Group 1 sUAS?

Answer: Expect original restrictions based on the POTUS executive order promoting the US drone market. The supply chain will be limited, excluding certain sources to bolster the domestic industry and align with DoD "Buy American" initiatives.

6. Question: Do the original restrictions extend to software, firmware, and flight control software with open-source components from various global sources, or is the focus on domestically developed solutions?

Answer: The focus is on domestically developed solutions as much as possible. Acceptable international partners are those listed in the "Green Book."

7. Question: Will the government team provide concepts of operation (CONOPS) to guide industry partners on how to perform mission sets and utilize capabilities in specific ways?

Answer: Yes, when a solicitation is released, it will be accompanied by a CONOPS to help industry partners understand the government's objectives. Requirements will likely be stated as a statement of objectives, seeking a capability to perform specific tasks in certain environments, while leaving room for innovation within American sourcing constraints.

8. Question: Can you provide a rough order of magnitude regarding the modified mission engineering mission threads and baseline integration related to LINK 16 and other protocols, to help bound the scope of potential solutions and ensure compatibility with existing collaborative machine planning efforts?

Answer: When specific requirements are released, the government intends to provide Interface Control Documents (ICDs), government architecture models, and government reference models covering communication, software, and other aspects. While there are no current funding or specific requirements on the horizon, the government anticipates seeking a wide range of capabilities, including mission planning systems and "fire and forget" systems, likely for ISR missions with the ability to recover vehicles and conduct mission debriefs.

9. Question: Considering the potential for battlefield recovery, what are the criteria and plans for anti-tamper (AT) measures, and will these be integrated into the SAMI specifications or handled separately? The questioner also mentions participation in the ATEA anti-tamper program.

Answer: When a requirement is released, AT criteria will be included. Recognizing the risk of battlefield recovery, protecting hardware and software is a priority. The specific AT requirements and levels will likely be included in a future statement of objectives but will be discreet.

10. Question: Will there be any teaming documents, portals, or forums established to facilitate collaboration and team formation for this effort?

Answer: No, there are currently no teaming documents, portals, or forums planned. They haven't reached that stage yet.

11. Question: Will the requirement include integrating systems into C2, or will the government focus on acquiring specs, production software/hardware, and then handle the integration internally?

Answer: Initially, integration is the responsibility of the platform manufacturer with integrating the Air Force software stack SDK which includes some of the C2 interface. However, this might change based on the Air Force's development, and the government may potentially handle or seek integration services in the future.

12. Question: Is this autonomy effort coordinated with other ongoing efforts within SOCOM, particularly AFSOC?

Answer: No, this is a separate, independent effort focused on future systems and rapid prototyping. It's specific to the Air Force Lifecycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson AFB and is unrelated to other known DoD engagements. The current goal is to establish the contract vehicle, with no specific requirements yet.

13. Question: What is the anticipated timeline for issuing solicitations?

Answer: The timeline is uncertain, contingent on when the government team becomes available. Progress is currently delayed, and there is no specific date yet. More information on the other four statements of objectives will be released when the government team returns.

14. Question: Have you considered coordinating with DARPA, specifically regarding potential overlap with their REMA (Rapid Exponential Missionized Autonomy) program?

Answer: No, we have not yet tagged up with DARPA but are aware that sUAS is a focus across DoD and other agencies, and they plan to do so soon. We have already started developing relationships with partners like the Army (e.g., through the recent T-REX event).

15. Question: What are the weather survivability requirements (temperature, atmospheric conditions) and what are the detection/observation requirements?

Answer: Focus on pre- and transit weather conditions, not post-mission. Pre-mission includes storage and accessibility. Transit considers overland/water terrain, ground/air launch (possibly common launch tube). Specific environmental requirements will be detailed later with CONOPS/SOO/SOW.

16. Question: What performance requirements will be considered for collaboration with other systems, including speed, altitude, and other 3D aspects?

Answer: Currently, the software stack is still in development including the autonomy stack, as this development effort is complete, we will have better clarity in the performance requirements necessary for the mission’s success, but we are not there yet. Further details will be determined when the government team reconvenes after the shutdown. However, a wide range of possibilities are being considered, including communication and collaboration between various systems (swarm systems, smaller systems enabling other systems, etc.). More information will be provided in a follow-up, likely after the government team reconvenes.

17. Question: Do you plan to participate in the SAWC (Special Air Warfare Conference) at Fort Walton Beach in February?

Answer: Currently, there are no plans to participate due to the government team's absence and travel restrictions. However, once the team returns, they plan to attend as many events as possible for market research and networking.

18. Question: Which office is developing a Government Reference Architecture (GRA) for sUAS, like those seen in PEO Fighters and Advanced Aircraft?

Answer: The WII office is developing the sUAS government reference model (GRM) to fit within the architecture.

19. Question: How will this effort interface with the Army?

Answer: While we are aware that other services have similar requirements and have leveraged their market research, there is currently no planned coordination with other services on a system. We plan to attend events like T-REX and Navy exercises and will capitalize on similar requirements or solutions when possible.