Transport Tranche 0 Draft RFP Q and As (Round 2).pdf

SDA-SN-20-0008 –

Transport Tranche 0 Q&A Round 2

Q22. The DRFP provides SWaP requirements for the BMC3. Will these SWaP requirements be replaced with processing requirements, or does this indicate a GFE unit will be provided for that functionality?

A22. SDA is not planning to provide processing requirements but will likely rewrite this section to provide proposers great flexibility. SDA would like the spacecraft to include some prototype advanced processing capability (e.g., GPUs, low-power FPGAs, or other technologies that provide a significant step forward in on-orbit capability) but does not want this to be a significant driver on the overall size, mass, power, or cost of the vehicle. While the peak power is expected to be significant, the processing can be expected to be confined to a pass over a relevant theater and therefore may not drive orbit average power drastically.

The BMC- and Custody-related experiments SDA is considering for Tranche 0 are yet to be defined, but the options considered to date include: fusing Tracking Layer measurements and 2-D tracks to 3-D tracks, fusing ground-provided sensor data to demonstrate on-board generation of targeting-quality tracks for time-sensitive targets, on-board generation of IBS and/or Link-16 message sets, on-orbit time determination using OISL ranging data, experimentation with dynamic networking, and demonstration of the CONOPS for deploying and updating BMC software across a pLEO constellation. The intent is for the BMC- and Custody-related experiments in Tranche 0 to be adapted to the capability of the platform.

Q23. SOW Page 42 (Appendix A, External Interf., Link-16, capability 4): Can you specify the link to be used between the tracking layer and the Group “B” SV? Group “B” specifies only 2 OISL specific to IN-Plane communication. This implies that Group A and Group B will not be linked via OISL, and Group B will not be linked to Tracking Layer

A23. Group A and B will be linked by the in plane OISLs as they will be in the same plane.

Group B would not be linked to out of plane satellites, such as the tracking layer. Group A would provide those links.

Q24. Are the final Group A/B orbital parameters to be specified by SDA or the bidder?

A24. The intent was for the platforms to be able to perform over the inclination range from 80- 100 deg. After award, SDA would, in concert with the selected performers, determine a common inclination for all of the SVs.

Q25. Attachment 1, Figure 1 indicates preferences on coverage (1800 km) performance for each link. What are the number of beams and minimal coverage requirement from each satellite for each link?

A25. Offerors are free to design their overall technical solutions as they see fit to ensure satisfaction of SDA requirements. SDA will then evaluate those designs based on the Evaluation

Criteria stated in Section M of the RFP. The Agency OV-1 should not be treated as a requirements chart.

Q26. The RFI states: “SDA recognizes that sufficient or "good enough" capabilities in the hands of warfighter sooner may be better than delivering the perfect solution too late”. With this in mind, would SDA be willing to consider a Software Defined Radio (SDR) hardware running a proprietary MIMO MANET waveform which is supports anti-jam, LPI, and LPD features today, and can receive over the air (OTA) firmware updates to support additional capabilities in the future?

A26. Offerors are free to design their overall technical solutions as they see fit to ensure satisfaction of SDA requirements. SDA will then evaluate those designs based on the Evaluation Criteria stated in Section M of the RFP. Note, however, that interoperability is a requirement, and it is unclear how proprietary networking approaches that are not shared among all of the performers would meet that requirement.

Q27. The figure at the top of Page 2 of Attachment 1 shows “≤ 10 deg/s” on a link between satellites in the “Data Transport” layer and the “Sensing – High Altitude” layer. Presumably this is describing that OISLs between these layers track in the presence of slew rates ≤ 10 deg/s. Is this a requirement? If so, we would think it should appear elsewhere, such as in Table 1.

A27. Offerors are free to design their overall technical solutions as they see fit to ensure satisfaction of SDA requirements. SDA will then evaluate those designs based on the Evaluation Criteria stated in Section M of the RFP. The Agency OV-1 should not be treated as a requirements chart.

Q28. Please clarify that "IBS" capability on the group-A SV refers to (a) sending/receiving IBS data from the BMC3 module and (b) transparently relaying IBS data across the Ka-band and O- ISL links?

A28. Each Transport Layer SV shall receive and transmit IBS messages over the intersatellite and space to ground links. Each spacecraft shall also be able to demodulate the received IBS messages and pass the demodulated message to the BMC3 module.

Q29. SDA is pursuing several technology demonstration/risk reduction paths via parallel pre-solicitation actions, namely, Transport Layer Optical Crosslink Risk Reduction Demonstration RFI and the NDSA STEC BAA with the intent to fund and demonstrate technologies in time to inform NDSA design trades and capabilities. Is it SDA’s expectation that successful demonstrations conducted in FY21 will be incorporated into the Tranche 0 spiral or in subsequent spirals? If so, will these technologies and/or data rights be government furnished or will commercial arrangements be required?

A29. Information from relevant SDA risk reduction activities made available to SDA with Unlimited and/or Government Purpose Data Rights will be furnished as appropriate.

Q30. In the section discussion Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS), the draft RFP states: “The Transport Layer SV shall provide a bent-pipe transport capability for IBS messages through Ka-band and optical links.” Is the SDA open to enabling ground nodes to temporarily join the mesh network to facilitate propagation of IBS loads? There would be inherent benefits in network performance using ground nodes as data relays themselves.

A30. Offerors are free to design their technical solutions as they see fit to ensure satisfaction of SDA requirements. SDA will then evaluate those designs based on the Evaluation Criteria stated in Section M of the RFP.

Q31. What is SDA’s view on Cyber Security scope/requirements for Tranche 0?

A31. SDA is working with OSD CIO and NSA to define cybersecurity requirements for Transport Tranche 0. These requirements will be included in the final RFP.

Q32. SOW, aPNT capability using Cross Link Ranging, Tech. Obj. 1: Is the intent of the capability to provide time tagged ranging measurement across the OISL to the ground or to also provide time tagged ranging measurements between the SV and MOT via OGSL?

A32. Time tagged range measurements shall include satellite to satellite measurements and satellite to ground measurements. Both sets of measurements shall be provided to BMC3 and to the ground.

Q33. Table 1 on page 15 of Attachment 1 states Acquisition times. These will be highly dependent on initial ephemeris uncertainty, which is not provided. While each bus vendor can be responsible for this value when acquiring a distant terminal hosted on his own bus, for inter-vendor links, an initial ephemeris uncertainty needs to be specified in order to determine whether this requirement can be met. Does SDA want to specify this value?

A33. SDA does not intend to specify a value for ephemeris knowledge. SDA has required that each SV include a GPS receiver. It is anticipated that with a space validated GPS solution the ephemeris knowledge for neighboring SVs, when the range is factored, should provide sufficient information to enable acquisition. Proposers are free to assume a level of ephemeris knowledge consistent with GPS performance, and SDA will evaluate the technical solution proposed per the criteria identified in Section M.

Q34. At typical "on site" Industry Days, an important element is networking amongst companies to establish potential suppliers and partners. Will the government be providing an Industry Day attendee list to assist with this critical interaction?

A34. SDA has provided opt-out instructions to all registered Industry Day attendees and will share vendor contact information in accordance with those instructions.

Q35. Will SDA provide Industry Day attendee contact information to foster industry collaboration?

A35. SDA has provided opt-out instructions to all registered Industry Day attendees and will share vendor contact information in accordance with those instructions.

Q36. Will SDA consider increasing the page limit for Volume I to allow for industry to provide more detailed response to the SOW?

A36. SDA believes sufficient page limits have been provided but is accepting specific feedback from industry until 5:00 PM EST, 17 April 2020

Q37. Can industry propose alternative contract types if the contract type provides a greater value to SDA?

A37. SDA believes that a Firm Fixed Price provides the best value to the Government but is accepting specific feedback from industry until 5:00 PM EST, 17 April 2020.