Second Sources Sought Notice INC1 Top Attack - 3-30-21 vs3.docx

SOURCES SOUGHT

FOR

TOP ATTACK (INCREMENT 1)

CLOSE TERRAIN SHAPING OBSTACLES

INTRODUCTION

On behalf of the Project Manager Close Combat Systems (PM CCS), the Department of the Army, U.S. Contracting Command – New Jersey (CCNJ), Picatinny Arsenal, NJ is issuing this sources sought notice to identify vendors with potential solutions for a lethal, command and control capable Terrain Shaping Obstacle (TSO) Top Attack prototype. This effort is the first increment (Increment 1) of the Close Terrain Shaping Obstacle (CTSO) Program. PM-CCS will commence development of CTSO’s first increment in 2QFY22. The other increments, Bottom Attack (Increment 2) and Full Network Capability (Increment 3), will follow Increment 1 in 3QFY25 and 3QFY26, respectively. Due to the incremental acquisition approach, solutions to Increment 1 should allow growth for the future increments of CTSO. Responses from vendors that partially meet the desired capabilities of Increment 1 are acceptable in response to this sources sought notice.

DISCLAIMER

THIS SOURCES SOUGHT IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) TO BE SUBMITTED. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SOLICITATION AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A COMMITMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONSES IN ANY FORM ARE NOT OFFERS AND THE GOVERNMENT IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO AWARD A CONTRACT AS A RESULT OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT. NO FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO PAY FOR PREPARATION OF RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT. ANY INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS TO THIS SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE/QUESTIONAIRE IS STRICTLY VOLUNTARY.

ITEM DESCRIPTION

PM CCS is executing a sources sought notice in order to identify vendors with solutions for a hand-emplaced top attack terrain shaping capability for a directed close tactical obstacle. The top attack system is envisioned to consist of the Common Anti-Vehicle Munition (CAVM) top attack munition, the top attack dispenser launcher module (DLM), the Remote Control Station (RCS), and an obstacle planning capability. The CAVM top attack munition shall have improved lethality over previous generations of top attack munitions (M93 Hornet and XM204). Once emplaced in a tactical obstacle, the system shall be capable of operating in a standby mode for up to six months with the ability to transition to a target engagement mode for 30 days. The Remote Control Station (RCS) shall be capable of controlling at least 12 fields (150 m by 250 m) located up to 5 km away from the RCS. The system shall also be capable of displaying SAFE and UNSAFE authoritative safety information to the operator controlling the fields with a 1 in 1 million probability of false display of safe. In addition, the hand-emplaced top attack system shall be capable of rapid emplacement. Also, emplaced DLMs shall be recoverable and reusable prior to the firing of their top attack munitions. To enable future operational needs, the top attack Common Anti-Vehicle Munition (CAVM) design should consider compatibility with delivery platforms such as 155mm tube artillery, developmental Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF), robotic ground vehicle platforms, current and future vertical lift (FVL) aircraft, unmanned aerial aircraft, and fixed wing aircraft. To facilitate growth to Full Network Capability Increment 3, the Increment 1 system design needs to consider the capability to communicate with and allow command and control from Army Tactical Command and Control (C2) Systems with minimal modifications to Increment 1 hardware in Increment 3.

REQUIRED TOP ATTACK INCREMENT 1 CAPABILITIES

· The top attack system shall provide a lethal obstacle capability sufficient to shape terrain by disrupting enemy maneuver and defeating threat forces.

· The top attack system shall be compliant with US Landmine Policy issued by the DoD.

· The top attack system shall be capable of autonomously engaging threat vehicles.

· The top attack system shall engage enemy vehicles with a 50 m minimum standoff with sufficient threat of damage or destruction.

· Emplaced systems shall be capable of operating in a standby mode for up to six months with the ability to transition to a pre-armed mode for 30 days.

· The top attack system shall have the ability to plan the obstacle deployment and emplacement on an existing fielded platform.

· The top attack system shall be capable of communicating obstacle deployment and emplacement information from an existing platform to the top attack system’s remote control station (RCS).

· The RCS and the top attack DLMs in the field shall be capable of two-way communications.

· The top attack system shall be capable of remotely controlling at least 12 fields (150 m by 250 m).

· The RCS shall be capable of controlling top attack DLMs located up to 5 km line-of-sight (LOS) from the RCS.

· The RCS User Interface shall be a plug-in on the Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK) application.

· The RCS plug-in for ATAK shall be capable of operating on the Nett Warrior System End User Device (EUD).

· Data transmission shall implement NSA approved encryption.

· A device shall display authoritative safety information with a 1 in 1 million probability of false display of safe to the RCS operator.

· The system shall maximize commonality with future delivery methods to include artillery, missile, rotary wing, and fixed wing aircraft in support of a long-term Common Anti-Vehicular Munitions (CAVM) acquisition approach.

· The top attack system subcomponents should adhere to a form factor that allows for future integration into 155mm artillery delivery to the maximum extent possible.

· The top attack munition subcomponents that cannot be directly leveraged to support future 155mm artillery delivery shall be addressed via analysis to outline a growth path to achieving the required form factor.

· The top attack munition subcomponents shall address survivability for 155mm delivery to the extent possible and where not feasible to implement, shall address via analysis to indicate a growth path to achieving the requirement.

· The top attack system shall be capable of rapid emplacement, recoverability, and reusability.

· The emplacement of the top attack system in the field shall not require more than two (2) soldiers (84lbs) per item (MIL-STD-1472).

· The system should accommodate Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) where feasible.

GROWTH TO INCREMENT 3 FULL NETWORK CAPABILITIES

· Compatibility with Army Tactical Command & Control (C2) Systems with communication ranges up to 300 km to and from the obstacle

· Compatibility with the Army Common Operating Environment

· The CTSO system shall be able to exchange C2/SA messages with Army Tactical C2 Systems.

OTHER INFORMATION

· The prototype system shall have a desired Technology Readiness Level (TRL) greater than TRL 4 at contract award and a maturation to a TRL 7 within two (2) years.

· The system developer shall have the opportunity to refine their design at a Soldier Touch Point in the first year after contract award.

· A prototype system shall be developed and delivered within two (2) years after contract award.

· The system developer shall demonstrate the Top Attack Increment 1 during qualification tests between the second (2nd) and third (3rd) years after contract award.

· The system developer shall be capable of producing the first article of Top Attack Increment 1 within four (4) years after contract award.

SURVEY/SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE SUBMISSION DETAILS

The intent of this survey/sources sought notice is to identify potential sources that can address the capabilities listed in this survey and to identify the maturity of those solutions. The goal of collecting this information is to help shape the US Government’s Close Terrain Shaping Obstacle (CTSO) Program requirements. If your organization has the capacity and resources (technical, manufacturing, quality certification, personnel, etc.) to meet some or all of the required capabilities provided within Pages 2 and 3 of this document, please answer the questionnaire on the following page. If your organization does not currently have the capacity and/or resources to meet some of the capabilities, then your organization is encouraged to describe its plans to acquire the capacity and resources to address those required capabilities.

Submissions in response to this survey/sources sought notice, including any capabilities statement, shall be due by 3:00PM Eastern time on 14 May 2021 to the CCNJ Contracting Officer, Morgan Ziatyk, and Contract Specialist, Edward Gorsky, in either Microsoft Word or Portable Document Format (PDF), via email at morgan.f.ziatyk.civ@mail.mil and edward.a.gorsky.civ@mail.mil. The submission shall reference “Sources Sought for Top Attack, Close Terrain Shaping Obstacle” in the subject line of the e-mail and on all enclosed documents. The Government WILL NOT return information and materials submitted in response to this request. DO NOT SUBMIT CLASSIFIED MATERIAL.

For continuation sheets, please reference “Sources Sought for Top Attack (Increment 1) Close Terrain Shaping Obstacle” and the survey question number on each continuation sheet. Also, please identify any proprietary information submitted. All information submitted in response to this sources sought notice is competition sensitive and therefore protected accordingly.

As a reminder, this survey/sources sought notice is not a procurement action; it is an inquiry on potential solutions to a Government requirement. There will be no compensation by the Government for any submitted response.

The Government is planning to conduct a virtual Industry Day event, which is tentatively scheduled for 27-29 April 2021. The first day will be a general session and the remaining two days will be reserved for one on one sessions between the Government and industry attendees. Industry Day details will be provided in a separate notice that will be posted on Beta.SAM.gov.

Information requested from industry:

Respondent/Organization Information

a. Name: ________________________________________________________

b. Mailing Address: ________________________________________________________

c. Website: ________________________________________________________

d. CAGE (commercial and government entity) Code (if any): _________________________________________________________________

e. Business Designation: ________________________________________

Respondent/Organization Point of Contact

a. Name: ________________________________________________________

b. Title: ________________________________________________________

c. Company Responsibility/Position: ________________________________________________________

d. Telephone/Fax Numbers: ________________________________________________________

e. E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________

Please answer the questions below to the best of your ability. Your answers will help shape the Government’s requirements for CTSO.

1) Given the Increment 1 capabilities described earlier, describe how your top attack solution meets these capabilities.

2) Are there any limitations or constraints that these capabilities impose which the Government should reevaluate as part of the Government’s requirement development process? Explain.

3) Can you identify the perceived cost drivers in developing the Increment 1 prototype? What do you foresee as the major cost drivers in production?

4) How does your top attack solution lend itself to the goal of CAVM?

5) How does your RCS solution meet the Government’s desire for a RCS ATAK plug-in on the Nett Warrior EUD?

6) How do you plan to meet the Government’s desire to display safety authoritative information to the operator?

7) How does your Command, Control, Computers, Communications and Cyber (C5) solution allow for the growth of future increments of CTSO?

8) With respect to power, how does your solution plan to meet the capability to operate in a standby mode for up to six months and be able to transition to a pre-armed mode for 30 days?

9) What is the impact of a 20-year storage life requirement on your solution?

10) How do you plan to implement the requirement for NSA approved encryption?

11) What software development processes does your company practice?

5 | Page