CTSO INC1 Industry Charts Final_PAO328-21.pptx
PPTX presentation 4 MB Posted
- Attached to
- CTSO Increment 1 Industry Day
- Solicitation number
- W15QKN-21-Z-0H3L
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Non-Disclosure and Non-Use Agreement- Increment 1 19APR2021.doc | DOC document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
(U) Close Terrain Shaping Obstacles Increment 1 Industry Day
27 April 2021 Mr. Jonathan Silva INC1 Project Officer
(973) 724-4908 jonathan.n.silva.civ@mail.mil
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release: distribution unlimited. PAO# 328-21 4/23/2021
Intent is to add additional context and inform CTSO Increment 1 Program Information & solicit input on Contracting approach, Technology challenges and Test Implications
(U) Rules of Engagement Please mute your line if you are not speaking Raise your hand or message in chat if you have a question or want to speak Questions may be asked during the main presentation or during the individual break out sessions Desire is to record the discussion pending Legal Guidance Formal responses are due 2 weeks after Industry Day
(T) 14 May 2021
Industry Day Agenda – 27 Apr 2021
| Time | Topic | Presenter |
| 1230 – 1300 | Technical Support (if needed) | |
| 1300 – 1320 | Welcome, Introductions, and Industry Day Purpose | J Silva |
COL Hoff LTC Cuthbertson
| 1320 – 1345 | User Community Perspective | B Jones |
| 1345 – 1400 | Acquisition Strategy | J Silva |
| 1400 – 1420 | Contract Strategy | M Ziatyk |
| 1420 – 1445 | C5 Requirements | L Owens |
| 1445 – 1510 | Nett Warrior System Overview | P Meyer |
| 1510 – 1530 | Common Anti-Vehicle Munition (CAVM) Requirements | E Barker |
| 1530 – 1545 | Test Community Perspective | J Cook |
| 1545 – 1600 | Questions | J Silva |
| 1600 – 1630 | Summary / Closing | J Silva |
| 28 Apr 2021 | One-on-One Sessions | J Silva |
Breakout Sessions for registered vendors will take place on 28 April 2021 as detailed on Special Notice
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements Test Community Perspective Summary and Conclusion
Agenda
(U) Welcome and Introductions State of the Project – COL Hoff (PM CCS) State of the Product – LTC Cuthbertson (PdM TSO) Combat Armaments and Protection Systems SAVO Branch Chief TAC2 Branch Chief (Interim) XM204 Increment 1 Top Attack
JPEO
Armaments and Ammunition Combat Ammunition Systems Close Combat Systems
Maneuver Ammunition Systems Joint Services
Demolitions and Countermeasures Terrain Shaping Obstacles
Don’t need to brief org chart. It’s just a visual.
Jon to welcome participants and lay out how the day will be conducted.
Jon to lead introductions (Make sure someone is recording attendance.).
Jon to introduce COL Hoff and let him say a few words.
Jon to introduce LTC Cuthbertson and let him say a few words.
Next slide
Project Manager Close Combat Systems
Provide dominant and innovative lethal and protective capabilities for the Joint Warfighter through acquisition excellence
“On Every Mission”
Product Manager LTC Isaac Cuthbertson
Manager, Technology Management Division John Esposito
Business Division Manager Anita Polesky
Chief, Product Support Fred Willecke
Director, Program Integration & International Division Gary Barber
Project Manager
COL
Russell Hoff
Deputy PM Joe Pelino
Product Director Demolitions & Countermeasures Product Director Combat Armaments & Protection Systems Product Manager Terrain Shaping Obstacles Deputy PdM Ken Heider
Asst Product Manager(s) MAJ Frankie Jackson CPT Trey Bishop Branch Chiefs Spider & SAVO: Sean Stevens TSO: Eli Vainchenker Product Director David Millette
Deputy PD Don Palathinkal
Product Director Steve Bielamowicz
Deputy PD Tim Healy
Team Leads Shoulder Launched: Phillyp Lawson Grenades: Hugh MacMillan Protection Systems: Derek DeReiter Asst Product Manager Vacant Branch Chiefs Pyrotechnics: Harvard Yuen Demolitions: Tim Healy
Asst Product Manager Vacant G&PS Branch Chief Tinesha Nicholas
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
Army Modernization Strategy and Impacts
| Supports multiple Army key modernization initiatives: |
| A CAVM based CTSO Inc 1 munition fields integrated into the scheme of maneuver and fires improves the effectiveness of long-range precision fires, next generation combat vehicles, and Soldier lethality. |
| Enables key Army modernization initiatives by accomplishing: |
| A robust lethal obstacle capability deters threats from seizing land that US forces will defend. CAVM based CTSO provides a combat multiplier required to successfully fight and win against a near-peer enemy. Complex obstacles slow, turn, and canalize enemy formations creating exposed targets and massed vehicle concentrations. |
| Accomplishes the following tasks: |
| A CAVM based CTSO will be a policy compliant, rapidly emplaced, close directed obstacle. CAVM based CTSO munitions will report their status and location via the remote-control station (RCS) to mission command systems enabling a common operating picture of all munition fields via the unified network Army Tactical Network. |
MSR
EA Dog
CLOSE AREA
CTSO Common Remote Control Station Directed Obstacle CTSO Top Attack / Bottom Attack
The CAVM based CTSO capability is the first of a family of directed, situational, and protective obstacle capabilities that utilizes an intuitive suite of human-in-the loop, cyber security compliant, automated planning and remote control systems. CTSO remote control system (RCS) operators load CTSO top attack (TA) and bottom attack (BA) munition systems with encrypted COMSEC for secure C2 during operation. Engineers emplace top & bottom attack munitions by hand or with vehicle assistance to create disrupt, fix, turn and block obstacles. Operators remotely control CAVM CTSO munition fields from safer stand off distances to create effective tactical TA & BA obstacles as effective combat multipliers in the combined arms, MDO fight.
Common Anti-Vehicular Munitions (CAVM) Based Close Terrain Shaping Obstacle (CTSO) OV-1 v3 CTSO Communications
Attack Position
Proposed Operational Concept
Situational Obstacle Protective Obstacle
Army Modernization Strategy User Requirements
| Type | Title |
| DC 1 | System Survivability |
| DC 2 | Sustainment |
| DC 3 | Compatibility of Common AV Munitions with Future Delivery Methods |
| DC 4 | Top Attack (TA) Anti-Vehicle (AV) Obstacle Capability |
| DC 5 | Bottom Attack (BA) Anti-Vehicle (AV) Obstacle Capability |
| DC 6 | CTSO Field Breach Resistance |
| DC 7 | Obstacle Emplacement |
| DC 8 | Obstacle Command and Control (C2) |
| DC 9 | Satellite Communication with Tactical Command and Control Systems |
| DC 10 | System Training |
| DC 11 | Mission Reliability |
| DC 12 | Maintainability |
| DC 13 | Design Life |
Agenda
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
Past Administration’s Landmine Policy & Position on Ottawa Treaty Ottawa Treaty:
Bans the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention or transfer of anti-personnel landmines (APL) Defines APL as a mine designed to explode by the presence, proximity, or contact of a person that will incapacitate, injure, or kill one or more persons Excludes AV landmines and allows anti-handling devices to hinder clearance US is not a signatory to the Ottawa Treaty, but is still subject to obligations under Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Amended Mine Protocol TSO efforts in POM 23 are focused on the development of CAVM that can leveraged for use at all operational ranges to replace the current capabilities provided by the aging inventory of scatterable mine systems. TSO efforts are not impacted by Ottawa
| Decision Point 1 | Top Attack (TA) | |
| Increment 1 | Bottom Attack (BA) | |
| Increment 2 | Full Network Capability (FNC) |
Increment 3
| Acquisition, Requirements & Resourcing community agree to pursue Increment 1 as CAVM based Top Attack (TA) with C2 | |
| Acquisition community will receive decisional guidance to begin Program Initiation preparations and to execute Contracting Activities | Common Anti-Vehicle Munition (CAVM) for Close with considerations/mitigations for Mid and Deep delivery |
Dispenser Launcher Module (DLM) Remote Control Station (RCS) for Command and Control (C2) Terrain Shaping Obstacles Management System (MS) planning tool Authoritative Safety Information Common Anti-Vehicle Munition (CAVM) for Close, with considerations for Mid and Deep delivery Bottom Attack Dispenser Launcher Module (DLM) Leverages Increment 1 RCS for C2 and MS planning tool Adds Mission Command to Top Attack and Bottom Attack Dispenser Launcher Modules
Acquisition Strategy BLUF: CTSO Program is using an MTA Authority with an Incremental Approach to deliver Capability
Acquisition Strategy Priority for Rapid Prototyping Phase is to qualify a UMR product that meets Increment 1 Requirements INC1 Other Transaction Agreement will include additional lines of effort during years 4 & 5 INC1 Other Transaction Agreement includes specific Contract Line Item Numbers that allow U.S. Government flexibility to:
Resource qualification for possible transition to a Program of Record Resource Mission Command Integration
Agenda
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
Contract Strategy and Timeline Competitive solicitation for execution of one (1) Stand Alone Other Transaction Agreement under 10 U.S.C. 2371b Awardee must meet Non-traditional Defense Contractor/Small Business/Resource Share requirement Cost Plus Fixed Fee award Best Value evaluation approach 5-year period of performance Follow-on production award may be sought based on the successful nature of the prototype under a Stand Alone OTA award
| 4QFY21 | 1QFY22 | 2QFY22 | ||||||
| July | Aug | Sept | Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar |
Solicitation Release Proposal Submission (45 days) Award Decision Notification Stand Alone OTA Execution Solicitation Release: August 2021
Proposal Submission (45 days): September 2021
Award Decision Notification: November/December 2021
Stand Alone OTA Execution: January 2022 Contract Strategy and Timeline *This schedule is subject to change
Agenda
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
Proposed Inc 1 C5 Requirements
| Communications |
| Shall be capable of two-way communications. |
| Shall be capable of commanding the CTSO system up to 5 km line-of-sight (LOS) from the operator. |
| The communication design shall consider future increments of CTSO. |
| Establishment and Re-establishment of Communications and C2 |
| The CTSO system shall establish communications and C2 with a minimum of 95% of the DLMs in the field within 20 minutes. |
| The CTSO system shall re-establish communications and C2 with a DLM if communications are lost. |
| The CTSO system shall report the loss of communications if unable to establish or re-establish communications after 20 minutes. |
| The CTSO system shall execute received commands within 3 seconds. |
| The CTSO System shall execute a command and provide confirmation within 60 seconds. |
Proposed Inc 1 C5 Requirements
| Remote Control Station (RCS) User Interface |
| The RCS shall be capable of providing status information for at least 12 fields. |
| 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 compatible on the Nett Warrior End User Device (EUD). |
| The RCS shall be capable of displaying the emplaced the components on a map. |
| Span of Control |
| The RCS shall be capable of command and control of at least 12 fields. |
| Operations |
| 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 system shall have the ability to plan the obstacle deployment and emplacement on an existing fielded platform. |
Proposed Inc 1 C5 Requirements
| Safety |
| A device shall display authoritative safety information with a less than 1 in 1 million probability of false display of safe to the RCS operator. |
| Cyber Security |
| The CTSO system shall use two-way secure communications commensurate with the data security classification. |
Common Anti-Vehicular Munition (CAVM)
| CAVM Based CTSO Abbreviated Capability Development Document (A-CDD) States: |
| CAVM based CTSO will provide the Joint Force with a directed obstacle capability employed by hand that uses CAVM suitable for delivery by multiple means at close, mid, and deep ranges |
| CTSO TA and BA AV munition design shall consider compatibility with delivery systems to include 155mm tube artillery, developmental Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF), as future payloads for the next generation combat vehicle (NGCV) cross-functional team (CFT) remote control vehicle (RCV) ground platforms, and for current and future vertical lift (FVL) CFT and for fixed wing platforms |
| CAVM Requirements Approach |
| Intent is to address munition commonality in the Increment 1 Statement of Work (SOW) rather than the System Requirements Document |
| SOW will require contractor to develop Size, Weight and Power (SWaP) allocations for future MTSO/DTSO deliverable munition |
| Increment 1 system subcomponents will be assessed against the allocations |
| All Increment 1 system subcomponents must trace to MTSO/DTSO allocations |
Implementation of MTSO/DTSO SWaP into Increment 1 hardware to greatest extent possible Full analysis required for system subcomponents that will not address MTSO/DTSO SWaP in Increment 1 hardware
Planned Requirements Approach
| Middle TSO / Deep TSO Delivery Constraints |
| Multiple activities underway to identify specific future delivery platforms |
| Current requirements approach is based on assumption of 155mm artillery delivery |
| Proposed CAVM concept based on Increment 1 design must address physical integration into M864 carrier and survivability in line with the Army extended range requirements |
Planned Requirements Approach Subcomponent Compatibility
| Component | Hardware meets SWaP and Survivability | Hardware meets SWaP | Growth Path Analysis | |
| 1 | Top Attack Dispenser Platform/DLM | T | ||
| 1.1 | Dispenser Mechanical Structure | T | ||
| 1.1.1 | Deployment deceleration/stabilization | T | ||
| 1.1.2 | Dispenser Ground Stabilization | T | ||
| 1.2 | Top Attack Munition | O | T | |
| 1.2.1 | Projectile Body | O | T | |
| 1.2.2 | Projectile Launch/Propulsion Mechanism | O | T | |
| 1.2.3 | Warhead | O | T | |
| 1.2.4 | Electronics Assembly | O | T | |
| 1.2.4.1 | Sensor Seeker Module | O | T | |
| 1.2.4.2 | Communications to DLM | O | O | T |
| 1.2.4.3 | Orientation Module | O | O | T |
| 1.2.4.4 | ESAD | O | O | T |
| 1.2.4.5 | Power | O | O | T |
| 1.3 | Power | O | O | T |
| 1.4 | Sensors | O | T | |
| 1.5 | Electronics | O | T | |
| 1.6 | Communications | O | T |
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
INC 1 Test Coordination Government and Contractor will need to begin coordination of test activities during Contractor DT process Coordination of test events for Cyber, Safety, Packaging, and Reliability will be critical to optimizing program schedule Government and Contractor cooperative events need to be incorporated appropriately Soldier Touch Points will be conducted to meet Army needs and obtain soldier feedback Cyber Test process needs to begin during Contractor DT Other resources for testing Sensor Week Participation
CTSO INC 1 Critical Test Areas
| Safety | Live Fire & Operational Testing |
| ATEC Safety Series |
Sequential Transportation Test Series Environmental Test Series Electromagnetic Environments Effects (E3) Test Series Other Test Series Testing for UMR effort will be tailored to the environment targeted by the UMR DOT&E Oversight for both LF and OT A detailed combination of physical testing meshed with M&S capabilities Can both be tailored for UMR but will only be done so as part of a plan for the overall project to get to its ultimate end goal DOT&E & ATEC will evaluate the system on lethality performance in UMR
| Cyber | Other Test Areas |
| DOT&E Oversight |
Army requires the complete evaluation of Cybersecurity regardless of program acquisition strategy Six phases of Cybersecurity T&E must be addressed through Test & Program Planning For UMR phases may be combined but they require significant justification & often completion of initial phases of the test series to justify them. Packaging & Hazard Classification POP Testing for shipping containers Hazard Classification testing for Final Hazard Classification Interim Hazard Class can be obtained during UMR depending on the item and & its configuration with an expectation of future FHC planning being in place Army Boards Army Fuze Safety Review Board – Required for UMR or FMR Army Energetic Materials Qualification Board – Required for UMR or FMR Army Insensitive Munitions Board – Required to be briefed for UMR, Certification required for FMR
Welcome / Introductions User Community Perspective Acquisition Strategy Contract Strategy Increment 1 Requirements
Summary / Conclusion Questions?
Thank you for your interest image15.jpeg image16.jpeg image17.jpeg image18.jpeg image19.jpeg image8.jpeg image9.jpeg image10.jpeg image11.jpeg image12.jpeg image13.jpeg image14.jpeg image27.png image28.png image29.png image30.png image31.png image32.png image20.PNG image21.png image22.png image23.png image24.png image25.png image26.png image33.emf image34.emf image35.png image1.jpeg image2.png image3.png image4.png image5.png image7.png image6.jpeg
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .