JCO Industry Day Demonstration 6 Transcript.pdf

JCO Industry Day Demonstration 6-20241009_104933- Meeting Recording

October 9, 2024, 2:49PM 1h 53m 21s

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 9:55 Good morning, team.

This is major Mehler from the JCO. It looks like we have a few still dialing in, so we'll hold tight for a little bit before we get started. Thank you.

Oren Poleg - Sentrycs 10:42 31st.

Morning on the 30th.

5010.

Push.

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 11:50 OK, Team USA. Major Miller again. It looks like we do still have personnel dialing in, but that's OK.

They'll they'll get caught up with everything that we're doing, so we we won't belabor this any further.

So we'll go ahead and get started here.

I guess a few opening remarks. So as you can see on this current slide, we would appreciate if each individual who has joined, if you can please type into the chat.

Your your company name and your primary POC information. If you have multiple people.

That are on this call from your company.

No need for everyone to do it, just one individual from each company, whoever the primary may be. Please type in your company name and your POC information. That will allow us to continue our correspondence beyond today and allows to capture who all was in attendance additionally.

Please keep your mics muted.

We, as the JCO, will be the only ones doing the talking today any.

Correspondence that needs to occur between us and.

Any industry that's on will occur via the chat, and that's gonna be primarily to serve the purposes of asking questions.

So so we will not.

We will do a live Q&A at the end of this, but it will not be verbal from any participants from industry.

We ask that any industry participants, if you do have a question that that comes up during the course of this briefing or during the Q&A portion, please type that question.

Into the chat and what we'll do is we'll read the questions off.

Sequentially and provide response to those.

As.

Is suitable. Additionally, please keep your.

Video off that way we cannot decrease the bandwidth that this is taking to ensure that the quantity of personnel that may be on the call today are actually able to join.

And Haisen was there one additional thing that you reminded me of recording?

We're recording this and yeah.

It was gonna be posted for any participant or vendor that didn't have the opportunity to join us. So that way they have the opportunity to have the same answers that everybody will receive.

Like, yeah.

So we we do intend to post an update to sam.gov that captures the questions and answers that we discussed today and.

Will also input a copy of the slide deck as well.

Onto that update to sam.gov.

Also, with that being said, Chris, let's go to the next slide.

Greetings, ladies and gentlemen.

Again, I am a major.

Matt Miller, the JC OS technology demonstrations branch chief we'd like to thank you for joining us today in the the great work that you've done.

At least you know those who have worked with us in the past.

For providing many rapid solutions that have allowed me as the DoD to to maintain pace with the continuously emerging small UAS threat on behalf of Major General Stewart, the director of the JCO.

And attendant general rash, the director of Rickdo. We look forward to discussing today how you can help us with our next focus area for smarter kind of small US capability of the focus for our next demonstration in FY25.

Slide present.

So already introduced myself, we already talked about our remaining muted. So the way that this engagement will proceed, we will first go over this slide deck. We expect that may take upwards of 30 minutes for our initial briefing.

Following that, we will address.

We'll do the Q&A portion. We will first address questions that we received ahead of time.

About 15 of those. So we'll we'll answer those first.

And then we'll open it up to live Q&A.

Again, please type your questions into the chat.

That's how we're going to answer them.

Everyone will remain on mute and if we do have people coming off mute we we will mute you on our end.

And if it's a question, please, please put that in the chat.

You can see on the 4th bullet on this slide when you are putting your question in the chat, please state what company you are and then state your question.

We stated previously anything further that we may not address today that that's posted in the chat. We'll we'll take a look at that and add that to our total list of questions and we'll provide an answer and we'll publish that to sam.gov if if we do.

Have repeated hot mikes for many individual that may be that may result in being removed from the engagement and just one thing on on.

When we say inappropriate questions, just just please refrain from asking anything about acquisition sensitive topic such as OTA or details for those who are familiar with the RFP.

It's a five phase process. The later phases include potential for OTA contract award at the at the back end of the demo.

So we we won't be discussing that specifically today.

That's that's for follow on engagements as as appropriate.

So don't, don't ask about those for today's engagement.

Next slide, Chris.

So this briefing and this engagement will be conducted at the unclassified level.

We will share as much information as we can, but there there may be some information at this point that we are not able to divulge, particularly threat related information and how we are generating our scenarios for the demonstration.

Certain levels of that information will be provided to the participating vendors after vendors are selected for the demonstration.

As for the schedule for this event, you can see the general timeline.

But just to reiterate, maybe about 30 minutes for this briefing.

After that, we'll go into Q&A before we close out about an hour and 45 minutes from now.

Next slide, Chris.

So with that being said.

I will turn it over to Lieutenant Colonel promotable.

You the acquisition and Technology division chief for opening remarks over to you, Sir.

Yu, Raymond K LTC USARMY HQDA ASA ALT (USA) 18:54

OK.

Thanks Matt.

Matt, can you hear me?

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 18:57 Yeah. So we had.

Yu, Raymond K LTC USARMY HQDA ASA ALT (USA) 18:59 Hey, hey, good morning, everybody.

Thank you for joining us this morning.

As Matt said, I am Lieutenant Colonel Ray Yu. The acquisition and Technology Division chief within the JCO.

So I just wanted to do a quick recap of how we got here, right?

So the UAS threat was rapidly evolving and the services were independently purchasing a mix of available government and commercial solutions.

Through like the operational needs process.

And then the DoD recognized these efforts.

We're not leading to a viable long term solution because in terms of acquisition, training or sustainment, we weren't synchronized across the joint force.

So as a result of the growing threat and these challenges in November of 2019, the Secretary of Defense designated the Secretary of the Army as the DoD executive agent or kind of small UAS.

In that capacity.

Secretary of the Army, Ben stood up the JCO. Delete and direct on our small UAS efforts across the BOD.

And then the Army senior leadership also directed the rapid capabilities and Critical Technologies Office DIRECTO to operate as the lead material and acquisition element in support of the JCO. So in broad terms, the JCO is responsible for working closely with the services to establish how the DoD will.

Conduct joint operations with the required kind of small UAS policy, Ontario solutions.

Doctrine.

And training to provide joint integrated capabilities that are needed to counter current and future small UAS threats.

So I'm very fortunate to have this opportunity to lead the acquisition and technology division within the JCO.

Providing that direct acquisition support to our director, Major General Stuart.

So back to the purpose of today's industry day.

So my team, in close coordination and support from the different services is planning and executing.

The JCO demo six our next annual event where we want you all to show us your solutions that help solve our capability gap focus areas.

We've heard from numerous partners that they are are ready to show us what counter small UAS capabilities they've developed or improved using their I rad.

Hayden Gamarra 21:33 You.

Yu, Raymond K LTC USARMY HQDA ASA ALT (USA) 21:34 So here's a chance we want to provide that opportunity as soon as possible and intend to provide future recurring opportunities to industry on an annual basis.

Each with its own focus area.

So Demo 6 is scheduled to be April of 25 and we will focus on solutions.

For short range defeat within a contested electromagnetic environment, I say again.

So Demo 6 is focused will be short range defeat within a contested electromagnetic environment. We will provide a JCO standardized test range and threat UAS.

With instrumentation to obtain truth data that the services will leverage to a development and procurement decision making moving forward.

You want you all to demonstrate in capabilities and limitations of each of your solutions to detect, track, identify and defeat UAS across successive scenarios with increasing difficulty.

And it will be held at Yuma Proving Ground.

Following the demo, we will also evaluate the business case of each participant and at the conclusion of Demo 6, the GCO will make recommendations to the services and determine the path forward to the best solution set to provide for additional assessments by the different services.

Thanks again for all your interest and participation with your partnership. We will successfully get after this problem set and I'll now turn it back over to proceed with the rest of today's agenda.

Thank you.

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 23:30 You, Sir, are Chris.

Score the next slide, please.

So the glide path that we have established as you can see here, so all white papers are due no later than 25 October and that's specified in the request for White paper post.

Jolinda Ivy is the contracting specialist.

So those will be sent to her again stated in the rfwp. We do intend to notify.

Respective vendors of your selection for the follow on step, which is oral presentations.

So we're looking at around 26 November to make that notification.

And then the oral presentations, as you can see on the slide right now, it shows that first week of December, given the activities that need to occur within the government, that may end up being the second week of December.

So just be flexible.

But we will not that notification.

And you will be informed of when that will occur. If you are selected as such.

And reduce around 16 December, we do.

Intend to send the final notification to the vendors that have been selected after oral presentations for actual participation in the demonstration.

So yes, the demo we are are currently on the schedule to conduct in April of 2025 and then for those who have participated with us in the past, you are aware that?

Following the demonstration, there will be the report that is published to inform each of you that have participated the results of of your system, so you can use that for internal usage and continued development as as necessary.

Slide please.

So what we've bulletized on this slide is just a rehash of what information we are seeking within the rfwp.

So the Rfwp has out a paragraph explanation for each of these, but we just wanted to restate what those are that this is the information that we require in order for us to make informed decisions on who we would like to move forward with.

And so for the capability statements really, we just need to know.

What what your proposed system is able to do. Capabilities, limitations.

You know, use the opportunity to.

You know, tell tell why your system is great.

You know we we need to know those things so that we know what we're what you're bringing to the table.

So that we aren't formed, you know, essentially for the capabilities that we may be interested in bringing to the demonstration as you if if you've reviewed the rfwp.

Already you are aware that there are two.

Focus areas that we are interested in the overall umbrella of this event is.

Demonstrating systems that are able to operate within a contested electromagnetic environment.

But those two focus areas are one Group, 3 short range defeats. And when we say short range defeat, we are specifically looking at within a 2.

Kilometer slant range, so less than a 2 kilometer slant range.

Slant range being not just the ground distance out, but also considering the elevation as part of that range as well. We are specifically for that topic. We are interested in small arms munitions that are 40mm and lower or.

Kinetic interceptor, drones, or effectors, essentially so. So that's topic one, the other topic.

Is groups wanted to dismounted detect, track and identify and or defeat?

So we are interested in systems that.

For this topic specifically, that may not have the additional defeat portion of the kill chain, but we are also interested in systems that do the DTI to detect, track, identify, and defeat portion of the kill chain as well.

So those are the two topic areas, if you if any company has a solution that can address both.

We do request that you submit a separate White paper for those two topics, respectively.

We are also interested in what current DoD counter small US systems. Your solution is either interoperable or integrated with.

Currently that includes ADC 2.

Now that is not a requirement to participate in the demonstration. However, it is we we would like to at least know that.

And in the rfwp we do define what interoperability and integration means, and so please use those definitions when coming to the determination. If your solution is either interoperable or integrated both.

Any unique capabilities so.

The core requirement is to address either or both of the topic areas. However, we are additionally interested if there's any unique capability that you're solution might bring to the table.

That might enable decision making if there's two solutions that are very similar, you know one is bring something very unique that might be deemed beneficial to the government. That may be a determining factor as to why we choose one or the other.

So if there is anything that you think you bring to the table, please let us know about that.

We also need to understand what support you will require for the demonstration.

So the jco.

Push the range.

The facilities, the data collection, any security network, all that type of stuff. But you as a company are required to transport your systems there, you know, pay for that logistics to and from will handle certain logistics related activities such as reviewing on sites, but you need to get.

Josh Chartier 29:48 Yeah.

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 30:08 There and you need to get your stuff out of there.

You know any any labor, travel, any, any, any of those types of items would would need to be paid for by the vendor.

But we do need to know what support is required, such as generator support is is one example high sing.

Is there any other examples of support that we may need to know about?

It'll be depending on the system and what the system architecture.

Will require, so if you anticipate.

Calibration flights or specific support that you're not bringing it will be good to capture again for the first response to the White Paper. You don't have to worry too much on this aspect once you get invited to the demonstration after orals, that's when we're gonna be working close.

With each of the vendors invited to the demonstration to make sure that we refine that list of requirements.

And make it a two way conversation to make sure that we have full understanding what you're bringing and you have full understanding what's required for you to be successful.

Yep, if we call out. Additionally, the cost for your system and the production schedule.

So if you recall from the RFP, we asked for the cost of of 1 system.

We asked the cost.

And production schedule for one system and we asked for the same for for 10 systems.

That enables us.

That information is not going to be used as far as selecting vendors to participate in the demo, however.

What it does help us with is on the back end after demonstration that that provides additional information that we would use for the follow on activities. Those later phases of the process. If we do move forwards, awarding, sending out a request for prototype proposal.

Looking looking to award an OTA contract.

So that information is is beneficial to include as well. We do want to know about any export ability for those aware of the request. For information we published a couple months ago.

We appreciate all the responses we got on that, but similarly we do want to understand if your system is exportable and to which countries it is exportable to.

We we do need to know about data rights.

Again, that's not going to be used as part of the decision making to to participate in the demo.

However, for follow on contracting activities, we will need to know about data rights, technology readiness level, that is one of the important aspects to participate in the demonstration.

You do need to be at RLA 6 or above, at least that maturity level to participate and we will be reviewing that as one of the essentially the entry criteria before we continue looking at your white papers to verify.

If it makes sense to even move forward with a potential selection of that solution, so you don't necessarily need to be TRL six right now.

But if you project to be that technology readiness by the start time of the demonstration, we just need to know that.

Availability is also.

A essentially an entry criteria to move forward with reviewing the White Papers. If you simply if your solution simply will not be available to attend a demonstration, then it's very unlikely that that you'll be selected to attend.

Self-explanatory.

So we just need an affirmation within your White Paper response that you will be available to attend the the dates that are specified and then as typical any standard contact information that so that we can continue correspondence.

Next slide please.

So any vendors that are selected to attend the demonstration?

Again.

Documentation that is required.

This clearly isn't an an exhaustive list, but this is just a couple of the things that that we'll be interested in and our team will reach out to get these documents.

Upon selection for the demonstration, and as we begin the technical interchange meetings after that selection.

But as you can see, some of the documents that you can see the JF 12 of 1494 that'll allow us to initiate the RF emissions approval timelines and again we will communicate the list of requirements fully to any vendors that are selected as far as what.

Documentation we need from you.

Laser clearing House responsibility is on each vendor to coordinate with the LCH to get that approval and any de confliction that is necessary.

Well, vendors, we must provide any system, subsystem or component that is a part of your solution in order to successfully operate do, do not rely on the government to provide any other systems such as radars or other sensors in order for your solution to function, you must have.

A fully functioning system of systems.

Solution. Clearly any you know, maintenance spares that you need on site.

You need to bring those operators you need to bring your own.

Operators are just some examples of that.

During the demonstration, we will take a look at the performance of all your solution against the threat profiles that we build.

So we will provide a certain level of information about what those scenarios look like.

However, we will not give the answers to the test prior to the demonstration.

So more information about that will come out during our technical interchange meetings. Once vendors are selected for participation.

Demonstration is occurring in an open air environment, essentially so personnel and equipment will be exposed to the elements.

So plan accordingly.

This next one we have shown in blue because this is this has become one of the foot stop areas that we need to make sure we're clear not only ahead of time, but we'll continue to re engage this as the demonstrator.

I'm going, but we will need data provided to us from each vendor and your system daily.

This data is essential for us to conduct an analysis on the participating systems and it's it's required for us to give you an objective feedback for how your system performs and to also inform the DoD stakeholders on how the systems perform so that they can make informed Dec.

About.

Further.

Development or procurements as necessary so that absolutely is essential in order to make this event worthwhile. In previous demonstrations, we have had some issues with getting either timely or usable data, so that's something that we just want to state up front. And for those who are selected we.

Will probably state that at every technical interchange meeting, and probably and we'll state it every day as we're out there on the demonstration.

But prior to execution, we will make sure that we go through procedures.

So that each vendor understands what is required of data. The readable formats that we need.

And we'll work.

We'll work through that ahead of time.

Again, we will provide the the that data as as far as system performance within a report following the events.

We will.

So we will plan to publish a schedule.

About 8 to 12 weeks prior to the demonstration.

So that respective vendors can better plan for for what your time looks like off of that month of April.

Again, TRL 6 foot stomp that overall, go ahead just to clarify that, that schedule is published to the vendors that they got invited.

So we're basically going to share that schedule with them. The rest of industry or public domain will not receive that schedule, just to clarify.

Publish. Thank you.

So additionally for vendors, any range safety approval for your system operation would be required. Part of the demonstration.

So that is on the vendor's responsibility.

We, as the JCO, we will assist with that process as well and you can see the sub bullets of that, the range hazardous area working group, they will conduct that review and approval. So any necessary information will need to be provided to them again with the JCO will.

Assist through that process.

And then finally.

Participation. If you are selected participation in the technical interchange meetings is required 'cause that serves as our venue to communicate to each other on any changing requirements or what's required in order to make the demonstrations successful.

That's like Chris.

So.

Icing will now and go to the next slide again.

Icing will now go over the general concepts for the demonstration.

Yeah. Good morning, everybody.

Thank you for dialing in.

So we're not gonna go too deep into the details and the design of the of the demo just because this is a a work in progress.

But basically the focus area has been alluded already.

Is that you?

To your system will defend a location or a a area to be defended.

With within a short range 2 kilometers slant range like the major mentioned, you will have time for detection, tracking ID of around 6 to 8 kilometers.

And then.

Will assess how well are you defending?

Your area, and again the threat will be either a Group 3 or a Group One and two depending on the focus area that your system falls upon.

The contested electromechanic environment we're giving you men's minimum and maximum ranges, which is the 30 megahertz to 20 gigahertz.

Again, details on what exactly.

Those frequencies are how they're going to be.

Executed on the range.

That's all one being determined and being worked. And two, that's part of the answer of the test. So.

You're probably not gonna be divulged prior of the execution. However, these are the ranges of the frequencies that we're expecting to provide as that that contested environment.

And again, if you're getting invited, there's gonna be a probe walk and run approach.

Meaning there's gonna be increasing difficulty.

And once we start running the scenarios and and developing, how we gonna do that evaluation again?

The concept is very open, but once we have the final list of vendors and what systems you're bringing to the table then.

The team and I work specifics for those profiles and scenarios that.

Are gonna be tailored for your system to demonstrate the capability, because that's what I we see this as a partnership.

Both.

CO2 get awareness of what your system brings to the table, but also it's an opportunity for your capability to be.

Shine a spotlight so the the full DoD service in Cocoms have awareness of what additional capability you can provide to the the.

To the to the soldiers.

So at the end of the day, that's why it's so important for us to capture.

The capability.

And any specific additional capabilities that your system may bring to the table?

OK.

So we will now proceed into the Q&A portion of this engagement.

So again, I will initiate by first answering the 15 questions that we received ahead of time. But as we're going through that, if any additional questions arise, please do use the chat box function.

To pose your questions and then we will answer those in sequence as we get to that.

Again, just real quick.

White papers do no layer. Then the 25th of this month.

Jolinda Ivy, as you can see the the e-mail right there.

And then if there are, you know outside of the scope of this demonstration.

Most are already aware of this, but we, as the JCO we do periodic engagements with industry just to see any emerging and.

Nuanced capabilities that you may be in the process of developing.

So this is an opportunity for us to just reiterate to the collective group that if you are interested in having any of those engagements on Christopher Barnett is is our continued POC that you can reach out to to schedule set engagements.

Right. So we we have two slides where we we just posed we we transposed on the screen as you can see the questions that we've received. So you can follow along with the questions as we're going through and answering these and I'll just go through and sequentially answer.

Each of these questions.

So for the first one, so any requests for extension for the rfwp response. So unfortunately due to the schedule established for our demonstration.

Planning and execution.

We do not foresee the ability to facilitate an extension to turning into white papers beyond 25 October at 1600 Eastern Time, however.

We do understand that there at times may be extenuating circumstances, so if that is the case and any vendor absolutely needs to request an extension, you can still field that request and we as the JCO will just have to work through that with our contract team.

To feel that it is, it makes sense to do so. So as of right now, we are we are not currently approving an extended request.

But something we may work with through contract.

And second question, would lightweight networked vehicle counter UAS solutions meet what the JCO is looking to demonstrate?

Ultimately, yes, this configuration could be acceptable as long as it additionally meets the other needs outlined within the RFWP.

So. So we're not gonna dictate the the platform type that you bring a wheeled vehicle absolutely is potentially of a platform type that would be acceptable, but it has to achieve the other needs as outlined within the request for White Paper.

For instance, kinetic defeat or drone on drone interceptor for Group 3 UAS defeat if your vehicle platform incorporates that type of capability to respond to focus topic #1, then that would be acceptable.

3rd question, will there be a tactical network connection provided for instance ATAC or FATSI 2 to use for situational awareness and detection for network Ready counter UAS systems?

So I I will reiterate a statement that we made earlier, but each participant during the demonstration needs to bring your own system of systems solution that includes the sensors that detect, track and identify portion of the kill chain.

Additional to providing your own C2C, so you must bring that entire solution because we will not have that for you for you there to incorporate into your solution.

Now we as the JCO are working the details to incorporate Fancy 2 into the demonstration as an opportunity for vendors to demonstrate either interoperability or integration with FAS C2.

Again, this is not a requirement to be chosen for demonstration.

But if there are any systems that come to the demonstration that can function with bad C2 pending time available to conduct that explosion, we would treat it as a side excursion. We may be interested to see what that interoperability or integration level looks like.

So. So in that case, we as the government would provide a fad, see to to incorporate for that excursion.

The next question.

#4 will Red Air UAS be flying cots frequencies such as?

You see some of the typical frequencies you see on the screen, 915 megahertz,

1.21.52.4 and 5.8.

So.

As he sing stated earlier, we are not going to divulge the list of target aircraft, nor the specific details of their RF signature data.

Essentially, that would be us giving the the answers to the test ahead of time.

However, we can share that we will be flying kot's frequencies, including what is listed in this question. So so that can be expected in, in broad general sense.

Of of that question.

Question #5 will there be sky views Belshazzar or other systems that?

There that we can demonstrate how we integrate with to get omnidirectional early warning from.

So the JCO will not provide additional systems for participants to demonstrate their integration with beyond what we stated earlier with the potential fancy.

To in the previous question, if there are other vendor systems that are required for your system of systems solution to function.

Again, that is the responsibility of each participating vendor to conduct that coordination with any other companies that that may provide that system within your solution.

Question number six for topic Area 2. And so to reiterate that topic is groups one and two dismounted.

Track and identify and or detect track, identify and defeat.

Question is, is the JCO interested in dismounted math war capabilities?

Will the demonstration have the ability to exercise systems of that kind?

So the answer is no.

Now for capability is not a technique that jcos interested demonstrate during this event.

#7 do we need to detect threats second and defeat threats? Jamming within the entire spectrum as listed in the RFI or the Rfwp all the way up to 20 gigahertz?

Or just make sure we can operate in a heavy.

EMI Environment electromagnetically interfered environment that can go up to 20 gigahertz.

So our intent of stating that frequency range from 30 megahertz up to 20 gigahertz is to inform industry of the portion of the spectrum that we expect to contest within the electromagnetic environment.

Therefore, your system must be able to effectively operate while frequencies within this range are being contested and jammed.

These specific frequencies that the target UAS will operate on is pending. Further information from the intelligence community.

Jcl will not divulge that information to the participants. As we stated earlier, we expect the system of system solution that industry brings to have the ability to identify the targets using organic functionality and defeat them appropriately without knowing what they are prior to the demonstrations.

Question #8.

Can we get test procedures from the government that shows how the system will be field tested?

Types of electronic attack, digital radio frequency, memory, drfm barrage, etcetera.

So the vendors selected to participate will attend the technical interchange meetings as previously discussed for the JCL will inform of more details about the test design.

However, the the JCA will not share all details of the demonstration. As I stated previously.

Will will communicate what is necessary in order for vendors to be able to successfully attend an event and demonstrate your capability.

But again, we won't share all the details.

Providing the answers to the tests that have been done.

All right.

Next slide please.

Question #9.

The background section.

It says that the ability to obtain technology release and build in export ability features including anti tamper is necessary.

Anti tamper solutions are typically classified.

Will this become a classified program and so any system that proceeds through the export ability procedures after the demonstration?

Concludes we'll need to have built in export ability features including anti tamper.

However it is not.

The requirements to have these features to participate in the demonstration, we will not use that as criteria for selection.

All systems selected for the demonstration must at least initiate the export ability process prior to demonstration execution.

So yes, it is a require.

It is a requirement to be on the glide path to become exportable. However you you don't need to be exportable prior to the demonstration, we at least want to see the process.

Begun to achieve export ability prior to initiating execution and so as it's stated in the rfwp under that export ability section, we explain specifically what we're interested in the vendors informing us of with respect to export ability.

So SEC.

Just a second to follow up part to that question's response, but.

The the demonstration to really answer the that question that was specifically posed, but the demonstration will not be conducted as a classified event.

But it is possible that the selected systems will become classified programs if chosen for export ability to allied and partner nations following the demonstration.

So just consider that for your company and how that looks on your slide path.

The next question, what level of anti tamper is expected? So the level of anti tamper would be dictated by the needs of the specific foreign military sales or direct commercial sales case. The JCO does not have the foresight to determine what level of of anti tamper is requ.

For each system based on that unique case. So for any systems that may be selected for a potential follow on.

Contract to include potential OTA.

The specifics of that will be divulged at that time.

#11. But we need to provide munitions. If down selected for phase three, which is the demonstration phase, and if so, will jco be willing to work with us and other government partners to facilitate the acquisition of munitions and fuses? So the provision of munitions will be a?

Case by case determination based on the needs of your solution, the JCO will provide common use GFE upon request. However this necessitates.

Participating vendors to inform us of what munitions you would require us to provide as GIF. If you are not not able to source that organically.

#12.

Will the JCO work to assist with getting laser clearing House approval for participating systems? Or will vendors be responsible for this? So again, vendors will be responsible for LCH approval and coordination.

However, the JCO will provide the LCHPOC and as needed, assist the participating vendors through that process.

#13.

The Rfw piece specifies dtid.

So again, detect track identifying defeat of Group 3 UAS within a 2 kilometer slant and the JCO clarify that this is a minimum desired distance or is a maximum desired range. So.

The primary focus of this demonstration is a short range defeat systems.

So we do expect that the the two kilometer slant range is that Max range.

#14.

Does the rfwp specify an anticipated OTA contract award, which is phase five of the

RFWP?

So we do not currently have an anticipated OTA contract award date, but we will gain further clarity on this timeline of following the demonstrations.

So again, look that later.

Those later phases of the rfwp process beyond the demonstration, we will handle those once the demonstration is complete.

So really nothing further on that.

And then question #15.

Vendors that are selected to participate in phase three have access to the data analysis and reports that are conducted by the government on their respective systems.

So yes, the JCO will publish a final demonstration report which will be sent to the participating vendors following the demonstration completion.

So those were all of the questions we received ahead of time.

Again, we will post an update, or at least we expect to and we'll have to confirm this with contracting, but we expect to post an update to sam.gov.

That's outlines these questions that you see here as well as provides the the answers to each of them.

So with that being said, if we have received any questions via the chat and it looks like you have.

We will proceed through those sequentially as appropriate and we will provide response to those.

Now keep in mind we are seeing clearly we are seeing these questions for the first time, so it may require a moment for us to go on mute for us to fully understand is the JCO, what the question is come to.

Essentially, agreement with us on how how we would like to respond to that question and then we will come off mute and respond to that question.

And so I'll I'm looking at Chris now to just go down the list for the first question. And and Chris, just please use your judgment on what seems appropriate or not, if there's any questions that we are not able to provide the answer for now, we'll dig into.

That deeper and.

As as deemed with contracting, we'll provide those responses on the sam.gov update.

So go ahead, Chris.

OK.

First question, is there any specific platform you expect to see the solution mounted on or is there anything off limits?

So what we'll do is, I mean, I have my ideas on how to respond, but real quick, we're just gonna go on mute just to make sure that we are on the same.

Yeah. So we're we're not specifying any specific type of platform that that you bring as as part of your solution. We have had in the in the past.

Real military grade weapons systems mounted to civilian type vehicles, and so that that's fine.

You know we we understand that you are demonstrating the you know the the tech track, identifying defeat portion of your system system solution and and and we do understand that certain capabilities have been fielded or equipped in the past.

That have been mounted on on soft platforms as well.

So so that is fine.

Go ahead, I think.

So in your white paper.

Responds.

If your solution needs to be mounted to something that you are not.

Currently have stated there and say it this mounts to a tower or I need those are the type of requests that it's important to capture because we need to acquire a platform, a trailer or something, an antenna to give you so you can mount your solution. That's where.

It's important to communicate. But yeah, whatever. You gonna mount it to.

If you require us the government to provide that.

Stated. If not, then you can provide that whatever you're mounting to. It doesn't matter if it's military or civilian.

Great. And with that being said that jocks another thought, but as far as range support that's required for your solution material handling equipment.

So if you need a forklift, let us know, because we can source them. Yep.

OK.

Next question.

Next Questions Group One group and two drones may not be able to operate in a contested election.

Magnetic environment. Given that, how do you see counter SUS systems that manipulate the drones electromagnetic environment? Succeeding in this demo?

And so Chris, to clarify, they're they're asking about the drones.

So the drones that are flying in the environment? Yeah, because we're not gonna block people.

Yeah. So.

We are going to design the scenario in a manner to where our target UAS can still fly.

Those are not going to be impacted by the contested electromagnetic environments.

Can already think of something that people might be scheming with respect to that, but but regardless.

Your assumption.

That only your systems can be affected by electromagnetic environment that not not the drone.

You assume that the enemy you know figured out a way to.

Flying into you without being affected by you, yeah.

And and so part of the selection process we we will know what systems you're bringing. And so we we are going to tailor the event to.

Allow you to demonstrate the capability of your system to be able to operate in that type of environment.

Is is what I'll leave it as and so we are really what we're really interested in here is does your solution have the technology built into it?

To be able to get around whatever.

Adversary.

Effects that they are implementing on the electromagnetic spectrum and in the in the rfwp we just listed a couple of examples of some of those types of technologies.

So if you do have a technology to to bring to the table that are within those lists or something, and that list was by all means not all inclusive, but something outside of that list of technologies as well.

What we are seeing, that's what we are interested in seeing you incorporate into into your solution.

So if if if your solution.

Involves groups. One or two Connecticut receptor drones.

Then your solution needs to harden that capability to be able to operate in that environment.

And and so that that's really on each, you know, vendor to figure out how to be able to.

Functionality in that environment.

Chris, go ahead to the next one.

What is the minimum engagement range allowed for weapons less than 40 Mic Mike.

The minimum minimum.

Yeah. So, so ultimately that's that's gonna end up being a range safety question. And so as we continue to develop the scenario for the event and we understand what systems are actually gonna be present for the event, we will generate what that would look like.

And we'll obviously communicate that to all the vendors.

So not not a hard response right now, but it's something that we will work through as we go through the technical interchanges.

So we think that that safety range will equal that, that will be the minimum.

That will translate to whatever the minimum range, right, exactly, yeah.

It will be derived that minimum range will be derived from what is deemed safe.

One thing I will add to that, if your system has a sweet spot of that range.

I will recommend that you put it in your request for White Paper response that way.

Let's say if you are saying 500 meter is is the best sweet spot for your system then stated there. So we can capture and once we we invite your solution to the range then we work with safety to get the approvals necessary to engage the.

The minimum that you need, OK.

Next one, Chris, topic number two, Group One and Group 2 dismounted. Dtid. Will kinetic systems that fire from a dismounted support vehicle be considered like the

ISV?

Consider like the ISV.

Can you read that one again, Chris?

Chapter 2, Group One and Group 2 dismounted dtid.

Will kinetic systems that fire from a dismounted support vehicle be considered like the ISV OK?

We'll take a moment.

OK, so for for topic #2.

Yeah, to reclarify it.

It is dismounted. You know groups wanted to defeat DTI and org, including the defeat portion of it. If your solution does include.

Shayne lewis 1:08:32 No, that's great, man.

I talk to her and.

I work.

Barnett, Christophe CTR USARMY HQDA DCS G-3-5-7 (USA) 1:08:40 Second, we're gonna mute the hot mute. OK, if if your solution does include a capability to where?

The system that is going to be used by the dismounted warfighter is is is brought into the objective. The scenario, such as on a platform like an ISV, that that that brings it in because it's not a soldiers personally assigned weapon system then then yeah you can show.

That to us, however, we are specifically interested in systems.

And and we specify in the rfwp as the examples of what we're interested in, but.

Sold through a fixable solver, soldier wearable weapon. A fixable systems.

Systems that are used by a a dismounted elements and so.

That, that's that's pretty much what we're interested in.

Again, if if there's additional clarity required on that, we can, we can discuss further.

One thing I will encourage the vendor.

That you are going to response to the White Paper state your con up your constituents operation so that way is clear to the government.

How exactly you are expecting to employ this system or how you are proposing to deal with the threat that you are planning to engage so that way it's easier for us to make that judgment.

Yes, this fits this bucket.

Yeah, and. And I'm, I'm just thinking additionally if if if you are if if the genesis of this question is referring to maybe something unique or exquisite that we currently don't have in mind, but such as like robotics for instance.

If there is a proposal for some sort of robotic type system that I guess is considered dismounted, even though it might be on a a robot platform that's used by a dismounted elements, then yeah, it's, housing said.

Just just clarify that in in the concept for how the system is to operate, and we'll use that in to inform us about, you know, the level of interest with that system.

But but yeah, for something like that for instance, you know, we may be interested in in taking a look at what that.

In in demonstrating that capability.

Next question.

That's it.

So that was all the questions received.

OK so.

We did schedule this for a little bit more time, but that currently is all of the questions that we've received in the chat.

Chris is just checking one more time.

Clarify one last time. You want a separate white paper for each topic area, not one paper covering both topic area solutions.

Yeah, yeah, that's correct.

So if if you have a solution that covers.

Either or or between both of the topic areas.

And and it's a different solution if if it's one solution that I guess I don't know if it be possible for one system to do both, but.

Yeah, please submit separate white paper if you are addressing.

Both topics and and you have and you have the page limits you know for for both those white papers you don't have to try to consolidate all that into one white paper.

One thing I will ask for whatever system that can be utilized for both focus area is that if you can tailor your your concept of operation, how you plan to employ that system.

To deal with that different threads so that way is clear for us how we are planning to demonstrate that.

Yeah, one more question.

OK, will a copy of these slides be sent out following this this this discussion?

Yeah. OK.

Yeah, we, we we do intend to and.

Again, we'll clarify with contracting that this is that this is the plan, but we do intend to post the slide deck on sam.gov additionally to the Q&A portion of this meeting.

Go ahead. Or is that everything, Chris, or go ahead.

So I do have two go back.

So in the discussion that we had earlier.

So we were talking about the classification of the test and your system getting classified or not.

I just want to make sure that it's clear that even though for this demonstration your system will not require to be classified.

The system government system or locations on the range might be handled.

On a classified.

Position. So meaning government systems that will be utilized on the range might be classified or locations from where we gonna be operating from might be classified secret.

So that is just to make sure that we will have to do additional coordination if your company does not have clear personnel.

Or will have to just develop COAS and how we're gonna?

Allow your your personnel to be on site, but that is not a limiting factor for your demonstration, and the second point I had was the results and sharing results with all vendors. Each vendor that is gonna come to the demonstration will receive their own data, but we will.

Break the report in a manner that we.

Will do our best intent to protect each other's vendors data.

That means that you will receive the results for your system, but not the other vendors results that government we will share the full report to the DoD services in Gocoms and any of the government personnel, but not to each vendor.

Another one.

Can you confirm that this amount of capabilities must be capable of full DTI or DTID capabilities? If you have a capability that is, that does defeat only?

The contestant environment. Will it not be considered?

Yeah. So great question and I'm glad we have the opportunity to clarify that.

So previously I I did state that we are interested in either the DTI portion of the kill chain and or and and so the the OR portion of that is where the clarification is.

So we are interested in. So really you can break it apart into three.

Sub categories for for topic two you have a.

You propose a solution that conducts the DTI.

Of groups wanting to or you can have a solution that conducts the the whole kill chain. The dtid for groups wanted to and then where the OR comes in is.

You can also have a solution that only does the defeat of groups one and two, and so for instance, I mean we can all think of.

Solutions that where it's it's it's a part of us, of war fighters personally assigned weapon. And so really you know.

Sensor for that may not be some technological system, but really it's the soldiers senses.

That they have inherent to them as an individual.

So if if your solution is only a defeat capability, then yes, we will look at that as well.

It's important to capture the concept of operation. If you're only at defeat your concept operation means the operator will serve as the detection tracking ID portion.

In your concept means that the operator needs to search.

Detect and track that target in order to engage with that weapon system that you're proposing.

That's it.

OK.

So that's all the questions we've received in the chat function of teams.

Again, we, we do have this for a little bit longer. So we as the Jcot team will stand by for an additional 5 minutes.

So I I capture.

Level 7 are about so, so we'll stay on the line until 12:15 Eastern Time just to see if there's any additional questions that that do pop up in the chat.

And if there are more that come in, we'll we'll continue to engage those. However, if we don't receive anything additional between now and 12:15.

We'll close this line and we really do appreciate…