Questions_and_Answers_for_FBO-Rnd_1_final_for_FBO.docx

REVIEW OF SOLICITATION, COMBINED SYNOPSIS/SOLICITATION QUESTIONS DURING POSTING TO FEDBIZOPS January, 31 2017

Questions and Responses:

1. Is an offeror required to submit both an architecture and “simulation subset” of capabilities, or can an offeror offer only one? It can be interpreted both ways.

Both are required - architecture and simulation subset.

2. Does the FORCE simulator have the capability to do mission planning or generate a subset of information that goes into the plan? Currently this is done by the Aviation Mission Planning System/Software (AMPS) on actual aircraft.

FORCE does not have a mission planning capability like AMPS. A control/tasking interface for UAVs and a digital map application are available for entering mission data based on assets chosen, mission objectives, constraints, initial AOIs and POIs, LZs, AXISs, threats, non-combatants, terrain, etc.

3. We do not have the AMPS, and if the answers to question 2 is yes, I am wondering whether we can only focus on the HMI subsystem using the mission plan generated by FORCE?

See Response to #2 above

4. The BAA states that there is $9,000,000 of total funding from FY17 to FY20. It also states that up to four contractors may receive award. In general and on average is each award anticipated to be approximately $750k (9,000,000 / 4 contractors / 3 years = $750,000k per contractor)?

No. The BAA Call at 3.2 and 3.3 states the number of awards depends on the technical merit and affordability of the proposals, whether the Government selects a proposal for full or partial funding, as well as the amount of industry cost share. There is no average amount. The following table provides the Government’s estimated available funding by Fiscal Year to assist offeror’s in proposal preparation:

5. Will the FORCE simulation be simulating any Payload Target Tracking based on Army STANAG 4586 ICWG?

The intent is for FORCE to provide payload target tracking similar to the capabilities of the payload sensors being simulated. Please refer to response for Question 16 for additional information.

6. Will the database of simulated target types, locations (i.e. GPS lat/lon), and range (i.e. AA batteries, MANPADs, etc.) be accessible by the contractor's application or will the application need to rely on our target recognition applications to process the virtual imagery of the target and recognize its type?

The intent is for the payload sensor outputs to be accessible as streaming video, e.g. H.264 or similar. The streaming media would be available for downstream processing. Data, including target type, for a simulated target within a sensor footprint on the terrain will be made available for access by the contractor's application.

7. Will the FORCE simulation follow the Army's STANAG 4586 ICWG to provide LOI 2, 3, 4 control and the STANAG commands that query UAS health, weapon status, etc.?

The data link interface messages used within FORCE will align to STANAG 4586 Edition 2, Amendment 1 and a relevant subset of its message numbers will be supported within FORCE. Please refer to response for Question 16 for additional information. Vendors may recommend specific messages for support by FORCE and describe how they will be used in the vendor's proposed technology solution for SUMIT.

8. The SUMIT_IDD and FORCE_SIG documents provided do not provide a mechanism for arming and launching of missiles/rockets. Is that expected to be added or provided at a later date?

Yes. If a simulated UAV within FORCE is capable of and carrying a deployable payload the system will provide an interface to deploy the asset(s). The interface description to prepare, arm and fire based on deployable payload type will be made available in a later update. Vendors are welcome to recommend and describe interfaces desired to support their proposed technology solution.

9. Is the AMC ownship connection to the UAS based on RF LOS radio links or SATCOM links?

SUMIT simulation evaluations will not simulate physical data links. The AMC ownship communicates with UAS entities either directly or through the Ground Control Station.

10. Is a TIA required? Does the amount of investment affect the source selection evaluation?

No, a TIA is not required. The BAA Call at 3.3 lists a TIA as just one of the funding instruments offerors can propose.

11. How is it envisioned that mission plans be loaded onto the ownship system and shared with the other team members of the simulation? Another example might be if our services want to request a manned team member to move to a new location; how is that information shared and executed in the FORCE simulation?

The AMC will use the human-machine interface to share information with the other team members of the simulation. The AMC is responsible for developing the mission plan. The type of information and level of detail in the mission plan (including assets available, mission objectives, constraints, initial AOIs and POIs, LZs, threats, non-combatants, terrain, etc.) that the AMC will have to input through the HMI depends on the specific Mission Operations Management and HMI capabilities of the vendor's Simulation Subset. The AMC would communicate with a manned team member through one of the communications channels available at the AMC station (radio or mIRC/chat) or through alternate means to exchange movement requests between the AMC and a manned team member that may be available through the vendor's Simulation Subset.

12. How do we ensure that the ownship and team members follow the plan that our services provide it? Will this be a manual process of a pilot flying the route or will this be autonomous?

As long as your services provide a plan consistent with the interface description provided by FORCE, the plan will be used to command simulated team member entities. FORCE logs and publishes status data for all active entities, be they autonomous or controlled by a human, per the IDD data model. Your services can subscribe to this information to assess whether your plan is being followed.

13. Is there a UAS Ground Control Station for controlling multiple UASs by a human UAS operator?

· Does FORCE support the ability for multiple GCS operators?

· Can a single GCS operator control multiple UAS while the AMC is in LOI2?

There is a simulated UAS Ground Control Station for control of UAS by a human operator. It allows the operator to select which UAS it is controlling at any given time, which allows swapping the UAS under its control, but does not support controlling multiple UAS simultaneously.

At present FORCE supports the ability for one GCS with one human operator to control one selected UAS at a time as described above. Should a vendor find support for multiple GCS operators of value to run their Simulation Subset in FORCE, vendor may state so and provide an explanation of their rationale in the proposal. Any requests for additional GCS will be considered for support only in Round Two simulation evaluations, subject to availability of Government funding and schedule. The Government will need to integrate additional software and computing hardware into the simulation network for any additional GCS and staff it appropriately during vendor's simulation evaluations.

A single GCS operator can control multiple UAS within the limits described above and to the extent permitted by the workload for the single GCS operator.

14. How many different simulation missions are expected?

· “The vignette will be varied over several simulation runs in order to evaluate the performance of offeror’s products under different conditions”

The plan is for Round One simulation evaluations to use four variations of a baseline vignette. A fifth vignette with more complex variations is planned for Round Two.

15. Will systems failures be introduced?

· Failures for UAV

· Failures for ownship

Failures for UAV will be introduced. Failures for ownship will not be introduced.

16. In the SUMITFORCE-SIG-00001, Rev DRAFT01 document

· FORCE will support:

· PFD

· Digital moving map for ownship navigation,

· What map types are supported? CHART, DIG, SAT, NONE,

· Will there be existing map controls for the AMC, such as PAN and ZOOM?

The PFD is for use only by the Government-provided ownship pilot who will sit next to the subject performing as AMC. It will not be available to the subject. Existing controls on the digital map for ownship navigation are available only to the pilot, not the AMC.

· Digital moving map for teamed mission control and observation,

· Is this map different or just a repeat of ownship map?

· Is the teamed mission control only displayed on this display?

· Can you put the team mission control somewhere else

No, it should not be assumed the digital map application which will be accessible to the Government pilot on the pilot side of the simulated flight deck will be identical to the digital map application available within the AMC station. The map which will be available within the AMC station of the flight deck will support user initiated changes to displayed map area including pan and zoom. The maps for the specific geographical areas which will be used in the evaluation will be loaded by the Government evaluation team. If the accessibility of a specific layer or type of map is beneficial or required for the evaluation of a solution it is recommended the white paper response include the associated information.

The baseline FORCE flight deck will have a digital map available at one, and only one, of the three displays in the AMC station.

Adjustments to the FORCE baseline display layout at the AMC station are feasible. If changes to the display layout are beneficial to the vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendors describe those changes in their proposal. Note that changes to the display layout will be made during integration and setup of vendor system, prior to start of simulation evaluations.

· Split views of various teamed vision sensor feeds,

· How many sensor feeds can be accepted?

· What are the sensor feeds – TV and FLIR (change polarities)?

A maximum of 8 sensor feeds can be accepted. FORCE UAS sensor simulations could support swapping between simulated EO and IR modes. Baseline vignette variations currently planned for Round One simulation evaluations require only the EO mode. The Government will consider using the IR mode in Round Two simulation evaluations, should vendor find use of the IR mode beneficial to their proposed technology solution.

· Radio and COM management

· What level of radio management will be present?

· Presets, manual tuning of frequencies

· Will this capability to conduct radio management be available in the baseline HMI?

· How is the radio controlled to listen/relay UAV data?

· Does FORCE have a radio manager for connecting to and interacting with 8 UAVs?

Radio management is not part of FORCE baseline. The capability to conduct radio management is not available in the FORCE baseline HMI. FORCE does not have a radio manager for connecting to and interacting with 8 UAVs.

· Digital messaging

· Will Tactical Internet messages be used or just simulated digital messages?

· How are digital messages sent and received by system?

· Can track data be sent?

· Can the UAS GCS send target coordinate data to the AMC?

· Can the AMC send target coordinate data to the UAS GCS?

· Are text messages sent from the CDR or other team members?

· Are there any existing messages, such as SPOT RPT or BDA or FARM that will be used?

A text messaging application will be used for simulated digital messages.

Operators at the various manned stations in FORCE will be able to send and receive text messages at each station through this application. The application will use an open interface to allow access for vendor's applications to send and receive text. Interface definition for this application will be made available in a later update.

At the present time, it is not integrated to automatically send or receive track data. If this capability is required or beneficial to the vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendor describe the specifics in their proposal. Alternately, the vendor can provide this capability and integrate with the messaging application available in FORCE.

The GCS operator can send target coordinate data to the AMC through the text messaging application. The AMC also can send target coordinate data to the GCS operator through the digital text application. The current FORCE baseline does not automatically transfer data. If this capability is required or beneficial to the vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendor describe the specifics in their proposal. Alternately, the vendor can provide this capability and integrate with the messaging application available in FORCE.

AMC and human operators will be able to send and receive text messages at each station. Unmanned team members cannot automatically send or receive text messages. If this capability is required or beneficial to the vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendor describe the specifics in their proposal. Alternately, the vendor can provide this capability and integrate with the messaging application available in FORCE.

The Government plans to populate the messaging application with a few relevant preconfigured text messages based on SPOT RPT, BDA, etc.

Vendors may recommend and describe specific messages beneficial to their technology solution for consideration by the Government.

· System status.

· What type of system status information will be available?

· Will the information be different for the ownship and each UAS?

· How is the information transmitted across the system?

· Will it support a WCA system and what WCA messages will be sent?

System information, such as UAS and ownship position, and payload status, sensor and weapons (as applicable) payload operational status will be available. They are based on STANAG 4586 messages and additional private messages associated with deployable payloads.

There will be differences in the information for ownship and UAS. Position and payload information will be available for both. UAS will have additional information associated with control and tasking.

The FORCE simulation network is designed to be accessible to vendor applications. The FACETM Transport Segment will provide the Application Programming Interface (API) and the Component Interface Design Document will provide the data format.

FORCE can support the ability to raise alerts such as WCAs. Planned baseline vignette variations do not include system related WCAs for ownship.

· Crew interaction with the glass cockpit is supported either though the touchscreen, with multi touch capability, or center console mounted cursor controllers.

· What is the console mounted cursor controllers?

· Is it similar to a mouse or touch pad?

· What type and quantity of inputs are available?

· Sensor slewing, weapons selection, sensor manipulation

· Laser on/off, laser designate,…

· Image Auto Track

· Do you have a list of cursor control capabilities?

The plan is to use a trackball style interface for the center console mounted cursor controllers.

For each cursor controller input is through a trackball and four buttons. The details of how a vendor's technology solution accomplishes these functions are up to a vendor. Vendor may or may not choose to use the cursor controller provided for use in FORCE. The FORCE baseline user interface may accomplish the above-listed functions without use of the cursor controller.

Mapping of FORCE baseline user interface functions to the cursor controller at the AMC station is ongoing. If the vendor has specific functionality required or beneficial to the vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendor describe the specifics in their proposal.

· Avionics tone generation

· How many and what are they used for?

· Can you add new ones?

· Are they a simple audio file, like .wav?

FORCE baseline user interface does not include preset tones.

FORCE can support incorporation of tones for use by vendor's applications. If vendor has specific tones required or beneficial to vendor's proposed Simulation Subset, the Government requests that vendor describe them in their proposal.

Yes, they are intended to be simple audio files.

· Three dimensional audio can be integrated to support technology exploration with associated capabilities.

· What is required to get 3D audio?

· Who is the vendor?

· What is its capabilities / limitations?

Details on 3D audio capability in FORCE are not available at this time.

· Voice to text capabilities will be available to support a subset of crew interfaces.

· Are Voice to Text capabilities Pre-recorded voice messages or real time using some type of automatic speech recognition (ASR) software.

· If ASR – who is the vendor?

· What subset of crew interfaces are supported?

Details on voice to text capabilities in FORCE are not available at this time.

· UAV

· A basic command and control interface is integrated at the left crew station to support command and control of each tasked UAV and the associated payload sensors.

· What are the commands (which STANAG 4586 and private messages are support)? What can it control?

· Looking at IDD it’s very limited

· Change the LOI

· Change the sensor but did not say to what kind

· Is it required to use or can you pass the information to our system?

The following message numbers based on STANAG 4586 edition 2 amendment 1 are planned for use;

#40, #41, #42, #43, #48, #100, #101, #102, #103, #104, #106, #109, #110, #200; #201; #207, #302, #800, #802, #803, #804, #1200

Additionally, private messages associated with deployable payloads will be available to request status, prepare, arm, enter key codes and launch deployable payloads. A private message to set the laser designator code will also be available.

The interfaces support requesting control of a UAS at a specific LOI. Mode selection between EO and IR can be supported.

Vendor is not required to use it. Information can be passed to vendor system. The intent is that the vendor system replaces the command and control interface in FORCE. It will be used as the baseline before the vendor's Simulation Subset is installed.

· ARINC 661

· The FORCE supports connection to ARINC 661 aligned Cockpit Display System from multiple User Applications. Connection interface information as well as the available layers, buttons, and other widgets are defined in the FORCE IDD.

· The FORCE IDD does not include ARINC 661 information. Is an expanded IDD with this information available?

The details associated with interfacing to an AMC display through the ARINC 661 cockpit display server will be available in a later update. If a vendor envisions technology being integrated through ARINC 661 for presentation in the cockpit it is recommended that vendor describe those details in their proposal.

17. From the UAV’s perspective and the Ownship sensor’s perspective, it appears that there is a rendered video feed of what the EO/IR sensor would produce.

· How can the system be integrated to receive this rendered/synthetic sensor feed? Is it available over an encoded video stream e.g. MPEG stream on the network? What resolution/bitrate/framerate?

· Is it possible to get this synthetic imagery streamed without any graphics overlays, HUD items, crosshairs, etc.?

· Can you provide example pictures of what the EO or IR synthetic sensor imagery would look like, in order to understand the visual quality of the synthetic scene renderer?

Yes, there is a simulated video feed for the UAV sensor payload.

The intent is for the payload sensor outputs to be accessible as streaming video, H.264 at a minimum 720p and 30 fps. The streaming media would be available for downstream processing. If a vendors proposed solution requires or would benefit from higher rate or resolution sensor imagery it is recommended that information is provided in the proposal.

The available streaming video in FORCE will be transmitted with the details required for display at the AMC station. It will include any symbology or other overlays that are part of the simulated sensor feed. The system supports one video stream per simulated EO sensor. If the vendor's technology solution benefits from or requires imagery data in a specific format or without additional information layers it is recommended that vendor provide the rationale for their specific request in their proposal.

No example imagery will be provided at this time. If a specific or minimum visual quality is required by the vendor, it is recommended that vendor describe specifics in their proposal.

18. Does the FORCE simulator have the ability to upload the mission plan (graphics/data) from the aviation mission planning system?

No.

19. Will an operations order be provided for generating the mission plan?

The subject will receive FRAGO type information for generating the mission plan.

20. Will internet be available in the lab/site where the FORCE simulator is housed? If not, can we bring our equipment to this lab/site?

Providing access to internet connectivity is a priority in site selection for the FORCE simulator.