FINAL_NexGen_UAS_RFP.docx

Next Generation Unmanned Aircraft System Technology Demonstration Conceptual Design and Technology Assessment

Topic Package Table of Contents

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT CALL W911W6-18-R-0014

Next GEN UAS Technology Demonstration PH II Conceptual Design Technology Assessment

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

A–1. INTRODUCTION

Call number W911W6-18-R-0014 issued under Master Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) number W911W6-18-R-0005 is soliciting technical and cost proposals to conduct a science and technology (S&T) effort entitled Conceptual Design and Technology Assessment (CDTA) in support of the Next Generation (NexGen) Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Technology Demonstration (TD). Additional information can be found within BAA W911W6-18-R-0005 which is posted to Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizzOpps) at https://www.fbo.gov.

A–2. BACKGROUND

The NexGen UAS TD is a U.S. Army Aviation Development Directorate (ADD) Science &Technology (S&T) effort to enable the development of an acceptable-risk acquisition program intended to supersede legacy UAS. The objective of the NexGen UAS TD is to identify, mature, and demonstrate capability-enabling air vehicle technologies that overcome key technology barriers, delivering desired advanced UAS (AUAS) performance, survivability, and reliability. NexGen UAS TD intends to culminate in a demonstration of enabling technologies and flying demonstrators.

Currently, the Combat Aviation Brigade lacks the ability to conduct long range Reconnaissance and Security Operations. Legacy UAS used for manned-unmanned teaming (MUM–T) face operational limitations, and they have been employed in uncontested airspace with limited survivability requirements. Incremental improvement to current UAS will not achieve overmatch in the current and future operational environments against peer and near-peer threats in a fullycontested multi-domain battlespace. Advanced UAS that work in concert with legacy manned, and optionally-manned, advanced platforms (e.g., Future Vertical Lift [FVL]) are necessary to preserve the Army’s asymmetric advantage.

Future UAS operating in the 2030 timeframe and beyond, must be collectively capable of performing a diverse set of missions in a fully-contested multi-domain battlespace against peer and near-peer adversaries. Expanded mission sets, supporting large scale combat operations will include counter integrated air defense (C-IAD), electronic warfare (EW) and counter-EW, reconnaissance and security, attack, and communications relay. Layered, holistic survivability will be achieved through susceptibility and vulnerability reduction, including: signature management (design) and awareness (algorithms); adaptive flight routing to avoid threats; speed and maneuverability/agility; and terrain flight or environmental masking. Operational parity with FVL, combined with increased autonomy/intelligence and cognitive/decision aiding, delegated control, and aided target recognition will transform advanced teaming concepts with manned aviation while reducing operator workload. Receiving intuitive mission-level outcome-based commands, UAS will be able to self-organize, self-optimize, and task-share across platforms, demonstrating complex teaming behaviors to accomplish mission objectives. AUAS, integrated with networked mission command systems, will aggregate information from disparate sensors and platforms to deliver tactical understanding, providing essential and timely actionable combat information to users at multiple echelons. Minimizing operator and manning requirements, cost, and logistics and sustainment burdens are important design considerations; these systems must support unit mobility, operate maintenance-free for extended periods, and must be organically sustained by Soldiers in austere, dispersed field conditions.

A–3. DESCRIPTION

a. Extent and Purpose This request for proposal addresses the NexGen UAS TD Phase II CDTA. The U.S. Army—subject to availability of funds—plans to subsequently conduct Phase III NexGen UAS TD activities (FY20 to FY23) to mature, build, and test capability-enabling air vehicle technologies and/or technology flight demonstrator(s).

Results of the Vertical Lift Consortium Phase I (FY18) Concept Study will inform refined requirements used as the basis of this CDTA effort.

This Phase II (FY19) CDTA effort will be conducted to develop feasible conceptual designs that meet the air vehicle requirements generated from the Phase I Concept Study results. Concepts will be assessed—including effects of projected technology insertions—to determine critical enabling technologies for development and demonstration in Phase III. An Objective Aircraft will be defined by successful offerors.

Phase III (FY20 to FY23). A flight demonstration and/or demonstration of capability-enabling air vehicle technologies is intended to be informed by the Phase II conceptual designs and identification of prioritized critical enabling technologies. The U.S. Government intends to directly choose Phase III demonstrators from Phase II concepts; however the government does not offer any guarantee and does not commit the U.S. Government to future contracts. Depending on the maturity and fidelity of AUAS requirements, Phase III may support the development and testing of competitive prototypes for entry into the engineering and manufacturing development phase of an AUAS program of record.

The purpose of the NexGen UAS TD CDTA is to:

(1) Define an Objective Aircraft

(2) Provide size, weight, cost, and performance information;

(3) Show promising approaches to meet desired capabilities and attributes;

(4) Quantify technology readiness;

(5) Establish credible cost, schedule and technical performance parameters;

(6) Understand size, weight, cost, and performance sensitivities through limited design excursions;

(7) Identify capability-enabling technologies

b. Execution Successful Offerors will define an Objective Aircraft concept that is an affordable, technically feasible conceptual design that accomplishes the mission tasks and meets the set of desired attributes and capabilities (to the maximum extent possible), summarized in Section B-1. A draft System Performance Specification (SPS) with detailed performance capabilities, trade-offs, and specifications for an objective aircraft is available upon request only to those offerors who have a valid Joint Certification Program (JCP) certification number. Please email your JCP certification number and CAGE code to the contracting office identified in the Master BAA to receive the SPS. If your organization does not have a JCP certification number, please refer to their website for assistance at https://public.logisticsinformationservice.dla.mil/jcp/search.aspx.

The Objective Aircraft conceptual designs should include assessments/contributions of technology insertions/developments expected in the development period (Phase III). The Objective Aircraft design and technologies assessment approach should describe, in detail, the critical enabling technologies, technology maturation plan, development risks, building block demonstration approach, and testing for validation of Technology Readiness Level (TRL).

The CDTA effort should have the following end-state:

(1) Conceptual design of an Objective Aircraft based on Government requirements, and any other derived requirements arising from the Government-provided vignettes and threat description, with additional detail for critical elements (see Section B-1).

(2) A set of design excursions from the Objective Aircraft, with additional detail for critical elements (see Section B-2). Sample design excursions are included in Table B-2; the final details of these design excursions will be provided by the Government prior to program kickoff. Additional information requested includes the impact of payload, mission equipment, and survivability features.

(3) A technology assessment and demonstration plan, as detailed in Section B-3, addressing technology advancements required to achieve stated performance of the Objective Aircraft.

Significant Government and Industry interaction is anticipated through formal and informal contact measures, including technical interchange meetings and design reviews. Following award, the Government will provide the following Government Furnished Information (GFI) as part of a Supplemental Package:

(1) Objective Aircraft desired attributes and design space definition;

(2) Threat description;

(3) A description of design excursions from the Objective Aircraft;

(4) Operational vignettes

A–4. ANTICIPATED FUNDING LEVEL AND PERFORMANCE PERIOD

Anticipated funding is approximately six million to nine million dollars ($6M to $9M); one million, five hundred thousand dollars ($1.5M) per award. The period of performance for Topic: Next Generation Unmanned Aircraft System Technology Demonstration Conceptual Design and Technology Assessment (CDTA) includes technical and administrative portions. A notional timeline of the expected order of events is depicted in Figure A-1.

Figure A- 1. Notional Phase 2 Timeline.

This topic is expected to result in multiple awards, which may address only part of the topic’s objectives (partial awards). Any Government award is subject to the availability of funds.

A–5. DATA ITEMS/DELIVERABLES

All awards under this announcement will require delivery of the following data items or deliverables in recipient or contractor format, described fully in Section C:

a. Program Management Plan, Deliverable 1

b. Technical Status Reports every two months, Deliverable 2

c. Financial Status Reports every two months, Deliverable 3

d. Final Presentation of Findings and Executive Summary, Deliverable 4 All awards will include a requirement to present the results of the work in a final conceptual design review presentation in Huntsville, AL (or other suitable location to be determined by the Government) upon completion of all technical effort.

A–6. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

Pre-award access to or submission of a classified proposal is not authorized. Offerors shall submit as part of the proposal evidence that the Offeror has a current SECRET facility clearance with the Defense Security Service.

A–7. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT, GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION, AND GOVERNMENT FURNISHED FACILITIES It is the Offeror's responsibility to identify, coordinate, and furnish supporting documentation for use of any Government furnished equipment (GFE), information, or facilities.

A–8. DATA RIGHTS

The Government requires, at a minimum, Government Purpose Rights as defined by the Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (DFARS) 252.227–7013, to all technical data, deliverables, and computer software to be delivered. It is the Offeror's responsibility to clearly acknowledge or take exception to the Government’s requirement for at least Government Purpose Rights.

A–9. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

(1) Specific instructions pertaining to the content and structure of proposals is specified in Master BAA W911W6-18-R-0005. For the Technical Volume, disregard Master BAA Technical content unless otherwise noted below. Volume I—Technical. The Technical Volume of the proposal shall include the following:

(a) Official Transmittal Letter and Cover Page – see Master BAA

(a) Establish credible potential for proposed concept(s) and/or technologies to surpass and extend beyond current capabilities with the goal of meeting desired attributes summarized in Table B-1 and available draft SPS.

(b) Define a thorough, complete, and clear approach to conducting conceptual design for unmanned aircraft with respect to size, performance, weight, and cost. Examples of past efforts used to inform the offerors ability to conduct conceptual design are acceptable.

(c) Describe how developed data will inform the Government on feasibility, size, performance, weight, and cost of concepts.

(d) Define a process (including description of design and analysis tools) for an Objective Aircraft to conduct conceptual design at the appropriate level of detail in order to communicate the overall design along with innovative or unique, critical features as well as size, performance, weight, and estimated cost.

(e) Include a description of the suitability and availability of facilities and qualified personnel to generate necessary data and generate an Objective Aircraft conceptual design.

(f) Include a description of the Offeror’s ability to mature and translate technologies, tools, special knowledge, skills, data and designs to a technology demonstrator program; and describe a high-level approach to conduct design, fabrication, and testing of offeror’s proposed design through preliminary design review and critical design review of design.

(g) Include a description of the Offeror’s previously demonstrated ability to conduct analyses, design, and build air vehicles of similar nature, including engineering analysis and documenting in a technical report.

(h) Include a draft Management Plan that clearly states the technical objectives, the specific approach to be pursued, and supporting background experience. (Refer to Section C, Deliverable 1).

(i) Include a description of industry partnership arrangements and define roles and responsibilities. The plan to award any subcontracts in a timely manner and effectively manage those subcontracts should also be included.

The Technical Volume shall not exceed 40 pages.

(2) Volume II—Cost. See Master BAA for Cost Volume content

A–10. EVALUATION CRITERIA/BASIS FOR AWARD

Proposal Evaluation Criteria The selection of one or more sources for award will be based on a scientific and/or engineering evaluation of proposals (both technical and cost as it relates to technical effort) in accordance with the criteria set forth in this section. Proposals will be evaluated on their own merit without regard to other proposals submitted under this announcement. Each proposal will receive an adjectival rating supported by narrative. The ratings/narrative will be used to develop an order of merit listing. The following evaluation criteria will apply:

(1) Technical Approach. The Government will evaluate the proposed approach in terms of:

(a) Degree to which the proposed concepts and/or technologies surpass and extend beyond current capabilities with the goal of meeting desired attributes. In addition, degree to which credibility of claims is established.

(b) Extent to which the developed data will be useful to inform the Government on feasibility, size, weight, cost, and performance of concepts

(c) Extent to which the conceptual design process (including design and analysis tools) for an Objective Aircraft design, is adequate and at an appropriate level of detail in order to communicate the overall design along with innovative or unique critical features, as well as performance, estimated cost, and survivability

(d) Thoroughness, completeness, and clarity of the proposed approach to conducting type/configuration conceptual design with respect to performance, weight, cost, technology assessment, and sensitivity to design excursions.

(2) Ability to Mature and Translate. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s team in terms of:

(a) Suitability and availability of facilities and qualified personnel to generate necessary data and conduct Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) conceptual designs

(b) Ability to mature and translate technologies, tools, special knowledge, skills, data, and designs to a key capability-enabling technologies demonstration effort

(3) Cost. See Master BAA for cost/price evaluation criteria.

Criteria (1) and (2) are equal and more important than (3).

A-11 ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

Technical and cost proposals shall be submitted electronically to the AMRDEC Safe Access File Exchange site at the following link: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/ Email notifications of submission shall be provided to the following points of contact for this Call:

Toy Robinson, Contract Specialist, email: Benyetta.m.robinson.civ@mail.mil and Laurie Pierce, Contracting Officer, email: laurie.a.pierce2.civ@mail.mil

The cost proposal shall be provided in Excel format for cost verification purposes. Questions should be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer noted above. All questions should be submitted within five days prior to the Call closing date to ensure a response. All questions and responses will be posted to FedBizOpps as an amendment to the Call. Proposals received after the date and time specified for closing will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors- Competitive Acquisition. Proposals shall be received not later than August 9, 2018 2:00 p.m. ET. In accordance with Section B-1a, a supplemental package (draft System Performance Specification) is available upon request to those offerors who have a valid Joint Certification Program certification number.

A. TECHNICAL EFFORT SCOPE DESCRIPTION

B–1. OBJECTIVE AIRCRAFT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

a. Summary of Desired Attributes The NexGen UAS objective aircraft conceptual design represents the future capability of an advanced UAS supporting Combat Aviation Brigade operations in the 2030 timeframe. This aircraft will support both legacy and future manned platforms, such as Future Vertical Lift (FVL). Key capabilities are derived from the operational parity with FVL, including: maximum airspeed, mission radius, operating environment, and survivability. To provide commanders with the highest level of operational flexibility and agility, the set of capabilities summarized in Table B-1 are desired. A draft System Performance Specification (SPS) with detailed performance capabilities, trade-offs, and specifications for an objective aircraft is available upon request only to those offerors who have a valid Joint Certification Program (JCP) certification number. Please email your JCP certification number and CAGE code to the contact identified in Section A-11 to receive the SPS. If your organization does not have a JCP certification number, please refer to their website for assistance at:

https://public.logisticsinformationservice.dla.mil/jcp/search.aspx.

Table B-1. Summary of NexGen UAS Desired Attributes

Flight Profile R2: EO/IR/LD

Geometric / Operating Limitations 40 ft X 40 ft [O] / 65 ft X 54 ft [T] Maximum Operating Size.

Unassisted take-off and landing, 150 ft x 125 ft field area, 10:1 climb from field center to clear 50 ft obstacle Downwash/outwash velocity NTE 120 ft/s, all height/azimuth

(9) NTE – Not To Exceed

b. Conceptual Design Data Data tables used in creation of documentation including curves on charts shall be provided in digital spreadsheet format. Aircraft drawing geometry shall be provided in electronic IGES format or STEP (ISO 10303) format. (Reference Documents: ADS–10D–SP, Air Vehicle Technical Description; ADS-40A-SP, Air Vehicle Flight Performance Description; SAWE RP8A, Weight and Balance Data Reporting Forms for Aircraft [including Rotorcraft].)

Copies of ADS documents are available from https://www.amrdec.army.mil/amrdec/rdmr-se/tdmd/StandardAero.htm or AMSAM–RA–IM–IS–IL, Building 5300, Sparkman Center, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama 35898–5000.

c. Conceptual Design This section provides overall concept and capabilities of the proposed aircraft to be manufactured and fielded (may be multiple configurations and types of aircraft) in acquisition program(s) such as AUAS. The following data shall be delivered, plus any other significant information that affects size, cost, and/or performance, survivability, or delineates one concept from another.

NOTE: As a general caveat in anticipation of unique or novel concepts or technologies that may be proposed, if the wording of a specific information requirement pre-supposes a particular configuration (e.g. conventional helicopter), provide equivalent information for the proposed configuration, if applicable.

d. Description

(1) Aircraft Derived Requirements. Enumerate the requirements used by the Offeror to specify sub-systems, vehicle capabilities, and associated systems. These requirements may include, but are not limited to:

(a) Sizing design conditions and mission profiles

(b) Atmospheric conditions

(c) Standards and airworthiness guidelines

(d) Maintainability goals

(e) Cost goals

(f) Operator capability limitations

(g) Component availability (e.g., commercial off-the-shelf subsystems), performance, and cost

(h) Component technology readiness

(i) Survivability goals, including threat system capabilities

(j) Performance and availability of supporting systems (e.g., communications infrastructure, transport infrastructure, launch and recovery infrastructure, teamed vehicle capabilities)

(2) Aircraft Drawings and Dimensions. Use ADS–10D–SP §5.1 (Level I) as guidance for drawings, dimensions, and tabulated data. Aircraft drawings shall be accurately scaled. The following aircraft drawings are required:

(a) Provide a set of 3-view engineering drawings with the aircraft drawn in the takeoff mode.

(b) For aircraft that change configuration during normal operation (e.g., tilt rotor aircraft), provide a supplemental drawing that shows the aircraft in other modes of operation (e.g., short takeoff, cruise). This drawing shall emphasize overall dimensions, clearances, and operating parameters (e.g., rotor shaft angle).

(c) Inboard layout drawings emphasizing major systems (e.g. fuel, engines, inlets/exhaust, transmission), payloads, and mission equipment arrangements. Drawings shall also indicate payload layout, restraint, and loading/offloading.

(d) For aircraft designed using 3D solid modeling tools, provide models for normal flight modes as appropriate.

(3) Aircraft Data.

(a) Design cruise speed

(b) Weight including, but not limited to:

[1] Weight Empty [2] Structural Design Gross Weight [3] Core Aircraft Weight [4] Fuel Tank Capacity [5] Operating Weight Empty [6] Maximum Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) Gross Weight (if applicable) [7] Design Gross Weight [8] Maximum Alternate Gross Weight

(c) Component Weight Data. Provide SAWE RP8A Part I Group Weight Statement less the Airframe Unit Weight page.

(d) Disk loading. For VTOL capable aircraft, provide disk loading at Design Gross Weight and Maximum Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) Gross Weight.

(e) Downwash/Outwash. For VTOL capable aircraft, characterize downwash and outwash flow and effects from lift system at hover in-ground effect at Design Gross Weight and 4k/95 °F conditions, with a 5-foot wheel/skid height above ground level.

(f) Cost estimates as enumerated in item (g) and including details and assumptions as follows:

[1] Acquisition cost estimates in FY18 Dollars of total development cost, vehicle prime equipment (fly-away cost), prime equipment plus support equipment (weapon system cost), and average procurement unit cost as defined by DoD Acquisition reporting standards.

[2] Operating cost estimates in FY18 Dollars per flight hour of direct manpower cost, fuel consumption cost, and direct maintenance (parts and maintenance consumables cost) as defined by the DoD Operating and Support Cost Estimating Guide.

[3] Both vehicle flyaway cost and vehicle direct maintenance cost should be organized into constituent components as defined by MIL–STD 881C aircraft WBS, with the cost of each vehicle component, the cost of integration and assembly, support equipment, initial spares, and profit and fee also listed and summed up to the total procurement cost.

(g) Cost estimates including but not limited to:

[1] Program cost estimates

· Development (research, development, test, and evaluation)

· Procurement (include any learning curve assumptions)

· Operations and support [2] Procurement cost estimates (in FY19 dollars)

· Fly-away cost—organized by MIL–STD 881C WBS

· Support equipment and initial spares costs [3] Operating cost estimates (in FY19 dollars)

· Average fuel consumption (and fuel type) for selected flight profile in gallons of fuel per flight hour or kilowatt-hours per flight hour

· Direct maintenance cost per flight hour—organized by MIL–STD 881C WBS

(h) Reliability, availability, and maintainability estimates including, but not limited to maintenance intervals of aircraft, given in flight-hours between tasks including but not limited to:

[1] Periodic inspections [2] Scheduled repair and/or replacement of vehicle components organized by WBS (MIL–STD 881C) [3] Predicted mean time in flight hours between unscheduled maintenance actions (MTBUMA) on vehicle components organized by WBS [4] Predicted mean repair time in hours for unscheduled maintenance actions organized by WBS [5] Predicted operational availability (Ao) as a function of operating tempo (OPTEMPO) measured in flight hours per month [6] Predicted mean time between mission abort in flight hours

(i) Propulsion system description, including but not limited to:

[1] Number of engines [2] Engine power ratings at sea level standard (SLS) (As applicable to vehicle configuration/design)— maximum continuous power (MCP), intermediate rated power (IRP), maximum rated power (MRP), contingency power (CP) [3] Drive and rotor system rated torque (all engines operating [AEO], one engine inoperative [OEI]) [4] Drive and rotor system rpm (100 percent speed), or multi-speed rotors/transmissions [5] Installed losses (inlet, inlet particle separator [IPS], exhaust, IR suppressor) [6] Fuel tank capacity

(j) Drag Estimate. The NexGen UAS objective aircraft will have a drag buildup of equivalent flat plat drag areas of major components conforming to ADS–10D–SP. Provide any changes in baseline drag due to different flight modes (conversion aircraft) or special mission packages. Example of a special mission package is addition of a fuel probe kit to baseline aircraft. Example of different flight modes is a tilt rotor in hover mode and cruise mode.

(k) Load Factor versus Airspeed (V-n) Diagrams. Provide limit load factor structural envelope at structural design gross weight (DGW). Provide estimated aerodynamic envelope for structural design and maximum alternate gross weights at SLS, SL/Hot, 4k/95 °F and 6k/95 °F conditions.

(l) Conversion Corridor. Provide conversion corridor for DGW and maximum alternate gross weight at SLS, SL/Hot, 4k/95 °F and 6k/95 °F conditions. Conversion corridor is bounded by the minimum and maximum airspeed curves versus conversion state (e.g. angle).

(m) Center of Gravity Range. Provide weight versus allowable center of gravity diagram for baseline aircraft. Show for all unique flight states (e.g. hover and cruise modes for converting aircraft). Show center of gravity range for mission profiles.

(n) Aircraft Aerodynamics and Dynamics Substantiation. For aircraft concepts whose aerodynamic and dynamic characteristics cannot be scaled from existing, well documented systems operating within their design envelope (provide references and data), the following aircraft aerodynamics and dynamics substantiation is required:

[1] Results of an aerodynamic analysis of the aircraft to substantiate lift, drag, and pitching moment characteristics of the aircraft and each major component subject to aerodynamic loading (e.g. fuselage, wing, stabilizers).

[2] Results of a comprehensive analysis of isolated rotor system to substantiate rotor performance, loads, and dynamics including aeroelastic stability.

[3] Results of comprehensive analysis of the complete aircraft to substantiate complete aircraft trim, performance, loads, aerodynamic interference, and aeroelastic stability.

[4] Complete documented electronic listing of all comprehensive analysis input parameters.

[5] For unconventional and novel rotor system concepts, provide rotor system data and rotor hub drawings as outlined ADS–10D–SP §5.4.2 (Level II Rotor Data).

e. Capabilities

(1) Payload versus Radius. Provide capability of aircraft to carry payload during the indicated flight profiles. The maximum takeoff weight will be limited by performance at initial takeoff, performance at mid-point hover condition, or a structural limit (Maximum Alternate Gross Weight).

(a) Payload versus radius curves

(b) Fuel burned versus radius curves

(2) Station Time versus Radius. Provide capability of aircraft to loiter at the mission mid-point for indicated flight profiles. The maximum takeoff weight will be limited by performance at initial takeoff, performance at mid-point hover condition, or a structural limit (Maximum Alternate Gross Weight).

(a) Maximum effort (with auxiliary fuel if applicable)

(b) Maximum internal fuel (if less than (a))

(c) Primary design mission payload

(d) Maximum payload (internal and external)

(3) Performance at Design Gross Weight. Provide curves at both International Standard Atmosphere (ISA) and constant 95 F atmospheres from sea level (SL) to maximum flight ceiling of aircraft at DGW. For each chart, altitude should appear on the y-axis of the plot.

(a) 99% (High) Best Specific Range Speed (V-br)

(b) Best endurance speed (V-be)

(c) One-hundred percent MCP limited cruise speed (Vmcp)

(d) Specific range at V-br, V-be, Vmcp

(e) Stall Speed (V-s)

(f) Rate of climb capability at best climb velocity (may use V-be)

(4) Flight Ceiling Charts versus Gross Weight. Provide flight ceiling curves ranging from Operating Weight Empty up to Maximum Takeoff Gross Weight.

(a) Hover ceiling (if hover capable) at 100 percent MRP (ISA), 95 percent MRP (95 F atmosphere)

(b) Service ceiling (100 percent MCP, ISA, 100 feet per minute climb capability)

(c) One engine inoperative service ceiling (100 percent MCP and 100 percent MRP, ISA, 100 feet per minute climb capability)

(5) Vertical Takeoff Capabilities. If VTO-capable, provide table of VTO capability at 95 percent MRP. Assume a nominal aircraft takeoff configuration with payload stored internally and use hover out of ground effect (HOGE) capability. For external load, use 200 feet per minute vertical rate of climb (VROC) capability. Table values include atmospheric points of SLS, SL/Hot, 4k/95 F, and 6k/95 °F conditions.

(6) Short Takeoff (STO) Capabilities. For takeoff in a confined space, either with a runway or with support equipment for launching, assume takeoff occurs at 95 percent MRP. Provide capabilities at SLS, SL/Hot, 4k/95 °F, and 6k/95 °F conditions. Short takeoff capabilities show the distance from zero speed to lift-off from ground and distance to clear a 50-foot obstacle. Show distance versus velocity during the STO, up to clearance of the 50-foot obstacle. For each chart, distance appears on the x-axis.

(a) Ground roll distance versus GW

(b) Distance to clear 50-foot obstacle versus GW

(c) Horizontal velocity versus ground distance

(7) Launch and Retrieve. For aircraft which takeoff or land with separate launch or retrieve apparatus, provide chronologies of the following at SLS, SL/Hot, 4k/95 °F, and 6k/95 °F atmospheric conditions, and a narrative description of how these might be affected by wind, rain, snow, and ice:

(a) Power and material supplies provided to the launch and retrieve apparatus (e.g., electrical power, compressed air, hydraulic fluid, fuel)

(b) Ground or vehicle interfaces (e.g., stakes, stabilizer bars, guy wires)

(c) Loads on the launch and retrieve apparatus and interfaces

(d) Loads at the aircraft and component level for critical components of the aircraft

(e) Vehicle altitude, airspeed, groundspeed, control margin, and clearance to edges of stay-out regions

(f) Communications and other interactions among the various systems

(g) Stay-out and other restricted regions

(h) Signatures (e.g., acoustic, visual, thermal, EM) which may reveal launch/retrieve locations

(8) Maneuver Capability. Provide Objective Aircraft design maneuver capability for the specified maneuvers. Perform maneuvers at DGW and 4k/95 °F conditions unless otherwise noted. All maneuvers start from a trimmed level flight condition with rotor/propeller/fan RPM set as appropriate for level flight condition.

(a) Level Flight Acceleration/Deceleration, Maximum Rate. Show capability for rapid level flight acceleration and deceleration; starting from trimmed level flight at V-be, increase power to MCP and accelerate at a constant altitude and heading to Vmcp, then rapidly decelerate back to trimmed level flight at V-be. Show footprint required to perform entire maneuver, with airspeed, transient altitude deviations, acceleration, and distance traveled. May also provide data for time-limited power application during the maneuver, as appropriate.

(b) Terrain Flight Turns. Show capability to conduct maximum effort turns while maintaining airspeed and holding a constant altitude. From trimmed level flight at target airspeed, conduct roll to maximum angle of bank that allows airspeed and altitude to be maintained through a 180 degree heading change; power applied during the maneuver may not exceed MRP. After a 180 degree heading change, recover to level flight. Conduct maneuver at V-be and Vmcp. For configurations with asymmetric turn performance, conduct turn in the worst direction. For each airspeed, show footprint required to perform entire maneuver, with airspeed, radius of turn, angle of bank, roll rate, pitch rate, heading change, aircraft load factor, power required, blade and/or wing loading, distance traveled, and transient altitude deviations.

(c) Obstacle Avoidance. Show capability to perform a maximum effort pull-up to push-over obstacle avoidance maneuver. Maneuver starts from both V-be and Vmcp trimmed level flight and end at trimmed level flight with an airspeed no less than V-be. Show footprint required to perform entire maneuver along with flight speed, aircraft load factor, blade and/or wing loading, distance traveled, and altitude change.

(d) Break Turn. Show capability to conduct an evasive turning maneuver, sacrificing altitude to maintain airspeed. From a trimmed level flight attitude conduct rapid roll to attain 60 degree angle of bank (AOB); apply maximum load factor as needed to conduct a 90 degree heading change given environmental conditions. Altitude will be sacrificed to maintain airspeed; an increase in airspeed is acceptable. Upon reaching 90 degree heading change, recover to level attitude at entry airspeed and minimize altitude loss. Conduct maneuver at V-be and Vmcp. For configurations with asymmetric turn performance, conduct turn in the worst direction. For each airspeed, show footprint required to perform entire maneuver, with airspeed, radius of turn, angle of bank, roll rate, pitch rate, heading change, aircraft load factor, power required, blade and/or wing loading, distance traveled, and altitude.

(e) Off Axis Climb to Pushover Break. Show capability to conduct rapid climb with heading change, and accelerating dive. From a trimmed level flight attitude at target airspeed, conduct rapid climb (trading airspeed as needed) to achieve 200 ft increase in altitude while making a 45 degree heading change. At top of climb/turn, return to trimmed level flight at no less than V-be and then conduct a rapid descent (pitch attitude as required) along this new heading to return to entry airspeed. Upon reaching entry airspeed (or entry altitude, whichever occurs first), perform a break turn recovery to a 45 degree AOB, returning to original heading. Conduct maneuver at no less than Vbe. For configurations with asymmetric turn performance, conduct climb turn in the worst direction and break turn in the opposite direction to the climb turn. Show footprint required to perform entire maneuver, with airspeed, radius of turn, angle of bank, roll rate, pitch rate, heading change, aircraft load factor, power required, blade and/or wing loading, distance traveled, and altitude.

f. Performance (As applicable to vehicle configuration/design)

(1) Vertical Flight (if applicable). Provide non-dimensional data at static conditions

(a) Isolated main rotor power versus thrust at 4k/95 °F atmosphere [1] Out of ground effect [2] In ground effect

(b) Download versus gross weight coefficient

(c) Tail rotor/Auxiliary propulsion coefficient of power (CP) versus main rotor CP

(2) Forward Flight. Provide tabulated dimensional data for level flight conditions at conditions listed as follows:

(a) Power Required versus Airspeed. Documentation shall include data points, which show best endurance speed and 99 percent best range speed.

[1] 4k/95 °F at DGW and STO weight, show point for 90 percent MCP [2] Sea level/Hot at DGW and STO weight [3] Sea level static, at DGW and STO weight

(b) For each power required data point in (2a, if applicable), provide rotor speed, rotor thrust, rotor tip path plane angle of attack, rotor blade loading (thrust weighted).

(c) For each power required data point in (2a, if applicable), provide power breakdown as:

[1] Non-rotor power required per ADS 40A section 5.6.1 and 5.6.1.1.

[2] Rotor power broken down per ADS 40A section 5.6.2.2.

(d) For each power required data point in (2a), provide rotor lift and wing lift.

(e) For each power required data point in (2a), provide rotor and auxiliary propulsive forces.

(f) For each power required data point in (2a), provide engine specific fuel consumption and aircraft specific range.

(g) For each power required data point in (2a), provide engine power available and drive shaft power limit.

(h) For each power required data point in (2a), provide any conversion states (angles) or unique flight properties of the system.

(3) Installed Engine Performance. Provide a functioning engine model (engine deck) or provide data for power available, fuel flow, engine operating rpm, optimum rpm, jet thrust, momentum drag, and any other engine characteristics that are needed to substantiate performance claims. Use a 5 percent margin for fuel flow conservatism. At engine power available settings of 50 percent MCP, 75 percent MCP, MCP, IRP, MRP, and CP provide engine performance data at the following conditions:

(a) Sea level static, SL/Hot, , 4k/95 °F, 6k/95 °F and altitude/temp of cruise-climb

(b) Static, 100 knot, 150 knot, 200 knot, 250 knot, 300 knot, and Vmcp (as applicable)

(4) Flight Profile Performance. Provide flight segment-by-segment data for all mission profiles (actual mission profiles will be provided by the Government in a Supplemental Package prior to program kickoff). For cost estimating purposes, assume 4 mission profiles with 11 segments per profile. Mission profile performance to be reported as mission performance in ADS–40A 5.7.1.1.

B–2. EXCURSION DESIGN REPORT

a. Excursions

Table B-2 contains example excursions from the Objective Aircraft design of the general number and scope envisioned for this study, provided to aid the offeror in developing cost estimates for this work. The final details of these design excursions will be provided by the Government prior to program kickoff.

Table B-2. Example Excursions

Objective Aircraft (2) Multi-role (3) Single Role (4) Light (5) Fast (6) Contractor Defined

230[O3] 205[T]- 230[O] 205[T]- 230[O]

EW9

Comm Relay (R1 and R2 Missions)

Notes: (1) KTAS – True Airspeed, knots

b. Supporting Data Data tables used in creation of documentation including curves on charts shall be provided in digital spreadsheet format. Aircraft drawing geometry shall be provided in electronic International Graphics Exchange Standard (IGES) format or Standard for the Exchange of Product (STEP; ISO 10303) format. (Reference Document: Aeronautical Design Standard (ADS)–10D–SP, Air Vehicle Technical Description.)

Copies of ADS documents are available from https://www.amrdec.army.mil/amrdec/rdmr-se/tdmd/StandardAero.htm or AMSAM–RA–IM–IS–IL Building 5300, Sparkman Center, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama 35898–5000.

c. Excursion Analysis NOTE: As a general caveat in anticipation of unique or novel concepts or technologies that may be proposed, if the wording of a specific information requirement pre-supposes a particular configuration (e.g. conventional helicopter), provide equivalent information for the proposed configuration, if applicable.

For each excursion from the objective aircraft, describe:

(1) Vehicle Performance

(a) Cruise speed

(b) Power required versus airspeed for all aircraft modes of operation (SLS, 4k/95, 6k/95)

(c) Payload versus radius

(d) Performance at DGW versus altitude (ISA) [1] Ninety-nine percent (high) best specific range speed (V-br) [2] Best endurance speed (V-be) [3] One-hundred percent MCP limited cruise speed (Vmcp) [4] Intermediate rated power speed (V-irp) [5] Stall Speed (V-s) [6] Specific range at V-br, V-be, Vmcp [7] Rate of climb capability at best climb velocity (may use V-be)

(e) Flight ceiling versus gross weight (GW) [1] Hover ceiling (if applicable) [2] Service ceiling

(f) Rotor/Propeller speed(s) versus airspeed

(g) Configuration specific information (as applicable) [1] Thrust sharing versus airspeed [2] Flight mode versus airspeed [3] Transition corridor (airspeed, altitude gain/loss) [4] 50 ft obstacle clearance distance versus density altitude (launch & recover)

(2) Aircraft Information

(a) Drag (equivalent flat plate area, each configuration)

(b) Payload: space, weight, power, drag (if applicable), and cost

(c) Mission equipment: space, weight, power, drag (if applicable), and cost

(d) Fuel type and capacity

(e) Weights [1] Core Vehicle [2] Max payload [3] Maximum takeoff gross weight [4] Design gross weight [5] Minimum operating [6] Structural design gross weight (and load criteria) [7] Weight of any peculiar support equipment used to support launch and recovery

(f) Rotor/tail rotor/propeller type [1] Type [2] Tip speed [3] Number of blades [4] Disk loading at DGW [5] Diameter [6] Max blade loading [7] Chord

(g) Engines [1] Number of engines [2] Max continuous power [3] Specific fuel (energy) consumption [4] Total power

(h) Configuration specific (as applicable) [1] Lift offset [2] Torque balance [3] Auxiliary thrust [4] Wing area [5] Launch & recovery support equipment description

(i) Technology estimation bases [1] Analysis or test references for parametric and analytical modes [2] Weights [3] Aerodynamics [4] Propulsion [5] Survivability [6] Manufacturing, operating, and support costs [7] Concept for autonomous operations

(3) Layout Information Aircraft Drawings and Dimensions. Use ADS–10D–SP §5.1 (Level I) as guidance for drawings, dimensions, and tabulated data. Aircraft drawings shall be accurately scaled. The following aircraft drawings are required:

[1] Provide a set of 3-view engineering drawings with the aircraft drawn in the vertical takeoff (VTO) mode.

[2] For aircraft that change configuration during normal operation (e.g., tilt rotor aircraft), provide a supplemental drawing which shows the aircraft in other modes of operation (e.g., short takeoff, cruise). This drawing shall emphasize overall dimensions, clearances, and operating parameters (e.g., rotor shaft angle).

[3] For aircraft that fold/stow for transport, provide a supplemental 3-view drawing that shows folded/stowed configuration for the aircraft. This drawing shall emphasize overall dimensions of the folded/stowed aircraft.

[4] For aircraft designed using 3D solid modeling tools, provide models for normal flight modes and shipboard operations as appropriate.

[5] For aircraft which use supplemental launch and recovery support equipment, provide 3-view engineering drawings of equipment.

(4) Additional Information For each excursion, provide an estimate of payload and mission systems equipment space, weight, power, and cost requirements and impact on aircraft size, cost, and performance. Also provide a description of the approach to interface with vehicle control interface (ground/air).

Assess the impact of survivability features on aircraft design and performance. Information provided should include: estimated space, weight, power, and cooling requirements; potential impacts on aircraft size, cost, and performance; and a general description of the methodology/technology used to meet the survivability level to be defined in the threat description to be provided as GFI.

B–3.

TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORT AND DEMONSTRATION PLAN

The report shall:

(1) Map desired attributes into engineering parameters, define metrics, and establish performance goals

(2) Identify candidate technologies by component, sub-system, or that provide innovative cross-sub-system functionality contributing to meeting performance goals

(3) Describe trade-study down-selection process to include any testing, analysis and substantiating data

(4) Describe down-selected technology [inter-]dependencies within and/or across subsytems that affect performance

(5) For down-selected technologies, assess target, expected, best- and worst-case values for defined metrics. Describe technical challenges that may limit performance below target value and unknowns represented by the difference between best- and worst-case values.

(6) Describe technologies in terms of operation, function, control, life, and cost along with any special material, manufacturing, or acquisition concerns

(7) Describe an analysis and test, building-block approach, to include interim experiments, demonstrations, and tests, for validating technologies to TRL 6 by FY23. Building-block approach should lead to a defined set of ground and flight tests necessary to validate technologies and demonstrate desired attributes. Flight testing should be considered for those technologies that can’t be validated through analysis, simulation or ground test and technologies that present significant integration risks or issues.

(8) Develop a top level schedule and estimated cost for a complete technology demonstration.

B. DATA ITEMS/ DELIVERABLES (DESCRIPTIONS)

C–1. DELIVERABLE 1

Program Management Plan Submission Schedule:

Draft – Due with Proposal Submission Final – Due at Kickoff

Note: The Government will review the Draft PMP during proposal evaluation and return an annotated copy to the respondent upon contract award.

The plan shall include:

(1) Organization with a biographical section describing key personnel, points of contact and contact information which defines the direct lines of control, responsibilities, functional relationships, team structure, and authority.

(2) A description of all interfaces between the Recipient and the Government and between the Recipient and its subcontractors, which are pertinent to the accomplishment of the SOW.

(3) The negotiated SOW and a narrative description of the technical approach, methods, tools, and facilities that the Recipient will employ to accomplish the tasks, including analysis, modeling and simulation, trade studies, and design.

(4) A detailed program schedule (WBS Level 3) depicting the schedule of events associated with accomplishing each task/milestone. Also include schedule for meetings, reviews, and data delivery.

(5) Labor hour, material, and other direct cost estimates shall be included by task, by quarter in a tabular format, and cumulative as a baseline for comparison to subsequent Financial Status Reports.

(6) A description of the facilities and/or data sources to be employed in the effort.

Submission shall be furnished electronically via MS Word® or PDF format.

C–2.

DELIVERABLE 2

Technical Status Report Submission Schedule:

Every 2 months after Kickoff

The technical status report will detail technical progress and major developments to date and report on all problems, technical issues or major developments during the reporting period. Each report shall include, as applicable:

(1) Procedures, analysis methods/tools, simulation and modeling, trade study methods utilized during performance of the effort

(2) Description of task products/documents and deliverables

(3) Statement of data/results/findings obtained and…