Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division – Request for Information (RFI) Naval Surface Technology & Innovation Other Transaction Authority Agreement
Type of document: Contract Notice
Country: United States
Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division – Request for Information (RFI) Naval Surface Technology & Innovation Other Transaction Authority Agreement
Department of the Navy
17362 Dahlgren Road
Suite 157 Dahlgren VA 22448-5100
Scott W. Montrief, Cost/Price Analyst, Phone 5402841252, Email email@example.com
Request for Information (RFI)
Navy Surface Technology and Innovation
Other Transaction Authority Agreement
The Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD), intends to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to competitively establish an Other Transaction Authority (OTA) Agreement with a single Consortium, a legal entity whose members will be comprised of both traditional and non-traditional defense contractors. The OTA, 10 U.S.C. § 2371b, allows the Department of Defense (DoD) to “carry out prototype projects that are directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, components or materials proposed to be carried out by the DoD, or to improvement of platforms, systems, components, or materials in use by the armed forces.” Constant innovation and rapid technology advances are occurring throughout the world. Partnerships with commercial industry, the civil maritime sector, and others will be used to leverage these approaches and increase flexibility and agility, reduce cost, improve technology and capability insertion, and decrease program development cycles.
OTA objectives include rapid development prototyping and testing that can be demonstrated in an operational environment and provide for a rapid fielding of an operational capability. A prototype project can generally be described as a preliminary pilot, test, evaluation, demonstration, or agile development activity used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of a particular technology, process, concept, end item, effect, or other discrete feature. Prototype projects may include systems, subsystems, components, materials, methodology, technology, or processes. By way of illustration, a prototype project may involve: a proof of concept; a pilot; a novel application of commercial technologies for defense purposes; a creation, design, development, demonstration of technical or operational utility; or combinations of the foregoing, related to a prototype. The OTA offers an alternative to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)‐based acquisitions, allowing for access to participation by non-traditional defense contractors with innovative solutions that may not normally desire to participate in government procurements.
The OTA Consortium model specifically allows for enhanced collaboration between Government and industry. The collaborative nature of this model also creates a longer‐term channel for the Government to capitalize on “technology push” by obtaining industry input and feedback on rapidly evolving technologies. The OTA Consortium model also fosters development of interoperable, modular, open architecture systems and prototypes that permit rapid, flexible technology upgrades and mission reconfiguration. Its emphasis on engaging non‐traditional technology suppliers casts a wider net for capturing ideas and innovations. For all companies, the model provides a process to have a voice and the ability to “weigh‐in” on critical technology issues and inform Government technology requirements. The OTA Consortium model also establishes a mechanism for creating technology transition partnerships between small technology innovators and large system integrators.
NSWCDD, is releasing this Request for Information (RFI) inform industry of an interest to establish a new Section 815 OTA Agreement with a consortium under the authority of 10 USC 2371b to develop and mature technologies to enable advanced approaches to maintaining maritime superiority, and to solicit feedback from industry on the proposed approach.
-maturing technologies that assist in surface maritime dominance
-experimenting to better inform and equip the warfighter
-demonstrating new technologies to increase warfighting capabilities
-developing innovative solutions for surface lifecycle challenges across the spectrum
The potential OTA Agreement is anticipated to cover the following technology areas across Naval Surface Warfare Centers. The list is provided for planning purposes only – the RFP will contain the final technology areas.
1. Multi-function Materials: Research, development, demonstration, and exploitation of technologies and methods associated with metamaterials. This includes the development of algorithms, measurement techniques, hardware, and techniques to validate the capability of multi-functional materials. As related to the development and demonstration, the manufacturability and survivability of the meta/multi-functional materials utilizing state-of-the-art (SOTA) technologies and capabilities.
2. Cyber: Research, development, demonstration, test, and evaluation of tools, techniques, procedures, and processes that expand the state of the art in cyber warfare, cyber engineering practices, and system security engineering practices throughout the system lifecycle. This includes advanced offensive and defensive applications, technologies (anti-tamper, supply chain risk management, Hardware and Software, microcode to application layer), and tools supporting vulnerability assessment and adversarial assessment (such as red team) cyber initiatives in all aspects.
3. Big Data Analytics/Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning: Boundary extension of ‘big data’ analysis tools used for data classification, clustering, dimensionality reduction, predictive analysis, visualization, and forensic analysis of streaming data. Research may include artificial intelligence (AI)/autonomy/deep learning for statistical pattern recognition, vehicle control, semantic reasoning, and cyber defense. Research may include threat assessment and enhancement of RF monitoring, and recording/analysis. Consider advanced Viz concepts for augmented reality, and personnel training/readiness.
4. Directed Energy Science & Engineering (including electrical power management): Technologies associated with EMRG, HEL, HPM, including integration into weapon, combat, and ship systems. Electric Weapons enable the defeat of Anti-Access capabilities with potentially lower cost per engagement than conventional weapons. Electric weapons applications include Electromagnetic Railgun (EMRG), High Energy Lasers (HEL) and High Powered Microwave (HPM).
a. EMRG will extend the reach of the warfighter beyond that of conventional guns, can address advanced air threats, and removes the need to store high explosive propellant to leave more space for projectiles. Technology areas of interest include high energy density pulsed power, high-rate charging systems, energy storage suitable for shipboard environments, novel rail materials and manufacturing techniques, mount systems, high-current transfer techniques, and thermal management systems.
b. HELs offer the ability to counter asymmetric threats with high precision, nearly instantaneous engagement, and deep magazines and no weapons resupply. Technology areas of interest include laser sources, beam control systems, integrated diagnostics, adaptive optics, atmospheric characterization, target tracking hardware and software, gimbals, advanced cameras and sensors from the visible to infrared, and test instrumentation.
c. HPMs employ non-lethal, non-kinetic effects in order to control escalation, avoid collateral damage, and expand the battlespace. Technology areas of interest include high average and/or peak power Radio Frequency and Microwave Sources, novel antennas, compact pulsed power and energy storage systems, high voltage devices and modulators, standoff battle damage assessment of electronic targets, and non-intrusive instrumentation.
Common to all three Electric Weapons applications is the need for integration with ship’s power, cooling and mechanical systems as well the interaction with other weapons and the Combat System. Research, development, demonstration, and exploitation of technologies, algorithms, methods as well as advanced prototypes in each of these application areas is desired.
5. Advanced Computing and Software Engineering: Research, development, demonstration, and exploitation of tools, techniques, and procedures that expand the state of the art in software engineering practices, advanced computing and computation, and heterogeneous/homogenous computing environments throughout the system lifecycle. This includes hardware and software architecture and design, formal verification tools and techniques, algorithmic development and design, clustering/high availability computing stacks, compiler technologies, software assurance tools, automatic code generation, networking tools and the necessary hardware and software to improve the state of the art in the field of computation and advanced computing.
6. Autonomous and Unmanned Systems (UxS): Research, development, test and evaluation, systems engineering, modeling & simulation, certification, and demonstration of autonomous and unmanned systems and payload technologies. Payload technologies include sensors, onboard computing, and weapon capabilities, and payload deployment mechanisms. Advanced control methods and technologies are desired for both platforms and payloads in all domains. This includes sub-system and system level control that incorporates integrated capabilities and the ability to collaborate between systems of systems for massively scalable multi-UxS “swarms” for both offensive and defensive purposes. Achieving autonomous and unmanned systems technology integration into modern and emerging weapon control, combat systems, and force structures is also sought.
7. Electromagnetic Environmental Effects and Spectrum: Research, development, prototype (including preliminary pilot), demonstration, test, and evaluation activities used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of evolving electromagnetic systems and the management of those systems to more efficiently utilize the spectrum and address electromagnetic compatibility, electromagnetic interference, and RADHAZ, as it relates to fleet operations and integrated topside design. The effort may include systems, subsystems, components, algorithms, software, materials, methodology, technology (e.g. machine learning), and processes. In order to support feasibility assessments, the project will address cost, technical performance, platform impacts (e.g. size, weight, and power), combat system integration, or any combination thereof.
8. Sensor Systems:
a. Advanced Radar Systems: Research, development, prototype (including preliminary pilot), demonstration, test, and evaluation activities used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of advanced radar systems for the surface navy. The effort may include systems, subsystems, components, algorithms, software, materials, methodology, technology, and processes.
b. Sensor Data Fusion: Research, development, prototype (including preliminary pilot), demonstration, test, and evaluation activities used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of fusing data from multiple types of sensors (e.g. radar, electronic warfare, electro-optical/infrared) that or either geospatially co-located or separated. The effort may include systems, subsystems, components, algorithms, software, materials, methodology, technology, and processes. In order to support feasibility assessments, the project will address cost, technical performance, platform impacts (e.g. size, weight, and power), combat system integration, or any combination thereof.
c. Sensor Data Analytics: Research, development, prototype (including preliminary pilot), demonstration, test, and evaluation activities used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of efficiently collecting sensor data from operational assets to be used for 1) identifying areas, including those not obvious to the warfighter, where sensors can be improved, 2) validating sensor models and simulations, and 3) assessing proposed solutions. The effort may include systems, subsystems, components, algorithms, software, materials, methodology, technology, and processes. In order to support feasibility assessments, the project will address cost, technical performance, combat system integration, or any combination thereof.
d. Advanced Electronic Warfare: Research, development, prototype (including preliminary pilot), demonstration, test, and evaluation activities used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of advanced electronic warfare systems, including advancement of threat characterization, combat system integration, cognitive decision support, real-time EW and sensor effects evaluation, and collaborative weapon and sensor engagements. The effort may include systems, subsystems, components, algorithms, software, materials, methodology, technology (e.g. machine learning), and processes. In order to support feasibility assessments, the project will address cost, technical performance, platform impacts (e.g. size, weight, and power), combat system integration, or any combination thereof.
9. Gun and Projectile Systems: Research, development, demonstration, and exploitation of technologies, algorithms, and methods that expand the ability for innovative design, manufacturing, and assessment approaches for gun and projectile systems. The gun and projectile system technology elements includes current and future gun mounts, gun barrels, gun launch energy, gun power and cooling, gun fire controls, gun fire control sensors, and projectile systems including hypersonic projectiles with seeker technologies. Areas of interest include prototype hardware and computer algorithms; establishing manufacturing techniques; modelling & simulation of equipment components, system elements and system interfaces; development of test equipment, instrumentation and fixtures; and validation testing of equipment and software utilizing an operationally relevant environment at land-based or at-sea test platforms.
The gun and projectile system technology elements are categorized into this modular framework to permit ease of discussing the technology improvements, communicating the relationship (interfaces) between element functions and weapon system capability, and understanding integration requirements for establishing validation plans to support accelerated learning and fielding.
The seven technology element for the current and future gun and projectile system are provided in the following:
a. The gun mount is the structure that permits training and elevating the barrel and all supporting equipment necessary to transfer ship services such as power, cooling or ammunition to the barrel.
b. The barrel is the tube through which the projectile will travel during firing and can be either a conventional gun barrel or rail gun at minor, medium or major caliber sizes.
c. The gun launch energy element provides the method and magnitude of launching the projectile toward its target and includes gun propellant, pulsed power or other methods of projectile propulsion.
d. The power and cooling element energize the mount and other gun support systems during operation and remove any heat generated during system operation.
e. The fire control element permits engagement against the threat and allows the operator at the console or the system actions to be translated into defense or offensive kinetic actions.
f. The fire control sensor provides the discrete track information so the round may intercept its intended target within a lethal miss distance.
g. The projectile is a modular and may maintain a common form, fit, and function for firing from both conventional guns or railgun. The HVP common flight body will use differently shaped sabot enclosures and assemblies to permit firing from round bore conventional guns and convex bore Railguns. The projectile may be designed for subsonic to hypersonic muzzle velocities with seeker technologies
10. Digital Engineering: Modeling and Simulation (M&S), Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE), Verification and Validation (V&V), and integration of models into System of Systems (SoS) environment. Digital engineering (DE) represents the philosophy, methodologies, practices and techniques that will enable Dahlgren to move all of its analytical and developmental activities into the digital age. The scope of this effort is broad; DE will encompass all activities across the system engineering “V” from the early conceptual development phases all the way to system deployment and training. DE is meant to eliminate the reliance on paper documentation while providing a digital collaborative environment to execute tasking within. NSWCDD’s DE strategy provides the overarching umbrella under which previously disjoint areas of research and work (e.g., artificial intelligence, machine learning, virtualization, etc.) will be brought into a holistic environment where these activities and be leveraged and coordinated with each other.
11. Human Systems Integration: Research, development, demonstration, and exploitation of technologies, algorithms, and methods that enhance human and team cognitive, physical, social and behavioral performance, improve manpower, personnel, and training capabilities, increase safety, occupational health, and survivability, optimize environment and habitability conditions to support performance, and that advance human systems engineering modeling, simulation and analysis capabilities as they relate to HSI engineering design, test, and experimentation. Critical HIS research areas include Human Computer Interaction (Augmented/Virtual Reality, Advanced Data Visualization and Displays, Interface/Interaction Design for Future Systems, and Wearable Interfaces and Performance Monitoring), Human and Unmanned Autonomous Systems Teaming (Interface/Interaction Design, Human Modeling, Teamwork/Teambuilding between Humans and Autonomous Systems), and Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning to aid human performance (Advanced Analysis and Design Tools, Human Modeling, Threat Prediction/Detection/Assessment, Decision Making, Situation Awareness, Mission Planning and Execution, and Teaming).
12. Quantum Technologies: New concepts or theoretical frameworks in the areas of quantum sensing, computing, and simulations, explicit (i.e. non-black-box) quantum and quantum-inspired algorithms for (e.g. material modeling, mission planning, and signal processing). Investigate new quantum computing paradigms, methods to use weak measurement/dynamic nonlocality, and other new quantum effects to provide novel detection methods and to enhance the sensitivity of field gradient measurements.
13. Threat Engineering: The technology area of current, specific interest is Threat Engineering Research and development concerning the identification of threat vulnerabilities and identifying countering effects. This Threat Engineering technology investment is the navy enabler to 1) avoiding technological surprise; 2) avoiding developing and deploying point solutions; and 3) deploying operationally capable systems to defeat specific threats. Enabling Threat Engineering research requires that we make significant investments in complex, intricate end-to-end threat Modeling and Simulation (M&S). The question is why do we need this Threat Engineering M&S technology? The answer is that threat vulnerabilities identification is the process of learning what the threat cannot do. Knowing what a threat does (a design and performance assessment) is not sufficient to know how to defeat it. We must find out what limitations the threat has, where does it not work or work well, when is it pushed over its performance limits, etc.? Inherently this is the evaluation of how well does the threat perform in an operational warfighting environment against our current and envisioned warfighting systems and within the elements of the environment we and our adversaries must operate in. With this technology and its use, we will then avoid technological surprise, and be enabled to confidently explore and deploy the most affordable warfighting solutions.
14. Mission Engineering and Analysis: Engineering and analysis across surface warfare domain mission areas. Mission engineering (ME) and analysis activities examine warfighting capability within an operational context. Warfighting objectives are translated into mission-level requirements which are then flowed down to individual platforms and systems. Gaps are identified and candidate solutions (material and non-material) are examined to determine if the gaps are addressed. Example models, reports, white papers, prototypes include:
a. Fleet Mission Level Assessment and Evaluation, in which analytical rigor is brought into the planning, execution and analysis of Fleet Exercises.
b. Mission and domain-level analysis in support of OPNAV and PEO IWS to assess current and planned warfighting capability.
c. Support to the Fleet Engagement Community of Practice Surface Warfare Analysis Team to analyze questions of interest to the Navy Analytics Office.
Mission engineering is now considered a core capability at NSWCDD and ME activities are primarily managed out of the Integrated Combat Systems Department (V).
15. Integrated Warfare Systems: Research, development, demonstration and exploitation of techniques and technologies that enable Integrated Warfare Systems to capitalize on Open Architecture computing environments. Research and demonstrate the use of Service Oriented Integrated Warfare System Architectures that utilizes continuous integration software development and enables the use of accessible commercial cloud infrastructure to enable disparate Design Code Test evolutions. Explore and implement Model Based System Engineering as a means to document and prototype Integrated Warfare System current and future performance across the entire Kill Chain (Plan, Detect, Control, Engage and Assess). Investigate and implement algorithms and techniques for integrated Warfare Systems capabilities that enable sensor netting and weapon pairing of an integrated force across the entire kill chain and surface warfare domain mission areas. Investigate and implement techniques that improve Human Machine pairing to support Integrated Warfare Systems across the tactical and training functional areas. Develop access to universities and Industry partners that focus on Open Architecture Environments, Service Oriented Architecture, cloud computing, and advanced algorithm development for sensor resourcing, distributed engagements and distributed computing.
16. Virtualization: Research, development, demonstration, and analysis of alternatives associated with Virtualization technologies, including hardware abstraction techniques (hypervisors) and operating environment abstraction techniques (containers). Virtualization solutions to include dynamic resource allocation, cyber resilience, real-time performance assessment, heterogeneous hypervisor deployment, and incorporation of service oriented concepts. Prototype efforts to include execution of hardware and software solutions that meet a wide range of Navy needs for both laboratory variations, portable, and shipboard environments.
17. Asymmetric Warfare: Research, development, test and evaluation, systems engineering, rapid prototyping and fielding of systems to defeat and defend against non-traditional threats. Utilize comprehensive scientific and engineering knowledge, operational experience, and rapid prototyping capabilities for the development and fielding of warfighting and peacekeeping technology solutions that enable warfighters to more effectively and appropriately respond to asymmetric threats and acts of aggression. Includes hardware and software development to deliver innovative and cost-effective solutions that include special payloads, advanced countermeasures, counter-asymmetric weapons, scalable effect weapons, disruptive technologies, special signals collection, embedded systems with specialized tactical electro-mechanical technologies, tagging/tracking/locating capabilities, and forensics and biometrics systems.
18. Manufacturing: Research development, demonstration, and exploitation of advanced mechanical manufacturing technologies, such as additive manufacturing, and their applications used for development and fabrication of prototype and developmental surface warfare, combat, and weapons systems hardware. This includes material science and engineering required to enable new materials and to enable utilization of existing naval and defense materials for advanced manufacturing technologies, modeling and simulation to support development, fabrication, and manufacturing of prototypes with advanced manufacturing technologies, and acquisition of advanced manufacturing materials and capabilities to enable rapid prototype fabrication at the center.
a. Additive Manufacturing
b. Global Manufacturing
19. Lethality: Research, development, and testing needed to measure, understand, model, and quantify emergent kinetic and non-kinetic weapons concepts and associated effects in order to provide acquisition decision makers an objective technical assessment of these concepts. Lethality begins with an understanding of the threat and its associated vulnerabilities as applied to the Systems Effectiveness Kill Chain and then uses this understanding to develop mathematically tractable models to assess weapon performance and resultant effectiveness when integrated with a platform.
20. Surface Offensive & Defensive Engagements: Research, development, engineering, testing and prototyping of capabilities for surface engagement, both offensive and defensive not covered by other topics. This includes the use of kinetic, non-kinetic, lethal and non-lethal mechanisms to allow the naval services the capability to execute all assigned missions whether in a hostile or benign environment. This topic includes technologies that will allow the more efficient use of current engagement systems via enhancements (better integration of systems, improvements in algorithms, and addition of sensors) and novel concepts in both hardware and software that will provide new capabilities to the naval services.
21. Launcher Technology: Research, development, test and evaluation, systems engineering, modeling and simulation, and demonstration of missile launching systems. The missile launching systems technologies include current and future missile launching systems, hot and cold missile launch technologies, shock mitigation methods for ship mounted equipment, hardening and protection methods for reducing missile sympathetic detonation risks onboard ship, lightweight and composite materials, rocket motor exhaust systems for ship launchers, insulating materials for high pressure and high mass flow environments, launcher electronics and architectures for integrating different missiles into a single launcher, missile canister technologies, modular launcher designs and integration methods, and launcher integration with fire control and combat systems. This includes missile launching systems that may be used for autonomous and unmanned systems. Areas of interest include prototype hardware and computer algorithms; establishing manufacturing techniques; modeling and simulation of equipment components, system elements and system interfaces; development of test equipment, instrumentation and fixtures; and validation testing of equipment and software utilizing an operationally relevant environment on land-based or at-sea test platforms.
Request for Information:
Information from industry is requested to assist NSWCDD develop the way forward, with a focus on the following areas and questions.
Respondents shall provide information related to their capabilities to fulfill/address/contribute to the Navy Surface Technology and Innovations areas listed.
Respondents shall specifically address:
•1. What are the advantages/disadvantages of working under an OTA Agreement?
•2. Under what conditions or circumstances would industry participate in an OTA consortium?
•3. What barriers does industry foresee in working with the Navy in an OTA consortium strategy? For example, are there any legal, security, or intellectual property rights implications?
•4. What are the potential advantages and drawbacks to the structure of the OTA Agreement, specifically as it concerns the number and value of projects to be awarded within the consortium, the time frame for the awards to be made and work to be accomplished, and how work is solicited (i.e. annually at set times versus ad-hoc as needs arise)?
•5. Does your company intend to propose as a consortium manager?
•6. Are there any technology areas not listed above that the Navy should consider?
•7. What is your approach to marketing requirements to non-traditional contractors?
•8. Have you previously managed a consortium model OTA?
•a. If yes, do you believe it was successful in meeting its objective?
•b. If yes, what lessons learned and best practices would you encourage to the Navy to adopt?
•9. What are your consortium dues? Are they one-time or annual?
•10. What services/benefits do you offer the Government? (hosting industry days, etc.)
All responses or questions related to this RFI must be received no later than 12:00 PM on 4 October 2018 by email to Scott Montrief (Scott.firstname.lastname@example.org) and Arline Parker (Arline.Parker@navy.mil) . All email responses shall contain the subject line “RFI_N00178-18-9-0001_COMPANY NAME”.
This RFI is not a Request for Proposal. The requested information is for planning purposes and does not constitute a commitment, implied or otherwise, that a procurement action will be issued nor will the Government pay for the information solicited. All information and data received in response to the RFI marked or designated as corporate proprietary information will be fully protected and held in strict confidence. The Government will post responses to questions received in response to this RFI via an amendment; the amendment will be posted within the FedBizOpps portal. Any request for competitive proposals will be issued by a separate announcement.