N254-C01 TITLE: Catapult Challenge: Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Multi-Platform Product Family Architecture
OUSD (R&E) CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Trusted AI and Autonomy;Advanced Computing and Software;Integrated Network Systems-of-Systems
The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws.
OBJECTIVE: Develop an architecture that facilitates capabilities to be fielded across Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) systems fielded across Maritime Patrol Reconnaissance Aircraft (MPRA), submarines, surface combatants, and seabed protection systems.
DESCRIPTION: The Navy is seeking additional Phase II research and development on previous Phase I and Phase II efforts. The proposing small business concern must detail the previous SBIR/STTR efforts and how they will extend the previous SBIR/STTR effort to meet the requirements of this topic.
The Navy desires a multi-platform architecture for Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) that can enable integration of key warfighting capabilities, to include Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms, across multiple US Navy Platforms. Multiple Navy enterprises and directorates contribute to undersea warfare. Over the decades, this has led to divergent system architectures. These divergent system architectures degrade the Navy’s ability to leverage developments in support of a combined lethal network of capabilities. The combined Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Multi-Platform Product Family Architecture will enable key architectures across constituent ASW acquisition offices to be aligned to enable capability reuse, increasing warfighting capability at reduced acquisition cost and with reduced sailor burden.
Hardware required for the architecture shall comply with Modular Open System Architecture (MOSA) and follow open standards for compute, storage, input/output (I/O) and memory. Software contributing to the architecture shall enable integration of key warfighting capabilities, including various AI algorithms, across different combat systems. These combat systems are developed by each of the three Navy enterprises that contribute to Anti-submarine Warfare: The Undersea Enterprise (USE), the Surface Warfare Enterprise (SWE), and the Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE). In addition, the architecture shall enable integration of capabilities with other DoD entities with a need for Anti-Submarine capabilities, for example the Coast Guard and Homeland Defense to defend against commodities and threats conveyed via submarines or Marine Corps for detecting submarine threats to advanced bases established to defend national interests across the world.
The ASW Multi-Platform Product Family Architecture shall both 1) demonstrate connectivity with at least one of the Navy systems with an Anti-submarine warfare mission (MPRA, SSN, DDG, FFG, or Seabed defense) and 2) be able to demonstrate the feasibility of connectivity with the other ASW systems. The architecture shall enable cyber compliance and support environmental qualification on air, surface, and undersea systems. The architecture shall incorporate standardized interfaces that enable integration of capabilities such as AI, sensor, and unmanned underwater systems modules across platforms with an ASW mission, with the P-8 representing a key system that possesses extended range at speed but with extremely limiting space, weight, power, cost, and cooling (SWAP-C2) constraints.
The small business concern shall demonstrate the ability to deploy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Algorithms developed by Project Harbinger to the P-8 and demonstrate that integration with other platforms with an ASW mission is feasible. In Phase II, the small business concern will define and standardize interfaces to enable affordable and effective integration of ASW capabilities and sensors aboard platforms with an ASW mission. Among the systems of interest, a key focus shall be integration of AI, sensor processing, and unmanned underwater systems modules with systems with a limited computational infrastructure, such as the P-8 Maritime Patrol Reconnaissance Aircraft.
Work produced in Phase II may become classified. Note: The prospective contractor(s) must be U.S. owned and operated with no foreign influence as defined by 32 U.S.C. § 2004.20 et seq., National Industrial Security Program Executive Agent and Operating Manual, unless acceptable mitigating procedures can and have been implemented and approved by the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) formerly Defense Security Service (DSS). The selected contractor must be able to acquire and maintain a secret level facility and Personnel Security Clearances. This will allow contractor personnel to perform on advanced phases of this project as set forth by DCSA and NAVSEA in order to gain access to classified information pertaining to the national defense of the United States and its allies; this will be an inherent requirement. The selected company will be required to safeguard classified material during the advanced phases of this contract IAW the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), which can be found at Title 32, Part 2004.20 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
PHASE I: Catapult leverages prior SBIR/STTR investment to accelerate technology development to meet Naval priorities. Small business concerns should have accomplished the following in their previously funded SBIR/STTR Phase I effort:
PHASE II: The Phase II effort shall develop a standardized interfaces to enable affordable and effective integration of ASW capabilities and sensors aboard platforms with an ASW mission. Building on these standardized interfaces, the awardee shall develop a prototype that enables the P-8 to integrate ASW capabilities, to include
Demonstrate the interfaces are standardized across the family of platforms with an ASW mission, develop a prototype that could be used to field important capability across each major platform with an ASW mission, to include SSNs, SQQ-89 sonars aboard DDGs and FFGs, and Seabed systems.
For each major platform, execute a land-based demonstration of the loose integration of a ASW capability that the platform’s organic ASW suite currently lacks. Negotiation of which capability will be demonstrate for each major platform shall be suggested in the Phase II proposal. If the capability the Navy desires integrated for each major platform exceeds the bounds of the Phase II funding, the Navy has the option to add their desired capability for each major platform with mission funds.
The government will evaluate the prototype to determine its capability in meeting the performance goals defined in the Phase II SOW and the current cybersecurity requirements for achieving authority to operate (ATO). The ASW Multi-Platform Product Family Architecture prototype will be delivered at the end of Phase II.
It is probable that the work under this effort will be classified under Phase II (see Description section for details).
PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The awardee will be expected to support the Navy in transitioning the ASW Multi-Platform Product Family Architecture to support major platforms with ASW missions as well as the need of Homeland Defense and Marine Corps to perform ASW as part of their missions.
The technology will have private sector commercial potential for any family of infrastructure-critical systems where stove-piped development has prohibited capability sharing that is desired but previously not affordable, as may occur for organizations performing disaster response.
REFERENCES:
KEYWORDS: Product Family Architecture; divergent system architectures; increasing warfighting capability; space, weight, power, cost, and cooling (SWAP-C2) constraints; standardized interfaces; detecting submarine threats
** TOPIC NOTICE ** |
The Navy Topic above is an "unofficial" copy from the Navy Topics in the DoD 25.4 R1 SBIR BAA. Please see the official DoD Topic website at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/solicitation-documents/active-solicitations for any updates. The DoD/Navy issued its Navy 25.4 Release 1 Catapult Challenge pre-release on October 2, 2024 which opens to receive proposals on October 23, 2024, and closes November 20, 2024 (12:00pm ET). Direct Contact with Topic Authors: During the pre-release period (October 2, 2024 through October 22, 2024) proposing firms have an opportunity to directly contact the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to ask technical questions about the specific BAA topic. Once DoD begins accepting proposals on October 23, 2024 no further direct contact between proposers and topic authors is allowed unless the Topic Author is responding to a question submitted during the Pre-release period. Topics Search Engine: Visit the DoD Topic Search Tool at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/topics-app/ to find topics by keyword across all DoD Components participating in this BAA.
|
| 11/6/24 | Q. | Can the government confirm whether CUI can be submitted within the proposal? If so, does the government have guidance regarding the inclusion of CUI. |
| A. | Yes, the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal (DSIP) accepts proposals that are CUI. The proposal submission will be considered CUI. | |
| 11/6/24 | Q. | We ask the government for clarification regarding the Catapult-specific Instructions for the Cost Volume (Volume 3). In the instructions, Table 3: Cost & Period of Performance displays Base – Cost (NTE) and POP (NTE). However, in Section 7 – Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table, the table askes for the estimated base, option amount, and the total estimated amount (base + option). Can you please clarify what the government intends to receive from industry? |
| A. | *** Navy SBIR/STTR Programs provides an updated response: on 11/7/2024 Section 7, Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table, of the Catapult Challenge Proposal template was revised to remove the table columns titled Estimated Option Amount and Total Estimated Amount Base + Option. Proposers are required to only provide the Estimated Amount in a single column. This revised Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table in section 7 of the Catapult Challenge Proposal template reflects the example Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table provided in the Navy SBIR 25.4 Release 1 Instruction.
Thank you for reaching out! The proposing small business concern can just use the Base column in the Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table. If selected to submit a full Phase II proposal (for Step Two) the proposing small business concern will then be required to provide details of both the Base and Option costs on a workbook that will be provided by the Navy. To confirm, the proposing small business concern is not required to provide cost detail for the Option in the Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Table. The Navy is just looking for a rough estimate of costs. |
|
| 10/17/24 | Q. | Given the topic’s requirement for a multi-platform architecture that facilitates capability re-use and reduced acquisition cost, what is an area that is of particular interest? |
| A. | There are multiple areas of focus that would be compelling, though we would not expect proposals to necessarily address all of these areas:
1) Some of the ASW architectures are based on decades of evolution. We would be interested in a proposal that includes innovation to decompose software baselines using model-based system engineering (MBSE) principles into component capabilities that could be containerized. 2) A useful task as part of a compelling proposal would be to accept a capability and its code, then refactor that capability so it is suitable to be delivered in a container. Details of such a task, if proposed, would be discussed between government and prospective awardees during final proposal development. 3) Use of virtual twins is of interest, not just for a near-term temporary alteration or roll-on, roll-off (RORO) system, but for long-term use both aboard tactical platforms and for use in certification to accelerate fielding timelines. 4) Since we often interoperate with other systems (and must test with other systems prior to fielding), an architecture that enables virtualized systems to be used in lieu of full blown tactical sets provide many opportunities to reduce costs. 5) Approaches which enable automated capability testing would be attractive as part of a proposal both because of the time savings and the requirement traceability that automated testing can provide. 6) An ability to rapidly field capability to deployed ships in response to emergent issues would be of interest. 7) We would be interested in innovative approaches to manage system resources in a Platform as a Service (PaaS) architecture. 8) We would be interested in innovative approaches to perform cyber hardening for existing algorithms, models, and databases in support of capability being granted authority to operate (ATO). |
|
| 10/17/24 | Q. | Given that this topic solicits an innovative architecture for fielding capabilities, what is the government’s expectation regarding SBIR data rights? |
| A. | The government values SBIR data rights because it allows the government to directly issue subsequent contracts to a vendor previously selected via the competitive SBIR BAA process, eliminating the need to resort to full and open competition every time the requirement needs to be filled. Since SBIRs are funded by the Government, the government receives a limited nonexclusive license, or right to use, SBIR Data, but such use cannot include disclosing it in any way. This nondisclosure obligation is accompanied by a Data Rights protection period (typically 20 years from award of the contract under which the innovation was created). While the government is not allowed to disclose SBIR Data, the business *is* allowed to disclose portions of their SBIR data to other contractors to facilitate capability demonstration and transition. For example, many of the component capabilities referred to in this topic (which the architecture we seek would house) are protected by data rights. | |
| 10/17/24 | Q. | How many proposals will be selected for this topic? |
| A. | The Navy may select more than one proposal for award, if there are multiple proposals that offer compelling solutions to the topic requirement. |