DON26BZ02-NV050 TITLE: Low-Cost Bottoming Seabed Nodes for Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) Support
OUSW (R&E) CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Contested Logistics Technologies (LOG)
COMPONENT TECHNOLOGY PRIORITY AREA(S): Integrated Network Systems-of-Systems;Sustainment;Trusted AI and Autonomy
PROJECTED CMMC LEVEL REQUIREMENT: Level 2 (Self)
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 modular, low-cost, high endurance seabed nodes to support integration of diverse subsea payloads.
DESCRIPTION: The Navy is seeking low-cost, modular seabed nodes with standardized mechanical, electrical, and data interfaces to accommodate diverse payload options, including acoustic communications modems, undersea sensors, navigation, and data transfer and storage. The commercial market lacks seabed nodes appropriate for Navy use. The nodes should be capable of operating independently or operating as part of a larger node network and support interoperability with other underwater acoustic platforms, networks, and a wide range of underwater vehicles.
The nodes must have a cylindrical form factor of 19 inches in diameter and 51 inches in length, with a maximum dry weight is 1,000 lbs and able to withstand maritime deployment while maintaining and controlling descent to the seabed.
The nodes must function regardless of their orientation on the seafloor and must be operational on the seabed for a minimum of 12 months (Threshold), 24 months (Objective). The nodes must be pressure tolerant up to a depth of 300 meters and able to anchor in differing bottom types, currents, sea growth, and corrosion without performance degradation, as well as in currents up to 2 knots. Each node must manage its power usage to maximize operational lifespan and utilize power management strategies when possible.
While the focus of the effort is the design and development of payload agnostic subsea nodes, the desired initial payload of this effort will be acoustic communications nodes with the ability to expand development. Acoustic communication nodes should support two interfaces. The first acoustic communications interface shall enable long range, low data rate horizontal communications in the frequency band of 1kHz to 5kHz. The second communications interface shall enable short range, high data rate communications with Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUVs). The acoustic communications modem used must leverage Commercial off-the-shelf products, to include software-defined acoustic modems, to allow flexibility in the definition waveforms, modulation schemes, transmission power levels, and the use of Low Probability of Detection and Low Probability of Intercept (LPD/LPI) acoustic waveforms. The mesh network must support persistent data storage and distribution services for small data payloads (less than 1KB in size), and data storage only for larger payloads (less than 100KB in size). To maximize range on the sea floor and enable connectivity with other nodes, the node can deploy an undersea beacon or other methods to adjust the altitude of its acoustic transducer.
A detailed Interface Control Document (ICD) will be provided as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) upon entering Phase II. This ICD will specify the physical attachment points, as well as describe the umbilical and electronic communications to be received from the vehicle.
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: Develop a concept design for low-cost, modular seabed nodes with standardized mechanical, electrical, and data interfaces that meet the form factor and operational requirements described above. The concept design feasibility should include any modeling and simulation and studies in support of concept risk reduction. Establish feasibility by developing system diagrams that show the design concept and provide estimated weight, dimensions, cost estimate, and manufacturability of the concept.
Phase I Option, if exercised, will include the initial design specifications and capabilities description to build a prototype solution in Phase II.
PHASE II: Develop and deliver a minimum of two prototype nodes for evaluation. The prototype will be evaluated to determine its capability in meeting the performance goals defined in the Phase I and the Navy requirements. Demonstrate performance with a detailed analysis and live demonstration in a test environment as part of the evaluation. Provide detailed technical documentation of the design, including an interface control drawing and interface specification, to allow successful transition of the product. Prepare a Phase III development plan to transition this technology for Navy use.
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: Support the Navy in transitioning the technology for Navy use. Support further refinement and testing of the functionality following successful prototype development and demonstration.
If successful, potential applications include integration with other government agencies depending on the capability provided that supports subsea warfare, increasing the Navy’s capability to perform a variety of Subsea Seabed Warfare and Undersea Warfare missions.
In addition to such DOW applications, these payloads could be used in commercial oil, gas, and oceanographic applications to improve communication between undersea vehicles.
REFERENCES:
KEYWORDS: Seafloor and Bottom Nodes; Seafloor Logistics; Undersea Communications Networks; Undersea Constellation; Unmanned Undersea Vehicle Communications; Clandestine Delivered Mine (CDM)
| 6/9/26 | Q. | The solicitation states one of the acoustic comms modems shall operate in the 1kHz to 5kHz band, and must also leverage COTS modems. COTS modems are typically higher frequency than this. Can you confirm 1kHz to 5kHz is the required communications band for long range, low data rate comms? Would the Gov't accept solutions that use COTS modems with operating bands above 9kHz? |
| A. | It is up to the respondent to provide the solution that meets the requested capability and justify why it works. If assumptions are necessary (ex: CONOP), make the assumptions and provide the rationale why they are reasonable. | |
| 6/4/26 | Q. | 1. Does this effort include the development of an undersea modem, or will it be government-furnished?
2. How much leeway is there on the size requirements? Is the 19 in x 51 an exact external envelop, a nominal cylinder, or an approximation representing compatibility with a specific launch/delivery system? 3. What deployment method(s) should be taken into account? |
| A. | 1. The government has not specified a preferred or government furnished modem. It is up to the respondent to provide the solution that meets the requested capability and justify why it works.
2. The size requirement is an exact external envelop during stowage. Once deployed it does not need to maintain that envelope. 3. The proposal was drafted based on leveraging the XLUUV platform, specifically its CDM deployment system. |
|
| 6/4/26 | Q. | Is there a maximum slope limit of the seabed and is it a safe assumption that deployment could be on sand, mud, and rocks? |
| A. | The government has not defined a maximum slope limit or topography. We are looking to the respondents to anticipate deployment on different surfaces, provide solutions and rationale to support them. | |
| 6/4/26 | Q. | Is there a desired descent rate and/or an allowable impact velocity to the seabed? |
| A. | The government has not defined a desired descent rate or allowable impact velocity, we are looking to respondents to provide their best recommendations. | |
| 6/4/26 | Q. | Is it possible to get a general power consumption range of the payload and duty cycles? |
| A. | The government has not defined a power consumption range, the respondents should supply their best solutions and design to support those solutions. | |
| 6/2/26 | Q. | The topic emphasizes low cost. For Phase I, should offerors optimize primarily for unit production cost, or for lifecycle/mission cost measures such as cost per successfully emplaced operational node-month, including deployment, emplacement reliability, endurance, recovery/refurbishment, payload integration, and production scale? Are there threshold/objective cost targets or assumed production quantities, such as tens, hundreds, or thousands of nodes, that offerors should use in cost analyses? |
| A. | The government has not specified a threshold or objective cost target. Please address rationale on how the unit cost has been minimized. | |
| 6/2/26 | Q. | Are there preferred or assumed deployment modes that should drive Phase I trades, such as surface vessel deployment, submarine or other constrained undersea-platform launch, UUV/USV-assisted deployment, aircraft delivery, or other Government-furnished deployment concepts? If specific deployment assumptions cannot be provided, should offerors treat deployment-platform compatibility and controlled descent as a trade space in Phase I? |
| A. | The proposal was drafted based on leveraging the Orca XLUUV platform with its Clandestinely Delivered Mine (CDM ) deployment system, with the intent of expanding the utility of this deployment system. The Orca platform may or may not be the host platform for testing. If an alternate platform is utilized, the same deployment mechanism is intended to be implemented on that alternate platform. | |
| 6/2/26 | Q. | The topic specifies a 19-inch diameter, 51-inch length cylindrical form factor, maximum dry weight of 1,000 lb, and the need to maintain/control descent to the seabed. Should offerors treat these as fixed stowed-envelope constraints for compatibility with existing Navy handling, stowage, launch, or deployment systems? Is it acceptable for the node to transition after deployment from a smooth stowed configuration into a seabed operational configuration, for example by deploying stabilizers, anchors, acoustic transducer supports, drogues, buoyant elements, or other external features? |
| A. | While stowed it does need to fit in the proposed package, otherwise we are open to industry suggestion. Once deployed, it does not need to maintain that envelope. |
** TOPIC NOTICE ** |
The Navy Topic above is an "unofficial" copy from the Navy Topics in the DoW FY-26 Release 2 SBIR BAA. Please see the official DoW Topic website at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/solicitation-documents/active-solicitations for any updates. The DoW issued its Navy FY-26 Release 2 SBIR Topics pre-release on May 6, 2026 which opens to receive proposals on May 27, 2026, and closes June 24, 2026 (12:00pm ET). Direct Contact with Topic Authors: During the pre-release period (May 6, through May 26, 2026) proposing firms have an opportunity to directly contact the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to ask technical questions about the specific BAA topic. The TPOC contact information is listed in each topic description. Once DoW begins accepting proposals on May 27, 2026 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. DoD On-line Q&A System: After the pre-release period, until June 10, 2026, at 12:00 PM ET, proposers may submit written questions through the DoW On-line Topic Q&A at https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/login/ by logging in and following instructions. In the Topic Q&A system, the questioner and respondent remain anonymous but all questions and answers are posted for general viewing. DoW Topics Search Tool: Visit the DoW Topic Search Tool at www.dodsbirsttr.mil/topics-app/ to find topics by keyword across all DoW Components participating in this BAA.
|