TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Integrated Sensing and Cyber 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 section 3.5 of 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 a system that minimizes the threat a UAS poses to military convoys in non-permissive environments that have the most restrictive rules of engagement. DESCRIPTION: The United States Military and its US government interagency partners have requirements to move personnel and equipment on public roads that are at risk of surveillance and improvised attacks by drones. The open nature of our free society provides anonymity to our fellow citizens and potential bad actors that makes UAS defense along public roads very challenging. The legal and beneficial use of UAS complicates the problem that all UAS in vicinity of US military operations in the homeland cannot be determined to be a threat by their presence alone. Convoys require a system that can identify UAS operations that either follow or are on a course for physical intercept of the vehicles in the convoy and have the ability to disrupt the flight of that UAS to ensure safe passage. While kinetic (Mass striking Mass) solutions are legal they must be a final measure and must be employed in a way that minimizes risk to US citizens in vicinity of the convoy. This is especially difficult when a bad actor uses the cover of an urban or suburban area to employ their system to maximize clutter to sensors and complicate the engagement process (Rules of engagement and establishment of intent) of kinetic solutions. The system is expected to detect UAS around the convoy and establish their trajectories with respect to the convoy. Human teaming with the detection system should be intuitive and cognitively low effort, similar to an alarm system in a security operations center. This system should have the ability to interfere with the UAS operations using Electronic Warfare or other non-kinetic means and have the ability to employ kinetic effectors that are produce effects that have a low probability of collateral damage. The system can require its own vehicle for proof of concept but must have accommodations to be an add on to an existing vehicle in the convoy. Proposals can be partial solutions to this problem but must have detailed and reasonable explanations on what would expected of the portions of the systems that are not within the scope of their proposal. The system must be Software Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) compliant so the requirement owners can add or complement successful offerors solutions with GOTS software and hardware. Proposals will not be selected if they are closed and fully proprietary architectures that do not allow other technologies development by the US government and their contractors to be added to the system. PHASE I: This is a Direct to Phase 2 (D2P2) topic. Phase 1 like proposals will not be evaluated and will be rejected as nonresponsive. For this D2P2 topic, the Government expects that the small business would have accomplished the following in a Phase I-type effort via some other means (e.g. IRAD, or other funded work). It must have developed a concept for a workable prototype or design to address at a minimum the basic capabilities of the stated objective above. Proposal must show, as appropriate to the proposed effort, a demonstrated technical feasibility or nascent capability to meet the capabilities of the stated objective. Proposal may provide example cases of this new capability on a specific application. The documentation provided must substantiate that the proposer has developed a preliminary understanding of the technology to be applied in their Phase II proposal to meet the objectives of this topic. Documentation should include all relevant information including, but not limited to technical reports, test data, prototype designs/models, and performance goals/results. PHASE II: Develop a system that minimizes the threat a UAS poses to military convoys in non-permissive environments that have the most restrictive rules of engagement. i. Develop or use an existing software architecture that connects sensors, effectors and microservices ii. Develop or select sensors that provide awareness of UAS around convoys that may travel as fast as 70mph iii. Design a system that takes sensor data and uses it to determine the presences and trajectory with respect to the convoy iv. Design a defeat system that uses EW, Kinetic (low collateral options) and other options that have the ability to change the UAS's flight path v. Prototype a complete system and its vehicle as required to do a demonstration of the system vi. Design and develop (or adopt) a SOSA with the details needed to prove its compliance with DoD goals vii. Produce documentation of the system and its internal and external interfaces viii. Demonstrate the system at a location of your choice or in collaboration (if available) with any US military or AFRL activity that can be negotiated after award Complete the design of the system, demonstrate performance of a prototype system through field testing, and deliver the prototype for subsequent evaluation by the government. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The Government has an interest in transition of the demonstrated concept to provide convoy security, but it could also be used for National Airspace (NAS) policing, commercial UAS fleet management and UAS awareness for commercial use REFERENCES: 1. Department of the Air Force Operational Imperatives, https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/2023SAF/OPERATIONAL_IMPARITIVES_INFOGRAPHIC.pdf 2. J. Schroeder, C. Martinez, G. Galloway; USAF Pallet and Dunnage System Evaluation, 1997 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA356785.pdf 3. Management and control of Intermodal Containers and System 463L Equipment, Defense Transportation Regulation Part VI https://www.ustranscom.mil/dtr/part-vi/dtr_part_vi_608.pdf KEYWORDS: Radar, Sensing on the move, Signal analysis, day/night cameras, Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Lidar, Low Collateral Effects Interceptors, Racing Quadrotors, Common Launch Tube, April Tags, Video Stabilization, GPS Jamming
