SOURCES SOUGHT
A -- REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MODULAR ACTIVE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (MAPS) FRAMEWORK (MAF).
- Notice Date
- 2/7/2014
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- ACC - Warren (ACC-WRN)(DTA), ATTN: AMSTA-AQ-AMB, E Eleven Mile Road, Warren, MI 48397-5000
- ZIP Code
- 48397-5000
- Solicitation Number
- W56HZV-MAPS-02-28-2014
- Response Due
- 2/28/2014
- Archive Date
- 4/8/2014
- Point of Contact
- Rachel Heaney, 586-282-9712
- E-Mail Address
-
ACC - Warren (ACC-WRN)(DTA)
(rachel.heaney@us.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- DESCRIPTION OF MARKET SURVEY: THIS RFI WITH ADDITIONAL GRAPHICS CAN BE FOUND AT THE LINK BELOW: https://contracting.tacom.army.mil/ssn/sources.htm This is a market survey Request for Information (RFI) in support of the development of a Modular Active Protection Systems (MAPS) Framework (MAF). This RFI is issued pursuant to FAR 15.2. The U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM), Tank Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center (TARDEC) Warren, MI, on behalf of the U.S. Army, desires to obtain information on key features for a MAPS Framework (MAF) as a development platform for the Army Survivability community. In accordance with FAR 15.201 (e.), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. No contract will be awarded as a result of this RFI. This is not a Request for Proposal (RFP) or an announcement of a forthcoming solicitation, nor is it a request seeking contractors to be placed on a solicitation mailing list. Response to this survey is voluntary and no reimbursement will be made for any costs associated with providing information in response to this market survey and any follow-on information requests. Data submitted in response to this market survey will not be returned. No solicitation documents exist at this time, and calls requesting a solicitation will not be answered. Although quote mark proposal quote mark and quote mark offeror quote mark are used in this Request for Information, all responses will be treated as information only and will not be used as a proposal. This solicitation is for the purpose of socializing the MAF concept with Industry and receiving input to guide the step-wise development which will culminate in the incorporation of COTS/MOTS equipment which is MAF compliant. MAPS OVERVIEW: The intent of the MAPS Program is to design, develop, and test a MAPS Controller (MAC) and a Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA)-based Open Architecture that integrates multiple APS material solutions / configurations in a manner that results in significant reductions in overall cost, schedule, and risk. The MAPS program will specify, validate, demonstrate, and maintain the MOSA-based system architecture, known as the MAPS Framework (MAF), for the integration of Active Protection System (APS) components, i.e. sensors, countermeasures, and related items of equipment on US Army ground vehicle platforms. The goals are to optimize requirements, improve on technology transitions, and provide evolutionary growth in capabilities. MAF standards will be developed in cooperation with industry and will be open to support multi-vendor implementation. It is the intent for these standards to be used in future acquisition of active protection system components. Implementation of the Modular APS Framework (MAF) allows platform systems to share and customize APS suites and to accept future technologies without the need for significant re-design. TOPIC: The Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) Ground System Survivability (GSS) group is conducting a market survey soliciting information from industry concerning existing, proven technology solutions to develop a MAF baseline. The baseline will consist of Computing and Interface hardware, the Modular APS Controller (MAC), in addition to MAF-conformant software architecture. TARDEC will use the MAF design concept and open standards to develop a lab-based prototype MAPS, to support system and subsystem software development, testing, and demonstrations. TARDEC plans to eventually acquire and host 3rd party developed MAF-conformant hardware and software components in the MAPS Lab to analyze acquisition strategies, system integration (i.e. software and hardware validation and test) and evaluate safety (AFSRB) certification implications. Responses will help inform the determination of MAPS interoperability profiles used in future MAPS acquisition performance specifications and requirement documents. The MAF is envisioned to include: -- An architecture, which defines common terminology, systems, components, and interfaces. -- Set of reference designs. -- A phased set of standard specifications covering the capabilities needed to integrate MAPS mission equipment /configuration items (CIs), platform applications and interfaces. -- Open standard physical and logical interfaces among system and APS components -- Set of shared communication services. -- Common and approved hardware and software information assurance (IA) components to enable systems integrators to build security designs that protect and control access to information in compliance with the Army IA regulations. -- Joint Service Weapon Safety Review Board reviewed safety approaches (although each Hardware, Software and Firmware configuration will be approved and certified) A Government-Industry standards body will develop the MAF standard specifications. This body follows an quote mark adopt-adapt-author quote mark methodology in the effort to move towards establishing a set of common open standards for use within the vehicle and mission system communities. These standards will be independent of specific hardware, software or firmware solutions. Modular and open hardware configuration is intended to mean: -- Deploy software i.e. addition of Software Configuration Items (SCI's) and applications (SLOC and throughput growth) w/o adding or replacing Hardware Configuration Items (HCIs). -- Deploy hardware additions while enabling software reuse. -- Modular hardware design counts for: Reconfigurable I/Os, power channels, signals, discretes, multiple interface protocols, busses bandwidth, CPU throughput, memory types and total budget used vs. reserve values to support growth. -- Provide for low, medium, or high level of protection hardware solutions. -- Integrated Electronics Environment that supports LRM designs with spare backplane slots. -- Capable of self test (ST, BIT/BID), report and fault isolate to its line replaceable module and component's malfunctions. -- Supports and interact with the host Vehicle's Health Management System (VHMS). Conceptual Architectural Diagrams Refer to Figure-1: The MAF will include a Modular APS Controller (MAC) and will provide and define the primary interfaces and controls between the APS sensors, the counter measures, switching devices and the host vehicle. Both Conceptual Architecture represented in Figure 2 and 3 are notional and they currently under evaluations by the USG. The interested parties are encouraged to provide us with feedback comments, enhancements, Pros/Cons on both concepts, and their design concept. The MAC may perform all critical processing such as target / threat classification, tracking of all direct-fire threats from a ground based adversary, 360 degrees, and countermeasure activation, as in Figure 2. Alternately, the MAC may perform minimal processing and act as a system arbitrator for the activation of countermeasures and provide an interface between the system and the host vehicle/system operator as in Figure 3. Communication Protocol Options A significant task in the development of the MAF will be the selection of communication protocols. This selection will be influenced by factors such as latency/ bandwidth, security/information assurance, and scalability. It is not expected that the architecture will have only a single protocol for everything APS. Rather, responses to this RFI will shed light on the system requirements and data transfer needs which will drive the protocol selection. Additionally, this selection will be impacted by existing APS communication protocols and the potential impact to existing industry technology. Protocol selection will also be influenced by safety requirements of the Army Fuse Safety Review Board (AFSRB) which must certify these systems. The Government is investigating the following candidates believed capable of gigabit per second performance: 1) IEEE 802.3 based AFDX / ARINC 664 Part 7 2) IEEE 1394b based SAE AS5643A (@ S800) 3) TTE based SAE AS6802 4) IEEE 802.3 and IETF COTS internet based Communication Considerations -- The MAF will provide the interfaces among the countermeasures, controller, sensors and other APS components. Consider the overall time budget to defeat every threat. Provide the analysis behind each design approach in-regards to the selection of each protocol. -- The MAF will provide the capabilities to exchange data with the host vehicle protocols and the MAF e.g. CAN, 1553, serial buses etc. in additions to the required interface and control with the crew station. -- Total time required to detect, identify, classify, process and defeat threats. A breakdown of time allocations consumed by each element of the MAPS is recommended. Interested parties shall justify their proposed time allocations, i.e. measured, tested, Modeling and Simulation, analysis, calculated, etc. -- The MAF will support multiple enclaves for data processing, storage and exchange according to their classification and comply with the DoD regulations. RESPONSES: MAF RFI Responses must be post marked by February 28, 2014. Please address any questions regarding this market survey via email to: DAMI_TARDEC_GSS_AP.C@conus.army.mil ; include name, phone number and email address for a response. Questions may be answered via email or phone. A. EACH RESPONSE SHOULD INCLUDE (AT A MINIMUM): 1. Feedback on Modular APS Architecture Framework boundaries (with rationale) a. Given the two concept diagrams presented (Figures 2 and 3), which approach is supported by your system or what would facilitate optimal integration of your components into a MAPS demonstrator? 2. Feedback on MAF protocols/interface trade-offs for your technologies. a. Please explain how the accommodation of conceptual architectural diagrams and protocols (COTS internet based) will impact your existing design in terms of cost, schedule, and performance. b. What other protocols would be applicable and should be considered for the Government's APS interface standards to meet the low latency budget? c. If possible, provide white papers or case studies and analysis discussing protocol selections for APS systems to support your design. 3. List of offerings/systems applicable to MAF. a. What systems and subsystems components does your company offer or plan to offer in the near term that may be applicable to the MAPS Program and MAF? (Please provide two versions: 1. With proprietary information, 2. Without proprietary information. Proprietary information may also be shared during the one-on-one sessions at the Industry Forum). Please provide Architecture of your subsystems which may be applicable to MAF architectural discussions. Please reflect on computing resources capabilities and interfaces. 4. Please provide additional information about your company's system/components which may be helpful to consider when developing the architecture. 5. Provide the TRL for each configuration Item including (Hardware, Software and Firmware). 6. Reliability and Fielding history data of configuration items on military systems / applications. B. Provide information from any previous Army Fuze Safety Review Board evaluation hearings the system has gone through. Specifically, when they were and how far the system got in the Fuze Board process. Describe system compliance with MIL-STD-1316 and provide information as to where the system deviates from MIL-STD-1316. C. Provide any other information pertinent to the formation of an APS architecture which should be considered by TARDEC GSS. Submit all responses, UNCLASSIFIED documents only, via email to scott.m.rogan.civ@mail.mil and nathan.s.fountain.civ@mail.mil or on a DVD via registered mail to: Label: US Army RDECOM/TARDEC 6501 E. Eleven Mile Road, MS 263 ATTN: Scott Rogan, GSS Team Warren, MI 48397-5000 GENERAL INFORMATION: The Government appreciates the time and effort taken to respond to this survey. The Government acknowledges its obligations under 18 U.S.C. 1905 to protect information qualifying as quote mark confidential quote mark under this statute. [To avoid possible confusion with the meaning of the term quote mark confidential quote mark in the context of Classified Information, quote mark we will use the term quote mark PROPRIETARY. quote mark Pursuant to this statute, the Government is willing to accept any PROPRIETARY (e.g., trade secret) restrictions placed on qualifying data forwarded in response to the survey questions and to protect it from unauthorized disclosure subject to the following: 1. Clearly and conspicuously mark qualifying data with the restrictive legend (all caps) quote mark PROPRIETARY quote mark with any explanatory text, so that the Government is clearly notified of what data needs to be appropriately protected. 2. In marking such data, please take care to mark only those portions of the data or materials that are truly proprietary (over breadth in marking inappropriate data as quote mark PROPRIETARY quote mark may diminish or eliminate the usefulness of your response). The respondent's marking of data as quote mark PROPRIETARY quote mark will preclude disclosure of same outside the Government and therefore preclude disclosure to support contractors assisting the evaluation effort. The Government will use its best efforts to evaluate those responses that contain proprietary information without using support contractors consistent with the resources available. Use circling, underscoring, highlighting or any other appropriate means to indicate those portions of a single page which are to be protected. 3. THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT OBLIGATED TO PROTECT UNMARKED DATA. Additionally, marked data that is already in the public domain or in the possession of the Government or third parties, or is afterward placed into the public domain by the owner or another party through no fault of the Government will not be protected once in the public domain. Data already in the possession of the Government will be protected in accordance with the Government's rights in the data. 4. Proprietary data transmitted electronically, whether by physical media or not, whether by the respondent or by the government, shall contain the quote mark PROPRIETARY quote mark legend, with any explanatory text, on both the cover of the transmittal e-mail and at the beginning of the file itself. Where appropriate for only portions of an electronic file, use the restrictive legends 'PROPRIETARY PORTION BEGINS: quote mark and quote mark PROPRIETARY PORTION ENDS. quote mark 5. In any reproductions of technical data or any portions thereof subject to asserted restrictions, the government shall also reproduce the asserted restriction legend and any explanatory text. 6. Participation in this RFI is NOT a requirement for future participation in any future MAPS/MAF activities or acquisitions citing MAF standards.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/7879605dfd15297bd1c2c730daf802fe)
- Place of Performance
- Address: ACC - Warren (ACC-WRN)(DTA) ATTN: AMSTA-AQ-AMB, E Eleven Mile Road Warren MI
- Zip Code: 48397-5000
- Zip Code: 48397-5000
- Record
- SN03283953-W 20140209/140207235452-7879605dfd15297bd1c2c730daf802fe (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |