UNITED
STATES SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND
Proposal Submission
The United States Operations Command’s (USSOCOM)
mission includes developing and acquiring unique special operations forces
(SOF) equipment, material, supplies and services. USSOCOM is seeking small businesses with a strong research and
development capability and an understanding of the SOF operational
characteristics. The topics represent a portion of the problems encountered by
SOF in fulfilling its mission.
Inquiries of a general nature or questions concerning the administration of the SBIR program should be addressed to:
United
States Special Operations Command
Attn:
SOAL-KS/Ms. Karen L. Pera
7701
Tampa Point Blvd.
MacDill
Air Force Base, Florida 33621
Email:
perak@socom.mil
USSOCOM will only accept proposals for those topics stated in this solicitation. The USSOCOM Program Executive Officers (PEOs) responsible for the research and development in these specific areas initiated the topics and are responsible for the technical evaluation of the proposals. Proposal evaluation factors are listed below and each proposal must address each factor in order to be considered for an award. Prior to July 1, 2002, scientific and technical questions may be directed to the topic author, and after that, through the DTIC SBIR Interactive Technical Information System (SITIS).
The maximum amount of SBIR funding for a USSOCOM Phase I award is $100,000 and the maximum time frame for a Phase I proposal is 6 months. A Phase I proposal for less than 6 months and/or less than $100,000 is encouraged where low risk technologies are being proposed.
USSOCOM will request Phase II proposals on a case by
case basis. The proposal must be
structured as follows: the first 10-12 months (base effort) should be
approximately $375,000; the second 10-12 months (option) of incremental funding
should also be approximately $375,000. A Phase II proposal for less than 24
months and/or less than $750,000 is encouraged. The maximum amount of SBIR
funding allocated for a USSOCOM Phase II award is $750,000 and the maximum
time frame for a Phase II award is 24 months. Proposals should be based on
realistic cost and time estimates, not on the maximum time (months) and
dollars. The cost of the project is
based on the overall amount of hours spent to accomplish the work required and
the overall term of the project should also be based on the same effort. In
preparing the proposal, (including the plan of objectives and milestones),
firms should consider that workload and operational tempo will preclude
extensive access to government and military personnel beyond established
periodic reviews.
Evaluation Criteria – Phase I & II
1)
The soundness, technical
merit, and innovation of the proposed approach and its incremental progress
toward topic or subtopic solution.
2)
The qualifications of the
proposed principal/key investigators supporting staff, and consultants.
Qualifications include not only the ability to perform the research and
development but also the ability to commercialize the results.
3)
The potential for
commercial (Government of private sector) application and the benefits expected
to accrue from this commercialization.
Selection of proposals for funding is based upon technical
merit and the evaluation criteria included in the solicitation. As funding is
limited, USSOCOM will select and fund only those proposals considered to be
superior in overall technical quality and most critical. USSOCOM may fund more
than one proposal in a specific topic area if the technical quality of the
proposal is deemed superior, or it may fund no proposals in a topic area.
All proposal information must be received
electronically via the DoD SBIR/STTR Submission site. To submit,
proceed to http://www.dodsbir.net/submission. Once your firm has been registered, you may
prepare (and edit) Company Commercialization Report Data, prepare (and edit)
Proposal Cover Sheets(s) (formerly referred to as Appendix A and B), complete
the Cost Proposal form, and upload corresponding Technical Proposal(s). The
electronic proposal must be transmitted to the site by 3:00PM EST on August 14,
2002. The proposal submission, exclusive of the Company Commercialization must
not exceed 25 pages.
Paper copies will not be considered. A complete electronic submission is required
for proposal evaluation. An
electronic signature is not required on the proposal. Proposal evaluation will be accomplished via
a secure web site. Please call 866-SBIRHLP (866-724-7457) (SBIR Help Desk) for assistance in uploading proposals. Please note that there have been problems in
the past with AOL uploads, therefore we suggest using an alternate internet
service provider (ISP) for files larger than 5MB. It is strongly suggested the
proposal be submitted 3-5 days prior to closing date to ensure complete
submission. Firms are entirely responsible for complete and timely submission
of the proposal.
Refer to the on-line help area of the DoD SBIR/STTR
Submission site for questions, troubleshooting, etc. For further assistance, contact the help desk at sbirhelp@brtrc.com or 866-SBIRHLP (866-724-7457).
USSOCOM offers information on the Internet about its SBIR
program at http://www.socom.mil and http://www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/sbir.
The term “Technical Proposal” refers to the part of the
submission as described in Section 3 of the Solicitation. WordPerfect, Text, MS Word, RTF, and PDF are
the only acceptable formats for proposal submissions. You are encouraged, but not required, to embed graphics within
the document. When including images,
care should be taken to ensure images are not of excessive size. A resolution of 200 dpi or below is
requested for all embedded images.
Please use standard fonts in order to prevent conversion
difficulties. An overall file size of
5MB or less is recommended for each electronic proposal submission.
You will receive a confirmation page via the submission
site once the proposal has been uploaded.
The upload will be available for viewing on the DoD SBIR/STTR Submission
site within 24 hours. It is within your
best interest to review the upload to ensure the server received the complete
file. Questions or problems should be
directed to the help desk as mentioned above.
You are responsible for performing a virus check on each
proposal to be uploaded electronically.
The detection of a virus on any submitted electronic technical proposal
may be cause for the rejection of the proposal. USSOCOM will not accept
e-mail submissions. You
should contact your Internet Service Provider if you have questions concerning
the provider’s file size transmission allowance.
SOCOM02-006 Worldwide C4I for Special
Operations Forces Combatant Craft
SOCOM02-007 Special Operations Forces
Combatant Motion Recording and Biofeedback
SOCOM02-008 Special Operations Forces
Combatant Craft Signature Reduction
SOCOM02-009 Analog/Video
Communications Link
SOCOM02-010 Frequency
Hopper/DSSS Detection
SOCOM02-011 HF to UHF Camouflaged
Antenna
SOCOM02-012 Threat Warning Software
SOCOM02-013 Portable Signal
Identification Training
SOCOM 02.2 SBIR TOPICS
SOCOM02-006 TITLE:
Worldwide C4I for Special Operations
Forces Combatant Craft
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE: To develop innovative, secure systems to
enable real time communications with Special Forces Operations Combatant Craft
deployed anywhere in the world with sufficient band width to enable command
structure decision making, to monitor craft and personnel status and to enable
real time failure analysis and in some cases, correction of deficiencies that
critically impact mission performance.
DESCRIPTION: USSOCOM is incorporating an Integrated
Bridge System into SOF Combatant Craft.
IBS consolidates the information from on board radar, GPS, optical
sights, weapons control, propulsion system monitoring, communication functions,
navigational charts and normal craft administrative functions into one or
redundant workstations. Developing a
system of secure communications would increase situation awareness by
incorporating data from remote locations such as video imagery from a closer
camera, AWACS input and other real time data available to the command
structure. If the on board system is
capable of receiving the data from the remote location, it should also be
capable of sending on board data to remote locations. By sending target data to the command structure, the decision to
engage can be reviewed in real time.
The same system would also be capable of transmitting the status of the
various subsystems on the craft and the status of the personnel if a personnel
status monitor were developed. With the
craft and personnel status data available, persons at a remote site, not under
the stress of boat operation and/or combat conditions could conduct trend
analysis, or failure analysis and could devise work around plans for a failure,
or in some cases actually send software instructions to make the repair without
crew involvement. This system would be
secure so that intelligence data cannot be monitored by external means.
PHASE
I: Design a secure, probably encrypted,
communication system that takes maximum advantage of on board systems, is
compatible with the Integrated Bridge System and can either directly or with
local relay be connected via world wide net to over the horizon remote
locations. The design must include
identifying algorithms and communication equipment interface to facilitate to
the best means of exchanging video and bi-directional data over existing low
bandwidth communication equipment currently in use on SOF Maritime Combatant
Craft. The design should not preclude expansion of bandwidth or data rates as
new communications equipment is deployed anywhere in the system.
PHASE
II: Determine which encryption and
transmission methods are effective within the constraints of existing
compression rates. Produce a prototype
system using data from IBS, the onboard communications system based on the
PRC-117F radio (which allow encryption and frequency hopping). Install the prototype system on one or more
SOF Combatant Craft and determine the effectiveness and the impact on operator
workload.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Security and
timeliness of data are major stumbling blocks for web-centric information
systems, especially for wireless systems.
Any progress in this area would greatly enhance the ability of local Law
Enforcement and Emergency Response Teams to respond to local emergencies and to
take advantage of a command structure that can see the big picture in real
time. A system of this sort deployed to
individual police and firefighters would have been invaluable in the recovery
from the attacks on the World Trade Center.
If this radio in the system could be reduce for just local transmission,
and all the other elements of the system left in place i.e., encryption, data
and video compression and real time, full time transmission, it could be
deployed to individuals, squad cars, SWAT teams, and emergency response
vehicles.
KEYWORDS: Automation; Control; Remote;
Trouble-Shooting; Support; Weapons
SOCOM02-007 TITLE:
Special Operations Forces Combatant
Motion Recording and Biofeedback
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Biomedical
OBJECTIVE: Deliver accurate, wireless, fieldable,
full-body motion recording system and biofeedback system for training Special
Operations Forces Special Boat Unit (SBU) combatant craft crewmembers. System
will provide corrective biofeedback signals to novice crew trainees for optimum
body positioning to best mitigate effects from shock. Basis will be data
recorded directly from expert/experienced crew or otherwise derived from
extrapolated conclusions.
DESCRIPTION: USSOCOM personnel are exposed to high shock
environments aboard SOF maritime combatant craft. That environment represents a
risk of injury to personnel, especially SBU crewmembers who are exposed to
shock environments continually over extended periods (years) of time. One means
for significantly reducing personnel risk is proper training. USSOCOM desires
an untethered, biofeedback system that will assist in risk reduction training.
The first and foremost requirement of the apparatus is that it must not present
any heightened risk to the user. It must not, for example, have any hard points
that could impinge upon or penetrate the body. It must be completely
self-contained on the user. It must require no equipment on the boat other than
what is on the user. For systems requiring frequent calibrations, the
calibration process must be sufficiently fast and automatic to be used by
minimally trained SBU personnel. The system must be low power for long-duration
operations with minimal battery load and pose no shock risk to the user. At a
minimum, it must measure posterior/anterior knee and ankle bend, varus/valgus
of the knee, posterior movement of the spine near along several sites, and
movement of the head relative to the plane of the shoulders. It must measure
accelerations at appropriate body locations and in appropriate planes of motion
while minimizing soft tissue artifacts. All data collection, processing and
interaction with the biofeedback system must require little to no user
interaction. The system must operate over a 24-hour time period with
appropriate duty cycle. The system must collect data at a rate of 60 Hz or
higher when risk is judged to be highest. The system will record all data so
that, if desired, it may be downloaded onto a shore-based computer. Data
download must be fast and require minimal manpower. The biofeedback system must
produce outputs that cause a reduction in risk of injury. The system will
withstand harsh marine environments with minimum downtime. If worn on the body,
the system will be washable using standard hand-washing techniques.
PHASE
I: Develop the system concept to assess
the feasibility of approach and technology readiness. Areas to consider include: biofeedback data requirements, sensor
requirements and selection, sensor placements, sensor network communications
architecture, embedded systems software architecture, data processing software
architecture, detailed calibration approach, systems integration and
human-systems integration. Build
breadboard and brassboard components to demonstrate the concept.
PHASE
II: Build field-testable prototype
systems that demonstrates sensor data collection, low-power operation, sensor
network communications, and integration with higher level platform capable of
housing biofeedback system. Collect data on actual SBU training missions at
site to be determined by USSOCOM to demonstrate potential capabilities and
utility to SOF operators.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: A rugged,
accurate, untethered motion sensor suit has great commercial potential. In the
health science field, it could be applied to the in-situ study of sports
injuries, such as the causes for noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries
in athletes, especially young female athletes where such injuries are
approaching epidemic proportions. For military markets, the system may be used
for training dismounted infantry in complex motions either directly via a
biofeedback approach or as a tool in validating virtual environments.
REFERENCES:
Ensign, W.,
Hodgdon, J., Prusaczyk, W.K., Ahlers, S., Shapiro, D., Lipton, M., “A Survey of
Self-Reported Injuries Among SBU Small Craft Combatants,” Shock Mitigation
Workshop, 2000.
Ronnie
Lundstrom, Patrik Holmlund, Lennart Lindberg, “Absorption of energy during
vertical whole-body vibration exposure,” Journal of Biomechanics 31 (1998)
317Ð326
Moon, D.W.,
C.W. Beedle, and C.R. Kovacic, Peak head acceleration of athletes during competition
football. Medicine and Science in Sports Exercise. 1971; 3(1): 44-50.
Naunheim,
R.S., Standeven, J., Richter, C. and L.M. Lewis. Comparison of impact data in
hockey, football, and soccer. , The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection and
Critical Care. 2000; 48(5): 1-4.
Chaffin DB,
Andersson BJ. Occupational Biomechanics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons;
1991
Fischer-Williams
M, Nigl AJ, & Sovine DL. A Textbook of Biological Feedback. New York, NY:
Human Science Press; 1981.
Bender K.,
Muscle pattern training and biofeedback-assisted ergonomics, California
Biofeedback. 9 (4), 5-13, 1993.
Bender K.
The role of biofeedback in work conditioning, California Biofeedback, 1987.
Boucher JP,
Pepin A, & Lefebvre R. Using the vastus medialis to vastus lateralis IEMG
ratio as a neuromuscular imbalance index for the diagnosis of patello-femoral
syndrome. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 21(2), 274-281, 1991
Sherman R.
Applied psychophysiological research and development in the US Army. In:
Proceedings of the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback
(AAPB) 25th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, March 1994. Wheat Ridge, CO, AAPB;
1994.
Haig AJ,
Groblet LJ, Pope M, MacDonald L, Holleran K,& Bendix T. The relative
effectiveness of lumbosacral corset and trunk inclination audio biofeedback on
trunk flexion. PMR 2:29-37,1991.
Greenwald
RM, France EP, Rosenberg TD, Toelcke T: Significant Gender Differences in
Alpine Skiing Injuries: A Five Year Study, Skiing Trauma and Safety: Tenth
International Symposium, ASTM STP, 1266, RJ Johnson, CD Mote (ed), ASTM,
Philadelphia, PA 1995
Greenwald
RM, Toelcke T: Significant Gender Differences in Alpine Skiing Injuries: A
Profile of the Knee Injured Skier, Skiing Trauma and Safety: Eleventh
International Symposium, ASTM STP, 1289, RJ Johnson, CD Mote (ed), ASTM,
Philadelphia, PA 1997
KEYWORDS: Biofeedback, shock mitigation, small boat
unit, training
SOCOM02-008 TITLE:
Special Operations Forces Combatant
Craft Signature Reduction
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Ground/Sea Vehicles
OBJECTIVE: Elimination of large wake and “rooster tail”
expressions that increase the likelihood of detection and compromise the
stealthiness of Combatant Craft when operating a high speeds.
DESCRIPTION: When operating at moderate to high speeds, the
propulsion systems of current Combatant Craft produce wake or “rooster tail”
expressions that are highly detectable by modern sensor systems. Reducing the radar cross section of the
craft must be accompanied by the reduction of these propulsor induced disturbances
above the surface of the water. Future
generations of Combatant Craft must have propulsors that allow them to operate
at all speeds with minimum risk of detectability due to wake or “rooster tail”
effects.
PHASE
I: Identify at least one candidate
propulsor that will shows promise in eliminating highly detectable wake and
“rooster tail” effects, while not significantly impacting the navigation draft
of the candidate Combatant Craft.
Conduct modeling and simulation to predict overall performance and
mission effectiveness for a candidate Combatant Craft equipped with such a
propulsor in the areas of speed, range, maneuverability, sea keeping, mission
effectiveness and transportability.
Additionally, provide cost and schedule estimates and a top level plan
to modify a candidate Combatant Craft with the proposed propulsor(s) and
conduct feasibility testing during Phase II.
PHASE
II: Install the proposed propulsor(s)
on the candidate Combatant Craft and conduct testing aimed at demonstrating the
reduction and/or elimination of detectable wake and “rooster tail” effects.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Above
propulsor(s) will have pleasure boat appeal ("Special Ops derived"),
to help eliminate wakes and associated damage to boats and property. Other law enforcement applications include
USMC, US Army, and USCG craft where detectability is an issue.
KEYWORDS: Propulsors, wake effects, detectability,
signatures, modeling and simulation
SOCOM02-009 TITLE:
ANALOG/VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS LINK
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE: Special Operation Forces (SOF) tactical
users lack an off the shelf configurable package that permits them to easily
tailor a system to their data and communication needs. Currently, a system must be configured and
built each time data must be moved.
This SBIR
will research, design and build a family of inexpensive, rugged, small, low
power tactical data/communication links for deployed SOF personnel. The system will use selectable transmission types
that have a low probability of intercept/detection (LPI/LPD).
DESCRIPTION: LPI/LPD communications is very important to
the SOF (and military) community.
Frequency hopper spread spectrum (FHSS) is no longer considered to be
LPI/LPD. Newer technologies, such as
direct sequence spread spectsorum (DSSS) and ultra-wide modulation, could
potentially enhance SOF data links.
This SBIR
will build a family of inexpensive data link/communication options for deployed
SOF personnel. This SBIR will research
the newest technologies in LPI/LPD signals and the latest in video and audio
compression; then recommend AT LEAST two configurations for moving
communications (such as voice) and data both in short and long haul
configurations. This will become part
of a ¡§toolbox¡¨ available to SOF.
The design
is foreseen to work in two different scenarios:
<< First, as a JTWS receiver to receiver
communicator, allowing the soldier to either send data/information to a fellow
soldier and/or permitting voice communications. This will be accomplished by the easy installation of a card
transceiver (Cxcvr) on a selected source such as a JTWS receiver or his body
worn computer.
<< Second, as a way to place a sensor (such as
a motion detector) and have the data transmitted back to the soldier's JTWS
receiver (or body worn computer). This
will be accomplished by the easy installation of a sensor transceiver (Sxcvr)
on a selected source such as a sensor, and a transceiver on a selected
receiving base station (Cxcvr), which will probably be a JTWS receiver.
For the
Sxcvr, the proposer will design very small, low power transceivers to be
connected to any source (unattended aerial vehicle (UAV), camera, etc.). For the Cxcvr, the transceivers will be
placed on a PCMCIA and CPCI cards for use with a JTWS receiver or inserted into
a computer. Thought should be given to
how the proposer will have a robust design to allow connection to varied
sources. The transceivers should be
capable of passing any analog (including voice) and digital data. This data will be sent via the LPI/LPD link,
in a format proposed by the researcher (most likely TCP/IP). The transceiver should have software
variable compression capability. When
used with a sensor, the Sxvcr will be DC powered from a small internal battery,
and have the capability of being powered externally (e.g. from the sensor's
power).
A plus
would allow multiple transceivers to relay signals. If using TCP/IP, the transceiver should have a unique selectable
IP address. The system should be capable of at least sending live video at 30
frames per second (pfs) 640x480 resolution video (requirement) in near real
time. Innovative proposals will permit
base and/or relay stations to automatically relay data.
The
"base" or receive station can be anything from a wearable computer on
a roaming SOF operator to a true base station located at a safe location. The Cxvcr (with or without its antenna),
decompression hardware, etc. will be implemented on at least PCMCIA and C-PCI
(16 bit) card formats. These can then
be inserted into a laptop, wearable computer, or custom designed base
station. The RCVR should have a
built-in antenna, but allow for a higher gain external antenna.
The
"base" station will use NT compatible software (requirement) and have
as an objective to be operating system independent and be Joint Threat Warning
System (JTWS) Component Architecture and Framework (JCAF) compliant. Note: SPAWARSYSCEN Charleston (SSC-C) Code 71 can assist the bidder with the JCAF
software. Information on JCAF is found
in the reference below.
When
configuring the system for use, the user should be permitted to choose the
modulation type by connecting the desired transceiver, then installing the
correct Cxvcr into the base station (if space permits, would prefer both chosen
LPI/LPD modulation types be on the same card) and configuring the system with
pull down menus. A plus would allow the
link to establish at full power, then automatically lower power until data can
still be sent with an acceptable error rate.
A plus would allow the link to continuously monitor itself and adjust
the power level according to conditions.
Innovative proposals will permit one Cxvcr at the base station to
receive more than one Sxvcr sensor at a time.
Proposers
should budget for a single day trip to Tampa, Florida for a Phase 1 kickoff
meeting.
Successful
proposals will use novel technology to achieve substantial enhancements to
equipment size, weight, performance, reliability, power consumption, data rate
speeds, and/or cost or offer new ways of computing, communicating, sensing or
displaying information.
Successful
proposals will use novel ideas to improve soldier usability, create future
commercial markets, and lower future costs of upgrades to the system. Pluses include:
<< Employees who have operational experience in
the tactical and/or SOF arena;
<< Incorporation in Phase 2 of Wolfpack
technologies, funds permitting;
<< Fully demonstrating the proposing company's
past and present experience;
<< Supplying references on proposing company's
products/programs (particularly government program managers);
<< Giving detail on its proposed technologies
to show expertise.
<< Showing expertise in communications,
fabrication, and LPI/LPD signals.
The proposal
should detail the firm's experience in innovative advanced software design and
familiarity on working with hardware.
The proposer should be prepared to deliver products in accordance with
the general information outlined in each of the phases as listed below:
PHASE
I: The proposer in Phase 1 will perform
an in-depth research of the latest in communications, modulation, compression,
and LPI/LPD signal type technologies.
The proposer will then recommend at least two configurations to be able
to communicate in two modes, Line of Sight (LOS) and over the horizon. Efforts
should focus on technological approach for addressing the requirement. Research, document, and give an estimated
price per unit of a short haul and beyond the horizon capability. A demonstration of the two types chosen (but
not necessarily in final form) will be seen as a plus.
PHASE
II: Develop system design after
significant interaction with SOF tactical users that specify how they want the
system to be used. Preference should be given to commercial off the shelf
(COTS) parts/equipment to minimize the per unit cost in Phase III. Develop system prototypes numbering at least
the following:
<< Four Cxvcr of chosen
modulation/configuration type 1, two on PCMCIA card format and two on 32 bit
C-PCI card format (if space permits, both types can be put on one card).
<< Four Cxvcr of chosen
modulation/configuration type 2, two on PCMCIA card format and two on 32 bit
C-PCI card format (if space permits, both types can be put on one card).
<< Four Sxcvr of the two chosen
modulation/configuration types.
Connection to what types of sensors for testing will be decided at the
start of Phase 2.
<< A small "base" station using a
PC104 format computer, with PCMCIA
and/or C-PCI slots.
Integration
and testing will be on any platform the Proposer chooses. Final demonstration will use a Digital
Receiver Technology (DRT) receiver (although the attempt should be made to
allow the software to be used on any platform). SOCOM will provide two DRT's as GFE for at least two weeks for
the final test.
Will be
required to demonstrate in a realistic tactical environment using two Sxvcr
sending data at the same time from two different sources to a soldier, and show
soldier to soldier communication.
Conduct limited testing to prove feasibility over a seven-day mission
scenario.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: This system is
designed primarily for SOF tactical operations, and has application in at least
two PEO-IIs programs. It will also have
application with the other military services (Marines and Army have expressed
interest) and law enforcement agencies.
With the explosion of wireless technologies, a company could easily spin
this product line off in the commercial world.
REFERENCES:
DARPA: Small Unit Operations.
http://www.darpa.mil/ato/programs/suosas.htm
"Wolfpack
Hunts Down Enemy Emitters," AFCEA Signal Magazine, December 2001, pgs.
57-59. Magazine info:
www.afcea.org/signal or signal@afcea.org
Darpa's
Wolfpack program: www.darpa.mil/ato/programs/wolfpack.html
POC for
JCAF is Charles Frasch, SPAWAR Systems Charleston, cfrasch@spawar.navy.mil,
843-218-4734.
For an
unclassified copy of the JTWS Operational Requirements Document (ORD), see the
SITIS page for instructions.
KEYWORDS: RF, VIDEO, LINK, COMMUNICATIONS, DSSS, FHSS,
FREQUENCY HOPPER, SPREAD SPECTRUM, C-PCI, PCMCIA, ULTRA WIDEBAND
SOCOM02-010 TITLE:
Frequency Hopper/DSSS Detection
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE: Research and design algorithms that will
enable detection of (threshold) and
demodulation (objective) of frequency hopper spread spectrum (FHSS) and Direct
Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) signals on a software definable receiver. If hardware is needed, plug and play
technology in the PCMCIA and/or C-PCI formats will be used.
DESCRIPTION: SOF tactical users lack a software package
that permits them to monitor spread spectrum and other advanced wideband
signals. The commercial and government
use of these types of signals is exploding.
SOF operators cannot currently monitor these kinds of communication in a
small package; being able to do so can and will save lives.
This SBIR
will fund the research and design of algorithms that will detect and identify
(requirement), and demodulate (objective) spread spectrum, and in particular
frequency-hopping signals. These
algorithms will be implemented into the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS)
software definable receivers. JTWS uses
the Digital Receiver Technology (DRT) family of receivers. Proposer should design and implement any
needed electronics onto the C-PCI and/or PCMCIA formats, which the DRT
receivers use. Software will be written
for the NT operating system. However,
innovative proposals will design for algorithms that can be used easily on any
platform or on any operating system.
Proposer
should include a design that will allow for easy upgrades as new signals/signal
variants come available in the future.
Proposer should also allow for detection of variants of the same signal type
that occurs in different parts of the world.
Proposer
should incorporate the new Joint Cryptologic Architecture Framework (JCAF) into
its design. Information on JCAF can be
obtained from Navy SPAWAR Systems Charleston, Mr. Charles Frasch, cfrasch@spawar.navy.mil.
Potential
bidders should acquire a copy of the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS)
Operational Requirements Document (ORD) for more information on
requirements. JTWS ORD can be obtained
from widdoed@socom.mil, with request for JTWS ORD in the subject line. Proposers should budget for a single day
trip to Tampa, Florida or Baltimore, MD for a Phase 1 kickoff meeting.
Integration
and testing will be on the Digital Receiver Technology (DRT) family of
receivers, although the attempt should be made to allow the software to be used
on any platform to increase commercialization.
Successful
proposals will use novel ideas to improve soldier usability, create future
commercial markets, and lower future costs of upgrades to the system. Pluses include:
<< Employees who have operational experience in
the tactical and/or SOF arena;
<< Detection of other advanced signals such a
802.11, bluetooth, and ultra-wideband.
<< Fully demonstrating the proposing company's
past and present experience;
<< Supplying references on products/programs
(particularly government program managers);
<< Giving detail on its proposed technologies
to show expertise.
<< Showing expertise in frequency hopper/spread
spectrum detection and demodulation.
The
proposal should detail the firm's experience in innovative advanced software
design and familiarity on working with hardware, especially receivers. Proposers should be prepared to show their
expertise to later solve some of the harder problems, such as encryption and bandwidth. The proposer should be prepared to deliver
products in accordance with the general information outlined in each of the
phases as listed below:
PHASE
I: Research and report on FHSS and DSSS
variant types used throughout the world, in preparation for a smart Phase II
design. Develop system and algorithm
design on one of those variants to show expertise. All efforts should focus on technological approach for addressing
the requirement.
PHASE
II: Develop full version of the
algorithms and incorporate as many algorithms as possible into the DRT family
of software definable receivers. Funds
permitting, look into other advanced signals.
Conduct limited testing to prove feasibility over a seven day mission
scenario. SOCOM will provide a DRT receiver
as GFE.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: This system is
designed primarily for SOF tactical operations, and has application in at least
two PEO-IIs programs. It will have wide
interest with the other military services, intelligence community, and law
enforcement agencies. A successful
Phase II will result in the developing company being one of the leaders in
small frequency hopper monitoring equipment.
REFERENCES:
For an
unclassified copy of the JTWS Operational Requirements Document (ORD), see the
SITIS page for instructions.
KEYWORDS: COMMUNICATIONS, DSSS, FHSS, FREQUENCY
HOPPER, SPREAD SPECTRUM, C-PCI, SOFTWARE DEFINABLE RADIO, SOFTWARE
SOCOM02-011 TITLE: HF to UHF Camouflaged Antenna
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE: SOF tactical users lack a high frequency
(HF) to ultra high frequency (UHF) type of antenna package that permits them to
clandestinely monitor communications.
This SBIR
will research, design and build a family of rugged, inexpensive tactical antennas
for deployed SOF personnel in two different versions; one as a tent and the
other as camouflage netting.
DESCRIPTION: Development of transparent or
non-traditional antennas offers placement possibilities not formerly possible.
The designer will use the latest in antenna technologies to design a series of
transparent antennas that can receive HF up to at least UHF frequencies.
This SBIR
seeks to design and build a family of antennas that to the casual observer
looks like an ordinary military tent and/or camouflage netting. Proposals will use novel technology and
antenna theory to permit a “normal” size camouflaged tent or net to be a
receiving antenna. Due to the long wavelengths of HF, proposer will need to use
innovative antenna technologies to maximize sensitivity from a smaller than the
optimum antenna.
We envision
a readily available supply of camouflage antennas that have different
characteristics, such as omni-directional versus directional; HF, VHF, and/or
UHF, etc. Innovative proposals will
allow the user to easily configure the antennas to maximize for the reception
desired (for example, the ability to zip individual camouflage together to
create the antenna package desired, and could be zipped in “parallel” or
“series” to get the desired frequency range and/or extra gain).
For the
tent version, the tent should look like any military issue tent to the normal
observer.
For the
camouflaged netting version, the netting should look like any military issue
netting, and could be placed over any structure or possible bushes/trees.
Both would
permit SOF to connect their receivers to the tent or netting to receive RF
signals. Proposer may incorporate an antenna into existing tents/netting or
make a designed antenna look like a tent/netting. Proposer should include designs made of lasting materials, due to
the expected rough treatment in the field.
Also, a
transmitting antenna version will be needed, with the capability of
transmitting at least 100 Watts in the HF frequency range.
Innovative
proposals will permit future integration of netting or tent parts to allow
reception up into the GHz range (e.g. to receive satellite transmissions), or
if costs permit included as part of this SBIR.
A desirable
addition integrated into this package would be a very small, high dynamic range
preamplifier for the 20MHz and higher frequency range. The preamp should have
the capability of being DC powered either through the coaxial cable, or an
external DC connection.
The
proposer should attempt to use as much as possible the latest in commercial off
the shelf (COTS) and Government off the shelf (GOTS) equipment and provide for
future upgrades as technology and requirements change.
Proposers
should allow for a single day trip to Tampa, Florida or Baltimore Maryland for
a Phase 1 kickoff meeting.
Successful
proposals will use novel ideas to improve soldier usability, create future
commercial markets, and lower future costs of upgrades to the system. Pluses include:
<< Employees who have operational experience
in the tactical and/or SOF arena;
<< Fully demonstrating the company’s past and
present experience;
<< Supplying references on proposing company’s
products/programs (particularly government program managers);
<< Giving detail on its proposed technologies
to show expertise.
<< Showing expertise in antenna theory and
application.
Successful
proposals will use novel technology to achieve substantial enhancements to
equipment size, weight, performance, reliability, power consumption and/or
cost.
PHASE
I: Effort should focus on technological
approach for addressing the above requirements, to include the proposed antenna
technologies and ideas for antenna design.
This should result in the delivery of a preliminary Systems Design
Document (SDD). Providing modeling
simulations of the intended design and any sample antennas would be a
plus. Accompanying the SDD would an
in-depth cost estimate for developing two prototype systems in Phase II for use
in developmental test and evaluation.
PHASE
II: Significant interaction with SOF
tactical users will be required to ensure that the system being designed will
meet their needs. Develop system
prototypes (at least 2 of each antenna design). Will be required to demonstrate in a realistic tactical
environment with the users partially through the program. User input will then be included into the
final design. Range testing will be
needed to verify VSWR and Gain specifications.
Conduct final limited testing to prove feasibility over a seven day mission
scenario.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: This system is
designed primarily for military tactical operations, and has application in at
least two USSOCOM programs. It will
also have application with the other military services and law enforcement
agencies. In addition, an enterprising company could spin this product off into
the commercial market as an advanced antenna product, with uses, for example,
in wireless communications area.
KEYWORDS: HF, VHF, UHF, HIGH FREQUENCY, VERY HIGH
FREQUENCY, ULTRA HIGH FREQUENCY, ANTENNA, ANTENNAS, CAMOUFLAGE, TENT, NETTING.
SOCOM02-012 TITLE: Threat Warning Software
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE: SOF tactical users lack a dynamic software
package that will give Special Forces a smart threat warning capability. Having
this capability will save lives during dangerous missions.
The purpose
of this SBIR is to research, design and create a threat warning software
package that will be the basis for future SOF technology. This will be
accomplished by researching the latest in software technologies, and
incorporating graphic maps with direction finding (DF) information, in order to
smartly design a system that will be dynamic enough to allow SOCOM to keep up
with technology changes.
DESCRIPTION: USSOCOM is currently developing its next
generation of Intelligence gathering and threat warning equipment, under the
Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS) program.
In order to keep up with the fast pace of technology, JTWS is using
software definable receivers (SDRs) and plug and play technology. The Ground, Maritime, and Air versions will
use the same baseline hardware. JTWS
uses standard Compact PCI (C-PCI) and PCMCIA card slots, and an NT operating
system. It is hoped that this SBIR will
be the starting point to encourage companies to voluntarily build accessories
and capabilities for this detection system.
One important aspect of the
threat warning software will be its detection of ¡§threat¡¨ signals. The software should be able to detect and ID
signals as threat or friendly, and include this into a database that can be
built and shared. Further, the software
should have the flexibility to learn and be configurable by any user to behave
as the user wants. An equally important aspect of the software is a provision
for Battlefield Mapping, and the software should incorporate NIMA, UAV and
other mapping data into the overall picture. This will allow for overlaying map
data with locating information (e.g., Line of Bearing or DF) into the threat
warning picture. A plus would allow the
user to automatically download the latest in map information (e.g. over the
internet) for inclusion into the database.
JTWS uses the Digital Receiver
Technology (DRT) family of software definable receivers, although the software
should be dynamic enough to permit use of other receivers. JTWS (and DRT) uses an NT operating
system. Innovative proposals will allow
the software to be operating system independent.
The software will attempt to be
Joint Component Architecture and Framework (JCAF) compliant. This software package will be the first
commercial software designed for JCAF; this research will be an interactive
design that improves portability and the JCAF design. The SBIR winner will work with SPAWARSYSCEN Charleston (SSC-C)
Code 71to make JCAF a better design product.
If the Proposer feels that he has a better solution than JCAF, this
should be documented.
The
software will have an open architecture software system that will permit future
hardware and software upgrades and will permit easy incorporation of other
equipment and software that SOF might desire.
Proposers
should budget for a single day trip to Tampa, Florida or Charleston, SC for a
Phase 1 kickoff meeting.
Integration
and testing will be on the Digital Receiver Technology (DRT) family of
receivers, although the attempt should be made to allow the software to be used
on any platform.
Successful proposals will use
novel ideas to improve soldier usability, create future commercial markets, and
lower future costs of upgrades to the system.
Pluses include:
<< Employees who have operational experience in
the tactical and/or SOF arena;
<< Fully demonstrating the company's past and
present experience;
<< Supplying references on proposing company's
products/programs (particularly government program managers);
<< Integration of Specific Emitter
Identification (SEI) technology;
<< Giving detail on its proposed technologies
to show expertise.
<< Showing expertise in target identification
and/or smart software design;
<< Experience with battlefield mapping.
The proposal should detail the
firm's experience in innovative advanced software design and familiarity on
working with hardware, especially receivers. Proposal should list clearance
information, and ability to handle classified information (we do not expect the
contract to be classified, but some information in Phase 2 may be
classified). The proposer should be
prepared to deliver products in accordance with the general information
outlined in each of the phases as listed below:
PHASE
I: Selected participant(s) will
research past/present target identification technologies and the latest in
smart software, and report on the pros and cons of different possibilities that
could be used to meet SOF requirements.
Then propose a system software threat warning design for the JTWS. By the end of Phase 1, contract participants
should have a limited amount of software written that will demonstrate the
proposal, including the look and feel.
PHASE
II: Significant interaction with SOF
tactical users will be required to ensure that the system being designed will
meet their needs. The program will be
run in phases, in order to get the hardware and software out to the users for
feedback. Will be required to
demonstrate in a realistic tactical environment with the users partially
through the program. A DRT receiver
will be provided GFE to the Phase II contractor.
PHASE III
DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: A number of
organizations in the Intelligence Community have teamed together on the JTWS
system. These teaming organizations are
very interested in this SBIR. Although
this SBIR is designed primarily for military tactical operations, it will also
have applications with the other military services and law enforcement
agencies. An enterprising company could
spin this product off into the commercial market as an advanced signal search
product, with uses, for example, in wireless communications area. In addition, JCAF has a good possibility of
being the standard for tactical operating systems; the winner of this SBIR
would be in position to capitalize on this market by being a JCAF consultant or
developing more applications that are JCAF compliant.
Acquisition
Programs Supported: Joint Threat Warning System, PEO-115
REFERENCES:
POC for
JCAF is Charles Frasch, SPAWAR Systems Charleston, cfrasch@spawar.navy.mil,
843-218-4734.
For an
unclassified copy of the JTWS Operational Requirements Document (ORD), see the
SITIS page for instructions.
Digital
Receiver Technology (DRT) web page and contact info: www.drti.com,
Mr. Acie
Vickers, 301-916-5554 x103.
"Smarter
Web," MIT Technology Review, November 2001, pgs. 52-58. Magazine info: www.technologyreview.com
"Wolfpack
Hunts Down Enemy Emitters," AFCEA Signal Magazine, December 2001, pgs.
57-59. Magazine info:
www.afcea.org/signal or signal@afcea.org
Darpa's
Wolfpack program:
www.darpa.mil/ato/programs/wolfpack.html
MiDAS,
Military Digital Analysis System, by Defence Research Establishment Ontario (DREO),
http://www.dreo.dnd.ca/pages/factsheet/ew/ew017_e.pdf
KEYWORDS: Threat Warning, software, JCAF, SIGINT, NT,
Operating System, database, receiver, software definable receiver, SDR, threat,
warning, SEI, battlefield mapping, emitter.
SOCOM02-013 TITLE: Portable Signal Identification Training
TECHNOLOGY
AREAS: Information Systems Technology
OBJECTIVE:
This concept describes the creation of a portable, lightweight threat warning
training system that will fulfill the need for experienced threat warning
soldiers.
Whether on
foot or in vehicles, whether on the move or still, it is imperative that our
Armed Forces know where hostile forces are located. As technology races ahead
and new technologies are created that threaten our forces, it becomes imperative
that sufficient training be provided. Currently most training is on the job,
where soldiers learn while on maneuvers. Most soldiers are not trained to
recognize all threat signals, and do not have the time or means to learn all of
the signals that they should. Technology can now permit quick and efficient
training that will save lives.
DESCRIPTION:
This SBIR
will research and build a portable signal training system prototype contained
in an easy to use software/hardware package. SOCOM envisions two different
training scenarios:
1. The
soldier sits down in front of a laptop computer containing the training system;
2. Live
signal collection is simulated by the training system “transmitting” (via cable
or over the air) to a soldier using his preferred signal detection system.
The laptop
and “signal generator” (in this SBIR, this term is used to define what will
generate the signal, not the classic signal generator. It is up to you, the
proposer, to decide what will best generate the signals) should be able to
simulate any kind of threat signal to include domestic and foreign cellular,
radar, INMARSAT, HF Comms, etc. (Desired signals will be specified with user
input). An option should be included to choose up to at least 50 test signals,
then transmit them in order or random with selectable dwell and duration times.
Creativity by the proposing companies is encouraged. The system should contain
an external signal input to permit a user to insert custom signals to be
modulated. Other possibilities include simulated GPS locations, NIMA map data
input with signals coming from different directions, and any other input that
the trainee’s monitoring equipment can receive. Innovative designs will allow
easy insertions of future upgrades and/or signal types. The subject author has
been told there are software libraries of signals available that could be run
on a DSP, which would save money and hardware size.
A smart
software package will need to be created to allow a database of signals to be
built, added to, and easily accessed.
Scenario 1
(requirement):
This
configuration will allow a soldier to sit in front of a laptop and use the
training system. Proposer initiative is encouraged, but as a minimum, the
laptop display should teach the soldier what the spectral display and sound of
a signal is like.
Scenario 2
(objective):
The purpose
of scenario 2 is to now take this database and transmit it to the soldier,
permitting a soldier to be trained using his/her own receiving equipment using
the simulated signals. This allows the trainer and trainee to train for both
signals and the equipment. Innovative proposals could even allow design or
incorporation of receiver training into the system (receiver of choice for this
SBIR is the Digital Receiver Technology (DRT) family of receivers.
The system
should be able to be setup in any environment, from a field to a city or base.
It should have the capability to train from a laptop alone, transmit via cable
to a receiver, transmit from one antenna, or from a series of antennas arranged
in a circle or line and be quickly configured, reconfigured, and dismantled.
Possible
scenarios for the multiple antenna include a soldier in a boat, vehicle, or
with a backpack learning to recognize signals using a single antenna in front of
him; a soldier positioned inside a circular antenna field wearing his threat
warning or any receiving radio system (even vehicular); air receiving system
(e.g. in a helicopter) that flies by the antennas that are placed in a line
with different signals emitting from each. All of these scenarios will permit
trainees to practice reception and identification using live threat signals.
An
innovative proposal would permit the computer to generate “threat” and
“non-threat” signals and permit these signals to be transmitted off of select
antennas (when more than one is used). By allowing this as he moves, the
soldier can learn and practice what signals are threats. By transmitting only
on certain antennas, the soldier can also practice direction finding (DF) skills.
The circle of antennas could also be placed around a live training exercise,
further enhancing the realism of the exercise.
The base
package should be composed of a laptop computer running NT, a “signal
generator”, and a communications package that will send the generated signal to
an antenna chosen by the trainer. The antenna package will contain at least 8
easily deployed antenna packages that can be used individually or configured in
a line or large circle (at least 1 mile) and be programmed to transmit the
generated signal individually or collectively. Innovative designs will permit
the circle to be enlarged and/or use more or less antennas in the array and
design the software to recognize this and to automatically configure itself.
Each antenna
package should contain the receiving and transmitting antennas, electronics,
and base in one easy to carry package. Personnel will be able to easily install
the antenna package(s) by inserting it/them into or on the ground. The antenna
electronics will be powered by either a DC or AC source, and include the option
to power by commercial AAA, AA, C, or D size batteries. Innovative proposals
will include rechargeable batteries with an AC input and small solar charging
panel that will run the electronics and charge the batteries during the day.
Innovative
designs will include self-test software to test antenna connection(s), and will
assist personnel with correct placement of the antennas if using in a circle.
User friendly software will permit trainers to quickly choose signal types,
line of bearing, signal level, etc. while the trainee is collecting signals
from the threat warning system.
If the
training location is in a Radio Frequency (RF) “quiet” area, the system should
also be capable of creating non-threat or random signals.
The base
package should be able to communicate with all antenna packages using wireless
technology. The base package transmitting to the closest antenna package and
this package relaying to the next closest antenna package is acceptable, and
may be desirable. This communication can either be:
- Analog
(the “signal generator” transmits out of band to the antenna packages where the
signal will be upconverted and/or downconverted into the band of the
receiving), or
- Digital
(the “signal generator” transmits the signal to the antenna packages that would
have unique IP address and could relay the signal among themselves). The
signals will then be transmitted from the appropriate antenna(s).
A late
request from a SOCOM Component for a training system similar to the above has
been received by the topic author, and is included below as an objective to
incorporate these requirements as well: “The system will be capable of
providing real time imagery, sensor data collection, communications and
photo/video imagery. The system will continually record and assess student
performance and at predetermined “level of knowledge”, increase the tempo and
complexity of subjects. Instructional data will be transmitted from the Subject
Matter Expert (SME) and instructor to the student via this system. Students
will be given a series of tasks to perform using situational data provided and
have the ability to mine additional data, i.e., and season specific movement
routes for infiltration and exfiltration. The system will be capable of
displaying up-datable friendly and enemy situation data, video/ photos and
fingerprints of selected individuals. It will be mission and case based
intelligent tutoring systems Subject Matter and instructor controlled oversight
and control. The student will determine the best alternative(s) to perform
tasks, based on the presentation and a series of alternative solution sets.
Students will be given the opportunity to true/false situations prior to
implementation, determine the best alternative/s to perform the assigned tasks.
The
application of this system will include, but will not be limited to subjects
taught in the Special Forces Course, Civil Affairs and PSYOP courses where
subjects require demonstration and performance.
The system
will make use of industries “packet data protocols” for communications
application, expanding traditional messaging, to data, facsimile, imagery, live
video, data compression and query capability to databases to elicit responses
of graphic and other data. To further link this system to industry standards
capabilities such as, packet switching “ Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)” and
those supporting protocols enabling efficient use of available bandwidth, i.e.,
“bandwidth on demand”. This will be a student employed training system/s.
Maintenance and replacement costs must be kept to a minimum and will not
require the addition of technologies for low probability of detection/
exploitation and interception of communications.”
Building
and marketing this training system as a base system with add-ons for different
customers is acceptable, and may end up being desirable (e.g., some customers
may not want the antenna package).
Preliminary
discussions with users indicates extreme interest across many Services,
especially if the designer can design a robust, easy to use system at a decent
cost.
Successful
proposals will use novel ideas to improve soldier usability, create future
commercial markets, and lower future costs of upgrades to the system. Pluses
include:
- Employees
who have operational experience in the tactical and/or SOF arena;
- Fully
demonstrating the company’s past and present experience;
- Supplying
references on proposing company’s products/programs (particularly government
program managers);
- Giving
detail on its proposed technologies to show expertise.
- Showing
expertise in target identification and/or smart software design.
-
Experience with battlefield mapping/incorporating maps into signals
intelligence.
- Knowledge
of signal software libraries, and a plan to easily integrate them into the
training system, saving development time and money.
The
proposal should detail the firm’s experience in innovative advanced software
design and familiarity on working with hardware. The proposer should be
prepared to deliver products in accordance with the general information
outlined in each of the phases as listed below:
PHASE I:
Perform a study to evaluate current commercial technologies that could fulfill
the above requirements. Research to determine if a current library of signals
exists and is available that could be generated with this system (this would
allow users to import signals at any time and save future cost). The study will
concentrate on yielding the best system at the lowest power consumption, ease
of use, and production cost. Begin work on database and training software.
Develop design for submission for Phase II. Provide an estimate of per system
cost at phase III.
PHASE II:
Design and build, or modify existing COTS hardware/software, to perform and/or
support the desired functions. Build two to four prototypes to conduct
extensive user testing that demonstrates ease of use, data and environmental
compliance, and successful performance of desired functions. Innovative proposals
will find commercial interest that would fund a Phase III production run. An
enterprising company could work with SOCOM’s Threat Warning Software SBIR being
run in parallel to have this SBIR have the same look and feel to better train
SOF.
PHASE III
DUAL-USE APPLICATIONS: This system could be used effectively by a wide portion
of military, police, FBI, and others who need to increase real life training
practice or test new monitoring equipment. This training and testing could
include hand held, backpack, maritime and vehicular monitoring systems. This
SBIR could be spun off to have wide civilian portable wireless applications.
Keywords:
ANTENNA, COMMUNICATIONS, TRAINING, THREAT WARNING, THREAT, SIGNAL, SIGNAL
GENERATOR, WIRELESS, BLUETOOTH, RF, RADIO FREQUENCY, DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING,
DSP