Find the Right Path to Working With DIU

Area of Interest (AoI)

Endpoint Accuracy 2: CUAS Close-In Kinetic Defeat Enhancement

The Department of War (DoW) is seeking innovative technologies to enhance the lethality of integrated weapons and fire control systems, with a focus on improving effectiveness of Remote Weapons Systems (RWS) against Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in support of the Counter-UAS (C-UAS) mission. Part One focuses on the integration of hardware and/or software that enables Aided Target Recognition (AiTR) (also known as Aided Target Detection and Recognition, AiTDR) to improve existing RWS capabilities. Part Two and Three will evaluate new RWS stations and next-generation enhancements to existing small arms systems. Part Four focuses on integrating and enhancing capabilities that enable weapon systems to fully connect and synchronize with sensors, fire control, targeting, and command-and-control systems, operating as part of a coordinated, networked kill chain rather than as standalone platforms.

Part 1 

This initiative aims to integrate Aided Target Recognition (AiTR) functionality into current Remote Weapon Systems (RWS), specifically the Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS). The primary objective is to accelerate the engagement timeline, initially focusing on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), with a secondary focus on other threats like vehicular and man-sized targets.

The desired AiTR system must offer passive detection, classification, ranging, and tracking of UAS targets, whether the RWS is stationary or on-the-move, during both daytime and, preferably, nighttime conditions. This capability will provide the operator with enhanced situational awareness and enable more effective engagement. 

Passive detection and classification will be handled by the AiTR system. AiTR classification will assist the RWS operator with determining threats versus non-threats while minimizing false positives. The AiTR system needs to operate effectively even in cluttered background conditions, both natural and man-made. This system may incorporate additional sensors to enhance existing capabilities, provided their Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) are compatible with the RWS station's base platform, use case, and constraints. Upon initial AiTR detection, target tracking may be performed using the RWS’s existing video output. The solution must achieve reliable target tracking while minimizing latency. While passive ranging is preferred, limited-duration active ranging may be acceptable. Overall the AiTR system must account for adverse conditions such as shake from weapon firing, muzzle flash, and high frequency jitter from the base vehicle platform.

Key characteristics for the integrated AiTR system include:

• Seamless integration with current RWS architectures.
• An open system design to ensure future scalability and interoperability.
• Improved target discrimination to minimize collateral damage.
• A reduction in operator workload and cognitive burden through automated target handling.
• The technology must demonstrably improve the RWS’s ability to optimally detect (~600m) accurately, track and engage at no less than ~100m both stationary and maneuvering (primarily incoming) UAS targets against dynamic Group 1 & 2 UAS moving at moderate speeds (<30 m/s) or faster.
• In the event of AiTR system malfunction or degradation, the RWS should revert to standard operational capabilities without any performance loss. 
• Must have human-in-the-loop functionality. 

Part 2

For Part Two, the Department of War (DoW) intends to either acquire a new system or substantially modify existing RWS and small arms systems. The goal is to enhance performance to achieve Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (C-UAS) capability on both moving and stationary platforms, including ground and maritime environments, while also maintaining and improving the system's effectiveness against traditional Remote Weapon System (RWS) targets. Future efforts may include scaling the system for different caliber weapons and integration with networked sensor and fire control systems. 

Key characteristics for the C-UAS capability include:

• In addition to the criteria in Part One, the weapon system prototype must be able to be fired in land and maritime environments, rather than just a laboratory setting at time of pitch. 
• Ability to engage and hit a Group 1 UAS moving laterally to the weapons system at 7m/s at a range of 50-200 meters.
• Ability to execute multi-target engagements.
• For RWS systems, full (360 degree) range of motion.
• For RWS systems, demonstrate -10 degree to 90 degree (direct overhead) range of elevation.

Part 3

For Part Three, the DoW intends to modify existing small arms systems to support dismounted C-UAS defeat. This may involve the scaled application of technologies from Part Two as well as the introduction of additional system enhancements to improve effectiveness against aerial threats. The goal is to enhance individual warfighter lethality by improving accuracy-to-decision through advanced fire control and projectile guidance. Desired solutions include systems capable of deflecting or self-aiming standard-issue rounds to increase hit probability against manually selected, transient targets, while integrating networked sensor and small arms fire control systems. Must be adaptable to dismounted legacy small arms, scalable across calibers and configurations, and maintain baseline weapon performance in the event of system degradation or failure. A semi-automatic, live-fire capable prototype is required.

The C-UAS solution must enable the ability to engage and hit a Group 1 UAS moving laterally to the weapons system at 7m/s at a range of 50-200 meters.

Part 4

Part Four aims to enhance battlefield lethality through the integration and improvement of sensor data, communications, and fire control systems. Key goals are: improved passive targeting, mutual sensor utilization, and communication between fire control and weapon systems.  A commercial wireless edge network architecture that bridges to military systems and the reverse is essential across all stages of this effort to manage data transfer from sensors and weapon/fire control systems. This required network must:

• Be Capable: Integrate both RF and IP-based transport layers and support operations in both terrestrial and maritime domains.
• Be Secure: Employ post-quantum encryption protocols, enable packet-level data protection, and control access through tiered decryption keys.
• Prioritize Domestic Infrastructure: Data transit should utilize U.S./domestic company-controlled infrastructure wherever feasible.
• Ensure Compatibility and Efficiency: Deliver sensor data in formats compatible with existing DoD-supported visualization, geolocation, and analysis software. To conserve bandwidth, edge-based analysis of relevant data may be necessary before network transmission.
• Be Team Awareness Kit (TAK) compatible.

Background and Problem Statement:

The Department of War (DoW) currently relies on Radio Frequency (RF) communications that are easily susceptible to degradation and disruption from low-cost proliferated jamming threats. Laser communication (lasercom) technology offers high data rate, low probability of intercept, and detection communications that are critical in contested domains. As the DoW builds out a force design that baselines laser communications, the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) is seeking to accelerate the insertion of this technology into contested air and space domains.

Desired Solutions and Key Objectives:

DIU is soliciting solutions for the following lines of effort (LOEs):

1. LOE 1: Development and demonstration of multi-waveform lasercom optical communication terminals (OCTs) and orchestration capable of enabling seamless data transport across different waveform and network boundaries. The OCTs will be low Size, Weight and Power (SWaP) and utilize a multi-chip package (MCP) capable of multi-waveform lasercom.
2. LOE 2: Demonstration of a reliable and high throughput optical communications between a commercially owned and operated proliferated Low Earth Orbit (pLEO) constellation and an airborne lasercom terminal in flight.

Vendors have the opportunity to provide a solution to one or both LOEs.

LOE 1 Key Objectives Include:

• 18-Months: Multi-Waveform Modem Validation: Government validation of in-fiber waveform compatibility testing as well as fiber-based atmospheric mitigation performance testing for multi-waveform lasercom.
• 24-Months: Multi-Waveform Integration into OCT: Government validation of atmospheric mitigation performance testing for multi-waveform lasercom through free space terminal testing of pointing, acquisition, and tracking (PAT) sequence and waveform quality metrics.
• 36-Months: On-Orbit Demonstration: Execute an on-orbit demonstration, proving full capability including PAT sequence, data transfer, and link termination for more than one waveform.

LOE 1 Key Solution Attributes:

Potential solutions must describe and substantiate their capabilities in the following areas. These attributes will be considered key performance differentiators:

• Interoperability: The types and quantities of waveform standards. This includes waveform and PAT sequence.
• Space Heritage: Past performance delivering OCTs with space flight heritage. Units should be at TRL 6 or higher prior to Authority to Proceed (ATP).
• Data Rate and Range: The data rates associated with LEO, MEO, and GEO ranges.
• SWaP: The OCT size, weight, and power characteristics.
• Orbit and Lifespan: The OCT design life for a given orbit.
• Atmospheric Penetration: The ability to deliver reliable data transport through the atmospheric channel.
• Recurring Engineering (RE) Cost: The recurring production cost of the multi-waveform capable OCT.

LOE 1 Waveform Priorities:

• Primary Waveform: JLIS/OIC2 v4.1
• Secondary Waveforms: Select at least one of the following secondary waveforms: OpenZR+, LCRD, SDA 3.2, SDA 4.0
  • Preferred Secondary Waveforms: LCRD, OpenZR+
  • Additional waveforms under consideration: SDA 3.2, SDA 4.0

LOE 2 Key Objectives Include:

• Airborne Demonstration Within 18 Months: Demonstrate successful PAT sequence, stable link maintenance, and link reacquisition during live flight between multiple commercial pLEO satellites and an airborne terminal within 18 months of ATP.

LOE 2 Key Solution Attributes:

Potential solutions must describe and substantiate their capabilities in the following areas. These attributes will be considered key performance differentiators, and will be separated by groups of airborne terminal providers and commercial pLEO coverage providers.

• Airborne Terminal Provider:
  • Flight Heritage: Company has proven flight heritage for airborne lasercom terminals prior to ATP.
  • SWaP: OCT size, weight, and power characteristics.
  • Recurring Cost: OCT production level cost.
  • Terminal Design: Airborne terminal must operate behind a flat or conformal window and not protrude into the airstream.
• pLEO Constellation Provider:
  • Coverage: Instantaneous number of satellites available for links assuming an airborne elevation angle of (a) 40 degrees and (b) 25 degrees, prior to ATP.
  • Recurring Cost: Subscription cost for providing capability as a service.

LOE 2 Key Technical Attributes:

The following characteristics represent the key technical attributes:

• Link Acquisition Time: The time elapsed from initial pointing command to data exchange between the pLEO terminal and the airborne terminal.
• Link Duration: The continuous interval over which the optical link maintains throughput during a single pass.
• Re-Acquisition Time: The elapsed time to re-establish a compliant link after a temporary loss of lock.
• Data Rate and Range: The data rates associated with an airborne-to-pLEO link.
• Turbulence Mitigation: Technique(s) to mitigate fading channels, with associated power penalty and latency impacts.

The following items represent enhanced capabilities that provide added value to the mission. While not mandatory for initial award, solutions that incorporate these features may be evaluated for their ability to provide increased capability:

• Airborne Terminal Provider:
  • Hybrid Terminal Roadmap: A plan for upgrading the design of the airborne terminal to make it capable of integrating multiple optical heads and a modem to support multi-waveform lasercom.
• pLEO Constellation Provider:
  • Global Lasercom Coverage:  Programmatic and technical roadmap to demonstrate seamless global lasercom coverage and simulate make-before-break architecture supporting lossless handover in a pLEO architecture by 2030.
  • Dynamic Scheduling: Demonstrate/demonstration of successful dynamic scheduling between a pLEO constellation and an aircraft on a non-predetermined flight path, to include recovery following unexpected link drops of several minutes.

Problem Statement

The Department of War (DoW) faces a widening gap between the computational demands of modern warfighting and its ability to deliver compute across strategic, operational, and tactical levels. AI now underpins situational awareness, command-and-control, intelligence fusion, and autonomous-systems coordination with modern workloads requiring 50–150 kW per rack today with anticipated needs scaling to 250 kW+, which represents an order of magnitude beyond the ~10–35 kW per rack typical of current field-deployable IT. Current infrastructure struggles to adequately cool modern AI accelerators, condition degraded power in austere theaters, or survive contested environments. Warfighters lack sovereign, survivable, high-density compute at the point of need, delivered as rapidly deployable, logistically sustainable Modular Data Centers (MDCs).

Desired Solutions

The Department of War seeks to prototype a Modular Data Center product family delivered along two parallel solution paths sharing a common architectural baseline. Both paths shall be modular by construction, support linear capacity expansion through standardized module additions, and provide space for up to ten IT racks per module at the densities defined below. Vendors may propose against Solution Path I, Solution Path II, or Solution I & II.

Solution Path I — Core MDC, a stationary or semi-fixed installation providing approximately one megawatt of IT power and matched cooling capacity per module, supporting per-rack densities of 150 kilowatts with engineering headroom to scale to 250 kilowatts. Modules interlink to an aggregate envelope of approximately ten megawatts. The cooling baseline is optimized for liquid-based thermal management.

Solution Path II — Edge MDC, a highly mobile, forward-deployed installation providing approximately 250 kilowatts of IT power and matched cooling capacity per module, supporting per-rack densities of 50 kilowatts with engineering headroom to scale to higher densities. Modules interlink to an aggregate envelope of approximately two megawatts. The solution is able to achieve full operational capability rapidly upon arrival in theater, on utility or generator power. The cooling baseline assumes a ruggedized thermal management system suited to high-density compute and austere environments.

Desired Solution Attributes

Modular Compute Expansion. Linear scaling through standardized container additions with secure interconnection that preserves environmental sealing, TEMPEST, and thermal performance.

• Structural capacity for liquid-cooled HPC payloads: minimum 4,000 lb per rack point load and 450 psf distributed floor load, or greater to accommodate future HPC payloads (e.g., 6,500+ lb)
• Secure interconnection methodology between modular containers (e.g., environmental seal rating (IP class), TEMPEST treatment at the interconnect, and connection time per module)
• Capable of sustained AI workload performance (e.g, Per-rack MLPerf results sustained over a 4-hour run at maximum rated ambient with no thermal throttling; report performance per kW)

High-Density Power Delivery and Resilience. Conditioned, resilient power that sustains AI accelerator load profiles and large transient fluctuations across utility and generator sources.

• Accept and condition utility or generator power across a wide voltage range (208–480 V) and frequency range (45–65 Hz), filtering harmonic distortion in both directions
• Deliver IT power compatible with regional voltage and frequency standards in OCONUS deployment areas (e.g., 230V/50Hz, 200V/50–60Hz, 480V/60Hz)
• Sustained IT power availability: 99.99% threshold across utility and generator transition events, with a 99.999% objective; N+1 or better redundancy topology across all critical electrical subsystems
• Reserved spare capacity for load growth (e.g., 10% or more of installed IT capacity)
• UPS sized to bridge loss of primary power through automatic generator start
• BESS sized for extended generator-off operations or low-observable tactical use (Solution Path II)

High-Density Thermal Management. Cooling engineered for sustained AI workloads at the per-rack densities defined by both solution paths, with ruggedization for Solution Path II in austere environments.

• Downstream architectural flexibility for evolving payload cooling approaches, including rear-door heat exchangers, direct-to-chip liquid cooling, and immersion cooling
• Vendor-provided narrative capability matrix declaring which cooling approaches are supported at which rack-density tiers
• Ambient operating range for Solution Path II: threshold of -20°F to 122°F or greater

Networking and Cybersecurity. Scalable COTS network sized for high-density AI, with boundary defense, cryptography, and supply chain controls intended to align with current DoW standards.

• Backend AI and storage fabric backbone: 25 Gbps to 800 Gbps+ for ultra-low-latency accelerator-to-accelerator and storage traffic
• Frontend general compute: 10 Gbps to 100 Gbps for management traffic and locally hosted mission applications
• External boundary: 1 Gbps to 100 Gbps WAN connectivity for inter-site links
• Weatherproofed external ingress: multi-orbit SATCOM (LEO/MEO/GEO), GNSS/NTP, and sealed ports for terrestrial fiber
• Next-Generation Firewall with inline threat prevention and IDS on External Boundary and Frontend traffic; Backend AI fabric may bypass inline inspection, governed instead by identity-aware ZTNA and micro-segmentation
• Configuration hardening to DoW-approved security baselines or government-accepted vendor equivalents (e.g., DISA STIG or DISA RME-approved Vendor STIG), UCR-CORE interoperability, and FIPS-compliant cryptography for data in transit and at rest
• SCRM compliance with relevant department standards (e.g., NDAA §889, DoDI 5200.44, and TAA)

Deployment and Sustainment. Posture and sustainment differ materially between paths.

Solution Path I — Core MDC:

• Sited installation with planned utility, fiber, and seismic preparation; deployment driven by site-readiness milestones
• Supportable by contracted personnel at skill levels equivalent to commercial data center technicians and electricians

Solution Path II — Edge MDC:

• Air- and ground-transportable (e.g., C-17, tractor-trailer)
• Full operational capability at an unprepared site (e.g., within 96 hours) upon arrival in theater, with provision for rapid displacement
• Supportable in theater by trained military technicians at defined skill levels

Survivability and Data Sovereignty. Resilient mission performance in contested environments through hardened, secure facilities that protect classified payloads at the point of need. Solutions shall augment commercial baselines with defense-specific hardening, including TEMPEST and CBRN, to meet rigorous military and industry standards.

• Threat protection pathway. Defined roadmap and timeline for achieving TEMPEST and CBRN protection tiers
• Accreditation posture. Solution Path I shall demonstrate a pathway to full TS/SAPF accreditation per ICD 705; Solution Path II shall provide a deployable accreditation posture (e.g., T-SCIF or equivalent)
• Cryptographic sovereignty. Architectural assurance that the Government maintains exclusive control over cryptographic keys, with zero vendor access to plaintext data or key material

Submission and Award

Submission Content. Submissions are requested to include:

• Label Solution I, Solution II, or Solution I&II
• An overview and technical details of the proposed solution
• Examples of successful deployment of similar solutions in the commercial sector (highly encouraged)
• Identification of any partners or subcontractors and the capabilities each will deliver
• Status of current production readiness and the estimated level of effort and timeframe to customize it for the Government's purpose

Evaluation Preferences. Preference will be given to submissions that:

• Demonstrate product maturity and deployment validation — products that readily fit or can be adapted for the solicited purpose with the least non-recurring engineering and demonstrate clear subject matter expertise (diagrams, figures encouraged)
• Demonstrate concrete integration and interoperability, particularly across partnered teams

Collaboration and Testing. The Government may test multiple solutions at separate or shared locations. Providers should expect to participate in a shared development space with other vendors, operators, and government developers to rapidly iterate, and may be asked to collaborate in cross-functional efforts under previously established contractual vehicles. Solutions submitted under this AOI may be used in a standalone capacity or as a component of a more complex DIU program, including via technology insertion into other prototyping efforts.