FAQs section:

1. What does winning look like?

a.) A combination of cash prizes as described above and the opportunity of a follow-on government contract.

2. Where can I submit additional questions not answered in this FAQ?

a.) Please send your questions via email to prizechallenge@diu.mil and reference ‘Specular MIST Prize Challenge’ in the subject line.

3. I have additional questions and want to talk to someone.

a.) While the Specular MIST Challenge remains open, no meetings with individuals or specific companies will be held on this topic in order to maintain a fair and competitive process.

4. Should I submit one proposal or multiple for each LOE?

a.) Submissions can be combined for LOE1 and LOE2 or submitted as separate proposals and a separate submission must be provided for LOE3

5. Who will operate capabilities selected for Phases 2 and 3?

a.) There will be a training period by companies for DoW operators beginning several days prior to the week of the demonstration events. To the maximum extent possible, military members will operate the capabilities.

6. Will there be follow on contracts?

a.) Being designated as a winner of a prize challenge under US Code 4025 makes your solution eligible for follow-on Prototype OTs.

b.) There is no guarantee that any follow-on awards or contracts will be awarded.

7. What happens at the end of Phase 2?

a.) Companies may be selected to continue to Phase 3 where they will provide capabilities and support to the partner unit over a period of 6-9 months for feedback and iterative product development. Additional prize funding will be awarded if selected for Phase 3.

8. If I’m already on the Blue UAS List, do I need to compete?

a.) Yes.

9. Can I team up with a partner?

a.) The DoW understands vendors may not address all attributes in this solicitation fully; teaming proposals are welcome. Due to the preference to demonstrate within three months of this solicitation, preference will be given to individual or team solutions with demonstrated performance to date.

10. Will proprietary solutions be accepted?

a.) While a modicum of integration is always required, solutions that are walled off or require extensive time, labor, and expense to integrate additional third party options will not be considered.

11. What should I put in my proposal?

a.) The criteria outlined in the AOI should be addressed. Key details should include size, weight, power, cost (SWaP-C), performance, ruggedness (e.g., IP rating), and ease of setup. Vendors should also outline delivery timelines, training plans, and their ability to scale production.

12. I have a great idea but it’s not called out as needed in this solicitation. Should I submit it?

a.) No.

13. Will I get feedback on my submission?

a.) Individual feedback will only be provided for submissions selected for Phases 2& 3.

b.) Industry wide feedback may be provided for common trends for success and failure of submissions selected / non-selected during Phase 1.

14. When do I need to submit to be considered?

a.) Submissions must be received by 22 Jul 26 to be evaluated.

15.) Do we need existing SIPRNet at our facility or can we use the Prize Challenge as our conduit to gain access as we meet all other requirements (PCL and compliance)?

a.) No, an existing FCL is not required to apply to this challenge. It is acceptable for teams who currently lack SIPRnet or JWICS access at their facilities to submit proposals, as long as they meet the other security criteria. Teams DO need to be able to access classified information (via JWICS OR SPIRNET) following Phase I, but it can be at another facility. DIU cannot support that access.

16.) Is this solicitation limited to payloads for preselected unmanned surface vessels (USVs), or may offerors propose an integrated USV and payload solution that meets the LOE requirements? If offerors may propose a USV, are there specific vessel criteria or performance requirements?

a.) The aim of this challenge is to deliver only the most viable, modular, containerized payload to perform on existing UxV platforms. Additional autonomous platforms are not desired.

17.) In regards to “LOE 3: Passive Electronic Surveillance:

Reference is made about current capability gaps, but no mention to what those gaps are. Would you elaborate on the gaps you are seeking to address?

a.) For LOE 3, we cannot share specific capability gaps at this level, but will provide additional specificity after phase 1 of the prize challenge.

The solicitation does not specify the RF sensing disciplines of COMINT or ELINT. Are you looking for one, both, just an RF emission survey, or something else?

b.) Both domains are desired.

LOE 3 requests “environmental sensing capabilities” which is vague. Would you prioritize search, identification, demodulation, fingerprinting, copy, recording, geolocation, or other desired RF sensing capabilities?

c.) We prioritize geolocation (including JICD 4.2 compliance), DVR, copy, recording, with potential follow on identification.

Are you seeking fully autonomous, man-on-the-loop, or interactive man-in-the-loop operation?

d.) We are seeking fully autonomous solutions.

18.) Would you clarify how you will evaluate during the demonstration? (What is the set-up platform and operating location?)

a.) All LOEs will be evaluated aboard a 120 foot motor vessel operating at sea.

19.) Where will the candidate sensors operate?

a.) Candidate systems for LOE 3 will be hosted inside the pilot house of the vessel, systems for LOEs 1 and 2 will be deck mounted. Government provided Starlink with Candidate systems for LOE 3 will be hosted inside the pilot house of the vessel, systems for LOEs 1 and 2 will be deck mounted. Government provided Starlink will be available for backhaul and C2 data pathways.

20.) What is the physical hosting environment?

a.) LOE 3 submissions will use a government furnished antenna for testing, though submissions with their own antenna will be considered.

21.) What data pathways are available? What does SWAP-C look like? Will the platforms have existing apertures, etc.?)

a.) LOE 3 submissions should target a 2 U size constraint, but larger systems that can easily fit within the pilot house will be considered for demonstration purposes.

22.) How firm are the demonstration dates?

a.) All demonstration dates are firmly mid through late September. Submissions for LOE 3 will need to plan for testing 9/11, and 9/14-17. These are firm dates.

23.) What are your target emitters for the ES LOE? Pulsed? CW? Both? (What CONOPs are best? Surface-Surface? Surface-Air? Surface-OTH? Surface-Space etc. Do you have thoughts on DF/geo performance?)

a.) All emitters listed, as well as push to talk, are of interest. Surface-Surface and Surface-Air CONOPS are of interest. Geolocation performance is a consideration for overall evaluation.

24.) I am reaching out to better understand a rough idea of what "cost-effective solutions" means in the context of a passive EW system for this use case. The baseline requirement of 50 MHz covering VHF and UHF on the receive side is quite limited, leading me to believe the target cost would be quite low. The higher the capability, the higher the expected cost, especially for larger bandwidths, processing, and other relevant capabilities such as direction finding. If you can share a rough order of magnitude on this topic or any other guidance that would be helpful.

a.) For LOE 3, solutions are expected to be 200k or less per unit at production, with competitive solutions substantially below this mark. LOE 3 solutions should be able to fit and operate in small USVs.

25.) Submission Requirements states that, “Companies may submit separate, distinct proposals for any combination of LOE 1, LOE 2, and/or LOE 3.” However FAQs answer # 4 states, “Submissions can be combined for LOE1 and LOE2 or submitted as separate proposals and a separate submission must be provided for LOE3”. Can we confirm that an offeror may provide one distinct proposal combining both LOE2 and LOE3? Submission Requirements for 1. White Paper, Content, require “a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) for cost and schedule.” Can the government better clarify what the ROM is expected to address ? Can the government confirm that the cost estimate limited to the scope of the demonstration in this challenge (maturation and coverage of live demonstration participation.?

a.) Solutions submitted that combine LOE 3 with other LOEs will be evaluated, however to be competitive for award under LOE 3, solutions should target minimizing SWAP and cost per unit. The ROM allows you to identify your financial assumptions for what you can provide the government. It allows you to identify what you can deliver for how much, and can include both your demonstration cost & projected post-challenge production costs if desired.

26.) The Other Transaction section of the Prize Challenge states the following: “This DIU Challenge public announcement is an open call to small businesses and non-traditional defense contractors…” Does this statement preclude a large business from submitting to this prize challenge as there is no statutory restriction under 4025 or 4022?

a.) Large businesses are not precluded from participating in this challenge. However, to be eligible for any further competition, traditional defense contractors acting as a prime must meet a cost-sharing requirement of 1/3 non-federal funds for any awardee that is not a non-traditional vendor (as defined in DFARS 202.101). However, this requirement is waived for traditional defense contractors if their proposed solution includes significant participation from non-traditional subcontractors. Consequently, prospective vendors can determine the applicability of a cost-share based on these guidelines.

27.) In regard to the subject request for White Paper, if a team submits a proposal that is a combined solution for LOE1 and LOE2 and the team is selected to advance to Phase 2 for both LOE1 and LOE2, would that team be eligible to receive up to $250,000 to fund participation for each LOE demonstration (total of $500,000)? In regard to the subject request for White Paper, if a team submits a proposal that is a combined solution for LOE1 and LOE2 and the team is selected to advance to Phase 3 for both LOE1 and LOE2, would that team be eligible to receive up to $1,000,000 to fund participation for each LOE demonstration (total of $2,000,000)?

a.) If a team is selected to advance for multiple LOEs, they are eligible to receive up to $250,000 at the end of Phase 2 for each LOE they have been selected for. To advance to Phase 3, a viable prototype is required. For those selected to advance to Phase 3, $1,000,000 will be split between selectees per LOE. For example, if one company is selected for both LOE 1 and 2, they are eligible to receive up to $2,000,000; if two companies are selected for a single LOE, each company would receive $500,000.

28.) Very little is said about the USV platforms,

Do submissions need to include USV platforms or will the Navy be providing them?
If the Navy is providing USV, can SWAP capabilities be provided?
Does power source need to be part of the solution or is this being provided by TBD USV?
Is there a targeted sized USV? LOE1 50 dBW requirement implies a mid to large sized USV to provide the power needed to generate 50 dBW EIRP with a 10 deg beamwidth, though the passive ES can be implemented on small USV
Is the LOE1 50 dBW power requirement a hard number or is there a range that could be accepted, such as 30-50 dBW?

a.)

The Navy will be providing USV platforms.
SWAP capabilities of the USV platform will be provided as part of phase 3 development.
Power will be provided via the vessel or by a generator on the vessel.
LOEs 1 and 2 should target a mid USV, but a smaller SWAP will be graded higher than a larger SWAP. LOE 3 should target a small USV.
50dBW is the targeted requirement for LOE1.

29.) Could companies support participating teams as a commercial drivetrain and marine-integration partner? Additionally:

Are gasoline two-stroke propulsion systems permitted on vessel platforms used in the Specular MIST Challenge, including the Phase 2 at-sea demonstration?
Are there specific emissions, fuel, noise, safety, or environmental requirements that would affect the eligibility of a two-stroke marine drivetrain?
Will participants be expected to provide their own vessel or USV platform, or will platforms be supplied by the Government or separate platform partners?
Because the solicitation welcomes teaming proposals, is there a process through which a company could be considered as a drivetrain supplier or integration partner for companies competing under one of the three Lines of Effort?
Could a company participate strictly as a supplier or subcontractor to a qualifying team, rather than submitting a standalone RF-payload proposal?

a.) The government is providing the Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) platform; therefore, proposals should only focus on the payload delivery described in the solicitation. Modifications to the vessel's propulsion or other operational systems are not requested. Companies are encouraged to partner with other organizations to deliver a complete solution, or they can provide the portion of the solution they specialize in and receive partner recommendations from the government during Phase 2.

30.) In regards to LOE 3. What does "cost-effective solutions" mean in the context of a passive EW system for this use case. The baseline requirement of 50 MHz covering VHF and UHF on the receive side is quite limited, The higher the capability, the higher the expected cost, especially for larger bandwidths, processing, and other relevant capabilities such as direction finding. Could you share a rough order of magnitude on this topic or any other guidance that would be helpful?

a.) "Cost-effectiveness" is open to the company's interpretation, as each specific company best understands its own unique development and operational costs. To account for this, a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) estimate is required with the submission. This ROM allows companies to clearly identify their own financial assumptions and provide estimates for both a baseline approach and/or a higher-capability solution.

31.) Would a large business with over $1B in annual revenue be disqualified from consideration because we are not a small business or non-traditional?

a.) Large businesses are not precluded from participating in this challenge.

32.) Can you please clarify the correct maximum number of pages allowed?

a.) Aim for 5 pages.

33.) LOE #2 describes the required EA functionality, but we did not see a defined frequency range associated with the capability. Can you provide any guidance regarding the expected frequency bands or a representative frequency range that solutions should be designed to address?

a.) A defined frequency range is not provided intentionally. Feel free to provide all or some of the potential ranges your solution(s) is/are capable of.

34.) For all LOEs, are there any preferred or required interface standards, communications protocols, middleware, or government reference architectures that vendors should anticipate supporting for payload integration, C2, and data exchange?

a.) For the purpose of phase 2 testing, Payload integration onto the vessel will be power and data via Starlink. Comm protocols, C2, data formats, etc are up to the vendor. The C2 needs to be conducted remotely via the Starlink network path (eg, be able to turn the system on and off via Starlink). For LOE 1 and 2, the C2 should also have a backup of being executed on the vessel if Starlink is not available (eg, be able to turn the system on and off while aboard the vessel). If selected for Phase 3, payload integration, C2, and data exchange will be worked via a common USV architecture.

35.) Can you confirm that one-third cost sharing is the only way for a Large Business to qualify - or are there other routes to qualify such as significant participation from a non-traditional partner.

a.) Cost sharing is not required for large businesses to participate in this prize challenge. Cost sharing would be required to participate in any OTA that results from this prize challenge, including any contracts awarded as prizes for LOE 3.