RFI for Communications Payload Concepts for GPS
1. Description 1.1 THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes – it does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to i... 1. Description 1.1 THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes – it does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. This request for information does not commit the Government to contract for any supply or service whatsoever. Further, USSF is not at this time seeking proposals and will not accept unsolicited proposals. Respondees are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this RFI; all costs associated with responding to this RFI will be solely at the interested party’s expense. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future RFP, if any is issued. This RFI is available on the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) website at https://sam.gov/SAM/. It is the responsibility of the potential responders to monitor this site for additional information pertaining to this RFI. 1.2 The Space and Missile Systems Center Portfolio Architect (SMC/ZAC) is seeking information on how an interested contractor could provide satellite communications (SATCOM) payloads for hosting on the GPS constellation, starting in ~2029. Frequency bands of primary interest are X and Ka, but other SATCOM frequencies may be considered as well.Classification Code: A – Research and Development 2.0 Background The GPS program maintains a constellation of at least 24 satellites in MEO (~20,000 km altitude). The satellites are placed into 6 planes, with 4 satellites per plane. Due to new space vehicle efficiencies, and more capable launch vehicles, the buses for Block IIIF satellites are expected to have excess Spacecraft Weight and Power (SWaP) margin which could be utilized to host other payloads. 2.1. Planned Production: The target for insertion of new payloads is GPS IIIF #13, to be launched ~2030, plus potential for nine additional vehicles to be launched at a rate of about two per year thereafter. Payloads must be delivered for integration onto GPS about one year before shipment for launch (first payload delivery in 2029). Payloads should provide useful capability for at least 10 years (15 years desirable), but may offer degraded performance in later years. 2.2. Limitations: SWAP: The available SWAP for hosted payload on the baseline GPS SV is expected to be about 800 pounds and 1200 watts at beginning of life, declining to 400 watts at 10 years. Power is available as a combination of 28V and 70V. The SV could be enhanced (at additional cost) to provide up to 3600/2500 watts (at BOL and 10 years) with some decrease in mass margin. The SV or Launch Vehicle could be enhanced (at additional cost) to provide up to 2000 lbs. of mass margin. Space: There is space for one large deployable reflector of up to 2.4 m diameter on the -X panel. There is also space for smaller antennas on the nadir deck. See attached drawings. 2.3. Command and Telemetry: The hosted payload must support in-band command and telemetry capability. In addition, the GPS bus will provide paths for sending commands to the hosted payload and returning telemetry to the ground in order to bring the hosted payload into operation and for anomaly resolution. 3.0 Requested Information Responders should provide information on as many of the following topics as possible. 3.1. Hosted Payload Design: Describe one or more designs for potential communications payloads, including reflectors, feeds, other RF equipment, and any digital processing. What bands are supported? Where will items be placed on the GPS bus to fit within constraints? How much SWaP will the payload require? Describe designs for the baseline SWAP available as noted in Section 2.2, and optionally for larger amounts of SWAP that might be provided with an enhanced bus or launch vehicle. 3.2. Coverage: Describe the coverage(s) that your design would provide including size of beams, number of beams, polarization, amount of spectrum supported. What granularity of spectrum and power can be allocated to different beams? What portion of the earth would be covered by a single satellite, assuming minimum elevation angle of 10 degrees for X band and 15 degrees for Ka band? How many satellites, and in what orbital position, would be needed to achieve at least 95% continuous single fold and dual fold worldwide coverage? 3.3. Connectivity: What is the connectivity between beams? Will all data go to an anchor station beam, or can data be switched between user beams? What granularity of spectrum can be switched? 3.4. Data Rates: Describe the data rates that can be supported to representative terminals (such as Navy NMT, AF GMT, AF Airborne, Army STT, Army SNE, GATR, portable TBD) and list the terminal and Gateway performance you are assuming. Add additional terminal types you think may be important in the 2030 time frame. Provide results for clear sky operation and for rain conditions requiring 7 dB uplink loss and 4 dB downlink loss in Ka band. 3.5. Jammer Mitigation: Describe any capabilities for mitigating the effect of jammers, beyond the normal side-lobe roll-off of the uplink antennas. Will the design include any onboard processing of user signals? 3.6. Design Life: What features will be used to achieve the desired design life for the payload? How will the performance degrade over time? How will the payload accommodate declining power over duration of the mission? 3.7. EMI mitigation: Describe how the design will consider and mitigate potential interference with the primary GPS mission. Define strategies for avoiding spectrum contention with other GEO and other NGSO emitters, and how this might affect coverage provided. 3.8. Space Environment: What measures will be taken to accommodate the space environment prevailing at 20,000 km orbit and occasional high flux events? 3.9. Schedule: When would work need to commence in order to deliver the first payload by 2029? What items or events are on the critical path? What is the technical maturity of the key components being used? What are the highest risk factors? 3.10. Affordability: Describe any innovative initiatives, approaches or partnerships that will contribute to affordability of implementing your design. To the extent possible, provide a non-binding planning estimate for non-recurring expense and a per unit cost for payloads, in then-year dollars, with an annual cost profile. Include in your estimate the cost of integrating the payload onto GPS. 3.11 Management and Control: Where will management and control of the communications payloads be performed. What techniques and products will be used to perform planning, dynamic resource allocation, and spectrum deconfliction? 4.0 Responses 4.1 All interested, capable, and responsible sources are requested to respond to this RFI with a white paper, using their preferred style, in either Word or PDF format. While this RFI is not limited to any specific business size, responses from small and small disadvantaged businesses are encouraged. 4.2 White papers are due no later than 1700 PDT, 30 days after release of this RFI. Responses shall be limited to 10 pages responding to the topics in Section 3 above, and submitted via e-mail only to alejandro.capristan.1@spaceforce.mil. All submissions become Government property and will not be returned. 4.3 Proprietary information, if any, should be minimized and MUST BE CLEARLY MARKED. To aid the Government, please segregate proprietary information. If any responder does not currently have a Proprietary Data Protection Agreement (PDPA) that would permit the government or the SMC support contractors listed below to review and evaluate white papers submitted in response to this RFI, the responder is requested to sign PDPAs for this purpose. Any Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) must be properly marked. The following is a list of support contractors who may participate in reviewing the responses. The Aerospace Corporation Mitre Corporation MIT Lincoln Lab LinQuest Corporation SAIC Frontier Technology, Inc. 4.4. Classified delivery must be arranged in advance. Responses at classification levels above DoD SECRET are discouraged but may be considered. Classified responses must include identification of their source of classification guidance. 4.5. Section 1 of the white paper shall provide administrative information, and shall include the following: a. Name, mailing address, phone number, fax number, and e-mail of designated point of contact. b. A brief (2 pages max) description of the responding company’s location(s), products, and relevant previous experience. c. A statement that the responder will allow the Government to release its proprietary data to some or all of the Government support contractors specified above for purposes of evaluating the response, under the terms of their PDPA. 5.0 Industry Discussions SMC representatives may or may not choose to discuss white papers with responders. Such discussions would only be intended to get further clarification of potential capabilities, designs, and risks. 6.0 Questions Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted in writing by e-mail to the Contracting Officer, alejandro.capristan.1@spaceforce.mil. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. The government reserves the right to post all questions and its answers to SAM.gov, so questions should NOT contain proprietary or classified information.
Data sourced from SAM.gov.
View Official Posting »