Notice

Right On Time: Automating Military Logistics Q&A

Updated 24 March 2021

1. Right On Time: Automating Military Logistics

1. Autonomous Base Distribution - can you please provide examples of what needs to be delivered where, how often etc. What in the environment is expected to change?

Autonomous Base Distribution could include any distribution activity at a Deployed Military Logistics Hub (inventory, personnel or equipment). As examples: inventory flowing through the Hub may require on-base distribution between the transport asset it arrives on, the transport asset it departs on, and/or on-base storage; or engineers conducting the maintenance and repair may require spares and inventory items to be transported from storage to the point of need.

We are unable to provide an exhaustive list of items required for this, but would invite suppliers to give an indication of the range of sizes / weights of items that your proposals could transport. We would work with successful suppliers through development to understand which items your technology would be relevant for transporting.

On a Deployed Military Logistics Hub, you could expect changes such as tents or other structures being put up or taken down during the development of the Hub (which could be in an austere or well found setting), or ISO containers being moved around, or military transport platforms moving around the base. We would expect any on base distribution capability to be able to adapt to these, i.e. it wouldn’t drive straight into an ISO container it knows shouldn’t be there.

2. The demonstration should be at TRL6 in September 2021, or could it be less than that, with a clear (future) plan for how it could mature to TRL6 quickly?

The competition document states we are working towards Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6, so it would be acceptable to propose a TRL5 demonstration with a clear plan of how it would progress to reach TRL6. The primary consideration when assessing proposals will be their potential to deliver a step change in capability. TRL would only be a factor when it was a choice between two proposals with equal promise to deliver a step change in capability.

3. Is this competition joined up with other cross industry working groups such as Team Defence Information?

Yes, Team Defence Information have helped us to advertise this competition. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) Logistics Technology Investigations project, of which this competition is a part, are regular participants at Team Defence Information events.

4. Can you provide details of the current cost model such that we can judge whether our technology will provide a cost-benefit before bidding?

We are unable to share a cost model for Defence Support. We would invite suppliers to consider and explain how the potential savings from their proposals might relate to the potential costs within the Deployed Military Logistics Hub.

5. How do you propose to validate and assure the autonomy systems to industry delivery standards?

For this competition we wouldn’t require the autonomous systems to go through as thorough a set of validation and verification activities as would be required for a formal procurement of the systems. We would work with successful suppliers to ensure the technologies are safe and appropriately assured for their use as prototypes at the demonstration event. If there is progression to further stages and procurement then there would be further formal exercises to confirm conformance to all the relevant standards. We cannot know in advance what standards might be relevant to technologies suppliers propose - we would invite suppliers to make it clear in their proposals which (if any) industry standards they are aligning to.

6. What type of demonstration is required? Do you have to demonstrate an end to end solution or can you demonstrate a subsystem of say waste management or a robotic? [sic]

Taking the example of Automated Recyclate & Waste Processing, we would understand an end-to-end solution to be an integrated system that takes mixed waste as an input and produces waste separated into useful categories as an output.

The primary consideration when assessing proposals will be their potential to deliver a step change in capability. Whether the proposal is an end-to-end solution or subsystem would only be a factor if it were a choice between two proposals with equal promise to deliver a step change in capability.

This competition’s supplier collaboration survey could offer opportunities for subsystem producers to work together on an end-to-end solution.

7. How does the Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) evaluate technologies with dual applications (civil and military)?

Please see the competition document for the scope of this competition, which relates to military application. However, a good proposal can have cross sector appeal. Whilst the military requirement should be the focus in your proposal for this competition, if the proposal does have cross sector appeal it is often rated highly, as part of DASA’s remit is to support national prosperity also.

8. Is it mainly hardware solutions required or are advanced software solutions being considered, for example within the maintenance and support and Additive Manufacturing (AM), or automation solutions?

This competition is weighted towards practical demonstrations. We recognise that in a high tech application like autonomy and automation there will likely be data and software components in order to deliver practical demonstration. However, we are not seeking purely data science or software proposals.

9. Is AM aimed at provision of standard spares or bespoke designed repairs, and to which type of equipment?

In AM we are looking at both provision of standard spares and bespoke design repairs. However, most of our focus, because of the support question, will be more towards how we provide standard spares. We are most interest in mission critical spares and repairs to “get equipment back into the fight” – i.e. components which directly impact the ability of an equipment to operate.

It is worth noting that, in defence our standard spares have a lot of variability within the supply chain and so may not be the same as industry standard spares.

Unsure which type of equipment is meant, but in terms of AM equipment we are equipment agnostic, so not focused on one AM technology. If the question is relating to military equipment, we are trying to be military equipment agnostic too, looking across different domains for different platforms and different types of components, and as such any solutions should not focus on a single domain.

10. What is the definition of an off-base self driving vehicle? Does this imply a need for on-base self driving vehicles to assist with handling etc.?

An off-base self driving vehicle is defined as a self driving vehicle being used outside of the perimeter of a Deployed Military Logistics Hub. This has been explicitly excluded from this competition as it is being looked at elsewhere in MOD: for example, in the DASA competition Autonomous Last Mile Resupply, MOD is already investigating autonomous vehicles used outside of operating bases to transport items in the last mile to the user. While none of the user needs captured in the competition document are technology specific, some of the example capabilities could be addressed with on-base self driving vehicles in a Deployed Military Logistics Hub, such as automated base distribution or manual handling.

11. How do you propose to facilitate interoperability with existing deliverables and equipment?

At this stage of the competition, we are not expecting the proposed solutions to integrate with the current systems and in-service equipment. If we progress to further stages of development (not guaranteed at this stage) that is something we’d look to further investigate and develop through future phases.

12. Can DSTL lend typical items (Government Furnished Asset’s) for the demonstration to exemplify prototype tracking solutions?

We can’t promise any items at the moment for this competition. We might get access to them in the future, but we cannot make any guarantees in advance.

13. Is the aim to remove people from the deployed military logistics hub? Or rather supplement operations with on-base vehicles?

One way in which a proposal could demonstrate benefit would be by reducing the reliance on personnel, with the benefits of cost, safety and potential performance benefits of freeing those personnel up for other activities.

14. Can the use of Synthetic data (i.e. from an asset) be used to allow for demonstration purposes?

Yes, the use of synthetic data would be permitted, provided it is synthetic data suppliers are generating.

15. What assurance activity is required for the demonstration?

We will work with the successful suppliers during the development process to mature the demonstration plans, including the safety element, to ensure the demonstrations are safe for all attendees.

The proposals and demonstrations must be safe and legal, so include any appropriate costs and resources to ensure the proposed demonstrations are safe and legal. We are unable to give a comprehensive list of the standards and law that would be relevant at this stage, as we cannot predict what technologies are going to be included in the proposals. We would expect any suppliers to know what the relevant legal and Health & Safety requirements are for the safe and legal running of their demonstrations, and to include this in their proposals, with details of all relevant UK and International Standards.

16. Would you consider innovative low-cost Radar sensor solutions for fast localisation applications?

Yes, radar would be an acceptable technology to be used within proposals, provided that it is using frequencies that are appropriate for civil and military regulations.

17. Are we allowed to collaborate with international partners?

Yes we would encourage collaboration with international partners. More information about the research worker due diligence can be found in the DASA Terms and Conditions.

18. What is the maximum cost per project?

There is no maximum cost per proposal, but the competition document states that we envisage proposals to be within £40-80k range.

19. Would you like to consider instrumenting of stock in store and in transit for example temperature or shock data that would degrade or assure that shock?

That could align with the remote environmental and consumption monitoring example included in the competition document. Yes, we would consider that, provided that it is an innovative development, above and beyond what already exists, and a case can be made for a step change in capability.

20. Would you like to consider innovative engineering proposals, for example innovative solutions for in theatre deep servicing rather than return to UK or ways to assemble AM products?

Yes, we’re interested in innovative solutions as alternatives to returning products to the UK. That is partly why we are considering manufacturing at the deployed military logistics hub on location, to limit the number of platforms we’re having to take back to the UK. We’re looking for solutions based at the deployed military logistics hub, so there is a level of support in terms of electric supply, hard standing. For this competition we are not considering application of AM further forward than that at the moment.

21. What consideration has been given to utilising interactive software to ensure coalition activities?

We’re looking for practical demonstrations rather than software in this competition, so unsure how that would fit within the autonomy and automation scope in this activity.

22. Can we use commercial off the shelf parts which are well established and cost effective?

Yes, we do not expect everything to be unique and will allow the use of commercial products as part of a proposal, provided that the deliverable itself is innovative.

23. Can MOD data be made available to us?

For this competition we are looking for a representative demonstration only – we are not expecting suppliers to need real data.

Dstl will consider any justified and reasonable data request where we are able to do so. Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee any data to suppliers. We will not be able to provide any data above OFFICIAL classification to suppliers in this competition.

Ref. Question 14, suppliers have the option to use their own synthetic data.

24. What method of communication is used to communicate with remote operators at a Deployed Military Logistics Hub?

Depending on security, how far forward the base is, and the nature of what is being stored, this could include:

• MOD-issued mobile telephones (non-smartphone)
• Landline / field telephone
• Email.

25. Does the fact that I am already working with the army put me at an advantage or disadvantage?

This would give you a better understanding of the user need, which we encourage you to articulate in your proposal.

26. My technology is based on a combination of existing technology which has not been used in Defence before, would this be acceptable?

Ref. Question 22, yes, we would consider a novel use of existing technologies within scope for this competition.

27. Will we be at a disadvantage if we do not collaborate with another supplier?

No, you will not be disadvantaged if you submit an individual proposal.

28. What range should we target for items moving around the Deployed Military Logistics Hub? Can we have gateways to increase the range?

Ranges across a Deployed Military Logistics Hub would typically vary from 100m to a few kilometers, max 10km.

If it is the only way to make the solution work effectively and this can be done securely in accordance with network rules, systems could use gateways to access the existing base communication network infrastructure where available.

29. There are different types of Deployed Military logistics Hubs (e.g. Air Port of Disembarkation, Sea Port of Disembarkation, Rail Port of Disembarkation) does the solution need to be applicable across all types of Hub?

It is not essential that the solution is applicable to all types of Deployed Military Logistics Hubs at this stage. In the long term, we will be interested in technologies that have Joint utility. It will be advantageous to your proposal if you can explain how your technology could be relevant to other Deployed Military Logistics Hubs with further work and development.

30. Can you give us more information on the types of item that will need to be transported around a Deployed Military Logistics Hub?

Ref. Question 1, we cannot share information on specific items. We suggest that you consider all NATO Classes of Supply that the military may be storing and transporting.

31. Can you give some more information on what would be required at the demonstration day for additive manufacturing solutions?

As stated in the competition document, we are looking at technologies that can be developed towards TRL 6 to give a working demonstration on the day. The project is not seeking simply to purchase additive manufacturing equipment through this DASA call or manufacture an example part. Instead, we are looking for demonstrable technology that will meet some of the challenges outlined in the competition document.

In addition we wouldn’t expect the demonstrator to show the entire AM process chain, only the parts of the system the project has been working on, for example if your innovation is around scanning technology a good demonstration would be scanning an example component.

32. What assets are considered a priority for monitoring?

We have not specified items. It could be anything from across NATO Classes of Supply, particularly items of high value or vulnerability to environmental change.

33. Does the military currently operate an active (RF ID) tracking system which records asset content?

Dstl can’t share any details on whether the military currently operate an active (RF ID) tracking system. Integration with any in service systems would not be required at the demonstration for this competition.

34. What systems will our solution need to interface with, can you provide data or information on these systems?

We are not expecting solutions to integrate with live MOD Information Systems for this competition or the demonstration, but we are looking for suppliers to consider future integration in their proposals.

35. Can you clarify what is meant by digitised engineering?

In this term, we mean digital access to engineering data, as opposed to paper copies of e.g. drawings.

36. Can you provide any further information on the parts required for additive manufacturing?

The NATO Stock Number (NSN) system is used to group parts by category and would be a good guide as to the sorts of parts that would be required. Further information on the categories used can be found here.

37. I have several potential solutions which could be integrated how should I present this in the proposal(s)?

If your solutions are stand-alone technologies which could also be integrated then we would suggest that you create multiple proposals and highlight the potential integration in each proposal. Each proposal will be assessed and considered for funding individually. While the integration aspect will be taken into account, this does not guarantee that all related proposals would receive funding.

38. Are there any restrictions on Radio Frequency Identification (RF ID) tagging?

The use of RF technology can be restricted in ammunition store areas, fuels store areas, and on-board / near aircraft. RF ID technology is permissible for this competition but (like any other technology) would have to demonstrate safety before being procured for in-service use.

39. Can you give more details on the complex nature of a Deployed Military Logistics Hub?

Please refer to the competition document and launch webinar for a description of the complexity and austerity at Deployed Military Logistics Hubs. The Hubs are also personnel centres with potentially large number of people on site and a high frequency of turnaround of personnel.

40. Are you looking at automation of physical activity in the field or automation of processes?

We are interested in automation of both physical activities and processes at Deployed Military Logistics Hubs.

41. For additive manufacturing, what material are you looking to use (e.g. metallic or polymer)?

It could be either metal or polymer.

42. Can you provide further information on we can expect on the demonstration day?

We are currently looking to hold a week long physical event (COVID-19 restrictions allowing), where all successful suppliers will attend to demonstrate their solutions. The venue will offer a large, flat area of hardstanding and a covered area (such as a hanger or under canvas) and there will be mains power available. We cannot guarantee the availability or reliability of 4G network coverage.

We will expect suppliers to design and orchestrate a suitable demonstration for their systems and have made all necessary safety considerations and risk assessments. Successful suppliers will be assigned a Technical Partner for the duration of the contract who will be able to assist with designing a suitable demonstration.

Suppliers should not expect there to be military equipment or vehicles available for their use on the demonstration day and should therefore consider a representative demonstration (e.g. weights or representative items) or to source items themselves where appropriate.

We are expecting stakeholders from Dstl and the Front Line Commands to attend this event.

Details of this event, such as dates and location will be released to successful suppliers nearer to the time.

43. Would a twin track approach (i.e. a synthetic demonstration and a physical demonstration) to the demonstration be acceptable?

Yes, a synthetic demonstration to complement their practical demonstration would be acceptable for those aspects that cannot be practically demonstrated safely within the time and cost bounds of this competition.

44. We need more than £80k for our proposal, would our proposal be considered?

Yes, your proposal would be considered, there is no fixed funding limit per proposal in this competition (other than the overall £800k budget). It is likely that a larger number of lower-value proposals will be funded than a small number of higher-value proposals, hence the example of £40k to £80k (ex. VAT) given in the competition document. For illustration, a £160k proposal would need to demonstrate greater potential to deliver a step change in capability for Defence Support than two £80k proposals combined in order to secure funding.

45. We have identified potential benefits from our solution for improving base security in addition to support activities at a Deployed Military Logistics Hub, would this be considered in the assessment of the proposal?

The aim of this competition is to identify technology with the potential deliver a step change in capability for the Defence Support community, so this should be the primary focus of any proposal; however, any potential for future benefit for other Defence functions, such as base security, are welcome and should be included in the proposal.