Distributed Multispectral Event-Driven Integrated Sensing and Communications

• Q&A content added (previously empty): The Q&A section now contains two question sets, with no prior version to compare against, so these are all new.
• Scope and technical flexibility (Q1): Applicants asked whether a solution using commercial event-based sensors, custom neuromorphic processing, and a novel low-probability-of-intercept communications subsystem (without a new sensor chip) is responsive. Also asked whether ultraviolet non-line-of-sight optical communications may be an alternative or complement for distributed nodes. No answers are shown yet, so these remain open.
• Communications and clearance questions (Q1): Applicants requested quantitative range, data rate, latency, and LPI performance requirements. They also asked whether a Secret Facility Clearance must exist at proposal or award, or can be obtained during Phase I. Answers are not yet provided.
• Phase I demonstration scope (Q2): Questions cover whether drone detection/classification/tracking can serve as the Phase I use case, whether applicants may choose representative sensor types or bands, whether simulated Navy shipboard sensors must be included, and whether applicants can define their own performance targets (detection, tracking accuracy, speed, power, communications).
• Aegis integration and Phase II access (Q2): Applicants asked whether simulated Aegis interfaces and data formats are acceptable, and whether the Government will provide Aegis Test Bed or other Navy facility access for Phase II evaluation. Answers are pending.

Why it matters: The Q&A is entirely unanswered in this version, so key decisions on sensor selection, communications approach, clearance timing, and Phase I performance targets remain open. Applicants should track future updates for answers, especially on clearance and Phase I performance requirements.

New opportunity: Distributed Multispectral Event-Driven Integrated Sensing and Communications