DIU Commercial Solutions Openings for AI and Autonomous Systems is sponsored by Defense Innovation Unit. The Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) issues Commercial Solutions Openings (CSOs) to rapidly prototype and field commercial AI and autonomous systems technologies for defense applications.

Work With Us - Open Solicitations - Commercial If your company has a proven track record of commercial viability with commercial off-the-shelf products and tech, you’re in a great position to work with us. We actively work with companies both in the U.S. and internationally, across allied countries.

You can submit your technical solutions to posted solicitations under our Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) process and Other Transaction (OT) authority - a fast, flexible way that allows us to competitively solicit proposals for DoD projects, often awarding within 60-90 days.

CUAS Close-In Kinetic Defeat Enhancement 2026-05-15 23:59:59 US/Eastern Time 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.

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. 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 degre e to 90 degree (direct overhead) range of elevation. 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 a bility 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 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. Solicitation Requirements and Important Considerations The CSO phase two (pitches) requires vendors to deliver an in-person pitch.

Vendors will be required to conduct a live-fire range demonstration of their product after the prototyping phase. Fully developed systems applying to Part Two and Three will be asked to conduct a demonstration on a live fire range of their system as part of the CSO downselect. Demonstration and Validation If selected, the effort will involve a series of demonstrations.

These will culminate in a live-fire validation to effectively assess the solution's tracking performance under operational conditions. Vendors must clearly specify which of the four parts their solution addresses. While these parts can be executed concurrently or in any sequence, proposals may be submitted for one, multiple, or all parts.

Crucially, submissions must indicate the Part(s) being addressed on the first page. Only one submission per vendor is permitted. Fully AI generated submissions will be rejected.

Ethical AI Adherence: All AI-enabled solutions must strictly comply with the DoD AI Ethical Principles; non-compliance will result in immediate disqualification. Open System Architecture: Solutions must be built upon an open system architecture. Intellectual Property: Proposals must clearly demonstrate ownership or provide appropriate licensing and data rights for all proposed technologies.

Excluded Submissions: Proposals from purely research organizations, resellers, and integrators will not be considered.

Registration: Vendors who do not currently possess a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code must register in the System for Award Management (SAM) to receive a prototype agreement Collaboration: The Government reserves the right to encourage collaboration among vendors with complementary capabilities to optimize overall results. Parts: All four parts may occur at the same time.

Commercial solution(s) in Part One should be ready for full-scale system testing, demonstration, and evaluation within three months from project start date. Part One vendors will provide on-site and remote support during the on-base system testing, demonstration, and evaluation period. Part Two should be ready for demonstration within three months of project start date.

Demonstrations for Part Three will be determined during prototype development. 2026-05-17 23:59:59 US/Eastern Time 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 follow ing lines of effort (LOEs): 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. 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. Q. Can vendors submit to both LOE 1 and LOE 2?

A. Yes. It is recommended that vendors provide separate submission briefs to each LOE they intend to submit.

Additionally, it is recommended that vendors individually submit to the particular solution within the LOE they are addressing. These include: LOE 1 Terminal, LOE 2 pLEO constellation, LOE 2 airborne terminal. Q.

For LOE 2, can vendors submit to only provide the pLEO constellation or airborne terminal? A. Yes.

Vendors may propose a solution that incorporates the pLEO constellation, airborne terminal, or both. Q. Will submission for subsystem providers (i.

e Optical Head, FPGA Developers, Bus Providers, etc.) be considered for LOE 1? Q. For LOE 1, what orbit, ranges, and data rates are required?

A. DIU would like to demonstrate representative GEO-to-ground data transport for JLIS/OIC2, and OpenZR+ rates, but may elect to focus on a LEO-to-LEO or LEO-to-ground demonstration. Q.

For LOE 1, what government investments have been made to advance multi-waveform OCTs? A. The DARPA SpaceBACN effort progressed both optical head and modem development for multi-waveform lasercom.

DIU’s RAZORBAC program builds upon DARPA’s modem investment to develop an FPGA-based MCP capable of JLIS/OIC2, OpenZR+, LCRD, SDA 3. 2, and SDA 4. 0.

Information can be provided to vendors upon award. Q. For LOE 1, what is the most preferred combination of supported waveforms?

A. As part of this effort, DIU is interested in developing an optical head that is capable of supporting JLIS/OIC2, LCRD, OpenZR+. For this CSO, it may be sufficient to demonstrate optical head functionality for these three waveforms through a benchtop demonstration with two modems.

The government may decide to pursue a subsequent flight demonstration with a single modem that only supports two out of the three waveforms. Q. Is adoption of the RAZORBAC MCP required?

A. No, it is not a requirement that the RAZORBAC MCP be utilized for LOE #1. Alternative approaches will be considered.

They must be scalable to support OpenZR+, JLIS/OIC2 v4. 1, LCRD. Q.

Is bus procurement and space vehicle launch integration within scope of this solicitation? A. The scope for the AOI is limited to OCT development, payload bus integration and on-orbit operations.

Bus delivery and launch is not in scope for this AOI, but DIU is interested in cost-effective hosted payload flight opportunities. This area of interest is open to U.S. and international vendors. Vendors are reminded that in order to utilize an Other Transaction agreement, the requirements of 10 USC 4022 must be satisfied.

Specifically 10 USC 4022(d) requires significant contribution from a nontraditional defense contractor, all participants to be small business concerns or nontraditional defense contractors, or at least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Government.

This Area of Interest will follow the Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) framework established under HQ085420SC0001 DIU CSO, posted to SAM. gov in March 2020. Opportunity for Follow-On Production (Direct Award) Companies are advised that a prototype Other Transaction (OT) agreement awarded from this area of interest may result in a direct award for a follow-on production contract without further competition.

This is contingent upon the successful completion of the prototype project. The follow-on production contract could be significantly larger in magnitude than the prototype OT agreement and may be used by multiple organizations within the DoW. All prototype agreements will include the relevant language in accordance with 10 U.S.C.

4022(f) to allow for this possibility. Pathways through Challenges or Commercial Acceleration Opportunities We regularly seek proposals from both U.S.- and internationally-based ventures just like you. Apply through DIU’s Challenges or Commercial Acceleration Opportunities to showcase your potential and get tailored support.

Open Challenges and Commercial Acceleration Opportunities — Sorry, there are no open challenges currently. If you would like to be notified when new challenges are posted please fill out our interest form here.