Frequently asked questions
If you can't find your answers here please contact challenge@mod.uk .
Q. Will all Q&A be circulated (via website or other means) in the same way as other competitive bids i.e. questions are anonymous and copied to all except for any accepted as being specific to any one bidder by MoD?
A. Yes, all relevant Q&A will be published on this website under the FAQ heading. We have now split up the Q&A into three sections FINANCE, CONTRACT/LEGAL/PATENT, TECHNICAL/PROJECT.
Q. What does the winner get?
A. The winner will have the kudos from their peers of being the best. Rising and meeting a challenge is very stimulating for any profession and will be for UK's innovators.
MOD will also present a Trophy, the R J Mitchell Trophy, suitably relevant given the immense innovation shown by RJ Mitchell in developing the Spitfire - initially created as the Supermarine Seaplane to win the Schneider Trophy.
MOD is keen to see the best solutions taken forward to front line kit.
Q. Will there be another Grand Challenge after this one?
A. The progress and outcome of the current Grand Challenge will inform us on the possibilty of a follow-on Challenge. There are currently no plans for a further Challenge but this is under constant review.
FINANCE
Q. If a team wins a Group 1 funded bid, but then subsequently decides to fund themselves (perhaps because they receive funding) is it possible to change from a Group 1 to Group 2 type contract?
A. Yes. However, this would only be allowed to occur within the 6-8 week "window" during the Proposal assessment process and before contract award. If a Group 1 team announces it wishes to become a Group 2 (unfunded team) prior to Group 1 contracts being issued this allows the MoD to identify an alternative team to receive the Group 1 funding. In practice, however, there is little time to do this and could possibly lead to a programme delay. If a Group 1 team withdrawal were to occur after a Group 1 contract award this would present significant difficulties to the MoD. There would possibly be issues concerning costs incurred and/or payments made to that point in time and would also have denied funding to another deserving team. The MoD would wish to avoid such a situation arising.
Q. Has a value been allocated for a single proposal?
A. The MoD has not set a specific value for a single proposal. You will appreciate that we have a budget for the Grand Challenge and we plan to fund a number of Group 1 teams. Therefore, we anticipate successful bids to be in the range of several thousands of pounds up to a few hundred thousand pounds. However, the final decision on the size of the bid is for the team. The MOD will consider carefully all bids no matter what their projected cost, but your proposal should be keenly priced to be competitive.
Q. In view of the budgetary constraints, would the MoD be prepared to consider shared funding arrangements?
A. Yes. The MoD is prepared to consider shared funding arrangements. However, this can sometimes necessitate complicated Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) arrangements. The MoD's preference would be to fully fund Group 1 proposals and so keep such issues relatively simple. It is suggested that participants considering shared funding should submit their Group 1 proposals on a fully funded basis but, in addition, offer the MoD an option to consider a shared funded solution. The latter should clearly detail the funding required from the MoD, the funding contribution being made by the Participant (which should be of the order of at least 50%) and any other consequential changes to the terms of the fully funded option. This then allows the MoD maximum flexibility when assessing and determining Group 1 contract awards in the context of available funding.
Q. In terms of funding, at the lower end of the indicative scale would you consider staged funding, of which the first sum would be paid at the beginning of the project, to enable us to order the necessary materials and equipment to get the project up and running.
A. The MoD is prepared to consider Stage Payments, against low value proposals, where there is a demonstrable case for so doing and where it would otherwise impose an unsustainable burden upon the Proposer. Full particulars of the circumstances and of the Stage Payments required must be included in Commercial Proposal responses for the Authority's consideration.
Q. VAT - I have not dealt with MoD before and I am not sure if there are special rules regarding VAT. For the proposal, I understand the final price line will be something like: Total Firm Price £100,000 + VAT. And during the contract we will invoice payments amounting to: £100,000 + VAT and we will receive in cash £100,000+£17,500 = £117,500 from MoD. In other words, dealing with MoD is the same as dealing with any other UK business from a VAT point of view.
A. Correct.
Q. Price - With reference to the Proposal Price Breakdown in Para 15 of the Commercial Proposal document, do you prefer overheads to go under Direct labour costs or Other Costs?
A. To avoid confusion, if a Group 1 Grand Challenge applicant has a pricing structure that involves separately identifiable overheads (or, indeed, any other factors), then the indicative table, included at paragraph 15 of the Commercial Proposal guidance notes, should be appropriately expanded by means of additional rows. The applicant's methodology of calculating overheads should be clearly shown. This is normally derived as a factor of the Direct Labour costs but any variance from this must be described.
CONTRACT/PATENT/ LEGAL
Q. Is the UK Grand Challenge open to foreign teams and/or participants?
A. The MOD's Grand Challenge is pre-dominantly aimed at UK suppliers - large and small, research laboratories, academia and education science faculties. The MOD will consider interest from teams who have members who are not UK citizens. All teams must have a UK located team base, and all system development must take place in the UK.
MOD would expect any participating team to follow our published programme for the Grand Challenge and to be able to demonstrate that they can participate as fully as UK based suppliers with access to UK facilities and resources. It would also be expected that proposals show consideration for how this would be taken forward to a UK Defence capability. Group 1 teams must be prepared to accept MOD terms and conditions of any contract associated with the Grand Challenge and the arrangements regarding Intellectual Property Rights.
Q. A proposal may be dependent on one novel but simple concept. Revealing this concept, especially to the enemy may render it useless. How, therefore can secrecy be ensured and the basic idea protected as one assumes patents cannot be filed for secrecy reasons.
A. The issues of revealing the concept "to the enemy" and the impact on MOD capability are, of course, distinct from the legal protection of that concept. Patents aside, information can be protected as confidential information but only provided it is maintained as such. With regard to patenting, the Patents Office normal process is to keep applications confidential for the first 18 months (after the filing date) but then publish them. However, alternative procedures apply to applications that fall within the scope of Section 22 of the Patents Act 1977. Specifically, those cases deemed to be "prejudicial to national security or safety of public" where a prohibition order may be raised to cover ideas of a sensitive nature. Grand Challenge participants, sharing the concerns expressed above, may wish to bring these issues to the attention of the Patents Office, in their patent applications. It should be noted that the concept covered by a classified patent may have commercial value which is relevant to the potential value of the patent. For example, encryption could be used to send military messages or in commercial banking. A classified patent only becomes effective and known to the public once the prohibition order is rescinded. Only then can it be enforced through the courts. Further information and contact points can be found on the Internet using "UK Patents Office" or "Patents Act 1977" as the search criteria. Grand Challenge applicants may also wish to consult appropriate patent agents or attorneys.
Q. It is possible that some background information exists that we would wish to exclude from a (DEFCON 705) "Full Rights Version", since it comprises useable technology which has been costly to acquire, and use by the MOD might turn out to be our primary way to benefit from it. Does such information have to be patented in order to keep it separate from the "Full Rights" project deliverables?
A. No. There is no prerequisite for background information to be patented. The point at which such information is patented/protected is at the originator's discretion. Any such Background Information should be confined to the DEFCON 705 "Limited Rights" version of the deliverable (see clause 9 of DEFCON 705).
Q. How much technical detail is needed in describing background technical information?
A. Usually, very little technical detail is necessary. A brief unambiguous, but meaningful description, of the nature of the Background Information is normally all that is necessary, so long as intellectual property "boundaries" (between Background and Foreground) are clear to all parties.
Q. How does the MOD judge whether the information is already in the public domain?
A. Generally, if it is publicly and freely available.
Q. In applying for a patent it is mandatory that the invention has not been publicly disclosed prior to submitting a patent application. To get round this, it is usual to get a Non Disclosure Agreement signed prior to disclosing an invention to a person or organisation. Please could you clarify for the purposes of patent disclosure:
- Will the Technical Proposal and supporting documentation that an entrant makes for the 15 May deadline, be treated confidentially by MoD and hence not be a public disclosure?
- Will the negotiation period prior to July contract signature be treated confidentially by MoD and hence not be a public disclosure?
- Will the contract period, the Finale itself and the Technical Presentation/Report be treated confidentially by MoD and hence not be a public disclosure?
- Can you confirm that any publicity or publicly circulated team summaries during 2007-2008 required by MoD may be written so as not to disclose an unprotected invention?
- 5. Regarding a definition of background knowledge, should we be successful, we propose to submit a patent application immediately before signing a Group 1 contract. This patent application would substantially define our background knowledge. Can you confirm that background knowledge is defined as knowledge up to the point that a contract is signed and not to the point of the proposal? A.
A.
- Yes
- Yes
- The contract period is treated as commercial in confidence. The Finale may include some publicity, however, only as agreed with yourself. The Presentation would be treated as Commercial in Confidence. However, assuming your involvement is as a funded Group 1 participant, the Final Report will be subject to the MoD's dissemination rights as defined in Defcon 705. It is therefore important that any pre-existing proprietary interests are declared to us in your Grand Challenge Bid Proposal and are subsequently confined to the Limited Rights deliverable under Defcon 705, thus preserving your Intellectual Property interests.
- The MoD will not disclose commercially sensitive material. Any material declared by the team as being commercial in confidence will be safeguarded by the MoD. Any publicity will be notified to teams.
- For the purposes of Defcon 705, "Foreground Information" is defined as technical information generated in performance of work under the contract. Consequently, it is the work done, during the performance of a Grand Challenge Group 1 contract that determines whether it is Foreground Information and not the point in time of the proposal or contract signing. Conversely, anything that pre-dates the work done constitutes Background Information. Clearly, any changes to a patent/patented design, as a result of work done under the contract, would be classified as Foreground Information but the pre-existing patent/patented design would not. Whilst it may not apply to your particular circumstances it is worth adding that, in some scenarios, Background Information may have been generated as a result of an earlier MoD funded contract, in which case the Authority may have certain rights of use (under Defcon 705 or some other IPR arrangement).
Q. Does the MoD have a tariff or table of labour rates. We haven't done an MoD contract before, so have not agreed a labour rate with the PFG [Price &Forecasting Group, part of the MOD that looks at price forecasting and agreed rates with certain frequent defence contractors]?
A. Paragraph 16 of the Commercial Proposal guidance notes only make reference to MoD PFG agreed rates in the context of those companies/suppliers who have rates agreed with PFG. Clearly, there will be Grand Challenge participants who do not have agreed rates with PFG. Consequently, in these cases the first sentence of paragraph 16 applies. That is to say, competitive labour rates should be utilised. Clearly, these labour rates should reflect the normal pricing structure of the participant concerned but who should, nevertheless, bear in mind the Authority's statement at paragraph 3 - "a 'fair and reasonable' (but keen) price for the programme is being offered.
Q. Can I assume that you want sub-contractors to provide a full cost-breakdown (manpower, charge-out rate, T&S, bought-in items etc) in the contractor's proposal?
A. The Authority would not wish for the pricing activity to become an onerous task. Consequently, we would not expect all subcontractor costs to be submitted to the same level of detail as the participant submitting the Grand Challenge proposal. As indicated in paragraph 15 of the Commercial Proposal guidance notes, details of subcontractor costs are required in the suggested table. However, in the case of minor subcontractor involvement a single total figure for the subcontractor in question should suffice. In the case of more substantial subcontractor involvement, a breakdown of costs approaching the level of detail in the table may be appropriate. In all cases the submitting party should be cognisant of the fundamental point of demonstrating "value for money". In any case where the Authority considers it is necessary for further data to be provided it will seek this through the submitting party following receipt of their Grand Challenge proposal.
Q. At what point do we start negotiating the omission of certain Defcons (such as Break 656)?
A. Whilst the Authority seeks "unequivocal acceptance of the proposed contract terms and conditions" (Commercial Proposal guidance note paragraph 2 refers) it recognises that some conditions may not be relevant in certain situations. Indeed, as the guidance note explains, there may be instances where additional conditions are necessary. We expect Grand Challenge participants to include in their Commercial Proposal submissions their unequivocal acceptance of our terms and conditions or, where appropriate, demonstrable reasons for a condition not to apply. In cases where this cannot be readily agreed the Authority will enter into discussions with the participant to resolve the matter.
Q. Technical Proposal - Should we assume that 3.6 Facilities is actually 3.5?
A. Yes.
Q. Commercial Proposal - para 13 Price: The document states that "...prices quoted are not subject to the effects of escalation or exchange rate variation." If we intent to purchase bought-in items from the US, these may be subject to export licences, taxes, duty and exchange rate fluctuation. How do we handle these?
A. The Authority would prefer that suppliers attempt to cost such factors into the price quoted to us and, if appropriate, advise what exchange rates they have assumed for pricing purposes. If, however, to do so would place significant risk upon a supplier or indeed the Authority, if costing contingencies became excessive (for example if there was a high value item which generated significant Sterling risk on an exchange rate) then you should bring this to our attention in your Bid (with full details), isolate the item concerned from your main price costing and we can "ring-fence" the item for pricing purposes.
Q. Commercial Proposal - para 15 Price: If we do not yet know of the exact component and related cost details, how do we handle these? Can we estimate approximate values?
A. Yes. By providing details (as sought in paragraph 15 of the Commercial Proposal) it enables us to determine if any estimated values are fair and reasonable for the purposes of pricing.
Q. Commercial Proposal - para 15 Price: Is it acceptable to make a profit? If so, what is a fair?
A. Yes, although as profit margins vary considerably, depending upon individual supplier circumstances, it would be improper for us to suggest what level you should use. Suffice it to say, if we considered any profit margin included in a Bid was excessive we would seek justification from the supplier concerned and/or seek to renegotiate it.
Q. Commercial Proposal - para 15 Price: Does your FY 07/08 end 31 March 2008?
A. Yes.
Q. Commercial Proposal - para 20 Payment: This para refers to 'para 37 above', should this be para 15?
A. Yes, quite right. Apologies.
TECHNICAL/PROJECT
Q. Can you please advise whether the marksman operating from a building will possess the following attributes:
- A rifle fitted with a telescopic sight and if so what diameter will this be? Will the sight be optically coated?
- Will the marksman's head be visible? Will he / she wear a helmet or head covering?
- Will the marksman be inside a room and if so how far from the window?
A. Potential adversaries that the Army may come up against have access to a wide variety of weapons, some of which have telescopic sights. We would wish to be able to detect a marksman using a rifle with a telescopic sight. Whether it is optically coated or not is not known and may depend on it's age, or manufacturer.
For the Finale, there may be more than one marksman, outside and inside. Marksman in a building may be close to an open window. It is our intention for the scenario to be as realistic as possible. Therefore, they are likely to take up a position where they have line of sight to their intended target but without revealing their position to avoid being detected for any follow up action. Whether their head is covered or not is not known.
Q. To develop a prototype solution we need to define a specification for what weather conditions it is operable in. Will the MOD Grand Challenge halt a Team's trial run if weather parameters are exceeded? If the Task is halted due to out of parameter weather conditions in the middle of the run, please confirm the whole Task 1.5 hrs (including setup time) will be restarted when the weather conditions return to in-parameter? Also, please could you confirm that the Forward Operating Point will provide sufficient protection for equipment against rain/strong wind etc during any break in a Task due to poor weather?
A. We have not defined weather parameters so far. We will consider doing this if it is required, although our thoughts on environmental conditions so far are as follows:
- The systems to be presented for the Finale may incorporate a wide spectrum of technologies to provide the capability we are looking for. We do not wish to be proscriptive about any aspect of the Challenge so we feel it would be better for participating teams to advise us of the environmental limitations for their system that is being presented.
- The weather in mid-summer at Copehill Down will be as benign as can be expected for that time of year and location.
- If environmental conditions are sufficiently adverse as to affect the performance of the system then every effort will be made to reschedule the run without penalty.
The Forward Operating Point will have shelter for teams and their equipment.
Q. Having a good environment description of Copehill Down is very important. What sort of environment description are you going to provide, and when? This will impact our plans and costs. Will another team be using a description developed under previous work with the MOD? If so, will this description be made available to all teams, and when?
A. We have provided an aerial photograph of Copehill Down which is included in the presentations from the Participants Conference. We do not envisage providing much more because to do so may lead teams to develop a system which can only operate in Copehill Down and not be capable of development into a military capability for the future. There is intended to be a one-day visit to Copehill Down for July 2007 which would be a "kick-off" event. We are not aware of another team using a description developed under previous work with the MoD. If we were made aware of this, we would seek a solution to it's use that would be fair for all teams.
Q. Are you definitely going to let UAVs fly in Copehill Down (subject to your H&S inspection/audit)?
A. UAVs will be able to fly at Copehill Down.
Q. What is the height band for flying UAVs at Copehill Down (under 20Kg weight)?
A. Our current advice from technical experts is up to 400 feet.
Q. When will you provide Representative threat images? It would be useful to have them before we submit our proposal. There are very few IED and 'technical' images in the public domain.
A. We have no plans to provide threat images. Images of the threats we have described are widely available in the public domain. The IED has been described at recent Grand Challenge events and it is our intention to position a number of "box with wire" IEDs for the Finale in a variety of locations which will range from "easy" to "difficult". It is our intention to include a weapons display at the team "kick-off" day at Copehill Down in July 2007 (exact timing tbc).
Q. What camouflage will the soldiers be wearing (UK, desert, etc)?
A. 'Friendly' Forces will not be in the designated area during the time that the team have deployed their system - you are being deployed in advance of the patrol team. 'Hostile' Forces could be wearing a variety of possible clothing that is civilian or military.
Q. Have you any plans for a smaller-scale pre-Finale trial?
A. This has been considered and whilst not ruled out, it is not part of our current plans.
Q. Will the IED be a metal or non-metal box?
A. There may be more than one IED. It may be a metal or non-metallic box.
Q. Will the roads in Copehill Down have significant obstructions in them or large potholes?
A. No
Q. What are the legal issues with using a UAV on the Grand Challenge?
A. The operation of UAVs in the UK civil environment, such as during development, is governed by the Air Navigation Order, which is implemented and enforced by the Civil Aviation Authority. The following documents may be of assistance to teams:
CAP 393 The Air Navigation Order, available from the CAA website here: http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP393.PDF
Further guidance specifically relating to UAVs is available from the CAA here: http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP722.PDF
In particular, teams might wish to note the definition of a "Small Aircraft" in Article 155 and also note the contents of Article 164 and the referred ANO Articles.
It should be noted that the CAA guidance on model aircraft, CAP 658, does not cover the use of small aircraft for non-recreational use. Teams should also note the requirements of ANO Article 98 (2) (e) and also ANO Article 157 relating to aerial work and seek clarification as to whether permission may be required from the CAA.
UAVs in this competition will be classified as civil aircraft. Their operation within the military controlled environment of the competition site will be subject to regulations that are not significantly different from the civil requirements referenced above.
Teams will be asked to provide sufficient information about their equipment to allow a safety and risk assessment to be performed before they will be allowed to operate within the designated competition airspace.
Teams may wish to specifically note the broad scope of ANO Article 74 with regard to the need for a robust safety and risk assessment.
See the additional notes for more details.