52 Caliber Vendor Engineering Services For the US Propelling Charge & Primer Evaluation

Market Survey for 52-cal Cannon Vendor Engineering Services, Test Assessment, and Deliverables for the United States Propelling Charge & Primer Evaluation 

The United States Army Contracting Command – New Jersey (ACC-NJ)  on behalf of Project Manager – Combat Ammunition Systems (PM-CAS), both located at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, is conducting a market survey to identify potential sources (hereafter referred to as “Vendor(s)”) who are capable of providing Hardware (propelling charges & percussion primers) and relevant Testing and Engineering Services to support United States (U.S.) ammunition evaluation for compatibility in the 155mm 52-caliber howitzer Mobile Tactical Cannon, (MTC).  The purpose of this Sources Sought Notice (SSN) is to  have vendors provide a propulsion solution for MTC and to obtain vendor’s  schedule, cost and technical information for providing hardware, tests assessments, and engineering services to support the characterization & evaluation of propelling charges with respect to performance, suitability, manufacturability, technical maturity, and compatibility in 155mm 52-caliber cannon for the MTC howitzer. Since the final MTC configuration has yet to be fully determined by the United States Government (USG), this market survey will use a 23-liter chamber for evaluation.  The information obtained will inform an ammunition strategy at PM-CAS.  Specifically, the hardware deliverables are:

(1)    155mm propelling charge in top-zone configuration including a single or multi-piece consumable case, propellant, ignitor(s), and additives for enhancing performance for 52-caliber gun tube with 23-liter chamber. 

(2)    155mm percussion primer with plunger, pyrotechnic, and ignitor.  

This propulsion combination will enable extended range artillery fires for the MTC howitzer.  The howitzer and ammunition interfaces are shown in appendix A. The propelling charge and percussion primer solution and related key performance parameters are shown in appendix B. To receive the Appendix A and B, respondents are required to submit a signed and completed DD Form 2345 - Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement; AMSTA-AR Form 1350 - Technical Data Request Questionnaire; and Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). If Technical Information for this effort is provided, a Certificate of Destruction form shall be completed and submitted by any contractor in receipt of the Technical Information, upon this source sought notice closing PM-CAS plans to perform a Propelling Charge & Primer Evaluation in FY27 to inform Army Senior Leadership of opportunities and propulsion solutions to extend the range of the Mobile Tactical Cannon. The overarching goal of this evaluation is to promote solutions through modeling, simulation, live-fire testing, manufacturing, and synergy of vendor-USG assessment of prototypes. The test site for these activities is likely US Army Yuma Proving Ground. To be considered as a capable source for this effort, all interested Vendors must submit a response summarizing the following information:

a)    Provide company name, address, CAGE code, telephone number, email address, technical point of contact, and company size (please specify as either a Large Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, 8(a) concern, Woman-Owned Small Business, Historically Underutilized Business Zone concern, Veteran-Owned Small Business, or Service-Disabled Small Business).

b)    A description of the Vendor’s propulsion solution (percussion primer and propelling charge) relative to the technology readiness level (TRL), manufacturing readiness level (MRL), and similar maturity aspects of performance, suitability, and compatibility related to 52-cal cannons for this activity, along with any previously Vendor-conducted reports detailing these items (if available).  The Vendor’s propelling charge solution should likely consist of a short description of: Case formulation & geometry; propellent formulation, geometry, & additives; ignitor formulation & physical configuration; wear reducer, blast reducer, etc. The intent is for the report(s) to reinforce the maturity aspects of the proposed propulsion solution.  

c)    A description of the Vendor’s propulsion solution in a 52-caliber 23 liter cannon including a modeling & simulation prediction of the following propelling charge key parameters: Muzzle velocity, Maximum Operating Pressure, Extreme Maximum Operating Pressures, Extreme Service Condition Pressure, expected muzzle exit pressure, gun tube wear or equivalent full charge to wear gun tube, flame temperature, temperature sensitivity (pressure vs charge temperature), or similar parameters to understand the Vendor’s ability to meet the standards in accordance with relative to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Standard Agreements (STANAG) 4110, Definition of Pressure Terms, or similar standards.  

d)    A description of the Vendor’s propulsion engineering and test experience (relative to NATO STANAG 4224 Large Caliber Artillery Ammunition, Safety and Suitability for Service Evaluation, or similar test standards) on cannon-ammunition design and compatibility efforts along with relevant reports, if available. The intent is for the report(s) to reinforce that the Vendor has the experience, personnel, and organizational capability for supporting potential future ammunition design, integration, compatibility, and test efforts of propulsion for 52-caliber cannons. 

e)    A description of the Vendor’s existing hardware along with relevant reports available as a system under test and assessment; specifically, the availability of propelling charges and primers to perform U.S. Ammunition Characterization Tests.  The propelling charges and primers are necessary to perform basic assessment & live-fire testing of cannon-ammunition compatibility relative to live-fire performance, safety and suitability for service, or similar ammunition compatibility aspects.

f)    A description of the Vendor’s ability to provide modeling and simulation Engineering Services (planning; modeling of charge, primer, cannon; integration of propulsion designs, modeling and simulation findings & predictions, early risk assessment of designs, and data in support of these services) for a period of 4-8 weeks for initial modeling and simulations predictions and assessments between Vendor and U.S. government engineers and program managers. These services will ensure that the propulsion designs are adequate, understood to be safe and effective, and may be verified through live-fire of 52-caliber howitzer.  The modeling parameters of interest are shown in Appendix B.  

g)    A description of the Vendor’s ability to provide pre-live-fire Engineering Services (planning, shipping integration, test setup, early risk assessment, and data in support of these services) for a period of 4-8 weeks for initial safety and suitability assessments. These services will ensure that the live-fire testing will be safe and effective and reduce any risk that may complicate live-fire testing of ammunition in the 52-caliber howitzer.

h)    A description of the Vendor’s ability to provide live-fire Engineering Services (test execution, safety assessment, and data in support of these services) for a period of 6-10 weeks (could be broken into 2-3 blocks over non-consecutive weeks) during test execution to support live-fire performance, safety, and suitability assessments relative to U.S. ammunition compatibility in the Vendor’s howitzer.  

i)    A description of lead-time estimates for both delivery of the Vendor’s hardware (propelling charges & primers, etc.) and the availability of Vendor personnel to support Testing (e.g. planning, setup, execution) and Engineering Service activities.  The lead-time estimate should take into consideration any long-lead considerations including updated Vendor design of propulsion for US fuzed-projectiles, shipping from prototype manufacturing facility to Yuma Proving Grounds (YPG), and any other major activities that would, ultimately, feed live-fire testing notionally in late-FY27.

j)    A description of vendor’s existing capability to produce supercharge quantities or similar propelling charge technologies and what quantities produced monthly, if a manufacturing line exists (likely for other non-US artillery efforts) or will exist in coming months or years.  The response to this description will allow the USG to define a contract strategy for future contract options, if necessary, to leverage existing capacity or create new capacity, as far term contracting solution.  

All companies interested in this notice must be registered and active in the System for Award Management (SAM).
This market survey is being released for informational and planning purposes only and shall NOT be construed as a Request for Proposal (RFP) or as an obligation on the part of the United States Government (USG).  All information provided will not be returned and will be held in confidential status. Please identify and appropriately mark any proprietary information submitted.  All information is to be submitted at no cost or obligation to the Government.  If a formal solicitation is generated at a later date, a solicitation notice will be published.  No award will be made as a result of this market survey. If a solicitation is released, it will be synopsized on the Army Single Face to Industry.  It is the responsibility of the potential Offerors to monitor this site for additional information pertaining to this requirement.

All market information sought in this notification must be provided within 15 days of this notice by electronic mail only at no cost to the Government. All responses shall utilize SSN W15QKN-26-X-1C6R The point of contact for this requirement is Mr. Yery Ysabel via email Yery.j.Ysabel.civ@army.mil and/or Mr John Scott john.c.scott158.civ@army.mil. All inquiries shall be made via e-mail only. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted.

* Ammendment 1 was issued to add the Appendixes as well as extending the response date to 08/07/2026 
 

**Ammendment 2 was issued to extend the response date to 8/21/2026 as well as provide an answer to industry questions.

QUESTION 

1.  Is the bore resistance profile provided in Appendix A representative of the M795, or is it closer to the XM1113 or Excalibur? Based on our initial analysis, we suspect it aligns with the XM1113, but we would appreciate your clarification.

ANSWER 

1.  We are looking to tie the supercharge to the XM1113 projectile. The bore resistance is generally used for our copper rotating bands, which is not projectile specific.