Guardian Lessons Learned H4D Stanford 2016

42,746 views

Published on

agile, bmnt, business model, corporate innovation, customer development, diux, dod, h4d, hacking for defense, lean, lean launchpad, lean startup, nsa, stanford, steve blank

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
42,746
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
38,296
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Guardian Lessons Learned H4D Stanford 2016

  1. Countering asymmetric drone activities Experts Total: 118 interviews Users Buyers Week 0 problem How to defeat UAVs ? Week 10 problem Classify and detect UAVs in real-time Markus Diehl (MBA, MEMS) Han Ye (EEMS) Alon Kipnis (EE PhD) Fabian Schvartzman (MBA) AWG (Sponsor) Challenge: Protect military personals from adversary use of commercial off-the-shelf UAV
  2. Team Guardian Alon Kipnis Fabian Schvartzman Han Ye Markus Diehl PhD Electrical Engineering 2017 MBA 2017 MSc Chemistry MSc Electrical Engineering 2017 MBA 2017 MSc Mechanical Engineering Communication Designer, Machine Learning, Electrical Engineering Hustler/Military veteran Embedded systems, sensor technology, prototyping of solutions Systems Engineering using DoDAF, industry expertise, overview of existing technologies
  3. Guardian Video:
  4. - Need buy-in from U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Need implementation by ground forces - Develop hacking device - Develop shooting device - Develop intercepting device Requirements Engineering - Define top three scenarios of deployment - Define performance limitations of current systems System design - System and components engineering Week 0 Mission Model Canvas: - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Suppliers of radars for small flying objects - Depending on solution: suppliers of system components for detection and counter measures - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of Do-it-yourself drone kits -FAA - Provide affordable and mobile drone protection Fixed: - System design & engineering Variable: - Hardware costs - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities Mission AchievementMission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Key Activities Key Resources Key Partners Where we started: - Primary: Ground forces - Secondary: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group Beneficiaries - Developing a Countermeasure Protecting from: + Weaponized drones + Swarm of drones + Drone aided reconnaissance Value Proposition
  5. Week 1 Existing technology Focus on FOB protection Week 3 Expert: “I’ve tested 56 countermeasures” “no one gun useful in all scenarios” Week 2 Scenario analysis Tested existing technologies with sponsors and users Scenarios are many and complex single solution can’t fit them all Forward Operating Base (FOB) protection is a critical and transferable scenarios Tested various scenarios with sponsors and experts User: “range of operation, operation over civilians, level of automation, scalability to swarms - all become issues” LearningExperiment Experiment Learning Discovery Process (Weeks 1-3):
  6. Week 3 Week 4 3. Drone sighted 7. Take it down Guard tower: 2 privates, handgun and radio1. Drone sighted 2. Drone sighted, what to do ? Control center 3. Drone sighted 7. Take it down 8. Counter measure initiated Lieutenant Sargent 6. Take it down Analysis of FOB workflowUnderstanding FOB Protection Discovery Process (Weeks 3-4): Commander: “In many cases in FOB, you can not just shoot down a drone - it happens way more than you may think” Lieutenant: “I want something that can buy me more time in making a decision” Interviews with FOB personnel about workflows and existing equipment Decision making process, user needs of 3 levels of command involved LearningExperiment
  7. Week 5 AWG: “The beginning of the UAV air-to- air combat era” MVP: “The Interceptor” Critical features -Range -Automation -Scalability Learning Portrayed the “Interceptor” - drone against drones Experiment FOB Commander: “If you can make it, that will be great. Dynamic solution is hard though. ” Platform for multiple devices: - Camera - Catching device - Jamming device Discovery Process (Week 5):
  8. Buy-In/Support Deployment - Provide affordable and mobile drone protection - Provide counter-drone capabilities to FOBs within 2 years Week 5 Mission Model Canvas Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of DIY drone kits - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO Ground forces operating within approximately 20 miles of adversaries (reach of today’s commercial drones) (1) FOBs: ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection ● Private at guard tower (front line) ● Operation officer in command center U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Demonstration day in Florida (mid June) - Testing in AWG - Modification (based on testing results) - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test - Asymmetric Warfare Group using RDT&E (from REF): single contract from concept to deployment (initial funding - maximum 2-years) Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Key Activities Key Resources Key Partners Midway Summary: - Weaponized drones -Swarm of drones -Drone aided -Reconnaissance - Automation - Countermeasure escalates according to threat - Counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Symmetric solution • Automation • Countermeasure escalates according to threat • Counter reconnaissance • Bring drone down without crashing • Gain intelligence while mitigating threat • Scalability for swarms • Symmetric solution Value Proposition User: “I Like the range of operation and flexibility of this solution.” Beneficiaries FOBs: ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection ● Private at guard tower (front line) ● Operation officer in command center Group
  9. Week 7/8 New MVP: Detection and Classification System AWG: “How long will it take to implement this into FOB?” AWG: “It will be great if you can deliver it! ” Week 6 Counter UAS Demo-day Observing existing counter UAS systems Experiment Pivot Discovery Process (Weeks 6-8): Countermeasures lack detection / classification platform Learning Proof of concept - type of payload detection from visual information Experiment
  10. Discovery Process (Week 9): New customer discovery after pivot Experiment Existing countermeasure providers are potential customer Learning Week 9 New Beneficiaries Directional jamming requires tracking Hacking requires drone model Interception requires accurate state-space information System and/or API providin g: - classific ation (type of control, radio) - target tracking - Classification algorithm - Data from multiple sensing technologies - Database - Threat analysis system Smart Jamming System Gains Gain CreatorsProducts & Services - Classify type of drone - Detect type of radio bands - Precise location and orientation Selectively jam drone signal Customer Jobs - Countering depends on type of drone - tracking is inaccurate and unreliable Pains- Identification and target information - Accurate location (tracking) Pain Relievers
  11. (1) FOBs: ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection ● Private at guard tower (front line) ● Operation officer in command center (2) Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (3) Countermeasure providers /manufacturer (4) Program Manager in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group Current Mission Model Canvas Pre-prototype: - Software development - Hardware integration Post prototype: - Deployment - Maintenance - System integration - Demonstration day - Modification (based on testing results) After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Integrate in existing systems - Train operators in field - First Prototype (3 months): $50,000 - Second Prototype (5 months): $335,000 - Initial Deployment (10 months): $930,000 Pre-prototype: - Lab - Initial Funding - Engineering Team - Patent - Advisory board (AWG and DoD ) Post prototype: - Partners - Contract - Military VC - IRAD - Angel - SOCOM - SBIR Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Key Activities Key Resources Where we are today: - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - REF - Ground forces - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO - I2WD (Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate) Countermeasures Providers - ELTA - Skyview - VERUS - Battelle - Blacksage Technologies - Threat assessment (type of payload and potential threat) - Allows early threat detection - Tracing drone operator - Modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Geo-localizing - UAV Classification - Scalable (part of a large air-control system) - Identify type of drone - Detect and localize drone - API for active countermeasuring - Effective against many drones - Scalable to swarms - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack Countermeasures Providers • ELTA • Skyview • VERUS • Battelle • Blacksage Technologies • Identify type of drone • Detect and localize drone • API for active countermeasuring - Provide drone detection and threat assessment capabilities - Provide sensing/detection/classification platform for existing and future countermeasure Mission Achievement Value Proposition (3) Counter measure providers / manufacturers BeneficiariesKey Partners
  12. The way forward Recruiting Partnership Funding Product Build engineering team 2016 June 2017 Jan June No hires Visual capability Sep Mar Integrate EM Acoustic capability Integrate Radar Seed funding $50,000 Additional seed funding $350,000 Series A EM sensor partner Radar partner - Next Step: Full development of visual capability for existing FOB camera systems within 3 months - Required funding: $50,000 - Successive integration of additional sensing capabilities
  13. IRL 1 IRL 4 IRL 3 IRL 2 IRL 7 IRL 6 IRL 5 IRL 8 IRL 9 First pass on MMC w/Problem Sponsor Complete ecosystem analysis petal diagram Validate mission achievement (Right side of canvas) Problem validated through initial interviews Prototype low-fidelity Minimum Viable Product Value proposition/mission fit (Value Proposition Canvas) Validate resource strategy (Left side of canvas) Prototype high-fidelity Minimum Viable Product Establish mission achievement metrics that matterTeam Assessment: IRL 8 Post H4D Course Actions Team Guardian intends to pursue funding to create a dual use solution for drone threats in both military and civilian fields.
  14. Thanks to: 49 experts Military Liaisons 28 users42 buyers Teaching Team
  15. Appendix
  16. Emotional Journey Week # EmotionalState 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 many counter measures out there, looks like problem already solved There are many scenarios and therefore many problems FOB protection is an important and transferable problem but is requires sophisticated sensing platform Users and sponsors like our “interceptor” Many countermeas ures requires the same platform Pivot to classification platform Funding from DoD is not easy Users like our MVP
  17. A drone with : - Automatic tracking system - Active countering device (jamming/catching) Value Proposition Canvas - Get physical proximity to target - Variable type of countermeasure Customer Jobs Protect FOB Lieutenant in charge on FOB protection Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Obtain information from close-distance - Escalate countering - Physical proximity Products & Services - Collateral demage - Collect close-distance information - Catch or jam from close distance - Extend range of operation - Telling friend/foe - Short time window for operating
  18. Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services - Classification capabilities - Threat analysis system - Data from multiple sensing technologies Customer Jobs Provide UAV countermeasure s (alerting, kinetic, jamming) - no existing localization capabilities - no existing classification capabilities - detection is inaccurate and unreliable - no existing automatic threat analysis Countermeasure Manufacturer Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Accurate real-time UAV location - Threat classification and characterization - Large and dynamic sensing range - Accurate location - Differentiation between UAV and other low-altitude flying objects - API - API for the following features: + tracking target + target information + threat analysis Appendix: Final Value Proposition Canvas
  19. Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services - Countering with basic training - Countering regardless of specific drone - Layered solution, countering multiple threats posed by commercial drones Customer Jobs Protect FOB: frontline protection responsible on a specific section - Threats( Reconnaisse, weaponized, swarms…) - No easy way to take down next gen UAVs - No existing solution tailored for off-the-shelf drone threat Private in guard tower Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Can react to threat with easy to use equipment - Can act rapidly and efficiently - Reduce mission irritation from drones - Mitigate threat - Minimal training, easy to use - Drone counter measure - Drone Classification Appendix: Final Value Proposition Canvas
  20. Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services -Countering without crashing - Highly autonomous system -Classification capability - Fast reaction period Customer Jobs Protect FOB - Surveillance - Unresolved threat Lieutenant/Captain Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Focus on mission without worrying about surveillance, or by spending less time on threats posed by commercial drones - Capturing the drone without crashing provides the opportunity to exploit the drone and trace back to origin for further mission - Reduce mission irritation from drones - Mitigate threat - Drone counter measure - Drone Classification Appendix: Final Value Proposition Canvas
  21. Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services Gain capability: 1. Countering drone without crashing and potentially exploiting data from it 2. Scalability: countering swarm of drones 3. Classification of drone threats 4. Solution can be deployed within 2 years Customer Jobs Bridge capability gaps in asymmetric warfare against for US forces - Unresolved emerging threat Asymmetric warfare group(Program Manager/Concept Generator/Requirement Writer…) Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Provide counter-drone capability to US forces -Fill in capability gaps between current technologies -Mitigate threat - Drone counter measure - Drone classification Appendix: Final Value Proposition Canvas
  22. System and/or API providing: - classification (type of control, radio) - target tracking - Classification algorithm - Data from multiple sensing technologies - Database - Threat analysis system Smart Jamming System Gains Gain CreatorsProducts & Services - Classify type of drone - Detect type of radio bands - Precise location and orientation Selectively jam drone signal Customer Jobs - Countering depends on type of drone - tracking is inaccurate and unreliable Pains- Reliable detection and target information - Accurate location (tracking) Pain Relievers
  23. We cannot get funding from our sponsors Learning “The Army is still deciding who will be the proponent for drones and counter- drones. ” Week 10 How to get DoD funding? AWG: “We do not have any purchasing authority to buy equipment to field to the big Army” Understanding how to get DoD funding Experiment
  24. Class process summary: Hypothesis: Problem is sufficiently solved by existing technology First MVP: correct or why not ? Focus on Forward Operating Bases (FOB) protection Understanding capability gaps Challenged existing technologies with sponsors and users First solution: “the interceptor” Knowing our first customers by name AWG Demo- day countermeasure missing detection / classification capabilities New MVP: detection and Classification system Proof of concept camera / no camera visual detector Week 3 Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Week 5 Funding options Week 7 MVP develop ment sensing technologies Integration Week 8 - Military VC - IRAD - Angel - SOCOM Week 1 Pivot
  25. MVP #1 Drone defender Raptor birds Defense contractors Skywall • Range < 400m • Can’t protect larger facilities • Trained personnel required • Not easy to use • Still to heavy to be included in squad as a mobile solution • Species-appropriate treatment can’t be entertained at military base • Radiofrequency jamming as well as GNSS jamming and spoofing are limiting solutions • Future navigation concepts like dynamic autonomous navigation using imagery information from camera will not be affected • Even lower range than drone defender • Can’t protect larger facilities • Trained personnel required • Not easy to use • Still to heavy to be included in squad as a mobile solution Hypothesis: Problem is sufficiently solved by existing technology Learnings: Shortcomings of existing technology
  26. MVP #2 Stage 1: Detection(Prerequisites of MVP)
  27. MVP #2 Stage 2: Countermeasure - Option 1: Hunter drone
  28. MVP #2 Stage 2: Countermeasure - Option 2: Swarm of micro-dones
  29. MVP #3: Input: signal features from all sensors, approximate location from radar Output: spatial location, type of drone, type of load Feature extraction from real-time data Geo-location Sensing signal Pre-processing supervised learning and classification Drone model, type of payload Main processing algorithm Output Radar data
  30. First prototype (using existing FOB sensing systems) Prototype using designated sensors - We can provide visual threat assessment capabilities to FOB within 3 months and $50,000 - We can provide a full identification and threat assessment system for FOB protection within 8 months and $350,000 Deployment The Way Ahead...
  31. Appendix: AWG Funding Cycle Product Deployment Workflow (Insight from Battle Drone Defender) - AWG identify capability gap (“never get caught by surprise”) research on bridging gap (experiments, experts) Demo MVP (list of features bridging gap) Recommendation to REF (RD&E money) Contract (private industry) Deployment (provide training and doctrines for operating new equipment) Typically does not get into acquisition cycle Company Own Research Fund Depending upon urgency 6 months 1-6months (canbeveryquick)
  32. Appendix: A Day in Life of a Beneficiary
  33. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 1) Requirements Engineering - Define top three scenarios of deployment - Define performance limitations of current systems System design - System and components engineering - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Suppliers of radars for small flying objects - Depending on solution: suppliers of system components for detection and counter measures - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of Do-it-yourself drone kits -FAA - Primary: Ground forces operating within approximately 20 miles of adversaries (reach of today’s commercial drones) - Secondary: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (budget, capability) Countering Drone Threat: - Weaponized drones -Swarm of drones -Drone aided -Reconnaissance - Provide affordable and mobile drone protection - Develop a hacking device - Develop a shooting device - Develop a intercepting device Fixed: - System design & engineering Variable: - Hardware costs - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Need buy-in from U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Need implementation by ground forces Beneficiaries Mission AchievementMission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  34. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 2) Requirements Engineering - Define top three scenarios of deployment - Define performance limitations of current systems - Functional structure System design - System and components engineering - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - DIUX - Depending on solution: and counter measures - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of Do-it-yourself drone kits -FAA -FCC - Other agencies working on the same problem - Primary: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (budget, capability) - Secondary: Ground forces operating within approximately 20 miles of adversaries (reach of today’s commercial drones) Countering Drone Threat: - Understand specific requirements of AWG - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Provide modular solution to deescalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating thread - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - affordable - portability - Provide proof of concept - Pilot project with one forward operating base (FOB) Fixed: - System design & engineering Variable - Purchase drones for testing - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test - Need buy-in from U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Need implementation by ground forces Beneficiaries Mission AchievementMission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  35. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 3) Requirements Engineering - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Military drone manufacturers - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of Do-it-yourself drone kits - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - D HS - CTTSO Primary: User at outpost, who is potentially 19 years old, inexperienced and not trained to use complex equipment Secondary: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (budget, capability) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to deescalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating thread - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - affordable - Costs for countering need to be symmetric to cost of commercial drone - Provide proof of concept - Pilot project with one forward operating base (FOB) Fixed: Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro), spider wires and nets ((no budget received) - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test - Need buy-in from U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Need implementation by ground forces Beneficiaries Mission AchievementMission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  36. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 4) Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of DIY drone kits - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO Primary: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (budget, capability) Primary: Private at guard tower, who is potentially 19 years old, inexperienced and not trained to use complex equipment Lieutenant and Captain at FOB responsible for protection Private at guard tower, who is potentially young, inexperienced and not trained to use complex equipment Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to deescalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating thread - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Costs for countering need to be symmetric to cost of commercial drone asset we are protecting -Provide proof of concept -Receive continuous support from sponsors and potential users/buyers - Pilot project with one forward operating base (FOB) -Generate iterative MVPs with FOB, potential funders and buyers - Test and modify MVP and produce versioned product - Potentially partner with existing contractors and integrate our product into existing systems Fixed: Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro (no budget received) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test - Need buy-in from U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (Funding) - Need implementation by ground forces/ Help us to iterate, test and modify our product - Need certification from AWG before deploying product Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  37. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 5) Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of DIY drone kits - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO FOBs: Lieutenant and Captain at FOB responsible for protection FOBs: (1) ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection (Kevin, Dave, Rick) ● Private at guard tower (front line) (Alon) ● Technician in Control Center (?) Private at guard tower, who is potentially young, inexperienced and not trained to use complex equipment Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (Steve) (3) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack - Geolocalizing source of attack - Provide counter-drone capabilities to FOBs within 2 years -Provide proof of concept -Receive continuous support from sponsors and potential users/buyers - Demonstration day in Florida (mid June) - Testing in AWG - Modification (based on testing results) After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Training field operators by AWG - Pilot project with one forward operating base (FOB) -Generate iterative MVPs with FOB, potential funders and buyers - Test and modify MVP and produce versioned product - Potentially partner with existing contractors and integrate our product into existing systems Fixed: Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test - Asymmetric Warfare Group using RDT&E (from REF): single contract from concept to deployment (initial funding - maximum 2-years) - Need implementation by ground forces/ Help us to iterate, test and modify our product - Need certification from AWG before deploying product Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  38. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 6) Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Suppliers of DIY drone kits - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO FOBs: Lieutenant and Captain at FOB responsible for protection FOBs: (1) ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection (Kevin, Dave, Rick) ● Private at guard tower (front line) (Alon) ● Technician in Control Center (?) Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (Steve) (3) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack - Geolocalizing source of attack Current focus: classification - identify type of drone, payload and potential threat: - Autonomous - Scalable (part of a large air- control system) - Provide counter-drone capabilities to FOBs within 2 years - Demonstration day in Florida (mid June) - Testing in AWG - Modification (based on testing results) After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Train field operators by AWG Fixed: Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test Asymmetric Warfare Group using RDT&E (from REF): single contract from concept to deployment (initial funding - maximum 2-years) Rapid Equipping Force SBIR Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  39. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 7) Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - REF - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO - I2WD (Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate) - US Marine Corps - Other companies working on countermeasures and detection: - ELTA - Skyview - VERUS - Battelle - Blacksage Technologies FOBs: (1) ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection ● Private at guard tower (front line) ● Technician in Control Center Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (3) Countermeasure provider/manufacturer (alerting, jamming, kinetic) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack - Geolocalizing operator Current focus: classification - identify type of drone, payload and potential threat: - Autonomous - Provides data essential for interception / jamming - Scalable (part of a large air- control system) - Provide counter-drone capabilities to FOBs within 2 years - Provide a platform for existing and future countermeasure - Demonstration day in Florida (mid June) - Modification (based on testing results) After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Train field operators by AWG Fixed: Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test Asymmetric Warfare Group using RDT&E (from REF): single contract from concept to deployment (initial funding - maximum 2-years) - SBIR Military VC: + onpoint + iqt Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  40. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 8) Requirements Engineering Understanding of FOB scenarios and capability gaps - Concept definition System design - System and components engineering - Reverse engineering on commercial drones Pre-prototype: - Software development - Hardware development Post prototype: - Deployment - Maintenance - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - REF - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO - I2WD (Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate) - US Marine Corps - Other companies working on countermeasures and detection: - ELTA - Skyview - VERUS - Battelle - Blacksage Technologies FOBs: (1) ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection Private at guard tower (front line) ● Technician in Control Center Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (3) Countermeasure providers /manufacturer (alerting, jamming, kinetic) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack - Geo-localizing operator Current focus: classification - identify type of drone, payload and potential threat: - Autonomous - Provides data essential for interception / jamming - Scalable (part of a large air- control system) - Provide counter-drone capabilities to FOBs within 2 years - Provide drone detection and threat assessment capabilities - Provide a platform for existing and future countermeasure - Demonstration day - Modification (based on testing results) - Prototype After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Train field operators Variable - Purchase equipment for testing including drones(DJI + Micro) - Purchase jamming equipment and power attenuators - Access to relevant ground forces to define relevant scenarios - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group to define relevant set of capabilities - Other agencies working on the same problem - Hardware to test Pre-prototype: - Lab - Initial Funding - Engineering Team - Patent - Advisors from DoD (AWG) Post prototype: - Partners - Contract Asymmetric Warfare Group using RDT&E (from REF): single contract from concept to deployment - SBIR - Military VC - IRAD - Angel Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners
  41. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas (week 9) Pre-prototype: - Software development - Hardware development Post prototype: - Deployment - Maintenance - U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group - REF - Ground forces - Commercial drone manufacturers (e.g. DJI) - SOCOM - Other agencies working on the same problem: - JIDA - DHS - CTTSO - I2WD (Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate) - Other companies working on countermeasures and detection: - ELTA - Skyview - VERUS - Battelle - Blacksage Technologies FOBs: (1) ● Lieutenant/Captain in charge on FOB protection Private at guard tower (front line) ● Technician in Control Center Air Force personnel in control center surveilling the air space (2) Program Manager, concept generator, requirement writer in U.S Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (3) Countermeasure providers /manufacturer (alerting, jamming, kinetic) - Effective countering regardless of specific drone - Classify and counter reconnaissance - Bring drone down without crashing - Provide modular solution to escalate the situation proportionally to the threat (sequential) - Gain intelligence while mitigating threat - Scalability for swarms - Low training need, easy to use - Symmetric solution: costs of countering is symmetric to cost of attack - Geo-localizing operator Current focus: classification - identify type of drone, payload and potential threat: - Autonomous - Provides data essential for interception / jamming - Scalable (part of a large air- control system) - Provide drone detection and threat assessment capabilities - Provide a platform for existing and future countermeasure - Demonstration day - Modification (based on testing results) After initial contract: - Limited User Assessment - Train field operators - First Prototype (3 months): $29,500 - Second Prototype (5 months): $334,500 - Initial Deployment (10 months): $925,000 Pre-prototype: - Lab - Initial Funding - Engineering Team - Patent - Advisory board (AWG and DoD ) Post prototype: - Partners - Contract - SBIR - Military VC - IRAD - Angel - SOCOM Beneficiaries Mission Achievement Mission Budget/Costs Buy-In/Support Deployment Value PropositionKey Activities Key Resources Key Partners

×