Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Guardian Week 1 H4D Stanford 2016


Published on

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

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to like this

Guardian Week 1 H4D Stanford 2016

  1. Team Guardian Affordable and portable drone protection Number of Consumers Spoken to: 10 Total Number of Consumers Spoken to: 10 Team Guardian is familiar with a wide variety of possible solutions to the problem and the relevant performance characteristics of existing commercial drone technology. Following a rigid scenario and requirements analysis we will be able to specify a counter system for the asymmetric warfare group that is portable, affordable and highly effective. We will develop a tailored countermeasure technology, and thus protect the military environment from commercial drone threat. Nick DangerGeorge Tirebiter Clark Cable Ralph Spoilsport Communication / Computer Science / Veteran Product / Veteran / Chemistry Embedded systems / Electrical Engineering Systems Engineering / Mechatronics Project: Countering Asymmetric Drone Activities Sponsor: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG) Military Liaisons: John Cogbill and Scott Maytan
  2. Guardian: Effective, tailor-made drone protection Nick Danger Ralph Spoilsport George Tirebiter Clark Cable Academic Program PhD Electrical Engineering 2017 MBA 2017 MSc Chemistry MSc Electrical Engineering 2017 MBA 2017 MSc Mechanical Engineering LinkedIn Alon’s profile Fabian’s profile Han's profile N/A Subject Matter Expert? No (Computer Science Engineer) No (Chemistry/Process engineer) No (Electrical Engineer) Yes (Systems Research on drone defense systems, patent pending) Role - How does your expertise fit the problem? 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: 1st MVP Deployment Scenario: 1.Shoot the drone down (Military) 2.Interception/Skycatch 3.Taking over command Hypothesis: Our solution will operate in established military environment / Conflict zone.
  4. Guardian: Customer Discovery Hypothesis: • We are targeting military threats and civilian threats Experiments: • Presenting deployment scenarios: Shooting down, interception, capturing, hacking, jamming and spoofing Results: • Regulatory solution may apply to both military and civilian environments • Shooting down is an option in military environment • Hacking is feasible for off-the-shelf drones. Action: • Is Regulatory Solution (Mandatory GoHome Command) good enough? • Exploring hacking • Asking if shooting drone down solve the problem
  5. Guardian: Mission Model Canvas 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
  6. Guardian: Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services Shooting - Leverage existing technology - Improve specific critical performance parameters either in counter measure depending on scenario - Improving ease of use Customer Jobs Execute operation on the ground- Incomplete protection with existing off-the-shelve systems - Non-flexible and only partially portable solutions, so protection only for camps - No identification of payload Ground forces Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Adequate solution to asymetric threat - Portable and flexible protection - Reduce size, weight and power consumption of equipment - Improve ergonomics of equipment
  7. Guardian: Value Proposition Canvas Products & Services Shooting, Catching and Hacking - Leverage existing technology - Understanding system constraints and required capabilities Customer Jobs Protect against asymmetric threats - Expensive off-the-shelve equipment - Off-the-shelve equipment does not counter new threat sufficiently U.S. Asymmetric Warfare Group Gains Pains Gain Creators Pain Relievers - Less costs for systems - More capabilities tailored to commercial drones - Reduce costs - Develop tailored solution without the burden of promoting proprietary legacy systems
  8. Appendix
  9. Competitive Landscape (selection) Enhance critical performance limitations of current systems in detection / counter measures and partner with system integrators. Stand-alone is possible as well. Import/purchase restrictions Mandate defined software access points on component manufacturer level Restrict capabilities It is important to note that our target is not necessarily to compete with the existing systems but rather enhance them with components that enable them to perform according to the threats at hand. A lot of technologies exist in the field, the challenge is to bring them together to form a cohesive system tailored to commercial drones. The limiting factors of today systems need to be tackled very specifically to allow for portability and affordability. The dispersed nature of the threat needs to be accounted for.
  10. d Portable search & track system Attributes (worst case) Rotary-wing aircraft m=2,5kg (incl. payload) v=17m/s Ø=40cm Height=7,5cm System performance improves dynamically • Single intruder wants to detonate explosive payload • UAS is either controlled directly or navigates autonomously via GPS-waypoints Direct effector (e.g. counter drone with net) Portable indirect effector (e.g. HPEM, malware) d Potential high-level operational concept (OV-1)
  11. Navigation Payload Control station Take-off / landing Other system interfaces Aircraft Communication Accessories Transport Potential access points for a selection of countermeasures (not at all exhaustive) GPS-spoofing, HPEM Kinetic countermeasures, Laser Hindering use of payload without directly affecting UAV itself (e.g. glare) Jam or take over communication, software vulnerabilities, HPEM Locating and attacking control station