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
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.
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
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)
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