This is the confirmation email that was sent to the Prime Contractor (Guild Associates) on June 3rd, 2003. Below the confirmation letter is a summary of SBIR RFP and Theiss Aviation’s efforts to be executed under Phase I of this SBIR Program.
_______________________________________________________________________________________


Date: 06/03/2003
Subject: Notice to Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR ) Offerors Selected for Phase I Funding

1. Your proposal submitted has been selected as one the Air Vehicles Directorate expects to contract, subject to successful negotiations between the Air Vehicles Technical Contracting Division (AFRL/VAK) and yourselves.

2. The process of entering into a contract with your firm has been initiated. You may expect to be contacted by the assigned buyer at AFRL/VAK who will negotiate the specific terms of the contract. The time is currently estimated at 30 to 60 days from the date of this letter.

______________________________________________________________________________________





TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Air Platform, Chemical/Bio Defense

OBJECTIVE: Develop extremely cheap disposable UAVs for detection, tracking, and tagging mass destruction agents.

DESCRIPTION: Recent bioterror attacks highlight the need to react to any chemical, biological or radioactive attack, quickly identifying the agent and its spread. The primary objective of this effort is to integrate novel air vehicle technologies with compact chemical sensors to provide real-time assessments of hazardous material releases from covert, cheap platforms.

The Air Force challenge is to detect agents and to, determine sources and extent. There are two general ways of sensing agents, remote and on-site. Remote sensing is currently under investigation, but weather and terrain conditions, as well as site location could render such remote sensing difficult. On-site sensing is possible with air delivered ground sensors; however, these cannot actively search for agents, only react when agents float by. Airborne systems could actively search for agents, identify sources, and map their spread. Such airborne systems need to be cheap, capable of aerial insertion, yet exhibit minimal impact to the logistical chain. They have to require minimal operator training, sparingly use communication bandwidth, and exhibit useful life. These airborne systems are envisioned to determine extents of attacks to the homeland, yet must also be able to identify agent research and development (R&D), manufacturing, and storage facilities in hostile countries. They also must be capable of sensing a broad range of agents, from chemical/biological to radioactive. It is a logical extension for such system to track other items, such as pollution, and light video cameras (< 6 g) have been developed which could also be used for intelligence collection, such as looking for victims within a cloud, or searching for caves. Therefore, operations should be automated through "plug and play" programming.

Although many approaches could be envisioned, recent advances in sensing and bio-inspired technologies might be useful to MAV systems. Biotechnology promises advances in sensor type and size reduction. Meanwhile, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has demonstrated the vision of small UAV integration with its successful demonstrations of the Micro Air Vehicle (MAV) effort. The tantalizing hint of what could be a breakthrough system for sensing agents of mass destruction is within our grasp, what is needed is breakthrough integration to put all the functions together on one small air platform.

PHASE I: Conduct analysis and research to develop air vehicle system concepts which innovatively integrates the disparate functionality required for sensing WMD agents on small UAVs. By system concept we mean that we need to consider not just the air vehicle, but the control, power, and other technical parameters such that we can envision a system which can be released into an area where WMD agents could be, and it will search and find the agents, then report back. We assume that the small UAVs work in packs (coordinated), have decent range and loitering capability, are small such that covert sensing can be accomplished, and are very inexpensive. We also assume that once they are released the human operator has as little interaction as possible. Develop a baseline mission to evaluate technology alternatives. Perform initial trade studies showing the suitability of the UAV system alternatives, evaluating practicality while determining the number of UAVs required for a mission based on technology used. Develop initial concept(s) of UAV group insertion method(s). Choose the "best" system design to bring forward to Phase II. Show how other agencies besides the USAF could use this and for which roles.



(Home Page)