Autonomous On Orbit Logistics and Sustainment Architecture
Overview
What you need to judge this in 30 seconds
SBIR · Phase: BOTH · Topic DAF26BX06-DV513 · Solicitation 26.BX
Space systems today are designed for single use and lack the ability to be maintained, repaired, or resupplied once deployed. This design philosophy limits maneuverability, reduces resilience, and forces operators to conserve resources. As maneuver warfare emerges in the space domain, the United States Space Force requires a logistics backbone that provides freedom of action, operational reach, and prolonged endurance. This backbone must support rapid reconstitution, autonomous servicing, multi orbit distribution, and predictive sustainment. The On Orbit Space Logistics Challenge seeks mature technologies that can transition directly into prototype development. These technologies must support a future in which satellites are serviced, refueled, repaired, repositioned, and recovered as part of routine operations. The D2P2 effort will focus on autonomous operations, multi orbit integration, servicing demonstrations, depot interactions, and logistics health monitoring. The performer must demonstrate how their technology contributes to a resilient logistics architecture capable of supporting sustained operations in contested environments. This topic encourages solutions that integrate with broader Space Force concepts such as sustained space maneuver, dynamic space operations, and contested logistics. The performer must show how their technology supports mission continuity, reduces reconstitution burden, and enhances the survivability of critical space assets. Offerors may structure their approach using one of two acceptable architectural frameworks. Both approaches are valid for early exploration and concept development, and both support the broader goal of building a resilient on orbit logistics enterprise. Offerors should select the approach that best aligns with their proposed technology, their integration pathway, and the operational problem they intend to solve. Systems of Systems Approach A Systems of Systems approach views the on orbit logistics enterprise as a collection of interconnected subsystems that work together to deliver sustained combat power. This perspective recognizes that no single technology can solve the logistics challenge alone. Instead, multiple systems must interact across orbital regimes, mission timelines, and operational conditions. Under this approach, the proposer describes how their technology fits within a larger architecture that includes depots, warehouses, orbital transfer vehicles, servicing vehicles, drop ships, and health monitoring systems. The feasibility study should explain how the proposed system interacts with other systems, how it contributes to distribution loops, and how it supports the overall sustainment mission. This approach is well suited for technologies that enable integration, coordination, or interoperability across multiple nodes. A Systems of Systems framing encourages proposers to think about interfaces, standards, autonomy, and mission sequencing. It also supports early identification of dependencies, constraints, and opportunities for modularity. This approach is particularly useful for technologies that enable routing, servicing, depot operations, or multi orbit logistics planning. Logistics Function Approach A Logistics Function approach focuses on the specific logistics activity that the proposed technology enables. Instead of describing the entire architecture, the proposer concentrates on the function their system performs. Examples include refueling, repair, recovery, resupply, warehousing, or health monitoring.Under this approach, the feasibility study explains how the proposed technology improves the performance of a particular logistics function. The proposer describes the operational need, the current limitations, and the functional improvements their solution provides. This approach is well suited for technologies that perform a discrete logistics task, such as propellant transfer, component replacement, autonomous inspection, or orbital resupply. A Logist…
- Category
- R&D
- Industry
- Mobility, Logistics
- Technology
- Needs verification
- Target stage
- Needs verification
- Project duration
- Needs verification
- Estimated preparation
- Needs verification
Funding
Award size and how it is paid
- Award range
- Needs verification
- Currency
- USD
- Total programme budget
- Needs verification
- Support type
- Needs verification
- Co-funding
- Needs verification
- Matching fund
- Needs verification
- Disbursement
- Needs verification
- Note
- -
Eligibility
Can we actually apply?
SBIR/STTR 은 미국 중소기업만 지원할 수 있습니다(Small Business Act 법정 요건). • 계열사를 포함해 상시 종업원 500명 이하 • 미국 시민 또는 영주권자 1인 이상이 50%를 초과해 직접 소유·지배 • 미국 내 사업장을 두고 주로 미국 내에서 사업을 영위할 것 • 수행책임자(PI)의 주된 근무처가 신청 기업일 것 출처: https://www.sbir.gov/faq/eligibility-requirements
- Company age
- Needs verification
- Employees
- 0명 ~ 500명
- Revenue limits
- Needs verification
- Consortium
- Needs verification
Location Requirements
Geography and legal-entity conditions
- Primary country
- 🇺🇸 United States
- Also eligible
- None
- Foreign companies
- No
- Local entity
- Required
- Location condition
- 미국 내 사업장을 두고 미국 시민·영주권자가 50%를 초과해 소유한 중소기업만 신청할 수 있습니다(법정 요건).
Required Documents
Required/optional · issuer · difficulty · validity · cautions
Document requirements were not captured (needs verification). Check the official announcement.
Application Process
How you apply
Application process not captured.
Evaluation
Review process and criteria
Evaluation process not captured.
Timeline
Announcement → intake → review → agreement → execution
Process steps were not captured.
Equity & Financial Terms
Equity, loans and contract conditions
- Equity required
- Needs verification
- Loan
- Non-dilutive grant
- Duplicate funding
- Needs verification
- IP ownership
- Needs verification
- Deliverable ownership
- Needs verification
- Exclusivity
- Needs verification
- Right of first refusal
- Needs verification
- Audit & settlement
- Needs verification
Risk Intelligence
Should we apply at all? — five dimensions plus an overall score (lower is safer)
No risk assessment yet. Re-analyse from Admin.
IP / Idea Protection
How much of your technology and idea you must disclose
No IP assessment yet.
AI Analysis
Pros · cons · difficulty · competition · attractiveness
From paperwork and review stages
Heuristic from award size and type
Amount, terms and IP combined
Weighted average of five dimensions
- Needs verification
- Needs verification
- Nothing flagged
Similar Programs
Comparable by type, country and technology
- Ground and Air Launched Drone Swarms Create a Self-Protecting Perimeter Using Autonomous AI
🇺🇸 United States · R&D program · U.S. Department of War — USAF
Needs verificationD-14 - Increasing competitiveness and resilience of multimodal freight transport and logistics for competitive supply chains
🇪🇺 European Union · R&D program · European Commission
€6.5MD-1 - ICU-in-a-Box: Autonomous Extracorporeal Multiple-Organ Support Therapies
🇺🇸 United States · R&D program · U.S. Department of War — DARPA
Needs verificationD-14 - Mobility
🇺🇸 United States · R&D program · National Science Foundation
Needs verificationD-273 - Other Mobility Topics
🇺🇸 United States · R&D program · National Science Foundation
Needs verificationD-273
Source & Provenance
Every value carries its source URL and fetch time
- Official URL
- https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/topics-app/
- Application URL
- https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/topics-app/
- Last fetched
- 2026.10.07
- Human review
- Not reviewed — check the official announcement
- First seen
- 2026.10.07
- Data status
- Auto-collected, not reviewed
- AI enrichment
- Needs verification
- PRIMARY
- HTMLSBIR/STTR 자격요건 (법정)
Fetched 2h ago
- HTML발주 기관 공식 공고
Fetched 2h ago
- · 2h ago — 최초 수집 (f8ad0d5c)