startup-tips
Sign in
UpcomingR&D programAuto-collected, not reviewed

Validated Modular Autonomy for Undersea Multi-Vehicle Coordination

🇺🇸 United States·U.S. Department of War — NAVY(Government)
Funding
Needs verification
Deadline
2027.01.06
D-61
Official noticeApplyOverseas applicants not eligible ExportPDF

Overview

What you need to judge this in 30 seconds

STTR · Phase: BOTH · Topic DON27TZ02-NV004 · Solicitation 27.TZ

Autonomous undersea vehicles performing expeditionary missions require state-of-the-art cooperative sensing and engagement capabilities. The Navy seeks to enhance those capabilities with modular software designed for reliability and operational effectiveness. The advancement sought is development of a modular coordination layer extending existing single vehicle with decentralized multi-vehicle behaviors to enable autonomous decision making under degraded communications, sensing, and PNT conditions. The software prototype needs to take in mission requirements provided by existing Navy command and control (C2) systems and sensor data provided by multiple platforms and use those inputs to coordinate mission performance with other vehicles. It should be compatible with modular unmanned autonomy architectures already in use by the Navy, such as the Open Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (OpenAUV) architecture and the Robot Operating System 2 (ROS 2). Within those architectures, the prototype must interface with existing autonomy designed for single-vehicle operations with minimal changes to already established systems. When the prototype is disabled or unnecessary, vehicle performance and behavior must conform to what would be expected of an unmodified single vehicle. The multi-mission management functions of the software prototype need to use a decentralized C2 scheme that is robust in low-information environments and that degrades gracefully if communications or sensing are limited. The C2 scheme must demonstrate sufficient scalability to effectively manage many vehicles: tens to hundreds. Real-time C2 is a must. The prototype should assume the primary sensing mode of each vehicle is acoustic. Realistic sensors include forward-look and side-scan sonar, possibly with a synthetic aperture. Cameras may be available, but if so, their field of view should not be assumed to allow for keeping other vehicles in sight. Realistic communications include acoustic modems with transmission rates of 5000 bps or less, possibly much less. Communications methods with higher transmission rates are unlikely to be available and may only be possible at extremely close range. The prototype should assume that access to radar and satellite systems is extremely limited or non-existent. In particular, the prototype should not depend on regular access to global positioning system (GPS) data, and it should take into account the possibility that each vehicle is subject to position, navigation, and timing errors that increase in magnitude as each mission progresses. The software prototype must include as an essential component a method of continuous validation that establishes and quantifies risk and trust for all autonomous decision-making, with an emphasis on repeatability. Deliverables must include the documentation and software necessary to implement this continuous validation method, as well as a report quantifying the efficacy of the method. The ideal prototype will be mission agnostic, instead focusing on a generalized set of multi-vehicle behaviors and objectives. The software prototype should minimize potential negative impacts on mission effectiveness, vehicle endurance, vehicle survivability, and operator workload. The prototype can include enabling hardware, provided that such hardware can be installed on existing autonomous undersea vehicles. The complexity of any vehicle modifications should be minimized. The prototype software and any accompanying hardware should also minimize their overall power consumption. Deliverable reports should include analysis identifying and quantifying any such impacts.

Category
R&D
Industry
Needs verification
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?

Check whether we can applyEnter where you are incorporated, how old you are and how big — we compare it against this announcement and tell you what would unlock it. No sign-in needed.

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

Preparation difficultyNeeds verification

From paperwork and review stages

Competition (estimate)Needs verification

Heuristic from award size and type

AttractivenessNeeds verification

Amount, terms and IP combined

Overall riskNeeds verification

Weighted average of five dimensions

Pros
  • Needs verification
Cons
  • Needs verification
Cautions
  • Nothing flagged

Similar Programs

Comparable by type, country and technology

Source & Provenance

Every value carries its source URL and fetch time

Last fetched
2026.11.06
Human review
Not reviewed — check the official announcement
First seen
2026.11.06
Data status
Auto-collected, not reviewed
AI enrichment
Needs verification
Snapshot history
  • · 3h ago — 최초 수집 (4446aeec)