Back to news

March 14, 2019 | International, Land

DARPA Seeks Tools to Capture Underground Worlds in 3D

DARPA is seeking information on state-of-the-art technologies and methodologies for advanced mapping and surveying in support of the agency's Subterranean (SubT) Challenge. Georeferenced data – geographic coordinates tied to a map or image – could significantly improve the speed and accuracy of warfighters in time-sensitive active combat operations and disaster-related missions in the subterranean domain. Today, the majority of the underground environments are uncharted or inadequately mapped, including human-made tunnels, underground infrastructure, and natural cave networks.

Through the Request for Information, DARPA is looking for innovative technologies to collect highly accurate and reproducible ground-truth data for subterranean environments, which would potentially disrupt and positively leverage the subterranean domain without prohibitive cost and with less risk to human lives. These innovative technologies will allow for exploring and exploiting these dark and dirty environments that are too dangerous to deploy humans.

“What makes subterranean areas challenging for precision mapping and surveying – such as lack of GPS, constrained passages, dark or dust-filled air – is similar to what inhibits safe and speedy underground operations for our warfighters,” said Timothy Chung, program manager in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office (TTO). “Building an accurate three-dimensional picture is a key enabler to rapidly and remotely exploring and searching subterranean spaces.”

DARPA is looking for commercial products, software, and services available to enable high-fidelity, 3D mapping and surveying of underground environments. Of interest are available technologies that offer high accuracy and high resolution, with the ability to provide precise and reproducible survey points without reliance on substantial infrastructure (e.g., access to global fixes underground). Additionally, relevant software should also allow for generated data products to be easily manipulated, annotated, and rendered into 3D mesh objects for importing into simulation and game engine environments.

DARPA may select proposers to demonstrate their technologies or methods to determine feasibility of capabilities for potential use in the SubT Challenge in generating and sharing 3D datasets of underground environments.

Such accurately georeferenced data may aid in scoring the SubT competitors' performance in identifying and reporting the location of artifacts placed within the course. In addition, renderings from these data may provide DARPA with additional visualization assets to showcase competition activities in real-time and/or post-production.

Instructions for submissions, as well as full RFI details, are available on the Federal Business Opportunities website: https://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/DARPA/CMO/DARPA-SN-19-21/listing.html. Submissions are due at 1:00 p.m. EDT April 15, 2019. Please email questions to SubTChallenge@darpa.mil.

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2019-03-07

On the same subject

  • To up fighter readiness levels, Pentagon looks to retire older planes and fix supply chains

    October 12, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    To up fighter readiness levels, Pentagon looks to retire older planes and fix supply chains

    By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — With Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis issuing new guidancedemanding readiness for tactical air assets increase in just one year, the Pentagon is openly acknowledging that older planes will have to be retired and cannibalized for parts to make it happen. The department will also look to overhaul how it handles its supply chain, according to the department's No. 2 official. In a September memo, first reported by Defense News, Mattis ordered the Air Force, Navy and Marines to get the Pentagon's fleets of F-16, F-18, F-22 and F-35 fighters to a minimum of 80 percent mission ready. That would represent a major jump in readiness over a short period of time, raising skepticism amongst analysts. From a pure numbers-on-paper standpoint, the easiest way for getting readiness rates up on the fleet would involve retiring older, less ready aircraft — essentially increasing the percentage of good-to-go planes by reducing the overall size of the fleets. Such a move may not be popular on the Hill, which routinely complains about the size of the military compared with previous eras. But it's a logical step being endorsed by both Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan and Gen. Robert Neller, the Marine Corps chief of staff. “You gotta get rid of airplanes. At some point, you gotta get rid of the old ones,” Neller told reporters Wednesday at a Defense Writer's Group event, when asked how he would hit that 80 percent mark. Neller added that such a move has to be part of a broader spectrum of moves, including better quality parts from vendors, being more efficient with maintainers, and adjusting the flying hours for pilots to make sure the wings aren't being worn off on jets. “It's not going to be a single thing, so we've got to do our part,” he added. Speaking to reporters at the AUSA conference the same day, Shanahan seemed to zero in on the oldest Navy jets as ones that could be retired. “Well, when you look at the size of the fleet of the F-18s, you got [F-18A models] out there, then you look at what it would take to restore them to a certain level of readiness, you might say it's much easier just to retire those,” he said. “So, I mean, there's a mix of answers.” “It probably doesn't make sense to generate a lot of activity to make something that is older more reliable, but when you think about the joint strike fighter and the hundreds of those that we're going to take, 80 percent should be the minimum, OK? It shouldn't be some aspirational goal, it should be the minimum.” However, he pushed back at the idea that anyone will “game the system” to get those readiness percentages up. Commercial practices In the memo, Mattis specifically notes the commercial aviation industry is able to maintain higher readiness rates and directs the service to look that way for inspiration. “I am confident in our department's ability to generate additional capacity from our current aircraft inventory, alongside the commercial aviation industry's sustainment of high availability rates,” Mattis wrote. “As we seek to achieve our goals, we can learn from industry's benchmarks for measuring speed, cost and mission capability, as well as its best practices for implementing a sustainable, Department-wide system.” Shanahan, who will be the overall leader of the readiness rate improvement efforts, is a longtime Boeing executive who worked directly on a number of commercial jet production programs. And to him, there are absolutely lessons that can be drawn from passenger aviation. “A jet engine is a jet engine; no one will convince me otherwise,” he said. “I've lived in both worlds, I've been on more airplanes than anybody in the United States, I know these things, OK?” The deputy said his focus was on helping the service develop “methods, systems and practices” that will lead to systemic changes in how maintenance is done and provide dividends for years to come. “When you look at the F-18s, this is the same size of fleet as Southwest has. It's not a super-large fleet, they're all basically the same,” Shanahan noted. “So how do we put in place, you know, the support practices and the parts so that people aren't working as hard?” The need to keep part quality and quantity up were on display just a day after Shanahan and Neller's comments. On Thursday, the Pentagon ordered a temporary stop to flying the F-35 as it investigated a fuel tube inside the engines of the fleet. That same day, an F-22 crashed on its side following a landing gear malfunction. During his talk with reporters, the Navy was singled out as already having committed to improving their methodologies. And he called out the need to “restructure” how both the Navy and Air Force handle their supply chains — something he said will ultimately bleed over into maintenance beyond the four selected jet fleets. “The real end game to me is as a department, how do we end up with a single sustainment system? And what was good about this is that once you get the F-18 right, it spills over into the P-8, because they're side-by-side, so [the P-8 maintainers] going to be like, ‘Those guys, they're working a lot less hard than we are and they're getting much better results, why don't we just do it that way?' “And then as people see the methods they apply to shipbuilding or ship maintenance,” he added. Shawn Snow of Marine Corps Times contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/10/11/to-up-fighter-readiness-levels-pentagon-looks-to-retire-older-planes-and-fix-supply-chains

  • Opinion: Is Pressuring Allies To Pay More For Defense Worth The Cost?

    December 9, 2019 | International, Other Defence

    Opinion: Is Pressuring Allies To Pay More For Defense Worth The Cost?

    President Donald Trump appears to be getting his wish that U.S. allies pay more for their own defense, which begs the question: Is the victory worth the cost? Pushing allies to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense is not a new concept. Trump's predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama both argued for greater burden sharing, and Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine's Crimea region had allies starting to move toward that benchmark. Arguably, Trump's “America First” drumbeat is getting NATO allies to pay a bigger share of the cost of their defense three decades after the end of the Cold War. Military spending by European NATO nations and Canada has risen 4.6% this year, and the majority of allies have plans to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense by 2024, according to NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg. Meanwhile, the U.S. is on a path to dial back its contribution from 22% of NATO's total funding to 16%. “This is a direct result of President Trump making clear our expectations that these Europeans would step up to help secure their own people,” says U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Unfortunately, Trump has not stopped there, openly expressing disdain for an organization established to guard against the kind of territorial expansion undertaken by the former Soviet Union. He has hurled sophomoric barbs at steadfast allies such as the UK, Germany and Canada, while refusing to criticize Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, the architect of both the Crimea invasion and Moscow's campaign to interfere in U.S. elections. For the first phase of the Trump presidency, his cabinet tried to temper those go-it-alone impulses. Then-Defense Secretary James Mattis sought to reassure allies of U.S. support for their security. But more recent White House appointees have been less willing to cross their boss. Even more damaging was Trump's abrupt decision to withdraw most U.S. forces from Syria, disgracefully abandoning America's Kurdish allies to the benefit of Turkey, Russia and Iran and leaving Europe more exposed to attacks from Islamic extremists. “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,” French President Emmanuel Macron told The Economist. Trump sees NATO in a transactional way, “as a project in which the United States acts as a sort of geopolitical umbrella, but the trade-off is that there has to be commercial exclusivity,” he added. “It's an arrangement for buying American.” While Macron is calling for a reconsideration of what NATO means in light of reduced American commitment, European nations are not waiting. They are building up their own defense industrial base. In 2017, the EU created the Permanent Structured Cooperation initiative, which is pursuing research toward new missiles, aircraft, missile defense and electronic attack capabilities. U.S. efforts to have its companies included in the work have so far been brushed off. Trump's hardball approach also is being applied to key allies in Asia that have long served as a bulwark against a rising China. The U.S. alliance with South Korea is now reviewed annually, instead of every four years. And after signing a deal in February that calls for South Korea to pay nearly $1 billion to maintain the U.S. military presence there, Washington is now demanding that Seoul pay $4.7 billion annually. Before an agreement was reached, the U.S. walked out of the talks. The Trump administration also is looking for more cash from Japan, calling for more than triple Tokyo's $1.7 billion contribution toward hosting U.S. troops in its country. These requests are straining longstanding alliances. South Korea is edging closer to China, while Japan, which has a strong industrial base, might partner with the UK on its Tempest fighter program. To be sure, U.S. defense exports remain near an all-time high. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced $55.4 billion in potential Foreign Military Sales in fiscal 2019, about the same as the prior year. But there are indications that Trump's pay-up-now methods may lead to an erosion in future sales. Asking allies to contribute more for their own defense certainly has merit, but the wider risks to U.S. global interests cannot be ignored. Can 70-year-old alliances survive if the leading partner vocally questions their value? And if the alliances crack, what would that mean for the U.S. military industrial base? “The more our alliances fray,” says Eric Edelman, a former U.S. undersecretary of defense, “the less interest people have in buying U.S. defense goods and services.” https://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-pressuring-allies-pay-more-defense-worth-cost

  • Leonardo DRS Awarded Contract for 150+ P5 Combat Training Systems for F-35 - Seapower

    June 28, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Leonardo DRS Awarded Contract for 150+ P5 Combat Training Systems for F-35 - Seapower

    ARLINGTON, Va. — Leonardo DRS Inc.’s Airborne & Intelligence Systems business division was awarded a contract from Cubic Mission and Performance Solutions (CMPS), a division of Cubic Corporation, to deliver additional P5 Combat Training Systems (P5CTS) for the F-35 Lightning II, Leonardo...

All news