Passive Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) for Terminal Guidance

# Q&A Changes Summary **New Q&As Added (7 questions):** - Platform approach altitude & maneuvering (low-altitude vs. descent from above) - Platform type assumption (fixed-wing vs. multi-rotor for Phase I) - Target designation timing (pre-launch vs. in-flight datalink) - Imagery sources for operator familiarization (commercial satellite, ISR) - Pre-mission 3D models & satellite imagery scope - Simulation fidelity requirements (realistic sensor noise vs. idealized conditions) - Single-drone vs. swarm scenario scope **Key Clarifications in New Answers:** - Phase I focus: **multi-rotor for maximum maneuverability** - Terminal approach: **low-altitude maneuvering through/below canopy** - Target approval: **in-flight datalink assumed sufficient** - Imagery: **commercial satellite imagery baseline** - Pre-mission data: **onboard real-time perception only** (pre-computed models out of scope) - Simulation: **realistic platform dynamics required; algorithmic performance acceptable** - Scope: **single-drone feasibility only** (no swarm for Phase I)

**Key Changes to Q&A:** 1. **A1, Q5 completed**: Terminal success metric now explicitly defined as composite—all four elements (target track, obstacle avoidance, clutter navigation, intercept envelope) weighted equally. 2. **No new questions added**: All five Q&A sets remain the same. 3. **No material answer updates**: Existing answers on sensor passivity, real-time processing, target behavior, non-cooperative tracking, day/night DDIL operations, and compute flexibility remain unchanged. **Summary**: The primary change is completion of the previously pending A1Q5 response, clarifying that Phase I success requires balanced achievement across tracking, avoidance, clutter navigation, and intercept—not prioritization of any single metric.

# Q&A Changes Summary **New Q&A Added (Q1):** Five clarification questions on Phase I priorities, "significant degradation" interpretation, baseline comparisons, onboard logging requirements, and terminal success metrics. Government clarified that Phase I should prioritize simulator performance and SWaP analysis; added sensors must not degrade endurance, payload, flight dynamics, or mission effectiveness; baseline should be traditional direct-to-target visual (pixel-lock) guidance; and logging of navigation confidence, obstacle decisions, and drift estimates is required for post-test evaluation.

Status changed from Pre-Release to Open

# Q&A Changes Summary **New Question Added:** - Q1: Clarifies that terminal guidance range is a key Phase I deliverable, to be determined by speed + camera + compute analysis rather than pre-specified. **No Material Changes:** Questions Q2-Q5 remain identical to previous version with consistent answers on passive-only sensing, real-time processing requirements, non-cooperative tracking in denied environments, and day/night operations in DDIL settings. **Note:** Q4 and Q5 in the updated version appear truncated (Q5 cuts off at "14. Evaluation metrics..."), so full comparison of Phase I feasibility evidence and Phase II demonstration expectations cannot be completed.

**Summary of Q&A Changes:** **New Questions Added (Q3):** Seven substantive questions added covering sensing modalities, real-time processing requirements, target behavior assumptions, cooperative vs. non-cooperative tracking, environmental conditions, compute constraints, and Phase I evaluation metrics. **Key Clarifications:** - **Sensing:** Passive sensors only; near-infrared laser ranging explicitly prohibited (Q1, Q2) - **Target Behavior:** Targets assumed to maneuver erratically in non-cooperative, denied environments—not pre-defined trajectories - **Real-Time Processing:** Required onboard; no hard latency specs if performance criteria met - **Compute:** No specific platform mandates; solutions must not degrade Group 1 UAS performance - **Operations:** Day/night capable in rural/urban DDIL environments - **Phase I Metrics:** Success measured on target interdiction rates, obstacle avoidance reliability, and SWAP (not specific accuracy thresholds yet) **Notable:** Answers emphasize operational realism (adversarial targets, GPS denial, non-cooperative tracking) while maintaining flexibility on technical implementation details.

This content specifies technical requirements for autonomous terminal guidance of Group 1 drones in GPS-denied environments using passive sensors, requiring ROS2/Docker architecture, visual odometry at 100Hz, operation on edge devices (Jetson/Voxl2), and obstacle avoidance in forested/rural, maritime, and rubble terrain.

New opportunity: Passive Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) for Terminal Guidance