DAF SBIR DAF26BZ06-DV037: Low-Cost Multi-Function Ku-Band RF System for Prompt Strike Weapons

Quick Answer

DAF26BZ06-DV037 is a Department of the Air Force SBIR Direct to Phase II topic under the DAF 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. The Air Force has a high priority requirement for much lower-cost long-range air-launched prompt strike weapons that operate in the very high supersonic flight regime, and this topic funds the seeker that goes in them. The objective is a Ku-band multi-function RF seeker system that can be manufactured at scale, supporting radar, passive direction-finding, and line-of-sight datalink modes. Low unit production cost and high-volume manufacturability are stated as key goals. Awards are up to $2,000,000 for up to 24 months, with a 35 page technical volume limit. The topic opens September 23, 2026 and closes October 21, 2026 through the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal.

Two things about this topic are unusual enough that they belong in the first paragraph. First, venture capital, hedge fund, and private equity majority-owned small businesses are not eligible under this announcement. That is the opposite of the rule in the DAF Release 6 CSO topics, and it disqualifies a meaningful share of the defense hardware startup market. Second, the Phase II deliverable is a design, not hardware. The offeror will design and model a prototype to Critical Design Review level. Physical prototype build, laboratory testing, hardware-in-the-loop testing, and flight experiment integration all happen in Phase III with Air Force Research Laboratory 6.3 funding.

Topic At a Glance

Topic number: DAF26BZ06-DV037

Title: Low-Cost Multi-Function Ku-Band RF System for Prompt Strike Weapons

Solicitation: Department of the Air Force 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), Release 6, Direct to Phase II

Solicitation instrument: BAA, not a CSO. This is a separate solicitation from the DAF 2026 SBIR CSO Release 6 topics, with different rules

Program type: Direct to Phase II (D2P2)

Award maximum value: $2,000,000

Award maximum duration: 24 months

Technical volume page limit: 35 pages or slides

OUSD (R&E) Critical Technology Area: Scaled Hypersonics (SHY)

Component Technology Priority Area: Integrated Sensing and Cyber

Projected CMMC level requirement: Level 2 (Self)

Export control status: Restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130 and EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774

Venture capital, hedge fund, private equity majority ownership: not eligible under this announcement

Phase II end state: Critical Design Review level design and model, not built hardware

Production cost targets: $50,000 threshold, $30,000 objective, per flight unit at volume production

Physical envelope: must fit within a 6 inch interior diameter cylinder

Interface standard: WOSA Seeker Domain interface specification

Named Phase III transition targets: AFLCMC/EB and other Department of Defense users

Topic open date: September 23, 2026

Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026, at the time stated in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA

Selection timeline: within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close, meaning on or about January 19, 2027

Submission portal: DSIP at dodsbirsttr.mil

Keywords: seeker, seekers, AESA, multifunction RF, radar, software-defined RF

Note on the deadline time. The DAF instructions direct firms to the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA for the proposal submission deadline date and time rather than restating it. DoW SBIR deadlines are ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern on the close date. Confirm the exact time on the live DSIP topic posting and do not plan around an end-of-day deadline.

Read This First: Venture Capital Ownership Is Disqualifying Here

The DAF Release 6 BAA instructions state that small business concerns owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are not eligible to submit applications or receive awards for DAF topics.

That single sentence deserves more attention than anything else in this document, because it is the reverse of what the DAF Release 6 CSO instructions say. The CSO documents covering the other Release 6 DAF topics state that such firms are eligible. This BAA says they are not.

Practically, that means a defense hardware company with majority ownership spread across multiple venture funds, which describes a large share of the companies actually capable of designing a Ku-band multifunction seeker, cannot compete for this topic. If you are in that position, verify your status against the definition before you invest proposal effort. The rule concerns majority ownership in part by multiple VCOCs, hedge funds, or private equity funds, so the analysis turns on your specific cap table rather than on whether you have taken venture money at all.

Two pieces of advice follow. If your ownership structure is anywhere near this line, raise it with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk during the open period, since the DAF explicitly encourages early clarifying questions and warns that late ones constrain its ability to respond. And if you are reading this page alongside our pages on the DAF Release 6 CSO topics, do not carry the eligibility conclusion from one to the other. They are different solicitations.

BAA Versus CSO: Why This Document Is Not the Same as the Other DAF Release 6 Instructions

The DAF issued Release 6 topics under two different solicitation instruments. The topics numbered with BX, including the five Direct to Phase II topics and the one Phase I topic, sit under the 2026 SBIR Commercial Solutions Opening. This topic, numbered BZ, sits under the 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement.

The two sets of component instructions are largely parallel in structure, and much of the language is identical, but they are separate documents governing separate solicitations. The differences that matter are these.

Venture capital, hedge fund, and private equity majority-owned firms are ineligible under the BAA and eligible under the CSO. This is the consequential one.

Evaluation criteria are not restated in the BAA component instructions. The CSO instructions spell out Criteria A, B, and C in descending order of importance. This BAA document says only that proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria outlined in the FY26 SBIR BAA Section 6.0. You must read Section 6.0 of the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA to know how you will be scored, and no summary of the CSO criteria is a substitute.

The address change notification uses a different subject line: "FY26 SBIR BAA Address Change" rather than the CSO version.

References throughout point to the FY26 SBIR BAA rather than the CSO for cover sheet instructions, proprietary information marking, technical data rights, and protest procedures.

The performance of work language in this document reads differently, and appears to contain an error, which the next section addresses.

The Performance of Work Problem, and How to Handle It

The BAA component instructions contain three statements about how much work you must perform yourself. Read together they do not cleanly agree, and one of them appears to be a drafting error.

Under Performance of Work Requirements and Location of Work, the document states that for Phase I, a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the awardee, measured by both direct and indirect costs, not including profit.

That sentence says Phase I, inside a Direct to Phase II instruction document where no Phase I awards are made. The parallel CSO Direct to Phase II instructions say Phase II and set the floor at one-third. The DAF Phase I instructions elsewhere in Release 6 say Phase I and set it at two-thirds. So the most likely reading is that the Phase I paragraph was carried into the Direct to Phase II document by mistake.

Under Consultants and Subcontractors, the document states that in accordance with the SBA SBIR Policy Directive, a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, and that such requests can only be made upon proposal submission.

Under the Cost Volume subcontracts discussion, the document states that the proposed total of all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements may not exceed one-half of the total contract price, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer.

The conservative course, and the one we would recommend, is to plan on performing at least two-thirds of the research or analytical effort in house and keeping all consultant, facility lease, and subcontract costs combined below one-half of the total contract price. That satisfies every reading of the document as written, including the strictest one. On a seeker design program that often means resisting the temptation to subcontract large portions of the RF front end or the digital back end design.

If your teaming structure cannot meet two-thirds, the document provides a process, and you have to use it twice. Requests for Performance of Work deviations must be made prior to submission during the topic open period, and again as part of the initial proposal submission. For requests prior to the initial proposal submission, the DAF will consider the request and approve or disapprove the applicant proceeding with DSIP submission. Upon proposal receipt, the DAF will again consider such requests for approval for the resultant award. Because the pre-submission request has to happen inside the four week open window, this is a first-week action, not a last-week one. It is also the natural moment to ask the One Help Desk which threshold actually governs.

All R/R&D work must be performed in the United States. Based on a rare and unique circumstance, the DAF may approve a particular portion of the R/R&D work to be performed or obtained in a country outside the United States, and the awarding Funding Agreement officer must approve each specific condition in writing. Applicants seeking that approval must make the request with their initial proposal submission, and the DAF will not consider these requests prior to proposal submission.

What the Air Force Is Actually Looking For

The requirement behind the topic

The Department of the Air Force has a high priority requirement for much lower-cost long-range air-launched prompt strike weapons that operate in the very high supersonic flight regime. Toward that requirement, the objective of this topic is to develop a Ku-band multi-function RF seeker system that can be manufactured at scale, supporting RF modes including radar, passive direction-finding, and line-of-sight datalinks. Low unit production cost and high-volume manufacturability are key goals of this topic.

The problem statement is economic before it is technical. Current multifunction radar systems for use onboard various types of small airborne platforms are prohibitively expensive to procure at scale, and the Air Force says this is especially true for systems engineered for use in demanding regimes at peak velocity greater than Mach 3 but under Mach 5. Note that the topic labels that velocity band "high subsonic," which is inconsistent with the stated Mach numbers and with the objective's own description of a very high supersonic flight regime. Read the Mach 3 to Mach 5 figures as the governing statement of the environment.

Because affordability at volume is the point, a proposal that delivers exquisite RF performance without a manufacturing and cost story has missed the topic. Conversely, cost reduction that sacrifices the performance floor also fails, because Phase II requires meeting or exceeding the RF performance metrics of a contemporary, similarly-sized multifunction radar system.

The technical approach the Air Force expects

The effort will leverage recent advancements in RF technology, high-temperature materials science, and associated manufacturing to design a complete multi-function Ku-band RF system to a Critical Design Review level of maturity.

Those three enabling areas are named deliberately and each maps to a different part of the problem. RF technology advancement points toward highly integrated, software-defined architectures, which the topic references reinforce by citing two papers on RF system-on-chip based multi-role sensors. High-temperature materials science addresses the thermal environment of sustained Mach 3 to Mach 5 flight, which is what separates this from a subsonic small-platform radar. Associated manufacturing is the volume production story that the cost targets demand.

The hard requirements

Four requirements are stated explicitly and should be treated as pass or fail gates in your proposal.

Physical envelope. The system must fit within a 6 inch interior diameter cylinder, whether conformally mounted or forward mounted. The Phase II description repeats this, adding that the offeror's design will size and package the front end and back-end RF electronics to fit within that envelope. The fact that both conformal and forward mounting are named means aperture architecture is a real design choice you should address rather than assume.

Interface standard. The design must conform to the WOSA Seeker Domain interface specification. Open systems architecture conformance is a stated requirement, not an option, and it constrains how you partition the system. If you have not worked to that specification before, understanding it is a prerequisite to writing a credible proposal.

Modes. The system must incorporate imaging radar modes, passive direction-finding modes, and height of burst fuze sensing modes. Combined with the objective's mention of line-of-sight datalinks, that is four distinct functions sharing one aperture and back end. Multi-function here means genuinely multi-function.

Maturity. The Phase II output is a design at Critical Design Review level of maturity.

The cost targets, which are the center of the topic

Phase II places emphasis on lowering the flight-unit production cost at volume production to a threshold of $50,000 and an objective of $30,000, while meeting or exceeding the RF performance metrics of a contemporary, similarly-sized multifunction radar system.

Those numbers are the heart of this topic and they are aggressive for a Ku-band multifunction seeker with imaging radar, passive direction finding, datalink, and fuze sensing packaged for a Mach 3 to Mach 5 environment. Your proposal needs a defensible cost model at volume, not a prototype bill of materials. Address component integration and part count reduction, wafer-scale or highly integrated RF and digital solutions, aperture manufacturing approach, thermal management approach and its cost, test and calibration cost per unit which is frequently underestimated in phased array production, and the volume assumptions your model depends on.

Be explicit about the volume at which you hit the threshold and objective. A cost model that only closes at a hundred thousand units per year and a model that closes at two thousand are very different propositions, and the evaluator will want to know which one you are describing.

What Phase II actually produces

For this Direct to Phase II topic, the offeror will design and model a prototype for Critical Design Review level, a complete Ku-band multi-function radar system.

Read that carefully. The verbs are design and model. This is a design maturation program culminating in CDR-level documentation and modeling, plus a cost and manufacturability case. It is not a hardware build program, and a proposal that promises fabricated and tested hardware within the $2,000,000 and 24 month envelope is misreading the topic and inviting doubt about whether you understood it.

That framing also tells you where your effort belongs: modeling and simulation fidelity, design analysis, packaging and thermal analysis, WOSA conformance documentation, producibility analysis, and the cost model. Existing hardware you can point to is feasibility evidence, not a Phase II deliverable.

Phase III

Following successful completion of the Phase II objectives and the culmination of a CDR-level system design, the Air Force Research Laboratory and its transition partner will use 6.3 funding to implement a prototype of the radar system designed in Phase II, perform laboratory, hardware-in-the-loop, and field testing, and then integrate it into a 6.3 flight experiment for further technology maturation. TRL and MRL gaps will be identified and addressed in order to transition the system to AFLCMC/EB and other Department of Defense users.

This is one of the more concrete Phase III descriptions in the Release 6 portfolio, and it is worth using. The government has told you that AFRL and a transition partner will fund the build with 6.3 dollars, that the test sequence is laboratory then hardware-in-the-loop then field then flight experiment, and that the eventual customer is AFLCMC/EB. Both TRL and MRL gaps are named, which reinforces that manufacturing readiness is being assessed alongside technical readiness. Your Relationship with Future R/R&D Efforts section should track this sequence and identify the specific TRL and MRL gaps your Phase II design will leave, along with how Phase III closes them.

The cited references

The topic cites two papers, both about RF system-on-chip based sensors: "ARESTOR: A Multi-role RF Sensor based on the Xilinx RFSoC" by Nial Peters, Colin Horne, and Matthew Ritchie, IEEE Xplore, 2 June 2022; and "Prototyping a Radar Sensor based on a Xilinx RFSoC Device for Detect-And-Avoid onboard Small UAV" by Valentine Wasik, L. Casadebaig, Benjamin Gabard, and Benjamin Gigleux, 2023 20th European Radar Conference.

Both references point in the same direction, toward a software-defined, highly integrated RF system-on-chip approach as the affordability enabler, which is also consistent with the software-defined RF keyword. Read them. Citing and engaging with the government's own references, including where you think a different approach is better, is a cheap and effective way to signal that you did the work.

The Feasibility Requirement

Direct to Phase II means you must document that you already completed the Phase I equivalent work outside the SBIR program. The DAF will not consider your proposal if you fail to demonstrate technical merit and feasibility have been established, or if you fail to demonstrate the feasibility effort was substantially performed by the applicant or the principal investigator. Proposals will be disqualified and not evaluated if the Phase I equivalency documentation does not establish the proposed technical approach's feasibility and technical merit.

What this topic requires specifically

For this Direct to Phase II topic, the offeror must have previously demonstrated Phase I-type feasibility by demonstrating the successful system design, modeling, and hardware specifications of a multifunction radar system for use in an embedded system application. The feasibility demonstration shall also describe a baseline conceptual design for the proposed multifunction radar system.

Three elements sit inside that requirement. Successful system design, modeling, and hardware specifications, meaning documented design work and modeling results plus specifications at the hardware level. A multifunction radar system, so a single-function radar heritage is a weaker fit and you should say how it extends. For use in an embedded system application, meaning integrated into a constrained platform rather than a benchtop or standalone instrument.

Plus a fourth element that is a deliverable rather than a heritage claim: the feasibility demonstration shall also describe a baseline conceptual design for the proposed multifunction radar system. That is forward-looking. You need to put a baseline concept for the Ku-band seeker into your feasibility documentation, not only evidence of past work.

The general D2P2 rules

Applicants must demonstrate completion of research and development through means other than the SBIR and STTR programs to establish the feasibility of the proposed Phase II effort based on the criteria outlined in the topic description.

Feasibility documentation cannot be based upon or logically extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work. This authority exists specifically for companies that matured technology outside the SBIR pipeline.

Feasibility efforts detailed must have been substantially performed by the applicant or the principal investigator.

If technology in the feasibility documentation is subject to intellectual property rights, the applicant must provide IP rights assertions, and applicants shall provide a short summary for each item asserted with less than unlimited rights describing the restriction's nature and the intellectual property intended for use in the proposed research. The document points to the FY26 SBIR BAA for technical data rights information.

One helpful mechanical detail this BAA states more clearly than the parallel CSO document: feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations. That means your design heritage, modeling results, hardware specifications, and baseline conceptual design can be documented at whatever length the evidence requires without eating into your 35 page technical volume. Use that.

If appropriate, include a reference or works cited list as the last page. Do not include marketing material, which will not be evaluated.

Funding Allowance and Cost Structure

Award ceiling

Up to $2,000,000 across up to 24 months. The topic index states that proposals in excess of this amount will not be considered for evaluation or award, and proposals in excess of this duration will not be considered for evaluation or award.

The instructions also note that any per-award or per-topic funding caps are budgetary estimates only and more or less funding may become available. Multiple procurements are planned and anticipated to be awarded as a result of the topic, each proposal is considered a separate procurement and will be evaluated on its own merit, and the Government may award all, some, or none of the proposals. Funding decisions are made with complete disregard to the other awards under the same topic.

Note the difference between the two dollar figures in this topic. The $2,000,000 is the design contract. The $50,000 threshold and $30,000 objective are per-unit flight hardware production costs at volume that your design must achieve. Do not conflate them.

Contract type and fee

Generally firm-fixed-price contracts are appropriate for Phase II awards. In accordance with the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive, Phase II contracts must include profit or fee.

A significant procedural note: if no exceptions are taken to an applicant's proposal, the Government may award a contract without exchanges. Therefore the applicant's initial proposal should contain the applicant's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. If there are questions regarding the award document, contact the Phase I Contracting Officer identified on the cover page. The Government reserves the right to reopen exchanges later if the Contracting Officer determines doing so to be necessary.

Technical and Business Assistance

The DAF will provide up to $50,000 per Phase II award, in addition to the per-topic total identified in the DSIP Volume 3 Cost Proposal. Applicants may elect to use 50 percent of this TABA allocation, meaning $25,000, on a first SBIR Phase II award and 50 percent, meaning $25,000, on a sequential SBIR Phase II award.

Awardees can only use TABA funding for the activities outlined in 15 U.S.C. 638(q)(1) and the purposes outlined in 15 U.S.C. 638(q)(1)(A) through (E). Eligible activities include access to a network of scientists and engineers engaged in a wide range of technologies, assistance with product sales, intellectual property protections, cybersecurity assistance, market research, market validation, development of regulations and manufacturing plans, and access to technical and business literature available through online databases.

For this topic, development of manufacturing plans is the standout. High-volume manufacturability is a stated key goal, the cost targets are aggressive, and Phase III explicitly names MRL gaps alongside TRL gaps. TABA support for manufacturing planning is directly on point.

Those activities can be undertaken in furtherance of the following purposes: making better technical decisions concerning such projects, solving technical problems which arise during the conduct of such projects, minimizing technical risks associated with such projects, developing and commercializing new commercial products and processes resulting from such projects including intellectual property protections, and screening for potential foreign involvement in technology development or commercialization activities.

Requests for TABA funding creditable to a TABA provider must include the following information or will be subject to denial: the TABA providers; the providers' point of contact, email address, and phone number; an explanation of the provider's unique qualifications to provide the TABA service; the tasks that will be performed by the provider, including the purpose and objective of the assistance, with the task milestone list tracking to the milestone payment schedule otherwise provided by the applicant; and total provider cost, number of hours, and labor rates, with average or blended rates acceptable.

If proposing TABA funding to hire new staff, augment staff, or direct staff to conduct or participate in training activities consistent with the purpose of TABA, the following must be included or may be subject to denial: names and positions, business need to be filled or training to be provided; number of employees to be hired, augmented, or directed to participate in training activities; qualifications of employees hired or augmented, or detailed need for training; tasks that will be performed, including both a description of the activity and the purpose that it will serve; and total staff or training cost, number of hours, and labor rates.

A detailed request for TABA funding must be included in the Volume 5 Supporting Documents in DSIP. TABA requests that only specify a TABA request value in the Volume 3 Cost Proposal will not be considered.

Cost volume expectations

A detailed cost proposal must be submitted, and cost proposal information will be treated as proprietary. Proposed costs must be provided by both individual cost element and contractor fiscal year in sufficient detail to determine the basis for estimates, as well as the purpose, necessity, and reasonableness of each. This information will expedite award if the proposal is selected. Cost proposal attachments do not count toward proposal page limitations.

Direct labor. Identify key personnel by name, if possible, and labor category, if not. Direct labor hours, labor overhead or fringe benefits, and actual hourly rates for each individual are necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine whether these hours, fringe rates, and hourly rates are fair and reasonable. On a design and modeling program, this will be nearly the entire budget, so it deserves the most care. RF engineers, digital designers, packaging and thermal engineers, and producibility analysts should be visible as named individuals or clearly defined categories with hours that match the task structure.

Direct cost materials. Costs for materials, parts, and supplies must be justified and supported. Provide an itemized list of types, quantities, prices, and where appropriate purpose. If computer or software purchases are planned, detailed information such as manufacturer, price quotes, proposed use, and support for the need will be required. On this topic, electromagnetic simulation, circuit and system modeling, and thermal analysis licenses are likely the significant items, and they need quotes and justification.

Other direct costs. This includes specialized services such as machining or milling, special test and analysis, and costs for temporary use or lease of specialized facilities and equipment. Provide usage hours expected, rates, and sources, as well as a brief discussion concerning the purpose and justification. Proposals including leased hardware must include an adequate lease versus purchase rationale. Anechoic chamber or near-field range time, if any is planned for design validation, belongs here.

Special tooling, special test equipment, and material. The inclusion of equipment and materials will be carefully reviewed relative to need and appropriateness to the work proposed. Special tooling and special test equipment purchases must, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, be advantageous to the Government and relate directly to the effort. These toolings or equipment should not be of a type that an applicant would otherwise possess in the normal course of business. These may include such items as innovative instrumentation or automatic test equipment.

Subcontracts. Subcontract costs must be supported with copies of subcontract agreements. Agreement documents must adequately describe the work to be performed and cost bases. The agreement document should include a statement of work, assigned personnel, hours and rates, materials if any, and proposed travel if any. A letter from a subcontractor agreeing to perform a task or tasks at a fixed price is not considered sufficient. The proposed total of all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements may not exceed one-half of the total contract price, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer. The prime contractor must accomplish price analysis, including reasonableness, of the proposed subcontractor costs. If based on comparison with prior efforts, identify the basis upon which the prior prices were determined reasonable. If price analysis techniques are inadequate or the FAR requires subcontractor cost or pricing data submission, provide a cost analysis, which includes but is not limited to consideration of materials, labor, travel, other direct costs, and proposed profit rates.

Consultants. For each consultant, provide a separate agreement letter briefly stating the service to be provided, hours required, and hourly rate, as well as a short, concise resume.

Travel. Each effort should include, at a minimum, a kickoff or interim meeting. Travel costs must be justified as required for the effort. Include destinations, number of trips, number of travelers per trip, airfare, per diem, lodging, and ground transportation. Per diem and lodging rates may be found in the Joint Travel Regulation, Volume 2. On a program that culminates in a Critical Design Review, budget for the design review itself and for interim technical interchange meetings with AFRL, since Phase III depends on AFRL picking the design up.

Indirect costs. Indicate proposed rates' bases, for example budgeted or actual rates per fiscal year. The proposal should identify the specific rates used and allocation bases to which they are applied. Do not propose composite rates; proposed rates and applications per fiscal year throughout the anticipated performance period are required.

Non-SBIR governmental or private investment is allowed. However, it is not required, nor will it be a proposal evaluation factor.

Export Control, Which Is Central on a Seeker Topic

The technology within this topic is restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services including export of sensitive technical data, and the EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items.

Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their countries of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work tasks intended for accomplishment by the foreign nationals in accordance with section 3.5 of the Announcement. Offerors are advised that foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under U.S. export control laws.

A weapon seeker is about as clearly ITAR-controlled as a technology gets, so treat this as a hard staffing constraint rather than a disclosure exercise. In the technical volume, identify all non-U.S. citizens expected to be involved in the project as direct employees, subcontractors, or consultants, and for those individuals, in addition to technical resumes, provide countries of origin, type of visas or work permits held, and identify the tasks they are anticipated to perform.

Foreign nationals, also known as foreign persons, means any person who is not a citizen or national of the United States, not a lawful permanent resident, and not a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b. All applicants proposing to use foreign nationals must follow the FY26 SBIR BAA and disclose this information regardless of whether the topic is subject to ITAR restrictions.

When the topic area is subject to export control, these individuals, if permitted to participate, are limited to work in the public domain. Further, tasks assigned must not be capable of assimilation into an understanding of the project's overall objectives. This prevents foreign citizens from acting in key positions such as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer. Additional information may be requested during negotiations in order to verify foreign citizens' eligibility to perform on a contract awarded under this BAA.

The following will apply to all projects with military or dual-use applications developing beyond fundamental research, meaning basic and applied research ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community. The Contractor shall comply with all U.S. export control laws and regulations, including ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120 through 130 and the EAR 15 CFR Parts 730 through 799, in the performance of this contract. In the absence of available license exemptions or exceptions, the Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate licenses or other approvals, if required, for exports of, including deemed exports of, hardware, technical data, and software, or for the provision of technical assistance. The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining export licenses, if required, before utilizing foreign persons in the performance of this contract, including instances where the work is to be performed on-site at any Government installation, whether in or outside the United States, where the foreign person will have access to export-controlled technologies including technical data or software. The Contractor shall be responsible for all regulatory record keeping requirements associated with the use of licenses and license exemptions or exceptions. The Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that these provisions apply to its subcontractors.

If you are asserting export-controlled status, a copy of the certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, or evidence of application submission must be included in Volume 5. The form, instructions, and FAQs are available at the United States and Canada Joint Certification Program website. DD Form 2345 approval will be required if the proposal is selected for award.

Proposal Structure: The Seven Volumes

Formatting

Proposals should be direct, concise, and informative. Type shall be no smaller than 11-point on standard 8.5 by 11 paper, with one-inch margins and pages consecutively numbered. Applicants are discouraged from including promotional and non-programmatic items. If included, such material will count toward the page limit.

The technical volume limit for this topic is 35 pages or slides, per the topic index. Pages or slides in excess of this number will not be considered during evaluations. The preferred submission format is Portable Document Format. Graphics must be distinguishable in black and white, which matters for a topic where you will want to show antenna patterns, block diagrams, and packaging layouts. Virus-check all submissions.

The complete proposal must be submitted electronically through DSIP. Ensure the complete technical volume and additional cost volume information is included in this sole submission.

Fraud, Waste, and Abuse training must be completed prior to proposal submission. When training is complete and certified, DSIP will indicate completion of the Volume 6 requirement, and the proposal cannot be submitted until the training is complete. The DAF recommends completing submission early, as site traffic is heavy prior to solicitation close, causing system lag, and states plainly not to wait until the last minute. The DAF will not be responsible for proposals not completely submitted prior to the deadline due to system inaccessibility unless advised by DoW, and will not accept alternative means of submission outside of DSIP.

Also note the criminal warning the instructions include: knowingly and willfully making false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations may be a felony under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, punishable by a fine up to $250,000, up to five years in prison, or both.

Volume 1, Cover Sheet

Complete the proposal Cover Sheet in accordance with the instructions provided via DSIP. The technical abstract should include a brief description of the program objectives, a description of the effort, anticipated benefits and commercial applications of the proposed research, and a list of keywords and terms.

The technical abstract of each successful proposal will be submitted to the Office of the Secretary of War for publication and therefore must not contain proprietary or classified information. If selected for funding, the proposal's technical abstract and discussion of anticipated benefits will be publicly released. On a seeker topic, be deliberate about what goes in the abstract, since it will become public.

If a proposal submitted in response to this BAA is substantially the same as another proposal submitted previously, currently, or in the process of being funded by another federal agency, DoW component, or the DAF, the applicant must so indicate on the Cover Sheet.

Volume 2, Technical Volume

The technical proposal includes all items listed below in the order provided.

Table of contents, located immediately after the Cover Sheet.

Glossary of acronyms and abbreviations used in the proposal.

Milestone identification, including a program schedule with all key milestones identified.

Identification and significance of the problem or opportunity, briefly referencing the specific technical problem or opportunity to be pursued under this effort.

Phase II technical objectives, detailing the specific objectives of the Phase II work and describing the technical approach and methods to be used in meeting these objectives, including an assessment of the potential commercial application for each objective.

Work plan. The work plan shall be a separate and distinct part of the proposal package, using a page break to divide it from the technical proposal, and begins on a new page. It must contain a summary description of the technical methodology and task description in broad enough detail to provide contractual flexibility. Do not include proprietary information, because in the event of proposal selection the work plan will be incorporated into the resulting contract by reference. The recommended format is 1.0 Objective, providing a brief overview of the specialty area explaining the purpose and expected outcome; 2.0 Scope, providing a concise description of the work to be accomplished including the technology area to be investigated, goals, and major milestones, with task development and deliverables as the key elements meaning the anticipated end result or the effort's product, and consistent with the information in section 4.0; 3.0 Background, in which the applicant shall identify appropriate specifications, standards, and other documents applicable to the effort, including information or explanation for and constraints to understanding requirements, relationships to previous, current, or future operations, and techniques previously determined ineffective; and 4.0 Task and Technical Requirements, in which detailed individual task descriptions must be developed in an orderly progression with sufficient detail to establish overall program requirements and goals, with the work effort segregated into major tasks identified in separately numbered paragraphs. Each numbered major task should delineate the work to be performed by subtask. The work plan must contain every task to be accomplished in definite, realistic, and clearly stated terms. Use "shall" whenever the work plan expresses a binding provision, "should" or "may" to express a declaration or purpose, and "will" when no contractor requirement is involved.

Section 3.0 Background deserves attention on this topic, since the WOSA Seeker Domain interface specification is exactly the kind of applicable specification the instructions are asking you to identify. Name it, and name any other standards your design conforms to.

Deliverables. Include a section clearly describing the specific sample or prototype hardware and software to be delivered, as well as data deliverables, schedules, and quantities. Be aware of the possible requirement for unique item identification in accordance with DFARS 252.211-7003, Item Identification and Valuation, for hardware. If hardware or software will be developed but not delivered, provide an explanation. On this topic that explanation matters, because the Phase II output is a design and model rather than built hardware, so be clear about what physical artifacts, if any, exist and why.

At a minimum, the following reports will be required under all Phase II contracts. Scientific and Technical Reports, noting that rights in technical data including software developed under the terms of any contract resulting from a SBIR Announcement generally remain with the contractor, and the Government obtains SBIR/STTR data rights in all data developed or generated under the SBIR/STTR contract for a period of 20 years commencing at contract award, after which the Government has Government purpose rights to the SBIR data. The Final Report's first page will be a single-page project summary identifying the work's purpose, providing a brief description of the effort accomplished, and listing potential result applications; the summary may be published by DoW and therefore must not contain any proprietary or classified information, while the remainder of the report should contain details of project objectives met, work completed, results obtained, and technical feasibility estimates. Status reports are due quarterly at a minimum. The Air Force may require additional reporting documentation including software documentation and users' manuals, engineering drawings, operation and maintenance documentation, safety hazard analysis when the project will result in partial or total development and delivery of hardware, and updates to the commercialization results.

Given that this program produces a CDR-level design, the engineering drawings item and the 20 year data rights provision together deserve a conversation with counsel before you decide what design detail to generate under the award.

Related work. Describe significant activities directly related to the proposed effort, including any previous programs conducted by the principal investigator, proposing firm, consultants, or others, and their application to the proposed project. Describe how these activities interface with the proposed project and discuss any planned coordination with outside sources. Also list any applicant-identified subject matter experts, regardless of affiliation, providing comments regarding the applicant's knowledge of the state of the art in the specific approach proposed. Describe previous work not directly related to the proposed effort but similar, providing a short description, the client for which the work was performed including an individual to be contacted and phone number, and the date of completion.

Commercialization potential. The DoW requires a commercialization plan be submitted with the Phase II proposal, specifically addressing what the first planned product to incorporate the proposed technology is, who the probable customers are and what the estimated market size is, how much money is needed to bring the technology to market and how it will be raised, whether the firm has the necessary marketing expertise and if not how the firm will compensate, and who the probable competitors are and what price or quality advantage is anticipated by the firm. The commercialization strategy plan should briefly describe the commercialization potential for the proposed project's anticipated results as well as plans to exploit it. Commercial potential is evidenced by the existence of private sector or non-SBIR/STTR governmental funding sources demonstrating commitment to Phase II efforts and results, the existence of Phase III follow-on commitments for the research subject, and the presence of other indicators of commercial technology potential including the firm's commercialization strategy.

If awarded a D2P2, the awardee will be required to update periodically the commercialization results of the project via SBA. These updates will be required at completion of the effort and subsequently when the contractor submits a new SBIR/STTR proposal to DoW. Firms not submitting a new proposal to DoW will be requested to provide updates annually after the D2P2 completion. Note that the Commercialization Plan and the Company Commercialization Report are distinct documents; the CCR comprises Volume 4.

The commercialization question is harder on this topic than on most, because a Ku-band prompt strike seeker has limited non-defense application. The honest framing is that the primary market is defense volume production, that the named Phase III path runs through AFRL to AFLCMC/EB and other DoD users, and that the underlying software-defined multifunction RF architecture and low-cost manufacturing approach have adjacent applications. Do not manufacture an implausible commercial market. Build the case on volume defense demand plus genuine architecture-level spillover.

Relationship with future R/R&D efforts. State the anticipated results of the proposed approach, specifically addressing plans for Phase III, if any, and discuss the significance of the D2P2 effort in providing a basis for the Phase III R/R&D effort, if planned. The topic gives you the Phase III sequence, so track it.

Key personnel. In the technical volume, identify all key personnel involved in the project. Include information directly related to education, experience, and citizenship. A technical resume for the Principal Investigator, including publications if any, must also be included. Concise technical resumes for subcontractors and consultants, if any, are also useful. The Principal Investigator's primary employment must be with the small business concern at the time of award and during the entire period of performance. Primary employment means more than one-half of the PI's time is spent in the small business's employ, which precludes full-time employment with another entity. Only one principal investigator or project manager can be designated to a proposal at any given time.

Facilities and equipment. Describe instrumentation and physical facilities necessary and available to carry out the D2P2 effort. Justify equipment to be purchased, with detail in the cost proposal. State whether proposed performance locations meet environmental laws and regulations of federal, state, and local governments for, but not limited to, airborne emissions, waterborne effluents, external radiation levels, outdoor noise, solid and bulk waste disposal practices, and handling and storage of toxic and hazardous materials.

Consultants and subcontractors. Private companies, consultants, or universities may be involved in the project. All should be described in detail and included in the cost proposal. In accordance with the SBA SBIR Policy Directive, a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, and these requests can only be made upon proposal submission. Signed copies of all consultant or subcontractor letters of intent must be attached to the proposal. These letters should briefly state the contribution or expertise being provided. Include statements of work and detailed cost proposals, and information regarding consultant or subcontractor unique qualifications. Subcontract copies and supporting documents do not count against the Phase II page limit. Identify any subcontractor or consultant foreign citizens.

Prior, current, or pending support of similar proposals or awards. While it is permissible, with proper notification, to submit identical proposals or proposals containing a significant amount of essentially equivalent work for consideration under numerous federal program solicitations, it is unlawful to enter into contracts or grants requiring essentially equivalent effort. Any potential for this situation must be disclosed to the solicitation agencies before award. Provide the name and address of the federal agencies or DoW components to which proposals were or will be submitted or from which an award is expected or has been received, the proposal submission or award dates, the proposal title, the PI's name and title for each proposal submitted or award received, the solicitation titles, numbers, and dates under which the proposal was or will be submitted or under which an award is expected or has been received, the contract number if an award was received, and the applicable topics for each SBIR proposal submitted or award received. If this section does not apply, state in the proposal, "No prior, current, or pending support for proposed work."

Volume 3, Cost Volume

Covered above.

Volume 4, Company Commercialization Report

Completion of the CCR as Volume 4 of the proposal submission in DSIP is required. Refer to the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA for full details on this requirement. Information contained in the CCR will not be considered by the DAF during proposal evaluations. Complete it for compliance and do not treat it as a scoring opportunity.

Volume 5, Supporting Documents

The following documents may be required if applicable to your proposal. DD Form 2345, which applies to this export-controlled topic. Verification of Eligibility of Small Business Joint Ventures, Attachment 3 to the DoW SBIR FY26 BAA. Technical Data Rights Assertions, if asserting data rights restrictions. On a seeker design program built on proprietary RF architecture, this last item is how you draw the line between your background intellectual property and what you develop under the award.

Feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations. Its requirements are described above.

The detailed TABA request, if you are requesting TABA, also belongs in Volume 5.

Volume 6, Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Training

Fraud, Waste and Abuse training material can be found in the Volume 6 section of the proposal submission module in DSIP and must be thoroughly reviewed once per year to proceed with proposal submission.

Volume 7, Disclosures of Foreign Affiliations or Relationships to Foreign Countries

Small business concerns must complete the Disclosures of Foreign Affiliations or Relationships to Foreign Countries webform in Volume 7 of the DSIP proposal submission. The webform will not be accepted as a PDF supporting document in Volume 5, and previous versions of this form must not be uploaded to Volume 5. For additional details, refer to the DoW Program BAA.

How Your Proposal Will Be Evaluated

The criteria are in the BAA, not in this document

D2P2 proposals are evaluated on a competitive basis by subject matter expert scientists, engineers, or other technical personnel. Throughout evaluation, selection, and award, confidential proposal and evaluation information will be protected to the greatest extent possible. D2P2 proposals will be disqualified and not evaluated if the Phase I equivalency documentation does not establish the proposed technical approach's feasibility and technical merit.

The component instructions then state that proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria outlined in the FY26 SBIR BAA Section 6.0.

That is the whole of it. Unlike the DAF Release 6 CSO instructions, which restate Criteria A, B, and C with their relative importance, this BAA document does not reproduce the evaluation criteria. You must read Section 6.0 of the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA to know how your proposal will be scored, and you should not assume the CSO criteria carry over. This is the single most important research task before you start writing, because the criteria determine your proposal's structure and emphasis.

The DAF adds that it is seeking varying technical and scientific approaches and varying and new technologies that would be responsive to the problem statements and areas of interest in the topic, that multiple procurements are planned and anticipated as a result of the topic, that each proposal is considered a separate procurement and will be evaluated on its own merit, and that the Government may award all, some, or none of the proposals.

Foreign risk evaluation

15 U.S.C. 638 and the Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act of 2026 require the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Small Business Administration, to implement a due diligence program to assess security risks presented by small business concerns seeking a federally funded award.

The DAF will evaluate all small business concerns that submit proposals under this release on whether the concern presents a security risk for any reason. The measures the DAF will use include the due diligence process required under 15 U.S.C. 638(vv), disclosures required under 15 U.S.C. 638(g) and (o), and coordination with the intelligence community as defined in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003), federal law enforcement, and other counterintelligence capabilities of the United States Government.

The DAF will assess using a risk-based approach as appropriate: the cybersecurity practices; patent analysis; employee analysis; foreign ownership of a small business concern seeking an award, including the financial ties and obligations, which shall include surety, equity, and debt obligations, of the concern and employees of the concern to a foreign country, foreign person, or foreign entity; foreign affiliations of a covered individual, owner, or other key personnel of a concern with an entity in a foreign country of concern; investment relationships of a concern with an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern; technology licensing agreements or joint ventures, including joint venture like agreements, with an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern; and business relationships between a covered individual, owner, or other key personnel and an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern.

For an RF hardware company, patent analysis and the semiconductor supply chain both deserve a look before you propose. RF system-on-chip devices, gallium nitride and gallium arsenide processes, packaging, and passive components frequently trace to suppliers with entries on one or more of the denial lists below, and the topic's own references point toward commercial RFSoC parts.

The DAF will also assess proposals utilizing open-source analysis and analytical tools for the nondisclosures of the information set forth in 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(13) or 638(o)(17), and examine any relationship of a concern seeking an award to any entity or individual included on the lists described in 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(16)(D) and 638(o)(20)(D).

If the DAF assesses that a concern has security risks, the DAF will review the proposal, the evaluation, and the security risks and may choose either to create a plan to mitigate the risks or to not select the proposal for award based upon a totality of the review.

Applicants will be required to disclose, under penalty of perjury, the representations, attestations, and certifications required under 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(13) and 638(o)(17), fulfilled by completing Volume 7. In addition, a written statement with any substantial changes to a foreign disclosure form must be provided to the awarding agency within 30 days of any changes while on a project for the DAF.

The DAF will not make an award if it determines the concern has an owner or covered individual that is party to a malign foreign talent recruitment program; has a business entity, parent company, or subsidiary located in the People's Republic of China or another foreign country of concern; has an owner or covered individual that has a foreign affiliation with a research institution located in the PRC or another foreign country of concern; or has a security risk connecting the small business concern to an entity, including any affiliates of the entity, or individual on any of the following: the UFLPA Entity List maintained by the Department of Homeland Security; the Non-SDN Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List of the Office of Foreign Assets Control maintained by the Department of the Treasury; the Section 889 Prohibition List established under section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 and maintained by the Department of War; the list of Chinese Military Companies required under section 1260H of the William M. Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 and maintained by the Department of War; the Military End User List maintained by the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce; the Entity List maintained by the Bureau of Industry and Security; the List of Equipment and Services maintained by the Federal Communications Commission; or the Withhold Release Orders and Findings List maintained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The DAF will also not make an award if it determines the concern has a security risk with a primary source that is classified or has a security risk the DAF determines warrants a denial.

If the DAF denies an award under 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(16) or 638(o)(20), or upon determining that the concern has a security risk described in that paragraph, the DAF will, as appropriate pursuant to its discretion and in a manner that does not compromise security, provide a notification advising the small business of the determination, the basis for the determination, and a statement that denial of award does not prohibit the concern from being eligible for an award in a subsequent award cycle. The same applies to denials under 15 U.S.C. 638(vv).

Support contractors

Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled for administrative purposes only by support contractors. These support contractors may include, but are not limited to, APEX, Peerless Technologies, Engineering Services Network, HPC-COM, Mile Two, REI Systems, MacB (an Alion company), Montech, Oasis, Astrion/Oasis, and Infinite Management Solutions. In addition, only Government employees and technical personnel from the FFRDCs MITRE and Aerospace Corporations working under contract to provide technical support to AF Life Cycle Management Center and Space Force may evaluate proposals. All support contractors are bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements. Contact the DAF SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer with concerns about any of these contractors.

Status, feedback, and protests

The Principal Investigator and Corporate Official indicated on the Proposal Cover Sheet will be notified by email regarding proposal selection or non-selection. Small businesses will receive a notification for each proposal submitted, so read each notification carefully and note the Proposal Number and Topic Number referenced.

Automated feedback will be provided for proposals designated Not Selected. Additional feedback may be provided at the sole discretion of the DAF.

Proposals submitted to the DAF are received and evaluated by different organizations, handled by topic. Each organization operates within its own schedule for proposal evaluation and selection, so updates and notification timeframes will vary. If contacted regarding a proposal submission, it is not necessary to request information regarding additional submissions, since separate notifications are provided for each proposal.

The DAF anticipates that all proposals will be evaluated and selections finalized within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close. Refrain from contacting the DAF for proposal status before that time.

Refer to the FY26 SBIR BAA for procedures to protest the Announcement. As further prescribed in FAR 33.106(b) and FAR 52.233-3, protests after award should be submitted to Air Force SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer Daniel J. Brewer and to the individual procuring contracting officer listed on your firm's selection notification.

All final reports will be submitted to the awarding DAF organization in accordance with contract instructions. Companies will not submit final reports directly to the Defense Technical Information Center.

Timeline and What to Do When

The dates

Topic opens: September 23, 2026

Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026, at the time specified in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA, ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern. Confirm on DSIP.

Selections finalized: within approximately 90 calendar days of close, on or about January 19, 2027

Period of performance: up to 24 months from award

A working backward plan

Before September 23. Settle eligibility first, because nothing else matters if you fail it. If venture capital, hedge fund, or private equity funds hold majority ownership in part, resolve your status against the definition and raise it with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk. Read Section 6.0 of the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA, since the evaluation criteria are there and not in the component instructions. Obtain and study the WOSA Seeker Domain interface specification. Read the two cited RFSoC papers. Assemble your feasibility documentation: system design, modeling, and hardware specifications for a multifunction radar in an embedded application, substantially performed by your firm or your PI, with no SBIR or STTR lineage. Draft the baseline conceptual design for the Ku-band seeker, which the feasibility demonstration must also describe. Build the volume production cost model that reaches $50,000 threshold and $30,000 objective, and identify the volume assumption it rests on. Audit your semiconductor and component supply chain against the eight denial lists. Resolve export control staffing, since foreign nationals may be restricted from performing on this topic, and start DD Form 2345 if you do not hold one. Check your work distribution against the two-thirds figure and, if you cannot meet it, file the pre-submission Performance of Work deviation request in the first week of the open period. Complete Volume 6 training and verify SAM and DSIP alignment.

September 23 through October 3. Draft Volume 2 in the required order against the 35 page limit. Structure the technical approach around the four hard requirements: the 6 inch interior diameter envelope with conformal or forward mounting addressed, WOSA Seeker Domain conformance, the imaging radar, passive direction-finding, and height of burst fuze sensing modes plus line-of-sight datalink, and CDR-level maturity. Build the milestone schedule early, since the TABA task milestone list must track to your milestone payment schedule. Write the work plan as a separate page-broken document in contract language with no proprietary content, naming the WOSA specification in section 3.0 Background.

October 4 through October 12. Build the cost volume by individual cost element and contractor fiscal year. Get quotes for simulation and modeling software licenses. Collect signed letters of intent, statements of work, and detailed cost proposals from every consultant and subcontractor, remembering that a letter agreeing to a fixed price is not sufficient. Verify all outside costs sit below one-half of the total contract price. Write the detailed TABA request into Volume 5 if requesting TABA, and consider manufacturing plan development given the volume production emphasis.

October 13 through October 16. Finalize the Volume 5 package, which for this topic carries real weight: feasibility documentation with no page limit, DD Form 2345, Technical Data Rights Assertions, and the TABA request. Complete the Volume 7 webform and the Volume 4 CCR. Run a compliance pass: 35 page limit, 11-point minimum type, one-inch margins, consecutive page numbers, graphics distinguishable in black and white, virus-checked PDF, no marketing material, no proprietary information in the technical abstract or the work plan.

October 17 through October 19. Submit and certify in DSIP.

October 20 through October 21. Buffer only.

Frequently Asked Questions

‍ ‍

What is DAF SBIR topic DAF26BZ06-DV037?

‍ ‍

DAF26BZ06-DV037 is a Department of the Air Force SBIR Direct to Phase II topic titled "Low-Cost Multi-Function Ku-Band RF System for Prompt Strike Weapons," released under the DAF 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. It seeks a Ku-band multi-function RF seeker system that can be manufactured at scale, supporting radar, passive direction-finding, and line-of-sight datalink modes, for long-range air-launched prompt strike weapons operating in the very high supersonic flight regime.

‍ ‍

Are venture capital backed companies eligible for this topic?

‍ ‍

No. The DAF Release 6 BAA instructions state that small business concerns owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are not eligible to submit applications or receive awards for DAF topics. This is the opposite of the rule in the DAF Release 6 CSO instructions, which cover the BX-numbered topics and state that such firms are eligible. If your ownership structure is near this line, verify your status and raise it with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk during the open period.

‍ ‍

Why does the eligibility rule differ from the other DAF Release 6 topics?

‍ ‍

Because they are different solicitations. The BX-numbered Release 6 topics sit under the 2026 SBIR Commercial Solutions Opening, and this BZ-numbered topic sits under the 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement. The two sets of component instructions are largely parallel but govern separate solicitations, and the venture capital ownership provision reads opposite ways in the two documents. Do not carry an eligibility conclusion from one to the other.

‍ ‍

How much funding is available under DAF26BZ06-DV037?

‍ ‍

Up to $2,000,000 for a period of performance up to 24 months. Proposals in excess of that amount or duration will not be considered for evaluation or award. Up to $50,000 in Technical and Business Assistance may be requested in addition to that ceiling.

‍ ‍

When is the proposal deadline?

‍ ‍

The topic closes October 21, 2026. The DAF instructions direct firms to the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA for the exact submission time, which is ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern on the close date. Confirm on the live DSIP posting rather than assuming an end-of-day deadline.

‍ ‍

When does this topic open?

‍ ‍

September 23, 2026, giving a 29 day submission window.

‍ ‍

What does Phase II actually deliver?

‍ ‍

A design, not hardware. For this Direct to Phase II topic the offeror will design and model a prototype for Critical Design Review level, a complete Ku-band multi-function radar system. Physical prototype implementation, laboratory testing, hardware-in-the-loop testing, field testing, and flight experiment integration all occur in Phase III with Air Force Research Laboratory 6.3 funding. A proposal promising fabricated and tested hardware inside the $2,000,000 and 24 month envelope has misread the topic.

‍ ‍

What are the production cost targets?

‍ ‍

The Phase II emphasis is on lowering the flight-unit production cost at volume production to a threshold of $50,000 and an objective of $30,000, while meeting or exceeding the RF performance metrics of a contemporary, similarly-sized multifunction radar system. These are per-unit hardware costs at volume, entirely separate from the $2,000,000 design award. State the volume assumption your cost model depends on.

‍ ‍

What is the physical envelope requirement?

‍ ‍

The system must fit within a 6 inch interior diameter cylinder, whether conformally mounted or forward mounted. The Phase II description adds that the design will size and package the front end and back-end RF electronics to fit within that envelope. Because both conformal and forward mounting are named, aperture architecture is a design choice worth addressing explicitly.

‍ ‍

What interface standard must the design conform to?

‍ ‍

The WOSA Seeker Domain interface specification. This is a stated key technical requirement, so obtain and study the specification before writing, and name it among the applicable specifications in section 3.0 Background of your work plan.

‍ ‍

What modes must the system support?

‍ ‍

The topic names imaging radar modes, passive direction-finding modes, and height of burst fuze sensing modes as key technical requirements, and the objective adds line-of-sight datalinks to the RF modes supported. That is four distinct functions sharing one aperture and back end.

‍ ‍

What flight regime does this seeker operate in?

‍ ‍

The objective describes a very high supersonic flight regime, and the description specifies peak velocity greater than Mach 3 but under Mach 5. Note that the description labels that band "high subsonic," which is inconsistent with the Mach numbers stated and with the objective's own wording, so treat the Mach 3 to Mach 5 figures as governing.

‍ ‍

Can I submit a Phase I proposal for this topic?

‍ ‍

No. This is a Direct to Phase II topic. Applicants must provide documentation satisfying the Phase I feasibility requirement to be included in the Phase II proposal, demonstrating completion of research and development through means other than the SBIR and STTR programs.

‍ ‍

What feasibility documentation does this topic require?

‍ ‍

The offeror must have previously demonstrated Phase I-type feasibility by demonstrating the successful system design, modeling, and hardware specifications of a multifunction radar system for use in an embedded system application. The feasibility demonstration shall also describe a baseline conceptual design for the proposed multifunction radar system. So you need both documented heritage and a forward-looking baseline concept.

‍ ‍

Can I use a prior SBIR award as my feasibility basis?

‍ ‍

No. Feasibility documentation cannot be based upon or logically extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work, and the feasibility efforts detailed must have been substantially performed by the applicant or the principal investigator.

‍ ‍

Does feasibility documentation count against my page limit?

‍ ‍

No. The instructions state that feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations. Use that room for your design heritage, modeling results, hardware specifications, and baseline conceptual design rather than compressing them into the technical volume.

‍ ‍

How long can my technical volume be?

‍ ‍

35 pages or slides, per the topic index. Pages or slides in excess of this number will not be considered during evaluations. Type must be no smaller than 11-point on standard 8.5 by 11 paper with one-inch margins and consecutively numbered pages. Cost proposal attachments, subcontract copies and supporting documents, and feasibility documentation do not count toward the limit.

‍ ‍

How will my proposal be evaluated?

‍ ‍

The BAA component instructions do not restate the evaluation criteria. They say only that proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria outlined in the FY26 SBIR BAA Section 6.0. You must read Section 6.0 of the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA to know how you will be scored, and you should not assume the Criteria A, B, and C structure from the DAF CSO instructions carries over. This is the first research task before writing.

‍ ‍

How much of the work must my company perform?

‍ ‍

The document states three overlapping figures. Under Performance of Work Requirements it says a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the awardee, measured by direct and indirect costs excluding profit, though that paragraph refers to Phase I inside a Direct to Phase II document and appears to be a drafting artifact. Under Consultants and Subcontractors it says a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm unless the Contracting Officer approves otherwise in writing. And the subcontracts cost guidance caps all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements at one-half of the total contract price. Planning to perform at least two-thirds in house and keeping all outside costs below one-half of contract price satisfies every reading. If you cannot, file a Performance of Work deviation request during the open period and again with your proposal, and ask the One Help Desk which threshold governs.

‍ ‍

How do I request a performance of work deviation?

‍ ‍

Requests must be made twice: prior to submission during the topic open period, and as part of the initial proposal submission. For requests prior to the initial proposal submission, the DAF will consider the request and approve or disapprove the applicant proceeding with DSIP submission. Upon proposal receipt, the DAF will again consider such requests for approval for the resultant award. Because the pre-submission request must happen inside the four week open window, treat it as a first-week action.

‍ ‍

Is this topic export controlled?

‍ ‍

Yes. The technology is restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130 and EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their countries of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work tasks intended for them. The topic advises that foreign nationals proposed to perform may be restricted due to the technical data under U.S. export control laws. A certified DD Form 2345, or evidence of application submission, belongs in Volume 5, and approval will be required if selected for award.

‍ ‍

Can foreign nationals work on this project?

‍ ‍

Only in limited ways, if at all. Where the topic area is subject to export control, permitted foreign national participants are limited to work in the public domain, and assigned tasks must not be capable of assimilation into an understanding of the project's overall objectives, which the instructions note prevents foreign citizens from acting in key positions such as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer. Additional information may be requested during negotiations to verify eligibility. On a weapon seeker topic, treat this as a hard staffing constraint.

‍ ‍

Who owns the design data I develop?

‍ ‍

Rights in technical data including software developed under a SBIR contract generally remain with the contractor. The Government obtains SBIR/STTR data rights in all data developed or generated under the contract for 20 years commencing at contract award, after which the Government has Government purpose rights to the SBIR data. Because this program produces a CDR-level design and the Air Force may require engineering drawings as additional reporting, review the data rights provision with counsel before deciding what design detail to generate under the award, and use Technical Data Rights Assertions in Volume 5 to protect background intellectual property.

‍ ‍

Does the Company Commercialization Report affect my score?

‍ ‍

No. Completing the CCR as Volume 4 in DSIP is required, but the instructions state that information contained in the CCR will not be considered by the DAF during proposal evaluations.

‍ ‍

What is TABA and how do I request it?

‍ ‍

Up to $50,000 per Phase II award, in addition to the per-topic ceiling, identified in the Volume 3 Cost Proposal, and splittable as $25,000 on a first SBIR Phase II award and $25,000 on a sequential one. Development of manufacturing plans is an eligible activity and is directly relevant here given the high-volume manufacturability goal and the MRL gaps named in Phase III. The detailed request must be in Volume 5, including provider name, point of contact with email and phone, an explanation of unique qualifications, the tasks with purpose and objective, and total cost with hours and labor rates, and the task milestone list must track to your milestone payment schedule. Requests that only specify a value in Volume 3 will not be considered.

‍ ‍

What happens in Phase III?

‍ ‍

Following successful completion of the Phase II objectives and the culmination of a CDR-level system design, AFRL and its transition partner will use 6.3 funding to implement a prototype of the radar system designed in Phase II, perform laboratory, hardware-in-the-loop, and field testing, and then integrate it into a 6.3 flight experiment for further technology maturation. TRL and MRL gaps will be identified and addressed in order to transition the system to AFLCMC/EB and other Department of Defense users.

‍ ‍

What is the commercial market for this technology?

‍ ‍

It is limited, and honesty serves you better than invention here. A Ku-band prompt strike weapon seeker has a primarily defense market, and the topic gives you a concrete Phase III path through AFRL to AFLCMC/EB and other DoD users. Build the commercialization case on volume defense demand plus genuine architecture-level spillover from the software-defined multifunction RF approach and the low-cost manufacturing methods, rather than on an implausible commercial application.

‍ ‍

What references does the topic cite?

‍ ‍

Two papers on RF system-on-chip based sensors: "ARESTOR: A Multi-role RF Sensor based on the Xilinx RFSoC" by Nial Peters, Colin Horne, and Matthew Ritchie, IEEE Xplore, 2 June 2022; and "Prototyping a Radar Sensor based on a Xilinx RFSoC Device for Detect-And-Avoid onboard Small UAV" by Valentine Wasik, L. Casadebaig, Benjamin Gabard, and Benjamin Gigleux, 2023 20th European Radar Conference. Both point toward a software-defined, highly integrated RFSoC approach as the affordability enabler.

‍ ‍

When will I hear about selection?

‍ ‍

The DAF anticipates that all proposals will be evaluated and selections finalized within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close, meaning on or about January 19, 2027. The Principal Investigator and Corporate Official on the cover sheet are notified by email, with a separate notification for each proposal submitted.

‍ ‍

Will I be able to negotiate after submitting?

‍ ‍

Possibly not. If no exceptions are taken to your proposal, the Government may award a contract without exchanges, so your initial proposal should contain your best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to reopen exchanges later if the Contracting Officer determines it necessary.

‍ ‍

Who do I contact with questions?

‍ ‍

For general information related to the DAF SBIR/STTR program and proposal preparation instructions, contact the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk at usaf.team@afsbirsttr.us. The DAF encourages applicants to request clarifying information as early as possible, since delays in such requests constrain its ability to provide satisfactory resolution to applicant concerns. For questions regarding the DSIP electronic submission system, contact the DoW SBIR/STTR Help Desk at dodsbirsupport@reisystems.com. For technical questions about the topics during the pre-announcement and open period, reference the FY26 SBIR BAA. The Air Force SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer is Mr. Daniel J. Brewer at Daniel.Brewer.13@us.af.mil. If your company mail or email addresses or points of contact change after proposal submission, provide the information to the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk with the subject line "FY26 SBIR BAA Address Change."

‍ ‍

Positioning Advice for Companies Considering This Topic

‍ ‍

Check eligibility before anything else. Majority ownership in part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds is disqualifying under this announcement. That is an unusual gate in modern defense SBIR, and it removes a large fraction of the companies that would otherwise be natural bidders. If you clear it, you are competing in a thinner field than the technology would suggest, which is worth knowing.

‍ ‍

Read BAA Section 6.0 first. The evaluation criteria are not in the component instructions. Writing a proposal without them is guessing at what matters, and the criteria should shape your section emphasis and your milestone framing.

‍ ‍

Lead with cost and manufacturability, not RF performance. The topic says low unit production cost and high-volume manufacturability are key goals, sets a $50,000 threshold and $30,000 objective, and identifies MRL gaps alongside TRL gaps in Phase III. Performance is the constraint you must satisfy, and cost is the variable you are being asked to move. Structure the proposal accordingly, with a defensible volume cost model rather than a prototype bill of materials.

‍ ‍

State your volume assumption explicitly. A cost target is meaningless without the production rate behind it. Give the number, justify it against plausible program quantities, and show cost sensitivity if the rate is lower.

‍ ‍

Respect the design-only scope. Design and model to CDR is what Phase II buys. Overpromising fabricated hardware reads as either a misreading of the topic or an unrealistic plan, and cost realism concerns follow either way. Put the build in Phase III where the government put it.

‍ ‍

Take WOSA conformance seriously as an architecture driver. An open interface specification changes how you partition front end, back end, and processing. Show that you understand it rather than asserting conformance in a sentence.

‍ ‍

Address the thermal problem directly. High-temperature materials science is one of three named enabling areas, and Mach 3 to Mach 5 sustained flight is the reason. Radome, aperture, and electronics thermal management is where a design that works subsonically fails here, and it interacts with the cost target because exotic thermal solutions are expensive.

‍ ‍

Engage the cited references. Both point toward RFSoC-class integration. If that is your approach, say how you go beyond the referenced work. If you have a better path, say why, and be specific. Either is stronger than ignoring them.

‍ ‍

Make the four modes share hardware credibly. Imaging radar, passive direction finding, height of burst fuze sensing, and line-of-sight datalink from one aperture and back end is the multi-function claim. Explain the time and frequency resource sharing, the calibration approach, and where the modes conflict.

‍ ‍

Build the feasibility package properly, and use the page relief. Feasibility documentation lives in Volume 5 and is not page limited. System design, modeling, and hardware specifications for a multifunction radar in an embedded application, plus the baseline conceptual design, can be documented thoroughly without spending technical volume pages.

‍ ‍

Audit the semiconductor supply chain early. The denial criteria name eight lists, and RF and digital component sourcing touches them more often than teams expect. A mandatory denial after selection is an expensive way to learn this.

‍ ‍

Plan for two-thirds in house. Given the ambiguity in the document, plan to the strictest figure and keep all outside costs below half the contract price. If your approach depends on a large subcontracted element, file the deviation request in the first week of the open period rather than discovering the problem at submission.