Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It kind of sounds like OH wanted to help and decided to try loaning the BIB to see if it would work. If DRNE was engaged directly, partners would have had time to assess the needs of the search and maybe it would have lasted more than a day. Or maybe they did and underestimated the situation.
What sort of payload would work to find a single man hiding under dense forest over a wide area of rugged terrain? Too bad Argus or anything else we own isn't the mix.
I just saw that on Fox News.
At least it is something we can relate too.
Agreed. I hope the "voilà" strategy that Indy referred to is more like "voilà - here is our tech and funding plan" vs. "voilà, we just sold more assets".
Awfully quiet lately, IMO.
Both WSGI and DRNE have been hovering around their respective levels for a bit. Given their respective prices of .003x and .3x, could a reverse 1:100 merger WAG be possible?
These are the dates listed in PACER...I thought I remember seeing something about case management or mediation meetings prior to that, but it looks like LJC is not backing down either.
45 Discovery Deadline 05/06/2015
45 Motions Deadline 06/10/2015
45 Pretrial Conference 08/26/2015
at 03:00 PM
45 Jury Selection 09/07/2015
at 09:00 AM
45 Jury Trial 09/07/2015
at 09:00 AM
CEO or COB - it would be nice to hear something from somebody. No news usually means no progress from this group.
Last we read, ARGUS business plan was done or close to being done and the ball was now in Phipps' court to get a GTC plan out. What have our "consultants" been up to?
DRNE asset needs a boost. One thing's for sure, they have been busy promoting it - more so than when we had it. But as we experienced, no amount of promotion seems to stick long-term. They probably need to make some significant sales to get noticed, IMO.
Looks like DRNE is trying hard to get the word out...
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/592211-john-h-ford/3200325-googles-and-facebooks-drone-investments-make-drone-aviation-my-top-pick
Coasti, if they are going to trial and one of the assertions involves breach of contract, doesn't the allegation of shorting by LJC enter into the picture since the contract had a no shorting clause? Or maybe boxing or putting or whatever mechanism will get them our of the strict definition of shorting even though the same results occurred - LJC benefits through direct or indirect depression of share price.
I guess we will see which way this proceeds through the coming year of pacer filings.
It is interesting. They PR a release to REF and we gain 2M on paper. LOL... I think our PR's didn't help to that extent. I know it is way too early to tell and we can't cash out the asset yet, but maybe GE was smarter than I was willing to credit at the time?
CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 5/6/2015. Motions due by 6/10/2015. Pretrial Conference set for 8/26/2015 03:00 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. James Donato. Jury Selection set for 9/7/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. James Donato. Jury Trial set for 9/7/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. James Donato.. Signed by Judge James Donato on 8/14/14. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2014) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
no clue about cases like this, insighter. I guess we just need to wait on the court docs to see what angle both sides are going to use and the stakes involved.
Or, maybe COB, West can shed some light on things and deliver some fire and brimstone?
Regarding the legacy debt, if they are able to find a way to perform some sort of adjustment, would they need to restate all prior filings or could it be handled in a single Q?
bank, the filing from PACER mentions:
The Court will issue an order on the pending Motion to Dismiss that was taken under submission:
So this is interesting. With discovery involved now, what if WSGI can prove that LJC was shorting and depressing the share price for their own gain which would violate the terms of their engagement?
fathem, we should know a result soon:
08/12/2014 43 CLERKS NOTICE Parties are hereby advised that the Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint set for hearing on August 13, 2014, has been taken off calendar based on the Court's finding that the matter is appropriate for decision without oral argument under Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). The Case Management Conference has been moved to 8/13/2014 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco.
I think Drew and Indy still have a shot...
Looks like Boeing is still trying to reach both altitude and duration goals.
Here is their accomplishment timeline:
The Phantom Eye is an evolution from Boeing's earlier success with the piston-powered Boeing Condor that set several records for altitude and endurance in the late 1980s.[4] Boeing has also been studying a larger HALE UAV that can fly for over 10 days and carry payloads of 2,000 pounds (900 kg) or more; the company is also working on the Phantom Ray UAV as a flying testbed for advanced technologies.
Phantom Eye's propulsion system successfully completed an 80-hour test in an altitude chamber on March 1, 2010; this cleared the way for the propulsion system and the airframe to be assembled. Boeing has worked closely with Ball Aerospace, Aurora Flight Sciences, Ford Motor Co. and MAHLE Powertrain to develop the Phantom Eye.
The Phantom Eye was revealed to the press at a ceremony at Boeing's facilities in St Louis, Missouri, on July 12, 2010. The Phantom Eye demonstrator is a 60%-70% scale design of an objective system. According to Darryl Davis, president of Boeing's Phantom Works advanced concepts group, the Phantom Eye demonstrator could lead to an objective system capable of achieving 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week coverage of an area year round with as few as four aircraft.
The demonstrator was shipped to NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California, for ground tests. It conducted its first medium-speed taxi test there on March 10, 2012, reaching speeds of 30 knots. Boeing declared the test a success and said it paved the way for the aircraft's first flight, expected to last 8 hours.
The Phantom Eye completed its first flight on June 1, 2012 at Edwards Air Force Base. It reached an altitude of 4,000 ft and a speed of 62 knots (115 km/h) for 28 minutes. Phantom Eye's landing gear dug into the dry lakebed and caused some damage to the aircraft.
On February 6, 2013, the Phantom Eye completed taxi testing at Edwards Air Force Base in preparation for the second flight. Sitting atop a launch cart, it reached speeds of 46 mph. In response to the first flight test, autonomous flight systems were upgraded and the landing system was improved.
The Phantom Eye completed its second flight on February 25, 2013 at Edwards Air Force Base. It climbed to an altitude of 8,000 ft at a cruising speed of 62 kn (71 mph) for 66 minutes. The second flight test ended with a successful landing.
On 6 June 2013, Boeing was issued a $6.8 million contract by the U.S. Missile Defense Agency to install an unidentified payload on the Phantom Eye demonstrator.
The Phantom Eye's fourth flight occurred on June 14, 2013, reaching an altitude of 20,000 ft for 4 hours. On September 14, 2013, its fifth flight reached an altitude of 28,000 ft for nearly four and a half hours. Although the flight test was deemed a success, sources claim that the test had originally been intended to reach a 40,000 ft altitude. The fifth flight incorporated a payload from the Missile Defense Agency. The sixth flight occurred on January 6, 2014 and lasted for 5 hours, longer than any previous flight.
In February 2014, the Phantom Eye was promoted to experimental status by the Air Force's 412th Operations Group on recommendation from NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center. The Phantom Eye had by then undergone six test flights and met NASA safety criteria. Classification as experimental under the USAF Test Center means it is no longer restricted to flying above Edwards AFB and will move to a test range several miles away to further endurance and altitude capabilities. In the coming months, Boeing will test the demonstrator to reach its desired operating altitude of 60,000 ft (18,000 m) and increase its endurance. If successful, a full-size operational Phantom Eye will be built to reach endurance goals of 7-10 days airborne.
Many thanks, Bank. Glenn's reasoning behind the LTAS sale makes a certain amount of sense now. IMO.
Be_real, Glenn's surname was just my input since Drew pronounced it during the intro. As to GTC, Drew said it was not in CONUS (I had to look that up - continental US).
If I can put any sort of positive spin on the SHM presentation, it is that Drew told us exactly what the state of affairs was. No fluff and puff. It wasn't what I wanted to hear as I was expecting more of a report of them being further along with things. It confirmed what the shareprice and lack of substantial info has been telling us.
Indy said he was a straight shooter and this proved it to me. It's not like he had a lot of ammo to use. I look forward to seeing what he can do for us. At less than a penny, why not?
Fly, I share the same thoughts. GTC, Argus, and legacy debt are not new. Why does is seem like they are in the early stages of addressing these areas now?
The results of Drew's efforts remain to be seen, but if the previous group was flying by of the seats of their pants, his methodical and written analysis approach may help to guide and target their focus going forward.
As to whether old management and board are capable, maybe they are more worker bees rather than leaders and maybe Drew can be the leader as COB to guide and execute the process. Or like you said maybe a fresh CEO is a better choice. Drew does have his other companies to deal with so how much time can he give to WSGI?
thebull2, bank or other attendees will hopefully be able to add more. I was typing and listening at the same time and could only make out certain things that Drew said and could not hear much from the QA because of the audio quality.
I think a replay will be available at some point on the broadridge website that does not require a control #. Other companies have their past presentations there.
quickly;
1) Estrella is pronounce ess-stray-yuh
2) Argus business case study done. Originally targeted military, but commercial application also targeted due to recent interest for internet access globally for developing areas a la google. they are going to stay in the mid altitude space for now with long term goal of targeting stratosphere. The are looking to partner with a google loon-like payload manufacturer to miniaturize some sort of payload for Argus.
3) feel GTC will complement Argus commercial applications
4) have tasked Phipps with developing a business case for GTC to expand globally and especially determine how to market and penetrate the US market since they are not US based.
5) consortium tasked with modernizing Argus technology, propulsion, nav, etc. to upgrade the tech to be able to market and sell to today's customers.
6) no timeline on when they are going to share the Argus business case with us, but it is completed. Got the impression that we will hear about it once Phipps supplies his case.
log into your brokerage account and see if you have a communication email or something that references the WSGI proxy vote. I have Ameritrade and a link under My Account, history and Statements, Shareholder Library, Edocuments.
There is a link to Vote, and while it's too late to vote, the link opens a window with your control #.
the BIB 250 is listed in this link from the LTAS website. It is a catalog item in the many available solutions from ADS Inc.
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/d536caf8#/d536caf8/72
The SHM is less than 2 weeks away. Will they be able to give us some real info to chew on or just more speculation for us to rehash? It's sad that the most interesting things we have to post about are the dramatic events from our past rather than anything of substance from the company. As funny and ridiculous as some of that stuff was, there have been some sobering reminders that it affected folks in a very negative way. But we are a pink sheet and take responsibility for the associated risk.
I look forward to experiencing this SHM tool that was mentioned, and I am planning on serving myself something more than water.
rattle, this is only a guess, but let's assume they got a feeling that there was no large contract coming and it was just going to be an occasional sale of a few units and sustainment equipment for the foreseeable future.
They already changed their WSGI deal from a combination of cash and stock to all stock. Either the cash was not there to give to the Hess's or they were convinced to take more stock in lieu of cash for the good of WSGI and a bigger payoff later. 5 months after the all stock deal, the stock price was in the tank.
Were they getting a paycheck and how much was it to maintain their salaries, contractor expenses, and any employee expenses from both LTAS and Aerial Products?
Where did money that was received from LTAS sales go? Did a portion go toward WSGI expenses and legacy issues? If the LJC court case went against WSGI, how would that affect the distribution of future revenue to the Hess's from their LTAS sales? I think the Hess's were probably getting a bit anxious about their WSGI relationship and how it was affecting the bottom line of the business that THEY had created. I don't think they could or wanted to play the waiting game and risk losing more equity.
It was interesting that the recent sustainment order and also sale to OH did not do much to DRNE in terms of volume and share price. Same reaction as when they were with WSGI - nobody gives it much credibility.
not much else to hang our hats on yet.
- fixing balance sheet
- LJC trial status
- translation of % increase in GTC sales into dollars
- Argus demo dates and progress update
- engagement and performance of "consultants"
- indirect benefit of DRNE asset
No official word on where we go from here, but the SHM is less than 4 weeks away. At least we should have some discussion points resulting from that event.
thanks for the correction and due diligence, coastie. EOM
run, for me, I want to know if they hit the mark on payload weight, altitude and duration without a tether. The website made claims about certain parameters but we have never received confirmation whether those goals were met. Without confirmation, I would assume no.
If it can do what the website says, then they missed the mark on thinking someone would buy it based on those specs. There is a reason why they needed to perform the static testing of the envelope and are experimenting with a different propulsion unit too. Why? Is it an upgrade or is it to at least get it to perform to website specs?
So what is next? That is a really good question.
The part I don't like is the lack of transparency of testing goals and resulting success as well as failure.
The Yuma and NV testing resulted in 250K from NASA for meeting the terms of a performance data package. So what was tested? It's one thing to say it was a success in a PR, but for me, it means nothing unless I know what was tested in the first place.
Thanks Indy. That's the first time I think we have seen a demo video from LTAS besides the Shark Week stuff. BTW, do any of the BIB units utilize some form of helium reclamation or does the unused gas get expelled on retrieval?
Nice read, Sami...30 lbs, 10,000 feet..where have we heard those specs before?
http://www.whio.com/news/business/economy/new-blimp-drone-could-bring-manufacturing-jobs-in-/ngSYR/
New blimp drone could bring manufacturing jobs in Springfield
By Brian Bondus
Staff Writer
SPRINGFIELD —
State employees learned Wednesday how to operate a new aerostat — or blimp drone — and the technology could bring manufacturing jobs to Springfield in the future.
The device consists of a 15-foot-diameter helium-filled balloon that can float up to 500 feet in the air. It has a camera mounted to the bottom and can see up to 15 miles.
The manufacturer, Lighter Than Air Systems of Jacksonville, Fla., currently produces the aerostats on a low-level scale, according to Terry Hofecker, chief technology officer at Trident Aerial Recon, which re-sells the blimps.
As orders grow it will need to ramp up manufacturing, and he said he is working with local economic development leaders to draft plans to possibly move to Springfield if that happens.
“We think they’ll like the manufacturing culture in the Midwest, Ohio and Springfield area,” Hofecker said.
The Joint IED Defeat Organization first used the device in Afghanistan to look for improvised explosive devices, said Rob King, lead trainer with Lighter than Air.
“This particular system is unique. This is more of a commercial and law enforcement variant so its not as robust as say the Army system,” he said.
The Ohio Department of Transportation recently bought one of the blimp drones and tested it on Wednesday at the Ohio/Indiana UAS Center and Test Complex in Springfield.
At about $15 an hour to operate, the unmanned aircraft is much cheaper than sending a person up in a helicopter.
“We are looking at applications, new ways of stretching the taxpayer’s dollar,” UAS Test Center’s Chief of Staff David Gallagher said. “We think UAS provide an alternative, in some cases, where we can deploy small aircraft to do surveying and mapping.”
Gallagher didn’t have the purchase price immediately available, but King said similar models typically cost about $150,000.
Currently, the Nashville Police Department uses a similar aerostat. The agency uses when it has large crowds in town, concerts, sporting events and the state fair, King said, as well as during natural disasters.
“Basically it’s looking at areas of interest,” he said.
Other possible uses include monitoring prison facilities and keeping contraband out, according to King.
On Wednesday, King trained employees from the Lebanon and Warren County Correctional facilities at the UAS complex in Springfield.
“It’s going to be a game changer for them,” King said. “They just increased, expanded their situational awareness several miles versus 600 or 700 feet.”
The Ohio Department of Correction and Rehabilitation is still in the discussion phases of using the blimp drone, spokeswoman Joe Ellen Smith said
“We are undergoing an operation assessment with the two facilities to possibly use it in the future,” Smith said.
Be_real, my mistake...I forgot who was doing what and where. BIB vs. WASP, Polk vs Bliss, NIE vs. JIEDDO, A-T vs ADS.....it's hard for me to keep track without a spreadsheet.
The DRNE PR reminded me of the WSGI/LTAS PR's and it had the same minimal effect on DRNE share price like the WSGI days. Acronyms for the partners and equipment with no indication of where they are in the support and sales cycle other than the present.
BUT, I want to thank you for posting that article and link because that really gives me an indication of how hard it is to anticipate when a contract will materialize or even IF one will come at all. If you want to be a player in this space, you have to be prepared to spend lots of time and money to grind yourself to a contract. Glenn may have been in a tougher position with few or no options on how to sustain the main WSGI business and LTAS relationship.
I did find it interesting that the article mentioned that "A lot of companies don’t even know that funding is available...". Could Glenn have accessed that? Is DRNE accessing it? If so, that only adds to the controversy surrounding the sale to DRNE.
I keep wondering about why the BIB has yet to see any orders of a magnitude greater than 2 or so. No hints as how many might be needed or when the evaluation might be concluded.
Is it possible that the BIB 250 is just being used as a testing tool to enhance the NIE exercises and nothing more? Use it to transmit test equipment signals, simulate a small private network, monitor the training over a small area, etc?
I was wondering the same - I got the proxy material from TD Ameritrade over the weekend and do not see Drew mentioned. Hopefully just an oversight.
Maybe I was mistaken, but my assumption about Glenn's involvement came from the Pacer LJC court docs. WSGI's argument made statements about Glenn meeting with Travis Huff from LJC on more than one occasion and I didn't get the sense that MC was as involved, in person. But to put his house up as collateral was big so he must have been involved heavily enough if he was pledging his asset.
I should have mentioned that I am grateful to Glenn and all the others that got us out of the SEC litigation with a few hundred thousand dollar fine. If it were not for them, we would not be here. MC put up a chunk of cash at the time, and people with the right credentials were put into place to make the SEC happy enough to get us back to trading. I would assume that the addition of our new COB was also due to Glenn's involvement so that would seem to be a good move in the right direction. He could have easily just kept the COB position and not done anything, but he did not.
I am hoping that the SHM will demonstrate the influence of our new COB, Drew West. Can he and Glenn articulate what the new plan will be and why we should maintain hope for our future? Maybe Glenn is best at being the coach, selecting the players and letting them execute. DRNE is responsible for growing our 10M share asset, the "consultants" are expected to address our finances and market, Phipps has GTC, West and the consortium need to get the Argus going. If this recent corporate reset works out with a sustained share price appreciation, then in true CEO fashion, Glenn will have demonstrated his ability to overcome the adverse legacy hand he was dealt and correcting the missteps from his first four years.
I agree that the LJC funding was a big contribution to our current problems. Share dilution, legal fees, and if we lose the case, we owe a sizable "true up" payment. The LJC was piled onto the Brio mess and all the other legacy problems. Glenn was responsible for engaging LJC, gambling that the worst case scenario would not happen - which it did, and allowing it to go on for so long before acting to stop the bleeding.
I can't necessarily fault him for the Argus not being commercialized yet. He at least gave it a chance and those connections led to another possible win with LTAS. Based on the DRNE PR, I cannot tell whether WASP orders are coming or not and whether orders of size are anticipated, but WSGI could not sustain the LTAS relationship long enough during the wait to keep the Hess's happy so he had to let it go it would seem.
The share price decline happened under Glenn's watch and he has had a number of years to make a positive difference without success. But, have his latest moves put us in a position to realize a future increase in shareholder value and how long before we see if that happens?
Also, what of the BOD? Are they not somewhat responsible for putting us into the position we are in and allowing Glenn to make the moves he has made? With Drew West as COB, maybe we will see some difference in company direction, urgency, and eventual success.
WASP news.
Drone Aviation WASP Systems Successfully Complete Participation in the U.S. Army's Network Integration Experiment
WASP Aerostat Systems Successfully Utilized in Network Integration Experiment 14.2
JACKSONVILLE, FL--(Marketwired - Jun 18, 2014) - Drone Aviation Corp. ("DAC"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Drone Aviation Holding Corp. (PINKSHEETS: DRNE), a developer of specialized lighter-than-air aerostats and tethered drones, has announced that aerostat systems provided to the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command ("SMDC")/Army Forces Strategic Command have successfully completed operations in the U.S. Army's Network Integration Experiment ("NIE") 14.2 at Fort Bliss, TX and White Sands Missile Range, NM. The Army requested that the two Winch Aerostat Small Platforms ("WASP") return to NIE 14.2 as a carryover System following their successful evaluation at NIE 14.1 as a System Under Evaluation. The Army's NIEs evaluate and integrate current and prospective systems thereby driving changing requirements, procurement, and field recommendations.
The Army's Brigade Modernization Command requested that the WASPs return to NIE 14.2 and serve as a robust platform to extend their aerial network by flying a Harris PRC-117G radio and antenna mounted to a DAC manufactured tactical aerostat tethered to a militarized WASP launcher system. Multiple waveforms were supported and extended the communications ranges 8-10 times greater than achieved with Army issue OE-254 (30') retransmit antennas. While stationed at NIE 14.2, the WASP systems were operated solely by junior soldiers who received four days of training prior to the start of the experiment.
The NIE 14.2 exercises are intended to evaluate joint force network capabilities; improve unified land operations with communications nodes based on aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles; integrate networking technologies into the armored brigade combat team; develop ways to deliver, collect and process integrated, multi-source intelligence to front-line warfighters; and make field command posts more mobile and efficient. The NIE 14.2 exercises also involved beyond line of sight communications; expeditionary signal brigade tropospheric scatter communications; network intrusion prevention; cellular communications; electromagnetic spectrum operation; condition based maintenance; and operational energy solutions.
The WASP is a mobile, tactical, turn-key aerostat system capable of carrying a variety of payloads in support of military operations in the field, giving troops a tactical edge by allowing them to communicate over greater distances. The WASP leverages aerostat technology to elevate network payloads to an advantaged height to enable persistent network connectivity while reducing risk to troops conducting missions. The self contained WASP systems are mounted to a compact trailer for use with various military or commercial vehicles. The WASP systems are engineered to provide significant benefits, including reduced acquisition, maintenance and overall operation costs, smaller footprint necessary for infrastructure and operations, reduced operators required to manage the aerostat, decreased time for inflation/deflation, faster launch and recovery, and a simplified process.
About Drone Aviation Holding Corp.
Drone Aviation Holding Corp. (DRNE) provides critical aerial and land based surveillance and communications solutions to government and commercial customers. Utilizing a unique tethering capability, drone systems operate in the National Airspace within FAA guidelines for safe operations. Drone systems are designed and developed in-house utilizing proprietary technologies and processes that result in compact, rapidly deployable aerostat solutions and mast based systems that have been proven to fulfill critical requirements by the military and law enforcement in the U.S. and to our allies around the world. For more information about Drone Aviation Holding Corp please visit www.DroneAviationCorp.com, or view our reports and filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission on http://www.sec.gov, including the Risk Factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 and in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 5, 2014, as well as our Quarterly Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2014 filed May 8, 2014 and our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 5, 2014 related to the transactions.
ah yes - "blaugas".
In terms of getting us to the stratosphere, is the current Argus form too small or is the altitude limited by the propulsion to get it there?
The lack of funding to build and test another platform might be our problem now. Maybe the strategy of proving out the mid-altitude design and then land a funding partner to build the strat is in play? I really don't know...they started at the foxhole level and now seem dedicated to the mid altitude level so they seem to be following a linear approach for now.
Drew and company must see something in the Argus technology that they can build upon.
Drew's letter was one of the better versions from a WSGI COB. It shows more attention and thought to the relevant business components than a generic "happy to be here" type greeting.
Now the hard part - execution to increase that elusive shareholder value.
GTC is starting to show a bigger contribution to the bottom line and I hope those percentages translate into a nice bit of ongoing revenue to support our lowered operating expenses. We'll see once Q2 10-Q is out.
One of the things I cannot tell is how Drew's experience will translate into making the right financial decisions for us. Is he going to defer to GE and the "consultants" or does he have enough knowledge to say whether the moves are good or bad? GE's and MC's LJC financing was a disaster and they were the experts at the time. Would Drew know enough to assess all possibilities and ask the right questions?
Regarding Argus (and maybe it's only because I don't know how the pace of development should be progressing), but I would have liked to have been given a little more detail. It's been over a year with the consortium and I still don't have a definite feel for what the Argus can or cannot do after being developed by Eastcor, tested with the Army, and dissected and tested by the Consortium. Selfishly, I would have liked to read about where it's been and where it needs to be....but maybe that is what will be revealed once the study comes out later in year. I guess that does make sense - rather than trying to create and lead a market with Argus, find out what the industry needs and develop toward that goal.
Regarding the idea of getting academia involved - does that provide a substantial savings to R&D costs for us? Other than fame and glory for participation in Argus development, are there financial benefits for them like increased funding, patent rights, etc.?
DRNE BIB 100 PR
JACKSONVILLE, FL -- ( Marketwired ) -- 06/11/14 -- Drone Aviation Corp. ("DAC"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Drone Aviation Holding Corp. (PINKSHEETS: DRNE), a developer of specialized tethered drones and lighter-than-air aerostats, has completed the initial delivery of a Blimp in a Box™ 100 (BiB-100) system to the State of Ohio Department of Transportation ("ODOT"). Immediately following the delivery, a demonstration of the BiB-100 was conducted for over fifty State officials from various departments including, Corrections, Agriculture and the Ohio State Air National Guard . Additionally, the customer awarded DAC further purchase orders for a highly advanced electro-optical /infrared sensor payload and advanced aerial imaging and mapping equipment, all of which all work in conjunction with the BiB-100.
Unlike a free flying drone or stadium-sized, fixed aerostat platform, the highly mobile BiB-100 aerostat system utilizes a high strength, power tether line to remain connected to an integrated trailer where secure communications are transmitted. The commercial BiB systems are designed to provide incident awareness and assessment and can be used to monitor illegal activity, identify and monitor traffic patterns, or provide disaster response in a secure manner without the risk of being intercepted or jammed. The compact design allows the BiB-100 to be mounted in a self-contained, high strength "box", which is mounted to a standard trailer and can be towed by standard commercial vehicles or light trucks.
The BiB aerostat systems are a cost effective aerial platform utilizing a unique tethering technology making it able to safely operate in the National Airspace in compliance with FAA regulations. Military versions of the BiB aerostat systems are intended to provide semi-persistent, mobile, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance ("ISR") as well as extend communications for troops. The BiB aerostat systems are designed to provide real-time, day/night, high definition footage for ISR, detection of activity, improvised explosive devices, border security and other governmental and civilian uses.
Drone Aviation Holding Corp. CEO, Felicia Hess , stated, "With the delivery of the BiB-100 to the ODOT and the successful demonstration to State officials, we now can plan to commence training and live exercises that will demonstrate how effective the BiB can be for State and local departments requiring an aerial asset to provide persistent coverage over an area of interest. The ODOT required a cost-effective, reliable solution to meet the requirements of its mission and the ODOT found that in the BiB-100, as opposed to the danger and restrictions on free flying drones and the expense of manned small airplanes and helicopters. We are excited about working with our customer and supporting them as they integrate the BiB-100 into their workforce."
About Drone Aviation Holding Corp.
Drone Aviation Holding Corp. (DRNE) provides critical aerial and land based surveillance and communications solutions to government and commercial customers. Utilizing a unique tethering capability, drone systems operate in the National Airspace within FAA guidelines for safe operations. Drone systems are designed and developed in-house utilizing proprietary technologies and processes that result in compact, rapidly deployable aerostat solutions and mast based systems that have been proven to fulfill critical requirements by the military and law enforcement in the U.S. and to our allies around the world. For more information about Drone Aviation Holding Corp please visit www.DroneAviationCorp.com, or view our reports and filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission on http://www.sec.gov, including the Risk Factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 and in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 5, 2014 , as well as our Quarterly Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2014 filed May 8, 2014 and our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 5, 2014 related to the transactions.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains certain forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties and are made pursuant to the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements include those regarding Drone's relationship with the DOT and our ability to continue and/or expand such relationship, the results of any demonstrations of Drone's products, the suitability of the Drone aerostat systems or components for any particular application, the ability of the Drone aerostat systems or components to satisfy customer demands or requirements or meet any specific challenges, the ability of the Drone aerostat systems or components to function in accordance with their design expectations, the capabilities, characteristics and advantages of, and costs related to, the Drone aerostat systems or components as compared to any competitors, the further advancement, development or commercialization of any of Drone's products, the ability of Drone to secure further business with the DOT or other new customers or grow revenues, and the ability of Drone to execute on its strategies or to accomplish any of its goals or objectives. The words "forecast," "project," "intend," "expect," "plan, " "should," "would," and similar expressions and all statements, which are not historical facts, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, any of which could cause the Company to not achieve some or all of its goals or the Company's previously reported actual results, performance (finance or operating) to change or differ from future results, performance (financing and operating) or achievements, including those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Important factors that may cause results and outcomes to differ materially from those contained in these forward-looking statements included in this press release are described in our publicly filed reports. The Company assumes no, and hereby disclaims any, obligation to update the forward-looking statements contained in this press release.
Image Available: http://www2.marketwire.com/mw/frame_mw?attachid=2614785
Contacts:
Drone Aviation Holding Corp.
918-932-2000
Kendall Carpenter
kcarpenter@DroneAviationCorp.com
Source: Drone Aviation Corp
Also, remember Uli Altvater and Trimax Wireless? That was also let go...Uli sold it for 10M to Infrax in 2010.
No Mas Cables, etc. Those were the days.