INERTIAL LABS / GOVERNMENT OPPORTUNITY INTELLIGENCE | October 9, 2026

Army PM PNT is actively assessing alternate-navigation sensors. Inertial Labs has a precise evaluation question worth bringing.

Thesis: PM PNT’s modernization office says it discovers and tests modular assured-PNT technologies, while its September 2026 industry briefing specifically addressed non-RF navigation and signals of opportunity. Inertial Labs’ CheetahNAV, INS-P and tactical IMU capabilities make a sensible technical inquiry about standalone inertial drift performance and external aiding. This is NOT a published order for Inertial Labs sensors.

Verified signals

Army PM PNT official program page describes a capability-discovery, assessment, prototype and test process that assesses Government-owned PNT Reference Architecture, pntOS and CMOSS interoperability.
PM PNT September 3 announcement announced non-RF technology and signals-of-opportunity topics for a September 29 event. The event and questions deadline have PASSED; ask for the published post-event answers, not a closed registration.
Inertial Labs INS product models include INS-P with magnetically assisted heading and INS-D/INS-DM dual antenna products; manufacturer advertises operation through degraded/GNSS-denied scenarios, subject to actual drift and conditions.
CheetahNAV technical presentation describes a rugged tactical vehicle GNSS-aided inertial system, vehicle displays and dead-reckoning support.

Why Inertial Labs may fit

CheetahNAV: a full mounted-vehicle moving-map and INS solution for a possible tactical vehicle evaluation, if the Army is assessing full systems rather than modular components.
INS-P / tactical IMU: embedded inertial sensor and heading capability for possible non-RF fallback / sensor-fusion evaluations; manufacturer claims must be tested under Army trajectory and denial profiles.
Boundary: an INS cannot automatically satisfy military M-Code, assured timing, anti-jam, CMOSS or security requirements. The precise interface, drift threshold and ownership of navigation fusion are unknown.

Best public contacts

Christopher Jais — Project Manager, PM PNT: official Army biography/office confirms current program leadership. Use official routing, not a guessed direct address.
PM PNT support office: PMPNTSupport@army.mil on the same official program page. Request the PNT Modernization sensor-assessment technical lead and access to public briefing questions/answers.
Technical decision maker: current sensor-fusion test lead is not publicly verified; obtaining that correct official route is the first actionable request.

Concrete approach

Prepare a two-page side-by-side CheetahNAV vs INS-P/tactical IMU capability note with measured drift/heading performance, interface specifications, environmental and electrical constraints, and explicit GPS-denial test conditions.
Ask PM PNT which current evaluation track is considering raw inertial sources, externally aided INS or full vehicle navigation, and whether commercial modules can be assessed against PNT Reference Architecture or pntOS.
Offer an unclassified technical data review or structured GNSS-denial bench/field demonstration only if the office confirms a valid evaluation pathway.
Ask whether a mounted or dismounted prototype increment still has third-party inertial-sensor scope; if not, treat the program as a future watchpoint rather than a current sale.

Suggested first message

Subject: PM PNT Modernization — Inertial Labs GNSS-denied inertial assessment question

Hello PM PNT team — Inertial Labs develops tactical inertial navigation systems and sensors, including CheetahNAV and INS-P. We reviewed your non-RF navigation industry briefing and the PNT Modernization assessment process. Could you point us to the team evaluating inertial sensor fusion or vehicle navigation modules, and advise which unclassified interface/performance material would be useful? We can provide documented drift, heading and integration data.

What would qualify the opportunity

Is the Army evaluating inertial subcomponents or complete assured-PNT devices?
What denied-GNSS trajectory length, drift, timing and verification thresholds apply?
What architecture/pntOS/CMOSS interfaces must be demonstrated, and is a future evaluation window accessible?
Which incumbent PNT components and suppliers are fixed?

Risks / confidence

High confidence in the program’s assessment mission, recent non-RF briefing and manufacturer capabilities. Moderate plausibility for evaluation. Unknown active work package, actual sensor selection criteria, incumbent architecture and commercial award. The briefing registration and Q&A deadlines are closed.