U. S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.  20549  FORM 10-Q  X. QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934  For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011  . TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934  For the transition period from ___________ to _____________   Commission File Number: 000-29735  TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC.  Nevada88-0455809(State or other jurisdiction(IRS Employerof Incorporation)Identification Number)123 West Nye Lane, Suite 517Carson City, Nevada 89706(Address of principal executive offices)(775) 888-6744(Issuers Telephone Number)   Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X. No .  Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a small reporting company.  Large accelerated filer.Accelerated filer.Non-accelerated filer. (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)Smaller reporting companyX.  Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Yes . No X.  APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS  Check whether the registrant filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Section 12, 13, or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934 after the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes . No .  APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS  State the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date:  2,997,935,294 common shares outstanding, $0.001 par value, as of August 22, 2011       Forward Looking Statements  Certain information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (this Report or Quarterly Report) includes forward-looking statements  expressed in good faith and based upon what we believe are reasonable assumptions, but there can be no assurance that these expectations will be achieved or accomplished.  These forward looking statements can be identified by the use of terms and phrases such as believe, plan, intend, anticipate, target, estimate, expect, and the like, and/or future-tense or conditional constructions (will, may, could, should, etc.).  The statements herein which are not historical reflect our current expectations and projections about the Companys future results, performance, liquidity, financial condition, prospects and opportunities and are based upon information currently available to the Company and management and their interpretation of what are believed to be significant factors affecting the businesses, including many assumptions regarding future events.  Readers are urged not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Report.  We assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect any event or circumstance that may arise after the filing date of this Quarterly Report, other than as may be required by applicable law or regulation.  Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by us in our reports filed with the SEC (which shall also include by reference herein and incorporate the same as if fully included in their entirety, all Form 10-Ks, Form 10-Qs, Form 8-Ks and other periodic reports filed by us in the SECs EDGAR filing system (www.sec.gov)) which attempt to update interested parties of the risks and factors and other disclosures that may affect our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.  Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth in this Quarterly Report.  2   PART I  ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions for Form 10-Q and Regulation S-X.  Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.  In the opinion of management, all adjustments considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included.  All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature.  Operating results for the three month period ended June 30, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2011.  3   MALCOLM L. POLLARD, INC 4845 W. LAKE ROAD, # 119 ERIE, PA 16505 (814)838-8258 FAX (814)838-8452   Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants  Board of Directors Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc.  We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. as of June 30, 2011 and the related consolidated statements of income and cash flows for the six-month period ended June 30, 2011.  These interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.  We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.  A review of interim financial statements consists principally of applying analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters.  It is substantially less in scope than an audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the object of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.  The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in notes to the financial statements, the Company has negative working capital, negative cash flows from operations and recurring operating losses which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  Managements plans in regard to these matters are also described in the notes to the financial statements.  These financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.  Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements in order for them to be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles accepted in the United States of America.  In our opinion, subject to the uncertainty of a going concern, the information set forth in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of June 30,2011  and the related consolidated statements of income and cash flows for the six months then ended, is fairly stated, in all material respects.   Malcolm L. Pollard, Inc.  /S/ Malcolm L. Pollard, CPA  August 22, 2011 Erie, Pennsylvania  4    TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESCONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS  June 30,December 31,20112010ASSETSCurrent Assets:Cash$4,384$168Loans Receivable326,500165,000Total Current Assets330,884165,168Property and Equipment, net--TOTAL ASSETS$330,884$165,168LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITYCurrent Liabilities:Accounts payable$221,147$154,500Short-Term Debentures, including accrued interest--Total Current Liabilities221,147154,500Long-Term Debentures, including accrued interest2,242,9901,543,503TOTAL LIABILITIES2,464,1371,698,003COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIESSTOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIENCY:Preferred stock, Series A-$.001 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; - 1,000,000 and -0- shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 respectively1,000-Preferred stock, Series B-$.001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; - 2,195,401shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 respectively2,195-Preferred stock, Series C-$.001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; -2,000,000 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 respectively2,000-Common stock-$.001 par value;30,000,000,000 shares authorized; -2,997,935,294 and 2,987,935,294 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively2,997,9352,984,443Additional paid-in-capital36,087,74635,425,158Accumulated deficit(41,218,934)(39,942,436)TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIENCY(2,133,253)(1,532,835)TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIENCY$330,884$165,168   5    TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESCONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS  Three Months EndedSix Months EndedJune 30,June 30,June 30,June 30,2011201020112010REVENUES$-$-$-$-Operating costsGeneral and administrative, including compensatory element of stock issuance of $13,492 for the quarter ended March 31, 2011549,768368,5711,086,244477,627TOTAL COSTS549,768368,5711,086,244477,627OPERATING LOSS(549,768)(368,571)(1,086,244)(477,627)OTHER (EXPENSE) INCOME:Interest expense(57,627)(28,506)(115,254)(60,516)Other----TOTAL OTHER EXPENSES(57,627)(28,506)(115,254)(60,516)NET LOSS(607,395)(397,077)(1,201,498)(538,143)Legal Settlement$-$-$(75,000)$-NET LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS$(607,395)$(397,077)$(1,276,498)$(538,143)Loss per common share - basic and diluted$(0.00)$(0.00)$(0.00)$(0.00)Weighted average number of shares outstanding - basic and diluted2,997,935,2941,718,855,2982,995,932,7571,548,431,721   6    TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESCONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS  June 30,June 30,20112010CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIESNet (loss)$(1,276,498)$(538,143)Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:Impairment of Fixed Asset--Bad Debt Reserve--Stock-based compensation113,492421,370Changes in operating assets and liabilities:Loan Receivable--Accounts payable66,6479,409Accrued liabilities-(107,364)Net Cash Used in Operating Activities(1,096,359)(214,728)CASH USED IN INVESTING ACTIVITIESIncrease in Notes Receivable(161,500)-Net Cash Used in Investing Activities--(161,500)Increase in Notes Payable for Services648,346-Proceeds from convertible debt400,000107,364Convertible Notes Converted to Stock213,729-Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities1,262,075107,364Increase (Decrease) in cash4,216(107,364)Cash - Beginning of period168107,364Cash - End of period$4,384-Interest paid$-$-Taxes paid$-$-   7   TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  NOTE 1 - COMPANY AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION:  General  Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. (TADS) is a Nevada public corporation operating as an Aerospace/Defense Services contractor that offers tactical aviation services, aerial refueling, aircraft maintenance, disaster relief services, and other Aerospace/Defense services to the United States and Foreign militaries and agencies.  TADS was incorporated in the State of Nevada on July 9, 1998 under the name Natalma Industries, Inc. Originally, TADS operated as a junior mining company engaged in the exploration of mining properties. We were unsuccessful in locating a joint venture partner to assist us in the development of our mining claims. As a result, TADS was unable to pay for and perform the exploration and development required in its agreement with the owners of its properties and lost our rights to the mining claims. Our management at the time, therefore determined that it was in the best interest of our shareholders that we seek potential operating businesses and business opportunities with the intent to acquire or merge with another business, which led to the purchase substantially all of the assets of AeroGroup Incorporated (the AeroGroup Acquisition).  On December 15, 2006 (the Closing Date), TADS and three of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Resource Financial Aviation Holdings Inc., OneSource Aviation Acquisition Inc. and Genesis Aviation Acquisition Inc., each a Nevada corporation (the TADS Subsidiaries and, collectively with TADS,) acquired substantially all of the assets of AeroGroup Incorporated (Aero or AeroGroup), a Utah corporation, and its three wholly owned subsidiaries, OneSource Acquisition, Inc., Genesis Acquisition, Inc. and Resource Financial Holding Acquisition, Inc., each a Delaware corporation (the AeroGroup Subsidiaries and, collectively with AeroGroup Incorporated, AeroGroup), pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement dated July 14, 2006, as amended (the Asset Purchase Agreement) and in consideration of the acquisition issued stock and assumed certain indebtedness and other obligations under various warrants, a real property sublease, government and non-government aviation contracts and certain other contracts of AeroGroup (the AeroGroup Acquisition). As a result of the asset purchase, the Company intends to be a provider of outsourced military fighter jet pilot training to military personnel, including certain flight support services.  Since the AeroGroup Acquisition was settled through the issuance of a controlling interest in TADS Common Stock, AeroGroup is deemed to be the acquirer for accounting purposes. Furthermore, since TADS is deemed to be a shell company prior to the acquisition, purchase accounting was not applied. Therefore, the transaction was accounted for as a reverse acquisition and recapitalization of AeroGroup. Accordingly, the historical financial statements presented in the financial statements are those of AeroGroup as adjusted to reflect the recapitalization and elimination of certain assets and liabilities that were not assumed by TADS. The net liabilities not assumed by TADS were recorded as a contribution to capital totaling $4,505,560. These liabilities substantially consisted of indebtedness due to Aeros controlling stockholder, Mark Daniels (Daniels).  The accompanying share information for Aero has been retroactively restated to reflect the recapitalization transactions, including the exchange of Common Stock and Common Stock equivalents of Aero for Common Stock and Common Stock equivalents of TADS based on the exchange ratio of 50 to 1.  In connection with the reverse acquisition, the consideration paid to Aero Group for the assets consisted of:  - 14,989,900 shares of restricted Common Stock of TADS, constituting a majority of the then outstanding Common Stock of TADS.  - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligations under its convertible debentures totaling approximately $5.6 million, inclusive of accrued interest, all convertible into shares of TADS Common Stock at prices ranging $0.15 to $1.00 per share.  - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligation under a convertible note issued in connection with a settlement agreement in the principal amount of $250,000, with an interest rate of 12%, payable in 36 equal monthly installments of principal, plus interest. The note has a maturity date of April 13, 2011. The note is convertible into shares of Common Stock at a rate of $.50 per share.  - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligation under an assumed secured note payable to Daniels in the principal amount of $1,100,000, plus interest, at the rate of 12% per annum. The outstanding principal and interest is convertible into shares of TADS Common Stock at a conversion price of $.0.50 per share.  8    - Assumption by TADS of Aeros' obligation under a note assumed by the Company in connection with its June 2006 asset purchase (Note 5) in the principal amount of $2.2 million, plus interest at the rate of 8% per annum. The outstanding principal and interest is convertible into shares of TADS Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.50 per share.  - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligations under certain outstanding warrants to purchase 23,968,315 shares of Common Stock exercisable at $0.15 per share. - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligations under government contracts and subcontracts and of leases relating to its Grayson Airport facilities, a $300,000 consulting contract and property leases.   - Assumption by TADS of Aeros obligations for accrued expenses totaling $136,000.  Aero is a Utah corporation, which was incorporated on July 31, 1984 under the name Diversified Resources Group, Inc. Aero was a provider of outsourced military fighter jet pilot training to military personnel, including certain flight support services. Effective January 1, 2006, Aero became a development stage company as it was devoting all of its present efforts to securing and establishing a new business.  Going Concern and Management's Plan  The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate the continuation of the Company as a going concern. However, as shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements,the Company has incurred losses from operations since inception and has a significant working capital deficiency as of June 30, 2011 of approximately $41,218,000.  On December 15, 2006, TADS acquired substantially all of the assets of Aero and assumed certain contracts in exchange for the assumption by TADS of certain liabilities of Aero. Management believes the Company can raise adequate capital for the Companys required working capital needs for 2010. Management also believes that it still needs substantial capital in order to carry out its business plan, which is to become a civilian provider of outsourced military aviation services which includes fighter jet pilot training, maintenance training, aerial fire-fighting, disaster relief services, and other aerial services. No assurance can be given that the Company can obtain the required estimated additional working capital, or if obtained, that such funding will not cause substantial dilution to stockholders of the Company. Being a development stage company, the Company is subject to all the risks inherent in the establishment of a new enterprise and the marketing of a new product, many of which risks are beyond the control of the Company. All of the factors discussed above raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.  These consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability of recorded asset amounts that might be necessary as a result of the above uncertainty.  NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES   Basis of Presentation  In the opinion of management, the accompanying consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, necessary for a fair statement of the results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented and the condensed consolidated balance sheet for the quarter ended June 30, 2011. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the SEC rules and regulations.     Financial Reporting  The Company prepares its financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Revenues and expenses are reported on the accrual basis, which means that income is recognized as it is earned and expenses are recognized as they are incurred.  9    Use of Estimates  The Companys significant estimates include accrued expenses and stock based transactions. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. While the Company believes that such estimates are fair when considered in conjunction with the financial statements taken as a whole, the actual amounts of such estimates, when known, will vary from these estimates. If actual results significantly differ from the Companys estimates, the Companys financial condition and results of operations could be materially impacted.  Cash and Cash Equivalents  Cash and cash equivalents include all interest-bearing deposits or investments with maturities of three months or less.  Concentration of Credit Risk  Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash. The Company maintains cash balances at one financial institution, which is insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The FDIC insured institution insures up to $250,000 on account balances. The amounts that are not insured by FDIC limitations are held in short-term securities.  Fair value of financial instruments  The carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet for accounts payable and accrued expenses, debenture and loans payable approximate their fair market value based on the short-term maturity of these instruments.  Impairment of long  lived assets and long- lived assets to be disposed of  The Company accounts for the impairment of long-lived assets in accordance with FASB ASC 360 Property, Plant and Equipment.  ASC 360 requires write-downs to be recorded on long-lived assets used in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets carrying amount.  As of June 30, 2011, the property and equipment held by the Company have been reviewed, and it was determined that the value had been impaired 100%.  Revenue Recognition  Revenue for services and goods is recognized monthly as provided pursuant to the terms of contracts or purchase orders, which have prices that are fixed and determinable. The Company assesses the clients ability to meet the contract terms, including meeting payment obligations, before entering into the contract. Deferred revenue results from customers who are billed for monitoring in advance of the period in which the services are provided, on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis.  The Company follows Staff Accounting Bulletin 104 (SAB 104), which requires the Company to defer certain revenue and expenses. The capitalized costs and deferred revenues related to the installation are then amortized over the life of an average customer relationship, on a straight line basis. If the customer is discontinued prior to the expiration of the original expected life, the unamortized portion of the deferred installation revenue and related capitalized costs are recognized in the period the discontinuation becomes effective. In accordance with EITF 00-21, Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables, the service contracts that include both installation and video streaming are considered a single unit of accounting.   Property and Equipment  Property and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. Expenditures for major betterments and additions are capitalized while replacement, maintenance and repairs, which do not extend the lives of the respective assets, are currently charged to expense. Any gain or loss on disposition of assets is recognized currently in the statement of income.  10    Earnings (loss) per share  Earnings (loss) per share is computed in accordance with FASB ASC 260, "Earnings per Share". Basic earnings (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income (loss), after deducting preferred stock dividends accumulated during the period, by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during each period. Diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock, common stock equivalents and other potentially dilutive securities outstanding during the period. The outstanding warrants for quarters ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 respectively are anti-dilutive and therefore are not included in earnings (loss) per share.  Accounting for stock-based compensation  In accordance with FASB ASC 718-10, Compensation-Stock Compensation, a public entity measures the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award (with limited exceptions). That cost will be recognized over the period during which an employee is required to provide service.  In addition, a public entity is required to measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of liability instruments based on its current fair value. The fair value of that award has been re-measured subsequently at each reporting date through the settlement date. Changes in fair value during the requisite service period will be recognized as compensation cost over that period.  For the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, the Company did not grant any stock options.  Non- Employee Stock Based Compensation  The cost of stock based compensation awards issued to non-employees for services are recorded at either the fair value of the services rendered or the instruments issued in exchange for such services, whichever is more readily determinable, using the measurement date guidelines enumerated in FASB ASC 505-50, Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees.  Common stock purchase warrants  The Company accounts for common stock purchase warrants in accordance with FASB ASC 815-40, Derivatives and Hedging. Based on the provisions of ASC 815-40, the Company classifies as equity any contracts that (i) require physical settlement or net-share settlement, or (ii) gives the company a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in its own shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement). The Company classifies as assets or liabilities any contracts that (i) require net-cash settlement (including a requirement to net cash settle the contract if an event occurs and if that event is outside the control of the company), or (ii) give the counterparty a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement).  Income Taxes  The Company accounts for income taxes using FASB ASC 740-10, "Income Taxes," which requires recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, deferred tax liabilities and assets are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the quarter in which the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded for deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The Company does not expect that this interpretation will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.  FASB ASC 740-10 also provides guidance about how an enterprise should determine whether a tax position is effectively settled for the purpose of recognizing previously unrecognized tax benefits. Under ASC 740-10, a tax position could be effectively settled on completion of examination by a taxing authority if the entity does not intend to appeal or litigate the result and it is remote that the taxing authority would examine or re-examine the tax position. The Company does not expect that this interpretation will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.  NOTE 3 - RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS  ASU 2011-05  Presentation of comprehensive income  ASU 2011-05 was the result of a joint project with the IASB and amends the guidance in ASC 220, Comprehensive Income,by eliminating the option to present components of other comprehensive income (OCI) in the statement of stockholders equity. Instead, the new guidance now requires entities to present all nonowner changes in stockholders equity either as a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or as two separate but consecutive statements.  11    All entities that report OCI items will be impacted by the changes in this ASU. The components of OCI have not changed, nor has the guidance on when OCI items are reclassified to net income; however, the amendments require entities to present all reclassification adjustments from OCI to net income on the face of the statement of comprehensive income.  The amendments to ASC 220, Comprehensive Income,included in ASU 2011-05, Presentation of Comprehensive Income, are effective for fiscal years and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2011 (that is, the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012 for calendar-year entities) for public entities and for interim and annual periods thereafter. The amended guidance must be applied retrospectively and early adoption is permitted.  ASU 2011-04  Amendments to achieve common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs  The amendments in ASU 2011-04 do not modify the requirements for when fair value measurements apply; rather, they generally represent clarifications on how to measure and disclose fair value under ASC 820, Fair Value Measurement,including the following revisions:  - The concepts of highest and best useand valuation premiseare relevant only for measuring the fair value of nonfinancial assets and do not apply to financial assets and liabilities.  - An entity should measure the fair value of an equity-classified financial instrument from the perspective of the market participant that holds the instrument as an asset.  - An entity that holds a group of financial assets and financial liabilities whose market risk (that is, interest rate risk, currency risk, or other price risk) and credit risk are managed on the basis of the entitys net risk exposure may apply an exception to the fair value requirements in ASC 820 if certain criteria are met. The exception allows such financial instruments to be measured on the basis of the reporting entitys net, rather than gross, exposure to those risks.  - Premiums or discounts related to the unit of account are appropriate when measuring fair value of an asset or liability if market participants would incorporate them into the measurement (for example, a control premium). However, premiums or discounts related to size as a characteristic of the reporting entitys holding (that is, a blockage factor) should not be considered in a fair value measurement.  The amendments to ASC 820, Fair Value Measurement, included in ASU 2011-04, Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs, are effective prospectively for public entities for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011 (that is, the quarter ending March 31, 2012 for calendar-year entities). Early adoption is not permitted for public entities  ASU 2011-03  Reconsideration of effective control for repurchase agreements  The amendments to ASC 860-10included in ASU 2011-03, simplified the accounting for financial assets transferred under repurchase agreements (repos) and similar arrangements, by eliminating the transferors ability criteria from the assessment of effective control over those assets as well as the related implementation guidance.  Currently under ASC 860-10-40-24 a transferor must meet four criteria to maintain effective control of securities transferred in a repo and to therefore account for the transfer as a secured borrowing rather than a sale. One of these criteria states that the transferor must be able to either repurchase or redeem the transferred securities on substantially the agreed terms, even if the transferee is in default. This criterion is satisfied only if the transferor has cash or collateral sufficient to fund substantially the entire cost of purchasing replacement securities.  The amendments in ASU 2011-03 remove this criterion and related implementation guidance from the Codification, thereby reducing the criteria that transferors must satisfy to qualify for secured borrowing accounting and, as a result, likely reducing the number of transfers accounted for as sales.  The amendments to ASC 860-10, Transfers and Servicing, included in ASU 2011-03, Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements, are effective for both public and nonpublic entities prospectively for new transfers and existing transactions modified as of the first interim or annual period beginning on or after December 15, 2011 (that is, the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012 for calendar-year entities). Early adoption is not permitted.  12    ASU 2011-02 -  This bulletin discusses ASU 2011-02, which was issued by the FASB to provide creditors with additional guidance in evaluating whether a restructuring of debt is a troubled debt restructuring. The new guidance does not amend the guidance for debtors. It is generally effective for public entities in the quarter ended September 30, 2011.  ASU 2011-01 - Troubled debt restructuring disclosures for public-entity creditors deferred  The FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-01, Deferral of the Effective Date of Disclosures about Troubled Debt Restructurings in Update No. 2010-20,which temporarily defers the date when public-entity creditors are required to provide the new disclosures for troubled debt restructurings in ASU 2010-20, Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. The deferred effective date will coincide with the effective date for the clarified guidance about what constitutes a troubled debt restructuring, which the Board is currently deliberating. The clarified guidance is expected to apply for interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2011.  When providing the new disclosures under ASU 2010-20, public entities would be required to retrospectively apply the clarified guidance on what constitutes a troubled debt restructuring to restructurings occurring on or after the beginning of the year in which the proposed clarified guidance is adopted.  Other accounting standards that have been issued or proposed by the FASB or other standards-setting bodies that do not require adoption until a future date are not expected to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements upon adoption.  NOTE 4  SALE OF STOCK  Pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement, in April, 2011, the Company sold 1,333,332 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to Cornucopia, Ltd. at a purchase price of $0.30 per share. The gross proceeds of the offering totaled $400,000.  See Preferred Stock below for additional information of the conversion of funding to preferred stock  Convertible Debentures  Second Quarter of 2011  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,500.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 26,333,333 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $6,692.09 to the Gary Fears Trust as consideration for a loan to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 4,461,393 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $15,00.00 to Brad Hacker as consideration for accrued accounting fees.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $75,000.00 to Jamie Goldstein to settle an indemnification claim by Goldstein.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 50,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  Warrants  In April, 2011, in connection with a securities purchase agreement with Cornucopia, Ltd., the Company issued Cornucopia: (a) Series A-100 warrant to purchase up to 533,333,333 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.00075 for a one year period; and (b) Series A-101 warrant to purchase up to 800,000,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of the lesser of: (A) $0.0025 or (B) a fifty percent (50%) discount to the average closing price of the Common Stock for the thirty (30) trading days prior to exercise of the A-101 warrant.  13    Conversion of Notes and Exercise of Warrants  No Notes or Warrants were converted during the second quarter of 2011  Retirement of Debt  In May, 2011, The Company retired a non-convertible Debenture issued to Jamie Goldstein in the amount of $110,000.  In May, 2011, the Company retired $6,000 of a $25,000 Convertible Debenture issued to Dwight Barnell.  Issuance of Common Stock  Issuance of Common Stock to Air Support Systems, LLC  The Company issued 10,000,000 shares of stock to Air Support Systems, LLC in May 2011 pursuant to the terms of a lease agreement between the Company and Air Support Systems, LLC executed on May 18, 2010, for which the Common Stock had previously not been issued. No registration rights were issued in connection with these shares.  The shares were valued at $15,000.  Designation of Preferred Stock  On April 25, 2011, the Company approved of a Certificate of Designation to be filed with the Nevada Secretary of State designating 1,000,000 shares of its authorized but undesignated preferred stock as Series A Preferred Stock and 5,000,000 shares of its authorized but undesignated preferred stock as Series B Preferred Stock. Each share of Series A Preferred Stock is convertible into one hundred shares of Common Stock and maintains a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock each share of Series A Preferred Stock is convertible into multiplied by thirty. Each share of Series B Preferred Stock is convertible into four hundred shares of Common Stock, maintains a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock each share of Series B Preferred Stock is convertible into, provides for a 12% annual coupon payment, is collateralized by the Aircraft and provides for an optional right of participation by the holder in the Companys operating profits through the redemption and retirement of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock. A copy of the Certificate of Designation filed with the Nevada Secretary of State designating the rights, preferences, powers, privileges and restrictions, qualifications and limitations of the Series A Preferred Stock and Series B Preferred Stock has been attached as an exhibit to the previously filed Form 8-K and has been incorporated in its entirety by reference.  Series A Preferred Stock  The Company issued 1,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock to Mr. Alexis Korybut in April, 2011 pursuant to an Employment Agreement between the Company and Mr. Korybut. No registration rights were issued in connection with these shares.  The shares were valued at $100,000.  Series B Preferred Stock  On April 1, 2011, the Company entered into a binding letter of intent with Cornucopia, Ltd. (Cornucopia) in connection with a proposed financing arrangement.  Pursuant to the terms of the letter of intent and subject to further negotiation and final agreements and documentation Cornucopia has agreed to provide the Company up to One Million Dollars (US$1,000,000) in financing as follows:  a.           Initial Financing Terms.  Cornucopia shall provide an initial financing of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$400,000 and the Initial Financing) through the sale and issuance by the Company of shares of preferred stock (the Preferred Stock) to be designated upon execution of the Definitive Agreements. The Initial Financing and number of shares of Preferred Stock: (i) shall be convertible into 533,333,200 shares of the Companys restricted common stock, par value $0.001 (the Common Stock); (ii) shall maintain a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock the Preferred Stock is convertible into; (iii) shall provide for a 12% annual coupon payment; (iv) shall be collateralized by certain Company assets to be agreed upon by the parties in the Definitive Agreements; (v) shall provide for a right of participation in the Companys operating profits to be agreed upon by the parties in the Definitive Agreements; and (vi) shall include (A) a warrant to purchase up to 533,333,200 shares of Common Stock and (B) a warrant to purchase up to 800,000,000 shares of Common Stock.  14    b.           Subsequent Financing Terms.  Cornucopia shall provide a subsequent financing amount of Six Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$600,000 and the Subsequent Financing), as required by and requested by the Company, subject to Cornucopia approval which shall not be unreasonably withheld, through the sale and issuance by the Company of additional shares of Preferred Stock. The Subsequent Financing and shares of Preferred Stock: (i) shall be convertible into shares of Common Stock at a conversion price equal to a fifty percent (50%) discount to the average closing price of the Companys Common Stock for the thirty (30) day period prior to each Subsequent Financing; (ii) shall maintain a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock the Subsequent Financing Preferred Stock is convertible into; (iii) shall provide for a 12% annual coupon payment; (iv) shall be collateralized by certain Company assets to be agreed upon by the parties in the Definitive Agreements; and (v) shall provide for a right of participation in the Companys operating profits to be agreed upon by the parties in the Definitive Agreements.  On April 25, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the SPA) for the initial round of the US$1,000,000 financing under the LOI. Pursuant to the terms of the SPA, Cornucopia agreed to provide the Company US$400,000 in financing through the sale and issuance by the Company of a total of 1,333,332 shares of Series B Preferred Stock in two separate tranches. As disclosed in the above reference the Company received the initial financing tranche of US$200,000 through the sale of 666,666 shares of Series B Preferred Stock.  On April 24, 2011, the Company received the second financing tranche of US$200,000 from Cornucopia under the terms of the SPA. Pursuant to the terms of the SPA, the Company agreed to issue Cornucopia an additional 666,666 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (the T2 Shares). The T2 Shares: (i) are convertible into 266,666,400 shares of the Companys restricted common stock, par value $0.001 (the Common Stock); (ii) maintain a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock the T2 Shares are convertible into; (iii) provide for a 12% annual coupon payment; (iv) are collateralized by certain Company assets; and (v) provide for an optional right of participation by Cornucopia in the Companys operating profits through the redemption and retirement of a portion of the T2 Shares.  On July 22, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the Second SPA) wherein Cornucopia purchased an additional 437,445 shares of Preferred Stock for a total purchase price of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$200,000). The rights, preferences and privileges of the Preferred Stock are outlined in the Certificate of Designation designating the Preferred Stock, which was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2011 and is hereby incorporated by reference.  NOTE 6 - STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY:  On August 5, 2011, the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State increasing the Companys authorized shares of Common Stock to 6,000,000,000.  NOTE 7  COMMITMENTS:  Compensation Agreements  On April 24, 2011, the Company entered into an employment agreement with its Chief Executive Officer, Alexis C. Korybut. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Mr. Korybut will be employed in the positions of Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company and will receive an annual salary of $120,000, a one-time issuance of 1,000,000 shares of the Companys Series A Preferred Stock and additional benefits as outlined in the agreement. A copy of the agreement has been attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 28, 2011and has been incorporated in its entirety herein by reference.  NOTE 8 - OTHER EVENTS:  Services Agreements  On or about May 2, 2011, Company entered into a joint venture Services Agreement (the Agreement) with Tactical Air Support, Inc., a Nevada corporation (Tac-Air) relating to the capital lease and operation of an Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano aircraft (the Aircraft). The Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano is world renowned for its capabilities in counter insurgency and air to ground ordnance deliveries.  Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Aircraft was leased in the name of Tac-Air under a capital lease, with Tac-Air maintaining full control of the Aircraft and responsibility for all associated operational, administrative, maintenance and insurance costs related to the operation of the Aircraft. Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. has deliver $80,280.00 as a security deposit (the Deposit) under the lease of the Aircraft, with Tac-Air required to compensate the Company with an interest payment equal to one percent (1%) of the Deposit payable monthly. In addition, the Company is entitled to thirty percent (30%) of the operating profit received by Tac-Air relating to work performed with the Aircraft. A copy of the Agreement has been attached to this Form 8-K and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.   15    On or about June 2, 2011, the Company entered into a Letter of Intent (the LOI) with Tactical Air Support, Inc. (Tac-Air) relating to the proposed acquisition (the Acquisition) of certain aircraft (the Aircraft). A copy of the LOI has been attached to the previously filed Form 8-K and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.  Subject to further Definitive Agreements (as defined in the LOI) and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, in the event the parties are able to complete the Acquisition of the Aircraft, the Aircraft is to be purchased in the name of Tac-Air, with Tac-Air maintaining full control of the Aircraft and responsibility for all associated operational, administrative, maintenance and insurance costs related to the operation of the Aircraft.  Subject to further Definitive Agreements and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. shall be responsible for the acquisition of necessary funding related to the Acquisition and shall receive the right to receive fifty percent (50%) of all future profits derived from the operation, sale, lease or any other use of the Aircraft.  Previously, on December 10, 2010, the parties entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the Merger) related to the proposed merger between the parties. Although the Merger had not closed prior to the termination period and the related agreement has since expired, the parties are currently in non-binding negotiations to finalize the proposed Merger. In the event the parties are able to finalize and close the Merger while the Aircraft continues to be employed under the Definitive Agreements, subject to further agreement between the parties, such Definitive Agreements shall be terminated and the Aircraft shall continue to be employed by the combined entity.  On July 22, 2011, the Company entered into a Binding Letter of Intent (the LOI) with Tactical Air Support, Inc. (Tac-Air) in connection with certain government services contracts Tac-Air is currently seeking (the Services Contracts).  Subject to further definitive agreements and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, in the event Tac-Air is awarded the Services Contracts, the Company will receive the right to thirty percent (30%) of all future net profits derived from the Services Contracts.  In connection with the LOI and Services Contracts, the Company has provided Tac-Air funding codified by a secured promissory note issued to the Company by Tac-Air in the amount of Three Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Dollars (US$315,000 and the Note). The Note maintains zero interest, a maturity date of October 22, 2011 and is secured by and convertible into 100,000 shares of Tac-Airs pledged, issued and outstanding common stock at the Companys option, which represents a ten percent (10%) ownership interest in Tac-Air. A copy of the Note has been attached as an exhibit to the previously filed Form 8-K, and is hereby incorporated by reference.  Financing Agreement  On July 22, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the Second SPA) wherein Cornucopia purchased an additional 437,445 shares of Preferred Stock for a total purchase price of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$200,000). The rights, preferences and privileges of the Preferred Stock are outlined in the Certificate of Designation designating the Preferred Stock, which was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2011 and is hereby incorporated by reference.  Debenture Issuances  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,000.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary and expenses during Q-2/2011.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 31,200 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $25,000.00 to The Bingham Law Group as consideration for unpaid legal fees as of 7/1/2011 to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 20,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  Increase in Authorized Shares  On August 5, 2011, the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State increasing the Companys authorized shares of Common Stock to 6,000,000,000.  16    Legal Proceedings  Mr. Charlie Searock, a former executive officer of our company, has brought a laws suit in the District Court of the 336th Judicial District of Grayson County, Texas against us and seven other defendants on February 6, 2007, on claims of breach of an employment agreement between Searock and International Tactical Training Center, Inc. (ITTC). (Charles J. Searock, Jr., vs. Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc., International Tactical training Center, Inc., Mark Daniels, Victor Miller, John Farley, Gary Fears, Jamie Goldstein, and Joel Ramsden, Cause No.07-0322-336). ITTC and the Company are the only two corporate defendants named in the Searock lawsuit. Of the six individuals named as defendants, three are former ITTC management.   Searock asserts that the Company is liable for ITTCs breach of employment agreement because he alleges that the Company acquired ITTCs assets, and that ITTC was a former subsidiary of AeroGroup, Inc., an entity not named as a defendant in the Searock lawsuit. In addition to his claim for breach of the ITTC employment contract, Searock also asserts theories of tort liability against the defendants.   The Company denies any liability to Searock on his claim for breach of the ITTC employment contract and denies Searock has any factual basis to impose liability on the Company under any of his theories of tort liability. Specifically, the Company denies that it acquired, owns or controls ITTCs former assets. The Company believes that this claim is without merit and is working towards resolution of the same.  In November, 2010, the District Court of the 336th Judicial District of Grayson County, Texas ruled in favor of Searock against the Company and four other defendants, and awarded to Searock a judgment of $524,000 jointly and severally with all defendants, $524,000 jointly and severally with all defendants for damages, and $2,000,000 against the Company for punitive damages.  The Company has filed an appeal in the Ft. Worth Court of Appeals and firmly believes that the judgment will be dismissed in its entirety not only based upon the merits of the case, but also because the Company and the other four defendants were all denied due-process in that none of the defendants including the Company was served with notice of the court date, and as such, none of the defendants were present to offer any defense.  Searock claims that all defendants were properly served, curiously, however no proof of such was requested by the presiding judge who then proceeded to issue the judgment against the defendants.  Most recently, the company has filed an appeal contesting a temporary restraining order issued in July, 2011 in connection with the judgment for which it did not have an opportunity to defend itself in court.  The Company believes that all of the above will be overturned when it has the opportunity to defend itself through the Appellate Court.  On March 4, 2010, TADS sued Mark Daniels, the Companys former President and Chief Executive Officer, and various entities affiliated with or controlled by Mr. Daniels, in The Circuit Court of The 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, for temporary and permanent injunctive relief, damages, and other relief for breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty; tortuous interference with advantageous and contractual relationships, and misappropriation, misuse and conversion of trade secrets and confidential business information. Although the Court did not grant our Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction, the court did find that here continues to be a valid and enforceable agreement between the parties. Most recently, the Company filed motions for the disgorgement of certain assets and opportunities that it believes Mr. Daniels has misappropriated, and for the cancellation of certain convertible promissory notes and certain share issuances that it believes the Company awarded to Mr. Daniels without proper consideration when Mr. Daniels was the President, CEO, and director of the Company, and based upon information relied upon at the time by Mr. Daniels that the Company believes was materially misrepresented by Mr. Daniels.  On May 7, 2010, Mr. Daniels filed an improper and frivolous Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition (the Petition) against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, in an effort to circumvent the legitimate court process, by claiming non-payment of a promissory note that the Company contends in its litigation against Mr. Daniels was issued without proper consideration when Mr. Daniels was the President, Chief Executive Officer, and a Director of the Company. Upon notification to the Company on May 10, 2010 of this improper Petition, the Company requested and was granted an Emergency Hearing for May 14, 2010 in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Florida before Chief Justice Paul G. Hyman (the "Emergency Hearing"). On May 14, 2010, Chief Justice Paul G. Hyman dismissed the Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition by a signed Order granting an emergency Motion to Dismiss the Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition filed against the Company by Mr. Daniels.  In the Court Order, it was agreed that:  -Mr. Daniels claim is the subject of a bona fide dispute;-The Company has more than 12 unsecured creditors (note holders are the only claims not in dispute);-The Court should enter an Order dismissing Mr. Daniels involuntary petition, with prejudice to any subsequent involuntary petition by Mr. Daniels (i.e.. he is barred from refilling an involuntary petition), or any insider or affiliate of Mr. Daniels; and-Moreover, Mr. Daniels cannot pursue any efforts or take any actions to solicit, recruit, encourage, or cause any other alleged creditor of the Company to file an involuntary bankruptcy petition against the Company.-The Company agreed to withdraw its claim for attorneys fees, costs, damages and punitive damages arising from the improvident filing in exchange for Mr. Daniels consent to the dismissal of the petition.   17    Additionally, Mr. Daniels attorney of record who filed the Petition, as a result of learning that Mr. Daniels had materially misstated the facts and failed to disclose that Mr. Daniels was currently the Defendant in civil litigation with the Company, filed a motion to withdraw his representation of Mr. Daniels in the Petition.  As disclosed in our past filings, Sichenzia & Ross LLP (Sichenzia) had been pursuing a claim against the Company for unpaid services dating back to early 2007. The Company recently learned that Sichenzia obtained a judgment against the Company in the amount of $21,471.87 in the Civil Court of the City of New York, County of New York on April 3, 2008. We believe that this claim is without merit and are working towards resolution of the same.  On August 31, 2010, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. (the M&M Agreement) to acquire the exclusive right to purchase a number of military jets and related parts and engines. However, as of the date of this Report, because M&M has failed to perform its obligations under the M&M Agreement, we cannot finance and take possession of the assets until such time as this issue is resolved. We have re-initiated legal action against M&M in Palm Beach County, Florida in order to take possession of the related aircraft and parts. TADS believes that when fully operational and under contract, the aircraft may add between $9,000,000 and $13,500,000 in the aggregate per year to its top-line revenue. In addition, TADS anticipates that the aircraft, related parts, and jet engines may significantly increase the assets to its balance sheet, as well as provide additional cash-flows to the Company from sales of surplus spare parts and jet engines. However, the Company was recently denied a permanent injunction against M&M and although the Company believes it will prevail in certain legal disputes with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. as described herein, the assets may not be available to the Company for an indefinite period, if ever.  As of June 30, 2011, TADS is not a party to any other pending litigation or legal proceeding that is not in the ordinary course of business. To our knowledge, no such proceedings are threatened.  NOTE 9  NOTES RECEIVABLE  On July 22, 2011, Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company) entered into a Binding Letter of Intent (the LOI) with Tactical Air Support, Inc., a Nevada corporation (Tac-Air) in connection with certain government services contracts Tac-Air is currently seeking (the Services Contracts).  Subject to further definitive agreements and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, in the event Tac-Air is awarded the Services Contracts, the Company will receive the right to thirty percent (30%) of all future net profits derived from the Services Contracts.  In connection with the LOI and Services Contracts, the Company has provided Tac-Air funding codified by a secured promissory note issued to the Company by Tac-Air in the amount of Three Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Dollars (US$315,000 and the Note). The Note maintains zero interest, a maturity date of October 22, 2011 and is secured by and convertible into 100,000 shares of Tac-Airs pledged, issued and outstanding common stock at the Companys option, which represents a ten percent (10%) ownership interest in Tac-Air. A copy of the Note has been attached as an exhibit to this Form 8-K, and is hereby incorporated by reference.   18    ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS  FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS  This discussion and analysis in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes. Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of any contingent liabilities at the financial statement date and reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. We review our estimates and assumptions on an on-going basis. Our estimates are based on our historical experience and other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results are likely to differ from those estimates under different assumptions or conditions, but we do not believe such differences will materially affect our financial position or results of operations. Our critical accounting policies, the policies we believe are most important to the presentation of our financial statements and require the most difficult, subjective and complex judgments, are outlined below in Critical Accounting Policies, and have not changed significantly.  In addition, certain statements made in this report may constitute forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve known or unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Specifically, but not limited to, 1) our ability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals for our products; and 2) our ability to increase revenues and operating income, is dependent upon our ability to develop and sell our products, general economic conditions, and other factors. You can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as "may," "will," "should," "expects," "intends," "plans," "anticipates," "believes," "estimates," "predicts," "potential," "continues" or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. We base these forward-looking statements on our expectations and projections about future events, which we derive from the information currently available to us.  Such forward-looking statements relate to future events or our future performance. Although we believe that the expectations reflected-in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements.  Forward-looking statements are only predictions.  The forward-looking events discussed in this Quarterly Report, the documents to which we refer you, and other statements made from time to time by us or our representatives, may not occur, and actual events and results may differ materially and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions about us.  For these statements, we claim the protection of the bespeaks caution doctrine.  The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date hereof, and we expressly disclaim any obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this filing.  OVERVIEW AND PLAN OF OPERATION  Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. (TADS) is a Nevada public corporation that offers air-combat training, aerial refueling, aircraft maintenance training, disaster relief services, and other Aerospace/Defense services to the United States and Foreign militaries and agencies. The Company is currently a developmental stage company with limited current business operations, no active contracts in operation and uncertain viability.  The Companys executive offices are located at 123 West Nye Lane, Suite 517, Carson City, Nevada, 89706 and the Companys phone number is (775) 888-6744.  TADS Corporate History  TADS was incorporated in the State of Nevada on July 9, 1998 under the name Natalma Industries, Inc. Originally, TADS operated as a junior mining company engaged in the exploration of mining properties. We were unsuccessful in locating a joint venture partner to assist us in the development of our mining claims. As a result, TADS was unable to pay for and perform the exploration and development required in its agreement with the owners of its properties and lost our rights to the mining claims. Our management at the time, therefore determined that it was in the best interest of our shareholders that we seek potential operating businesses and business opportunities with the intent to acquire or merge with another business, which led to the purchase substantially all of the assets of AeroGroup Incorporated on December 15, 2006 (the AeroGroup Acquisition). The complete terms of the AeroGroup Acquisition were disclosed in our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 18, 2006. AeroGroup Incorporated originally commenced its operations and business plan as a contractor of military flight training as AeroGroup International Corporation in January 2002, and eventually merged with and acquired AeroGroup Incorporated.  19    Current Business Operations  As a result of the U.S. Base Foreclosure Act, the overall downsizing of the armed forces of the U.S. and its foreign allies, and the advanced age of the U.S. military air fleet, there was insufficient equipment and personnel to meet demands for combat air training and air refueling training. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and various regional conflicts and terrorists acts, have only added to this crisis. The private-sector is now being asked to fill a role once the exclusive domain of the military, and the capabilities of civilian contractors are well recognized, and are frequently proven superior and more efficient than public-sector contractors. In addition, due to the escalating wild fires in the Western U.S., and the financial and environmental costs associated with this crisis, fire-fighting preparedness and capability have become a top priority at both the State and Federal levels of government. Again, the private sector is being asked to provide services that were previously the domain of the public-sector.  In order to meet present and future military, environmental, and financial threats, the United States and its allies has been forced to continue to commit billions of dollars to training, preparedness, and execution. These needs cannot be met without the support of the private-sector. We believe that there is currently no other private-sector contractor which has the potential capabilities to adequately fulfill these diverse and urgent demands, and we believe that TADS, through its current management and business contacts and relationships, has the potential ability to negotiate future contracts and business relationships in order to provide access to the aircraft, personnel, and operational skills necessary to claim a portion of this rapidly growing and highly-profitable market for diverse air support services. Although the Company believes it has the potential ability to negotiate such future contracts and business relationships, the Company does not currently have any such active contracts and it cannot be assured that it will be awarded any such contracts in the future.  We are currently pursuing and negotiating for the acquisition of maintenance and air training contracts with both the United States Department of Defense and various foreign militaries, but for security purposes, cannot disclose the countries with which we are engaged in discussions or bids. We believe that our most likely future revenues will come from foreign military training, both air and maintenance. The contracts that we are pursuing can be executed with or without planes or other physical assets, but the acquisition of planes and equipment would greatly enhance our ability to capture more and larger contracts.  As disclosed below, we are currently engaged in litigation to secure certain aircraft and parts that we believe have been improperly interfered with by third parties.  We have been pursuing this remedy diligently and although we believe that we will prevail and will successfully acquire the assets, the timing is uncertain as is the eventual outcome. Although we believe we will prevail in the acquisition of such assets, we are currently exploring other opportunities to acquire military aircraft and other military assets in order to further our business strategy. In order to acquire any such military assets, the Company would either need to lease such assets with the requirement of an upfront payment of a minimal security deposit, or purchase such assets. In either lease or purchase scenario, the Company would need additional funding and is currently exploring asset-based financing for the assets which it is contemplating purchasing and/or leasing, although it cannot give assurances that any such funding will be available to the Company for such use.  Air Combat Training  Air combat training exercises are currently conducted by the training commands of the United States Air Force, United States Navy, and of most of our NATO and foreign allies. We believe neither the U. S. Department of Defense (the DoD) nor its allies have sufficient personnel, support equipment, or access to foreign enemy type aircraft, to meet current demand. In many instances our European allies have neither the facilities nor the extensive airspace required for fighter combat training or fighter bomber training that we hope to provide.  TADS believes it will be able to provide the armed forces of the U.S. and its allies with a vast array of training services and support functions including, but not limited to air combat instruction and tactical training, actual aggressor simulated combat, classroom instruction, and airspace scheduling, fueling, aircraft spare parts support, aircraft maintenance and aircraft maintenance training.  Air combat simulation exercises are currently conducted by the training commands of the United States Air Force, United States Navy, and of most of our NATO, and foreign allies. We believe neither the DoD nor its allies have sufficient training and support equipment and personnel to meet current demand. In many instances, our European allies have neither the facilities nor the extensive airspace required for fighter combat training or fighter bombing training that TADS believes it can provide.  Although not a requirement, it is probable that in order to be awarded any such contract, the Company would need to acquire, through either lease or purchase, certain military aircraft to be deployed in any related contract.  The purchase of any such military aircraft would require significant additional funding, typically an asset-based funding, which funding the Company does not currently have in place, nor can guarantee that it will be able to acquire.  Our current proposed flight training services focus on two major components; initial qualification flight training and advanced flight training, both of which consist of ground, and in air flight training. In addition, we are preparing to perform other flight training support services as described herein.   20    Initial Qualification Flight Training  Initial qualification flight training consists of the training of military pilots that have only recently become qualified in their aircraft and of more experienced pilots returning for recurrency training. Initial qualification flight training involves aircraft specific flight theory, flight maneuvers, aerodynamics and emergency in flight procedures as they relate to combat in a specific aircraft. Pilots and other crew members are also trained in cockpit resource management, which focuses on division of duties between pilot and co-pilot and utilization of resources within the aircraft cockpit to complete the flight plan and address emergencies. Initial qualification training involves many hours of classroom instruction in aircraft systems operations, air-to-air flight maneuvers, tactics, formation flying, instrument training and air-to-ground tactics. In flight instruction is generally provided only once the pilot has shown proficiency in ground instruction and flight simulator instruction.  Although not a requirement, it is probable that in order to be awarded any such contract, the Company would need to acquire, through either lease or purchase, certain military aircraft to be deployed in any related contract.  The purchase of any such military aircraft would require significant additional funding, typically an asset-based funding, which funding the Company does not currently have in place, nor can guarantee that it will be able to acquire.  Advanced  Flight Training  Advanced flight training focuses on combat and other advanced maneuvers and is conducted after the pilot completes initial qualification training and returns to a full service training facility where he is provided refresher or upgrade training to sharpen his or her combat skills. We intend to focus the training venue on approved overseas customers and NATO customers who would use our accessible facilities and ranges to qualify, in some cases, and re-qualify in other cases in specific combat skills like air-to-air, air-to-ground, electronic countermeasure training, air-refueling training, and other advanced maneuvers.  Although not a requirement, it is probable that in order to be awarded any such contract, the Company would need to acquire, through either lease or purchase, certain military aircraft to be deployed in any related contract.  The purchase of any such military aircraft would require significant additional funding, typically an asset-based funding, which funding the Company does not currently have in place, nor can guarantee that it will be able to acquire.  U.S. Military Training  A crucial component to aerial combat training involves training against actual foreign adversary aircraft which are typically Russian, ex-Soviet bloc, or Chinese. However, because the U.S. military has little to no access to enemy aircraft, the status-quo has been to use aged U.S. military aircraft operating as the adversarial or Red Air aircraft. The status-quo leaves much to be desired because aged U.S. military aircraft do not possess the flying characteristics or capabilities of sophisticated enemy combat aircraft, nor do they emit the same electronic, radar signature, or visual signals.  Through its past and present relationships with companies licensed by the U.S. Department of Justice (BATF) to import foreignweapons of war, TADS believes it can provide unique Red Air aggressor aircraft, along with ILyushin IL-78s available in the U.S. or the Ukraine.  These are the aircraft that are the actual fighter aircraft currently used substantially many of the former Soviet bloc countries and non-allied nations.  In connection with contracts to provide adversary combat aircraft to the U.S. military, TADS believes it can supply various support services such as adversary pilots, spare parts, service and maintenance of the adversary aircraft, tactical training, actual aggressor simulated combat, and classroom instruction.  Although not a requirement, it is probable that in order to be awarded any such contract, the Company would need to acquire, through either lease or purchase, certain military aircraft to be deployed in any related contract.  The purchase of any such military aircraft would require significant additional funding, typically an asset-based funding, which funding the Company does not currently have in place, nor can guarantee that it will be able to acquire.  Foreign Air Combat Training  Unlike the training of the U.S. military, air combat training of foreign allied militaries typically entails air combat training techniques and strategies using U.S. military aircraft such as the F-16, which such foreign militaries have already purchased. Although a commercial endeavor, it has been a strategic decision of the U.S. government to supply U.S. fighter aircraft to its allies. However, the ability and resources of the U.S. military to thereafter train the foreign purchasers of its aircraft is extremely limited and sub-par.   21    As a result, there is a backlog of allied countries that have purchased F-16s and other U.S. fighter aircraft, and that have immediate and ongoing need for air combat training. TADS believes they are able to offer to foreign militaries actual combat training from highly experienced U.S. fighter pilots, classroom training, and parts, service, and maintenance protocols for their aircraft. TADS also believes it has the capability to either train on foreign soil and foreign military bases to fulfill multi-year contracts, or to provide a turn-key solution by hosting foreign militaries on U.S. soil, and therein provide not only pilots, training protocols, and parts, service, and maintenance, but also the air-bases, bombing ranges, fueling services, housing requirements, etc.  Although not a requirement, it is probable that in order to be awarded any such contract, the Company would need to acquire, through either lease or purchase, certain military aircraft to be deployed in any related contract.  The purchase of any such military aircraft would require significant additional funding, typically an asset-based funding, which funding the Company does not currently have in place, nor can guarantee that it will be able to acquire.  Air to Air Refueling  As demonstrated by the debacle between Boeing and AES in the awarding of the next generation of air refueling aircraft, air refueling is big business, and the U.S. fleet of air refueling aircraft, which were all built in the 1950s and 1960s, are operating well below the required levels. With its aging fleet and the uncertainty of the delivery of new tankers, there is an immediate need for the military to outsource air re-fueling and air refueling training.  On May 18, 2010 TADS signed a Lease Option Agreement for the exclusive lease of two Russian ILyushin IL-78 and two ILyushin IL-76 supertanker aircraft from Air Support Systems, LLC. The IL-78 is used for mid-air refueling by most air forces in the world including Russia, most former Soviet republics, China, India, Pakistan, Cuba, Libya, Syria, and many others. The TADS IL-78 is the Midas version and is configured for mid-air refueling. It is capable of re-fueling at an airspeed exceeding 400 knots, and can deliver fuel to three aircraft simultaneously. In addition, the ILyushin aircraft are the only planes ever made for the purpose of aerial fire-fighting and water-bombing, and are recognized as far superior to any other aircraft in existence for this purpose. A copy of the Lease Option Agreement was attached as an exhibit to our Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 filed with the SEC on May 24, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference.  Although the Company believes it has the resources available to it to pursue such air to air refueling contracts, the Company does not anticipate being awarded any such contracts in the near future.  Aerial Fire-Fighting  In addition to its military operation capabilities, the IL-76/78 is the only large aircraft ever built for the purpose of aerial water-bombing, and is considered by most fire-fighting experts as the most capable. The ILyushin IL-76/78 aircraft are dedicated water-bombers that are capable of quickly and efficiently disbursing large quantities of water or fire retardant to defeat the increasing damage from the extensive forest fires in the Western U.S. and other areas.  As exemplified by the state-of emergency declared by California recently, the United States Forest Service estimates that forest fires will be a permanent threat. In addition to the substantial revenue stream that TADS anticipates could result from these services, we believe that TADS would receive valuable high-profile publicity from providing aerial fire-fighting services.  Due to the escalating forest fire crisis in the Western U.S., and the unique capabilities and exclusivity of its ILyushin aircraft, prior to cancellation of its exclusive lease, TADS had been exploring opportunities with State and Federal agencies in connection with providing aerial fire-fighting services to combat the seemingly ever-growing devastation of forest fires. Although the Company believes it has the resources available to it to pursue such aerial firefighting contracts, the Company does not anticipate being awarded any such contracts in the near future.  Specialty Aerial Services  In addition to its use as an air refueling aircraft and as an aerial fire-fighter, the unique characteristics of the IL-78 make it extremely desirable for a number of specialty aerial services.  The IL-78 aircraft is a versatile workhorse that can be configured for heavy cargo and used for the transport of military vehicles, heavy equipment, and commercial air cargo services. The IL-78 has unique performance capabilities and is famous for its ability to operate in extreme conditions and from marginal landing areas.  Although the Company believes it has the resources available to it to pursue such specialty contracts, the Company does not anticipate being awarded any such contracts in the near future.  22    Current Asset Status  On May 18, 2010 the Company signed a lease agreement with Air Support Systems, LLC. As consideration for the lease option, TADS issued Air Supports Systems, LLC a one-time up-front fee consisting of 10,000,000 shares of the Companys restricted common stock. The lease provides TADS an exclusive one year period in which to lease and utilize the aircraft in exchange for: (i) a fee equal to fifty (50%) percent of the operating profits of any contract, where operating profits equals the gross cash receipts derived from a contract minus the direct expenses of operating said contract; (ii) a fee equal to fifty (50%) percent of the fee paid to TADS in connection with any off-loaded fuel for which TADS is paid in connection with a contract for air-to-air refueling; and (iii) TADS and Air Support Systems, LLC shall agree upon a minimum monthly, quarterly, or annual fee amount, as the case may be, on a case-by-case basis, relevant to the type and terms of the particular aircraft under lease and the related contract. A copy of the Lease Option Agreement was attached as an exhibit to our Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 filed with the SEC on May 24, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference.  On August 31, 2010, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. (the M&M Agreement) to acquire the exclusive right to purchase a number of military jets and related parts and engines.  Approximately $2,000,000 is required to complete the purchase of the assets under the M&M Agreement and the Company believes the ability to raise financing to cover such acquisition costs is good, however, as of the date of this Report, because M&M has failed to perform its obligations under the M&M Agreement, we cannot move forward on any financing or possession of the assets until such time as this issue is resolved. We have re-initiated legal action against M&M in Palm Beach County, Florida in order to take possession of the related aircraft and parts. Despite the legal hurdles, the Company is currently exploring a number of financing proposals for the funding of the acquisition of the assets. TADS believes that when fully operational and under contract, the aircraft may add between $9,000,000 and $13,500,000 in the aggregate per year to its top-line revenue. In addition, TADS anticipates that the aircraft, related parts, and jet engines may significantly increase the assets to its balance sheet, as well as provide additional cash-flows to the Company from sales of surplus spare parts and jet engines. However, the Company was recently denied an permanent injunction and although the Company believes it will ultimately prevail in certain legal disputes with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. as described herein, the assets may not be available to the Company for an indefinite period, if ever.  The Company is currently exploring other opportunities to acquire military aircraft and other military assets in order to further its business strategy. In order to acquire any such military assets, the Company would either need to lease such assets with the requirement an upfront payment of a minimal security deposit, or purchase such assets. In either lease or purchase scenario, the Company would need additional funding and is currently exploring asset-based financing for the assets which it is contemplating purchasing and/or leasing, although it cannot give assurances that any such funding will be available to the Company for such use.  RESULTS OF OPERATIONS  Revenues  Six months
ended June20112010Total Sales$0$0  We had no revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2011 or 2010.  Operating Expenses  Six months
ended June 3020112010Operating Expense$1,086,244$477,627  Total operating costs of $1,086,244 for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and $477,627 for the six months ended June 30, 2010 consisted of general and administrative expenses, including the compensatory element of stock issuances for such periods.  Net Profit (Loss)  Six months
ended June 3020112010Net Profit (Loss)($1,276,498)($538,143)   23    For the six months ended June 30, 2011, we sustained net losses of $1,276,948 as compared with net losses of $538,143 for the six months ended June 30, 2010.  Liquidity and Capital Resources  As at June 30, 2011, the Company had total assets of $330,884. There were liabilities of $2,464,137 comprised of $221,147 in accounts payable and $2,242,990 in long term debentures. Assets of $330,884 and liabilities of $2,464,137 resulted in a working capital deficiency of $2,133,253. The Company reported total stockholders deficit of $2,133,253 at June 30, 2011. We anticipate that our current cash on hand of $4,384 as of June 30, 2011 is not sufficient to satisfy our cash requirements without additional funding. The Company has funded its operations and met its capital expenditures requirements primarily through cash generated from contributions from the issuance of convertible debt securities and short-term promissory notes. In addition, we will need substantial additional capital during the next 12 months on order to complete our business plan.  During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company believes that it will expend funds on the following:  - Expenses related to the acquisition of potential contracts;  - Leasing and refurbishment of certain military aircraft and equipment; and  - Hiring of additional employees and independent contractors to fulfill potential contracts.  Total current judgments outstanding against the Company are described more fully in Part II; Item 1. Legal Proceedings. Considering the overall current legal proceedings described more fully in Part II; Item 1. Legal Proceedings and those specific to the acquisition of assets under the M&M Agreement described above in Part I.; Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operations; Overview and Plan of Operation; Current Asset Status, the Company has and expects to continue to expend significant funds on legal expenses.  Legal expenses have been a burden upon the liquidity of the company since early 2010, and continue to be so, although we believe a portion of these expenses will be greatly reduced in the coming year as the litigation is anticipated to be resolved within that time frame. Considering the importance of some of the current litigation to the Company, although it is an expense that we would prefer not to incur, our management believes that it is a necessary expense and we believe we can obtain financing to continue to fund the litigation.  In connection with the Searock judgments against the Company, it is the Companys position that it will be overturned on appeal in light of both the evidence and the fact that the Company did not receive proper notice of impending litigation and was not able to present any defense, and as such, until such time as final determinations by the courts have been made, we do not expect these judgments against the Company to affect our liquidity.  Need for Additional Capital  As indicated above, management does not believe that the Company has sufficient capital to sustain its current operations and execute its proposed operations without raising additional capital.  Accordingly, we expect that we will require additional funding through additional equity and/or debt financings.  However, there can be no assurance that any additional financing will become available to us, and if available, on terms acceptable to us.  Any financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants that may impact our ability to conduct our business or raise additional funds on acceptable terms.  If we are unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, we may have to delay, scale back or discontinue our expansion plans.  In the event we are unable to raise additional capital we will not be able to sustain any growth or continue to operate.  As further disclosed below in Contractual Obligations; Other Agreements, pursuant to the LOI and subsequent Initial SPA and Second SPA (as defined below), the Company has closed financings with Cornucopia, Ltd. (Cornucopia) in the total amount of $600,000 through the sale of 1,770,777 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (the Preferred Stock). We have used and expect to continue to use this initial $600,000 of financing in order to (i) help satisfy our immediate liquidity needs, and (ii) lease certain military aircraft that we believe will begin to generate revenue and earnings such that it will cover a material portion of our broader and future liquidity needs. Considering the $2,000,000 in estimated capital required to complete the purchase of the assets under the M&M Agreement and the legal expenses associated with the M&M Agreement and those required to defend against the judgments against us, the $600,000 in immediate financing will not completely satisfy our current liquidity needs. We are also pursuing a number of contracts that we believe will generate revenues and earnings to cover any outstanding liquidity shortfall. In addition, although we can make no guarantees, we believe that the current M&M litigation for the related aircraft and parts will be settled in our favor, and that the acquisition of said assets will greatly change the liquidity prospects of the Company due to either putting such aircraft to work on contract or by selling the assets at a significant premium to the price that the Company will have paid for such assets.  24    Effects of Inflation  Inflation and changing prices have not had a material effect on our business and we do not expect that inflation or changing prices will materially affect our business in the foreseeable future. However, our management will closely monitor the price change and continually maintain effective cost control in operations.  Off Balance Sheet Arrangements  We do not have any off balance sheet arrangements that are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, revenues, and results of operations, liquidity or capital expenditures.  Going Concern  The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going concern.  We have had substantial operating losses for the past years and are dependent upon outside financing to continue operations. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. It is managements plan to raise necessary funds from shareholders to satisfy the expense requirements of the Company.  CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS  Debt Obligations  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,500.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 26,333,333 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $6,692.09 to the Gary Fears Trust as consideration for a loan to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 4,461,393 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $15,00.00 to Brad Hacker as consideration for accrued accounting fees.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $75,000.00 to Jamie as consideration for indemnification to Goldstein.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 50,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,000.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary and expenses for Q-2/2011.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 31,200 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $25,000.00 to the Bingham Law Group as consideration for unpaid legal fees as of 7/1/2011 to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 20,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  Other Agreements  Cornucopia Financing  On April 1, 2011, the Company entered into a letter of intent (the LOI) with Cornucopia in connection with a proposed financing arrangement. A copy of the LOI was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 5, 2011, the terms of which are hereby incorporated by reference. Pursuant to the terms of the LOI and subject to further negotiation and final agreement and documentation, Cornucopia agreed to provide the Company up to One Million Dollars (US$1,000,000) in separate rounds of financing.  25    On April 25, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the Initial SPA) for the initial round of the One Million Dollar (US$1,000,000) financing under the LOI. Pursuant to the terms of the Initial SPA, Cornucopia agreed to provide the Company with an initial Four Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$400,000) in financing through the sale and issuance by the Company of a total of 1,333,332 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (the Preferred Stock) in two separate tranches. A copy of the Initial SPA was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2011, the terms of which are hereby incorporated by reference. As disclosed in the above reference Form 8-K and our Form 8-K filed on May 26, 2011, the Company has closed the initial round of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$400,000) in financing.  Pursuant to the terms of the LOI, Cornucopia agreed to provide subsequent financing in the total amount of Six Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$600,000 and the Subsequent Financing), as required by and requested by the Company, through the sale and issuance by the Company of additional shares of Preferred Stock.  On July 22, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the Second SPA) wherein Cornucopia purchased an additional 437,445 shares of Preferred Stock for a total purchase price of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$200,000). The rights, preferences and privileges of the Preferred Stock are outlined in the Certificate of Designation designating the Preferred Stock, which was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2011 and is hereby incorporated by reference. A copy of the Second SPA has been attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on August 12, 2011 and is hereby incorporated by reference.  The terms and conditions of the proposed and possible future Subsequent Financings under the LOI shall remain governed by the terms of the LOI.  Tac-Air Services Agreements  As disclosed in our Form 8-K filed on May 10, 2011, on or about May 2, 2011, the Company entered into a joint venture Services Agreement (the Tac Agreement) with Tactical Air Support, Inc., a Nevada corporation (Tac-Air) relating to the capital lease and operation of an Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano aircraft (the Aircraft). The Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano is world renowned for its capabilities in counter insurgency and air to ground ordnance deliveries. Pursuant to the terms of the Tac Agreement, the Aircraft was leased in the name of Tac-Air under a capital lease, with Tac-Air maintaining full control of the Aircraft and responsibility for all associated operational, administrative, maintenance and insurance costs related to the operation of the Aircraft. Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. has deliver $80,280.00 as a security deposit (the Deposit) under the lease of the Aircraft, with Tac-Air required to compensate the Company with an interest payment equal to one percent (1%) of the Deposit payable monthly. In addition, the Company is entitled to thirty percent (30%) of the operating profit received by Tac-Air relating to work performed with the Aircraft.  As disclosed in our Form 8-K filed on June 3, 2011, on or about June 2, 2011, the Company entered into a Letter of Intent (the LOI) with Tac-Air relating to the proposed acquisition (the Acquisition) of certain aircraft (the Aircraft). A copy of the LOI was attached to the Form 8-K filed on June 3, 2011 and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Subject to further Definitive Agreements (as defined in the LOI) and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, in the event the parties are able to complete the Acquisition of the Aircraft, the Aircraft is to be purchased in the name of Tac-Air, with Tac-Air maintaining full control of the Aircraft and responsibility for all associated operational, administrative, maintenance and insurance costs related to the operation of the Aircraft. Subject to further Definitive Agreements and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc. shall be responsible for the acquisition of necessary funding related to the Acquisition and shall receive the right to receive fifty percent (50%) of all future profits derived from the operation, sale, lease or any other use of the Aircraft.  As disclosed in our Form 8-K filed on July 28, 2011, on or about July 22, 2011, the Company entered into a Binding Letter of Intent (the LOI) with Tac-Air in connection with certain government services contracts Tac-Air is currently seeking (the Services Contracts). Subject to further definitive agreements and pursuant to the terms of the LOI, in the event Tac-Air is awarded the Services Contracts, the Company will receive the right to thirty percent (30%) of all future net profits derived from the Services Contracts. In connection with the LOI and Services Contracts, the Company has provided Tac-Air funding codified by a secured promissory note issued to the Company by Tac-Air in the amount of Three Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Dollars (US$315,000 and the Note). The Note maintains zero interest, a maturity date of October 22, 2011 and is secured by and convertible into 100,000 shares of Tac-Airs pledged, issued and outstanding common stock at the Companys option, which represents a ten percent (10%) ownership interest in Tac-Air. A copy of the Note has been attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on June 3, 2011 and hereby incorporate by reference.  Previously, on December 10, 2010, the parties entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the Merger) related to the proposed merger between the parties. Although the Merger had not closed prior to the termination period and the related agreement has since expired, the parties are currently in non-binding negotiations to finalize the proposed Merger. In the event the parties are able to finalize and close the Merger while any outstanding ventures continue to exist between the Company and Tac-Air, subject to further agreement between the parties, such arrangements shall be terminated and shall continue to be pursued by the combined entity.  26    ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK  Not Applicable.  ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES  As required by Rule 13a-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) we carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as June 30, 2011, being the date of our most recently completed fiscal quarter. This evaluation was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of our Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to them to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.  Such reasons for ineffectiveness were originally described in the Companys Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 and are again outlined below:  Insufficient segregation of duties in our finance and accounting functions due to limited personnel.  During the year ended December 31, 2010, the company internally performed all aspects of our financial reporting process, including, but not limited to, access to the underlying accounting records and systems, the ability to post and record journal entries and responsibility for the preparation of the financial statements.  Due to the fact these duties were performed oftentimes by the same people, a lack of review was created over the financial reporting process that might result in a failure to detect errors in spreadsheets, calculations, or assumptions used to compile the financial statements and related disclosures as filed with the SEC.  These control deficiencies could result in a material misstatement to our interim or annual financial statements that would not be prevented or detected.  Insufficient corporate governance policies.  Our corporate governance activities and processes are not always formally documented.  Specifically, decisions made by the board to be carried out by management should be documented and communicated on a timely basis to reduce the likelihood of any misunderstandings regarding key decisions affecting our operations and management.  We intend to take appropriate and reasonable steps to make the necessary improvements to remediate these deficiencies and we intend to consider the results of our remediation efforts and related testing as part of our next year-end assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, due to the limited personnel and financial resources available to the Company at this time, the Company has been unable to ameliorate such weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures.  During our most recently completed fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2011, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.  We currently do not have an audit committee, or a person serving on our Board of Directors who would qualify as a financial expert.  27    PART II  ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS  Mr. Charlie Searock (Searock), a former executive officer of our company, has brought a laws suit in the District Court of the 336th Judicial District of Grayson County, Texas against us and seven other defendants on February 6, 2007, on claims of breach of an employment agreement between Searock and International Tactical Training Center, Inc. (ITTC). (Charles J. Searock, Jr., vs. Tactical Air Defense Services, Inc., International Tactical training Center, Inc., Mark Daniels, Victor Miller, John Farley, Gary Fears, Jamie Goldstein, and Joel Ramsden, Cause No.07-0322-336). ITTC and the Company are the only two corporate defendants named in the Searock lawsuit. Of the six individuals named as defendants, three are former ITTC management.   Searock asserts that the Company is liable for ITTCs breach of employment agreement because he alleges that the Company acquired ITTCs assets, and that ITTC was a former subsidiary of AeroGroup, Inc., an entity not named as a defendant in the Searock lawsuit. In addition to his claim for breach of the ITTC employment contract, Searock also asserts theories of tort liability against the defendants.   The Company denies any liability to Searock on his claim for breach of the ITTC employment contract and denies Searock has any factual basis to impose liability on the Company under any of his theories of tort liability. Specifically, the Company denies that it acquired, owns or controls ITTCs former assets. The Company believes that this claim is without merit and is working towards resolution of the same.  On October 25, 2010, Searock was awarded a default judgment of $1,248,962 including accrued interest, jointly and severally against TADS and the other defendants, all of whom who failed to appear for trial, and an award of exemplary damages of $2,000,000 against TADS.   Searock claims that TADS and the other defendants were given notice of the trial, however it is TADS assertion and the assertion of the other defendants that none one of the defendants, including TADS, ever received notice of the trial, were unaware of the trial, and that the judgment is without merit.  TADS has filed an appeal in the Appellate Court of fort Worth, Texas, and is in the process of vigorously contesting the judgment based upon not having received notice, and although no assurances can be given, the Company believes that the judgment will be vacated by the Court. Most recently, the company has filed an appeal contesting a temporary restraining order issued in July, 2011 in connection with the judgment for which it did not have an opportunity to defend itself in court.  The Company believes that all of the above will be overturned when it has the opportunity to defend itself in court.  On March 4, 2010, TADS sued Mark Daniels, the Companys former President and Chief Executive Officer, and various entities affiliated with or controlled by Mr. Daniels, in The Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, for temporary and permanent injunctive relief, damages, and other relief for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty, tortuous interference with advantageous and contractual relationships, and misappropriation, misuse and conversion of trade secrets and confidential business information.  On September 7, 2010, Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge Jack S. Cox ruled in favor of TADF and imposed additional findings and sanctions on Daniels, including but not limited to:  - Since leaving TADF, Daniels has been actively participating in attempts to compete with TADF and has violated his non-compete agreement with TADF;  - Daniels, acting individually or in concert with any company or entity he is directly or indirectly involved in, is immediately enjoined from and ordered to cease and desist and to refrain from engaging in any and all acts of competition with TADS;  - Daniels non-compete agreement shall begin anew from September 7, 2010;  - Daniels lied under oath at the March 25th, 2010 Court Hearing and continued to lie under oath at the September 7, 2010 hearing;  - Daniels was found in Contempt of Court for having made false statements under oath;  - Daniels was immediately sentenced to 5 months, 29 days in confinement at the Palm Beach County Jail, subject to being released after 2 days and being on probation for 5 months, 27 days;  - In addition, the Court sanctioned Daniels by striking all of his pleadings because it found that Daniels set in motion a series of events and intentionally provided testimony for the purpose of hindering, delaying, and otherwise defeating the proper administration of justice.  28    In addition to the above, on May 7, 2010, Mr. Daniels filed an improper and frivolous Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition (the Petition) against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, in an effort to circumvent the legitimate court process, by claiming non-payment of a promissory note that the Company contends in its litigation against Mr. Daniels was issued without proper consideration when Mr. Daniels was the President, Chief Executive Officer, and a Director of the Company. Upon notification to the Company on May 10, 2010 of this improper Petition, the Company requested and was granted an Emergency Hearing for May 14, 2010 in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Florida before Chief Justice Paul G. Hyman (the "Emergency Hearing"). On May 14, 2010, Chief Justice Paul G. Hyman dismissed the Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition by a signed Order granting an emergency Motion to Dismiss the Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition filed against the Company by Mr. Daniels.  In the Court Order, it was agreed that:  -Mr. Daniels claim is the subject of a bona fide dispute;-The Company has more than 12 unsecured creditors (note holders are the only claims not in dispute);  -The Court should enter an Order dismissing Mr. Daniels involuntary petition, with prejudice to any subsequent involuntary petition by Mr. Daniels (i.e.. he is barred from refilling an involuntary petition), or any insider or affiliate of Mr. Daniels; and-Moreover, Mr. Daniels cannot pursue any efforts or take any actions to solicit, recruit, encourage, or cause any other alleged creditor of the Company to file an involuntary bankruptcy petition against the Company.  -The Company agreed to withdraw its claim for attorneys fees, costs, damages and punitive damages arising from the improvident filing in exchange for Mr. Daniels consent to the dismissal of the petition.  Additionally, Mr. Daniels attorney of record who filed the Petition, as a result of learning that Mr. Daniels had materially misstated the facts and failed to disclose that Mr. Daniels was currently the Defendant in civil litigation with the Company, filed a motion to withdraw his representation of Mr. Daniels in the Petition.  Despite the dismissal of the Petition described above, on August 3, 2010 certain affiliates and business associates of Mr. Daniels filed an improper and frivolous Involuntary Chapter 7 Petition (the New Petition) against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, in an effort to circumvent the legitimate court process, in direct violation of the Court Order issued by Judge Paul Hyman on May 14, 2010 described above.  The Company immediately requested an emergency Motion to Dismiss the New Petition based upon its contention that:  - the New Petition violated the Court Order because it was solicited, recruited, encouraged, or caused by Mr. Daniels;  - the majority of the new petitioners were affiliates and business associates of Mr. Daniels;  - a majority of the new petitioners were currently involved in civil litigation with TADF; and  - all of the claims of the new petitioners were either without merit, being contested, or were frivolous and improper.  On August 10, 2010, at an Emergency Hearing to Dismiss the fraudulent and improper Petition, the Federal Bankruptcy judge dismissed the Petition, as had been anticipated and previously disclosed by the Company, and, moreover, due to the egregious actions of the petitioners, reserved the right of the US Federal Bankruptcy Court to:  - impose sanctions upon the petitioners, and  - impose punitive sanctions upon the petitioners if it is determined that the actions of the petitioners violated the Court Order previously issued by U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Court Judge Hyman.  Although no assurances can be given, the Company believes that sanctions will be imposed upon the petitioners, and that it will be determined that the petitioners violated the Court Order issued by Judge Hyman.  29    On August 31, 2010, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. (the M&M Agreement) to acquire the exclusive right to purchase a number of military jets and related parts and engines. However, as of the date of this Report, because M&M has failed to perform its obligations under the M&M Agreement, we cannot finance and take possession of the assets until such time as this issue is resolved. We have re-initiated legal action against M&M in Palm Beach County, Florida in order to take possession of the related aircraft and parts. TADS believes that when fully operational and under contract, the aircraft may add between $9,000,000 and $13,500,000 in the aggregate per year to its top-line revenue. In addition, TADS anticipates that the aircraft, related parts, and jet engines may significantly increase the assets to its balance sheet, as well as provide additional cash-flows to the Company from sales of surplus spare parts and jet engines. However, the Company was recently denied a permanent injunction against M&M and although the Company believes it will prevail in certain legal disputes with M&M Aircraft Acquisitions, Inc. as described herein, the assets may not be available to the Company for an indefinite period, if ever.   As disclosed in our past filings, Sichenzia & Ross LLP (Sichenzia) had been pursuing a claim against the Company for unpaid services dating back to early 2007. The Company recently learned that Sichenzia obtained a judgment against the Company in the amount of $21,471.87 in the Civil Court of the City of New York, County of New York on April 3, 2008. We believe that this claim is without merit and are working towards resolution of the same.  As of the date of this Annual Report, the Company is not a party to any pending litigation or legal proceeding that is not described herein or in the ordinary course of business. To our knowledge, no such proceedings exist or are threatened other than those described herein.  ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS  Not Applicable.  ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS  Convertible Debentures  Second Quarter of 2011  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,500.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 26,333,333 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $6,692.09 to the Gary Fears Trust as consideration for a loan to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 4,461,393 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $15,00.00 to Brad Hacker as consideration for accrued accounting fees.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  On April 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $75,000.00 to Jamie as consideration for indemnification to Goldstein.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 50,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.0015 per share.  Subsequent Event Issuances  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $39,000.00 to Alexis Korybut as consideration for unpaid salary.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 31,200 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  On July 1, 2011, the Company issued a Convertible Debenture in a principle amount of $25,000.00 to the Bingham Law Group as consideration for unpaid legal fees as of 7/1/2011 to the Company.  The Convertible Debenture has a term of three years, an interest rate of 12%, and has full-ratchet anti-dilution protection.  The principle amount is convertible into 20,000,000 shares of Common Stock at a conversion price of $0.00125 per share.  30    Issuance of Common Stock  Issuance of Common Stock to Air Support Systems, LLC  The Company issued 10,000,000 shares of stock to Air Support Systems, LLC in May 2011 pursuant to the terms of a lease agreement between the Company and Air Support Systems, LLC executed on May 18, 2010, for which the Common Stock had previously not been issued. No registration rights were issued in connection with these shares.  The shares were valued at $15,000.  Warrants  In April, 2011, in connection with a securities purchase agreement with Cornucopia, Ltd., the Company issued Cornucopia: (a) Series A-100 warrant to purchase up to 533,333,333 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.00075 for a one year period; and (b) Series A-101 warrant to purchase up to 800,000,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of the lesser of: (A) $0.0025 or (B) a fifty percent (50%) discount to the average closing price of the Common Stock for the thirty (30) trading days prior to exercise of the A-101 warrant.  Series A Preferred Stock  The Company issued 1,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock to Mr. Alexis Korybut in April, 2011 pursuant to an Employment Agreement between the Company and Mr. Korybut. No registration rights were issued in connection with these shares.  The shares were valued at $100,000.  Series B Preferred Stock  On April 25, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the SPA) for the initial round of the US$1,000,000 financing under the LOI. Pursuant to the terms of the SPA, Cornucopia agreed to provide the Company US$400,000 in financing through the sale and issuance by the Company of a total of 1,333,332 shares of Series B Preferred Stock in two separate tranches. As disclosed in the above reference the Company received the initial financing tranche of US$200,000 through the sale of 666,666 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $0.30 per share.  On April 24, 2011, the Company received the second financing tranche of US$200,000 from Cornucopia under the terms of the SPA. Pursuant to the terms of the SPA, the Company agreed to issue Cornucopia an additional 666,666 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (the T2 Shares) at a purchase price of $0.30 per share. The T2 Shares: (i) are convertible into 266,666,400 shares of the Companys restricted common stock, par value $0.001 (the Common Stock); (ii) maintain a number of votes equal to the number of shares of Common Stock the T2 Shares are convertible into; (iii) provide for a 12% annual coupon payment; (iv) are collateralized by certain Company assets; and (v) provide for an optional right of participation by Cornucopia in the Companys operating profits through the redemption and retirement of a portion of the T2 Shares.  On July 22, 2011, the Company and Cornucopia entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the Second SPA) wherein Cornucopia purchased an additional 437,445 shares of Preferred Stock for a total purchase price of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars (US$200,000) at a purchase price of $0.45 per share. The rights, preferences and privileges of the Preferred Stock are outlined in the Certificate of Designation designating the Preferred Stock, which was attached as an exhibit to our Form 8-K filed on April 28, 2011 and is hereby incorporated by reference.  The Company reasonably believes that all of the issuances of securities described above were deemed to be exempt from registration in reliance on Section 4(2) of the Securities Act as transactions by an issuer not involving a public offering.  Each investor had a pre-existing relationship with the Company and/or represented that it had the financial wherewithal, knowledge and sophistication to invest in the securities of the Company.  In addition, each recipient represented that they are acquiring the securities as an investment only and not with a view towards distribution of the same to the public.  We made available to each investor with disclosure of all aspects of our business, including providing the investor with press releases, access to our auditors, and other financial, business, and corporate information.  Finally, all securities issued were either restricted with an appropriate restrictive legend on certificates for shares, notes and warrants issued stating that the securities (and underlying shares) have not been registered under the Securities Act and cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without an effective registration or an exemption therefrom, or were issued pursuant to an exemption provided under Rule 144.  ITEM 3. DEFAULT UPON SENIOR SECURITIES  None.  31    ITEM 4. REMOVED AND RESERVED  None.  ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION  On August 5, 2011, the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State increasing the Companys authorized shares of Common Stock. A complete description of the increase and a copy of the amendment to the Articles of Incorporation have been provided in the Companys Definitive Schedule 14C Information Statement filed on July 5, 2011, the terms of which are hereby incorporated by reference.   ITEM 6. EXHIBITS


|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|--------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Exhibit # | Title                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|3.1       | Articles of Incorporation and all amendment to date thereto. (Attached as exhibits to our Amended Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 filed with the SEC on May 10, 2011 and incorporated herein by reference).
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|3.2       | Bylaws (Attached as an exhibit to our Form SB-2 filed with the SEC on May 27, 1999 and incorporated herein by reference).                                                                                                    
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|31.1      | Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002                                                                                                                   
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|31.2      | Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002                                                                                                                   
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|32.1      | Certification of the Principal Executive Officer  pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002                                                                       
|          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|32.2      | Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002                                                                        

32    SIGNATURES  Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned on August 22, 2011 thereunto duly authorized.    TACTICAL AIR DEFENSE SERVICES, INC./s/ Alexis KorybutBy: Alexis Korybut
Its: Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, Principal Financial Officer)      33