David Ordonez and Trisha Saxena, Senior Associates in the NIF’s investment team, give a glance into what makes advanced manufacturing relevant to the NIF and how portfolio companies such as iCOMAT and Space Forge are increasing the Alliance’s resilience.

David, joining the NIF from Formula 1 engineering: What can the deep tech industry learn from Formula 1?

David Ordonez: Formula 1 considers itself the fastest lab on Earth. In an environment where you have to deliver tangible improvements weekend after weekend, a big part of the engineering process is led through learning from failure and iterating fast.

When it comes to Formula 1, the objective is clear: to make a car faster. The performance targets follow suit – from the aerodynamics to the choice of materials. In many industries, companies need to do similarly and choose a problem they want to relentlessly solve.

Why is the advanced materials manufacturing sector strategically important for NATO Allies and the broader DSR ecosystem?

David Ordonez: The advanced materials manufacturing sector underpins both the creation of new capabilities and the strengthening of resilience. In the physical world that we live in, having the capability to access the most advanced materials and to manufacture them at scale defines the difference between an advanced nation and a lagging nation.

On the capability side, advanced composites, alloys, ceramics, and metamaterials enable lighter, stronger, and stealthier platforms, improve the performance of radar systems that not only protect our airspace but also allows us to travel from one side of the world to the other.

On the resilience front, having sovereign advanced manufacturing and materials reduces dependence on adversarial suppliers for critical inputs, strengthens industrial surge capacity in times of crisis, and supports dual-use sectors like aerospace, telecommunications, and energy that are essential for broader societal subsistence. At the core, it comes down to safeguarding the ability to manufacture the essentials that keep economies and societies running – powering industry, transport, and communications, providing the tools to grow food, and those to build infrastructure. In a world where resource scarcity is a constant, manufacturing strength defines sovereignty and resilience.

It is a dual objective of creating new technological capabilities and securing the foundations of defence and economic security across the Alliance.

What kind of advanced materials are relevant from a NIF perspective?

David Ordonez: The materials that matter most to NIF are the ones most essential to any economy. Copper and lithium are central to the energy transition, while iron and steel form the backbone of industry. Critical minerals and rare earths are indispensable for powering electronic devices. The challenge is that these resources are unevenly distributed, and access to them has become a matter of sovereignty. For decades, Western countries outsourced much of their production and processing to China, which now controls key parts of the supply chain at nearly every stage.

When we think about materials, we are addressing both the “traditional” inputs, such as steel, that underpin today’s industries, and the advanced materials that will define the industries of the next decade.

For traditional materials, the priority lies in reshoring supply chains, particularly in separation, refining, and processing, which have long been outsourced to developing regions. Novel technologies are needed to make these processes economically viable in the west again. At the same time, as ore grades decline, new methods must be developed to increase yields and improve efficiency.

When we talk about advanced materials, we are exploring the frontiers that will drive the next wave of industrial manufacturing. Alloys, ceramics, lightweight composites, and compound semiconductors are considered cutting-edge today, much like many once-exotic materials were in past decades. The focus is on identifying those manufacturing processes or material innovations that have the potential to evolve from niche applications into the new industrial standard.

What capability gaps in the current advanced materials supply chain make it critical for the NIF to prioritize disruption in this sector?

David Ordonez: There is a massive gap in western countries and NATO allies, which have offshored their capabilities to process and produce material products from mineral resources. We can’t choose where resources are distributed, but we can choose in which areas of the supply chain we can play a big role again.

NATO and western countries depend on critical materials that form the backbone of our industry, energy infrastructure, and consumer products. Therefore, there is a clear mandate to make sure we grow the share of the supply chain owned by Allied countries. This, inevitably, will have to come through new technologies that leapfrog existing ones.

What made iCOMAT and Space Forge stand out to the NIF?

David Ordonez: Companies like iCOMAT and Space Forge bring new capabilities to the Alliance and will prove critical to retain the technological sovereignty of the west.

iCOMAT produces the lightest structures for defence and aerospace, achieving scale, speed, and cost efficiency far beyond existing composite production processes. While carbon fiber is only strong in the direction of its fibers and traditional components rely on layers of straight fibers, iCOMAT has developed the first process that allows steering the orientation of fibers to strategically reinforce components with optimal strength. Compared to the state of the art, this results in parts that are 10%–60% lighter and produced at fully automated speeds that are 10 to 100 times faster. Proven in demanding applications such as Formula 1, fighter jet structures, and primary aerospace structures, iCOMAT has also established a first-of-its-kind, fully automated 45,000 sq. ft. factory to mass-produce advanced composite parts. Having the capability to manufacture the lightest aerospace structures at industrial scale is critical to every mobility and defence sector.

Trisha Saxena: Likewise, Space Forge, grows high-purity, low-defect semiconductor wafer crystals in space and safely returns them to Earth. On Earth, gravity-driven convection currents and thermal inconsistencies introduce imperfections into semiconductor wafers, limiting their efficiency and performance. The unique conditions of low Earth orbit – microgravity, ultra-clean vacuum, and extreme thermal gradients – create an environment impossible to replicate on the ground. These conditions allow crystals to grow with fewer defects, reduced contamination, and superior structural uniformity. This directly translates into faster, more energy-efficient, and longer-lasting semiconductors. For example, it is estimated that space-manufactured cell tower amplifiers could reduce power consumption by over 50%. For the semiconductor industry, these advancements could mean chips that operate at higher speeds with lower power consumption, critical for applications such as AI data centres, quantum computing, clean energy technologies, and advanced defence systems.

What is unique about Space Forge’s technology with regards to its impact on sustainability?

Trisha Saxena: Space Forge has developed key technologies to enable the scalable manufacturing of high-performance crystals in space. Their expertise goes beyond silicon and includes other wafer materials like silicon carbide, gallium arsenide or diamond. These materials have been shown to possess superior properties to pure silicon, such as better thermal and electrical conductivity. However, they are currently expensive to produce and have low yield and increasing wafer sizes compound imperfections. As such, by utilising the unique environment of space, Space Forge are able to bring completely new semiconductor products to the market.

There are other novel impacts of Space Forge’s approach to materials manufacturing. Its focus is on producing materials and products which offer game-changing levels of performance and efficiency in power-hungry infrastructure and systems – reducing the environmental impact of production on earth to unlock new value and innovation. Research suggests that manufacturing these materials in space could reduce CO2 emission by 75% – the equivalent to removing cars from all UK roads on a yearly basis. Energy usage and sustainable production are fast becoming major concerns for terrestrial semiconductor manufacturers, with Space Forge’s approach posing a completely novel paradigm to addressing these issues.

How is Space Forge redefining the boundaries of what’s possible in advanced materials manufacturing?

Trisha Saxena: From Space Forge’s example, the company recognized that the unique environment of space – microgravity, vacuum, and extreme temperatures – enables the production of materials with properties unattainable on Earth. Their approach shows the importance of looking beyond conventional constraints and designing manufacturing systems around new frontiers. By pairing this vision with a focus on reusability and scalability, Space Forge demonstrates that innovation in advanced materials also depends on building viable, sustainable business models around novel production environments.

From your discussions with companies in this sector, what are the most significant challenges they face in developing and deploying advanced materials technologies within NATO-aligned industries?

David Ordonez: Let me highlight three significant challenges: First, strategic raw-material dependence is a pressing challenge slowing the development and deployment of advanced materials within NATO Allies. Many defence-critical minerals, including rare earth elements, cobalt, and titanium, are dominated by single-source suppliers such as China, creating significant fragility in supply chains that underpin advanced radar systems, electronics, sensors, propulsion technologies, and a wide range of both defence and civilian applications.

Second, developing novel materials is not something that happens overnight. As with all hardware operations, it is a process defined by long development cycles and significant capital requirements. Technical hurdles remain considerable, as many advanced materials demand new manufacturing infrastructure, testing methods, and standardisation protocols, meaning these industries take time to evolve from the status quo. Such long timelines and high capital intensity often deter investment in advanced materials. However, the economic impact of breakthroughs in this field is virtually uncapped, making a strong case for increased investment given the transformational potential these technologies hold.

Third, when it comes to commercialisation and procurement, even when innovative materials emerge from research labs, bridging the gap to field deployment requires extensive validation, investment, and alignment with often slow and rigid procurement processes. Breaking through these legacy approaches, where requirements are defined around past technologies, is essential to pave the way for greater innovation in materials and enable faster integration into vehicles, electronics, and other critical defence and civilian systems.

What are some of the most promising innovations or breakthroughs in advanced materials manufacturing that you’ve encountered, and how might they impact NATO’s capabilities?

David Ordonez: Several recent breakthroughs in advanced materials manufacturing stand to reshape NATO’s capabilities. Near term, ruggedized additive manufacturing technologies like cold spray repair systems and wire-arc additive manufacturing are giving forces the ability to produce and repair critical parts in the field – like one of our portfolio companies Kongsberg Ferrotech. This enhances readiness, reduces dependence on long and fragile supply chains, and helps NATO militaries sustain high-tempo operations under attrition.

Mid-term advances in composites and digital manufacturing are also important. In-situ consolidated thermoplastic composites promise lighter, faster-to-produce UAVs and aircraft, while AI-driven digital thread approaches can drastically shorten qualification cycles for new materials and parts. This is something that we can see today in the urge to manufacture large quantities of UAVs in the East of Europe.

On the high-performance frontier, ultra-high temperature ceramics, high-entropy alloys, and metasurfaces are maturing toward operational use. These materials enable survivable hypersonic platforms, radiation-tolerant systems for space, and adaptive stealth or communications surfaces for contested electromagnetic environments.

In other areas like power electronics, compound semiconductors like GaN/SiC, supported by diamond heat spreaders, are already making radar and electronic warfare systems smaller, cooler, and more powerful.

Advanced materials allow NATO to field more resilient supply chains, lighter and more capable platforms, and entirely new mission profiles in autonomous operations, and electromagnetic warfare. The challenge for NATO is less about the science, of which we have decades of research in leading institutions, and more about commercializing these scientific breakthroughs, scaling production, ensuring supply of critical raw materials, and rapidly certifying these breakthroughs for operational use.

How relevant is dual use in the advanced materials sector? Are there current examples of advanced materials being applied for civilian/everyday use?

David Ordonez: Very! Innovations in advanced materials are primed to serve both civilian and defence needs. One area is advanced composites. In the civilian sector, carbon-fiber reinforced polymers are used extensively in aerospace, for example in the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350, to reduce weight and fuel consumption. They also enable the construction of longer and lighter wind turbine blades, improving renewable energy generation efficiency. On the defence side, composites are widely used in advanced fighter jets for performance gains. They are also used in stealth platforms, where radar-absorbing composite structures reduce detection across land, sea, and air systems.

Energy and power materials are another area of rapid innovation. Solid-state electrolytes are enabling safer, higher-density batteries for electric vehicles, while hydrogen storage alloys and membranes underpin the expansion of clean energy systems. On the defence side, the emphasis is on resilience and endurance, with lightweight batteries powering soldier systems, drones, and other autonomous platforms. Fuel cells are also being developed to deliver long-duration, silent propulsion for submarines and unmanned aerial vehicles, allowing forces to remain persistent in contested environments.

Why is now the right time for NIF to focus on disrupting advanced materials manufacturing, and what are the risks of not acting?

David Ordonez: The sector sits at the intersection of geopolitical urgency, technological readiness, and expanding market demand. NATO allies and Western economies remain heavily dependent on adversarial suppliers, particularly China, for critical minerals and midstream processing, creating strategic vulnerabilities in defence, energy, and electronics. At the same time, breakthroughs in composites, alloys, ceramics, metamaterials, and quantum materials are reaching industrial scalability, with companies like iCOMAT and Space Forge already proving that step-change advances can be commercialized.

These technologies are inherently dual-use, serving both defence applications and massive civilian markets such as aerospace, mobility, semiconductors, and energy storage, which multiplies the commercial upside for investors who act now.

Policy priorities in NATO, the EU, and national governments are also aligning with this agenda, creating a tailwind for private capital through funding and public-private partnerships. The risks of not acting are significant: continued dependence on non-allied supply chains, erosion of industrial surge capacity, and the loss of technological leadership to adversaries. Economically, it also means missing the chance to back generational companies capable of transforming trillion-dollar industries. Inaction would leave investors and nations as consumers of innovation rather than shapers of the next industrial era.