Yes, so firstly I think we've done a great job in organizing the business. We're really focused on organizing our ability to deliver against it. So when we're communicating it to our investors, we have a high degree of confidence that we can deliver from a production standpoint, but also in the field with the customer. With that said, it's not easy, right? It's not easy to go from development to operational. And we've had to work really hard. So that means the team is under a lot of pressure, but they've been delivering.
I'd say if I extend a bit and think a little bit more strategically and tactically, moving into the US market is a challenge, right? It has been a challenge. Because you have to localize supply chains here, you have to build your pipeline, and these are systems that you don't just show up and say, 'Hey, you put them on a shelf and the customer goes shopping and says, I'll take that.' It's not fast-moving consumer goods. So there's a lot of work that needs to be done to get the pipeline. It means you have to be able to field the customers. That creates other operational challenges around getting equipment here. And that was particularly true when we were constrained from a capital standpoint, because we had to make choices and priorities. So if I go back I'll say 18 months ago, a lot of those decisions around what we're doing were focused on making sure we can validate operationally that the systems were reliable, working to customer requirements. And that was a lot of energy and focus. And then of course servicing those initial customers, that being the IDF and a handful of others. So now as we're transitioning the US and we're really looking to build a business here, you'll see we've been putting in the work, right? But that's been a challenge tactically to do it as you would expect.
I'll talk about a few, but it's not limited and there's a bunch of folks that we're engaging with increasingly. So I think you're going to see our ecosystem expand quite a bit over '26 and '27 and that's going to be a perpetual thing. We're a collaborative company. But some of the most important partnerships we have now, as you know, and we talked about earlier, was the Mistral relationship with the sales and marketing. They've actually provided some support for us on the production side as well, particularly with the RoboTeam. We've developed a relationship with Detroit Manufacturing, also known as DMS, out of Detroit. And they're a very capable producer, with industrial and we'll call it even vehicles and subsystems.
So on Optimus and Iron Drone and things like docking stations, we find them to be a great partner and I think that's going to really grow. Kitron is another good example. Kitron's building the WASP, which is our strike drone, and we're partnered with Rift Dynamics out of Norway. And it's a, you know, it's really, I actually when I think about that, I'd like to add that third-party manufacturing is an approach we've been taking. It's not going to be limited to that. So as we're scaling, you're going to see some internal activities and that includes American Robotics building drones and fiber optic spools, for example, which we're doing now. But you know, it's going to be a mixture, but I think emphasizing the contract manufacturers is actually being, is sort of very consistent with where the Department of War wants to see industry go.
Now, having your own vertically integrated factory is valuable and certainly we want to see people do that. At the same time, we also need to get scale efficiencies and that's exactly what the contract manufacturer business model is. So what I've seen is that, from Anduril, particularly as we've built our portfolio, I'm getting more and more inbound interest from large contract manufacturers. So we had it on our last deck, we had photos and logos they had to see before, like Flextronics, for example. We have others like that, like Sanmina, who are calling us up and saying, 'Hey, listen, we want to engage in this reindustrialization of America. This is what we do. We know the Department of War needs players like us.'
But the problem is when we want to build drones for somebody or any of these defense technologies, we have to interface with, you know, series A funded companies that aren't well funded. They don't have operational systems at the TRL level they need to be. And they don't have balance sheet, right? And they only have a single product, a single customer. It's very hard for them to devote their resources because the contract manufacturer model is all about thin margins, the efficiencies. So when we're coming now with a portfolio, I'm seeing increased interest from real serious and capable supply chain partners, manufacturing partners who want to work with us. And I only think that's going to get stronger and stronger. So that's what it looks like today. Detroit Manufacturing and Kitron are important. Some of the internal work we're doing is important. But you're going to see us build that capability into a very serious strength.
So I don't think we've looked at 3D Systems specifically, although 3D printing is part of our manufacturing process in certain places for sure. But we haven't, you know, with some context, when you go into something like that, I believe that's when you're going to be building many thousands in volumes, where you would outsource that. Now, we're of course going to get there, but we'll leave that to Kitron. I don't know what they do. Kitron can play a similar role, for example, on the WASP if we're 3D printing. We might do injection molding, too, right? So those are things that Rift Dynamics has been working on. And it'll all depend on how big our orders are and where we are in that cycle of growth.
In the air platforms, we have dock solutions like the Optimus system and like Iron Drone. The Optimus dock is very complex, as you said. So essentially we ask our manufacturing partners to build the whole thing. And they, my team can speak to this better than I can. But I do believe that there's subassemblies. So for example, the Optimus, the robotic arm, I think we'll take that from a different partner. So there's a bit of an assembly, but this is much more than that when you think about the level of sophistication it is to build the Optimus dock. The Iron Drone pod, we call it a pod, it's a much simpler mousetrap. So that is more of an assembly responsibility. And the individual drones themselves are, you know, a bunch of components you're putting together and assembling, really. So we can bring the components in to do that. And that's a place where you can see us at Aerobotics and at American Robotics doing it smaller batches internally. And of course when we do volumes like we're doing now with the WASP and we're going to do with these other systems like Iron Drone, we won't be using a third party in all likelihood. There'll be a point where we're probably going to take it in-house, at least part of it.
The benefits of having the internal and external manufacturing are not necessarily well appreciated. So maybe I'll just spend a brief moment talking about that. So in our markets when we're specifically thinking about defense and homeland security, there's a structural demand for what we do and what our peers do in the industry. You want to fill inventory, you want to refresh product cycles with new technologies, you want to have systems out for training. Of course in times of conflict it's a different animal. You need surge capacity. And I think if we as an industry and us as part of the industry have a capability to do a certain amount internally, we actually have to keep feeding that third-party group and making them able so they can react to surge capacity. Because we can't keep, you know, surge capacity might need 5x what you're building in a normalized environment. And it's not necessarily just about the warehouse or even the equipment to build it. It's the labor, right? So to be able to supply with labor. So I think that element of contract manufacturing is going to be critical and I know the Department of War is very, very concerned about that. They don't, they want their vendors to have that flexibility to flex and have surge. And if you're just building your own through your own facilities, it's much harder to do that flex.
It's a perfect question because it is the biggest risk. But if I take a step back and I'll just say that, you know, that's kind of a known risk, right? We do know that the supply chain is a challenge, right? It's a bottleneck source because, you know, over the last 25 years it's been hollowed out where we outsourced that to China. They did the same thing in Europe, of course, right? They deindustrialized Europe. Well, now the policy is very focused on reindustrializing. And the point is this is a process. We don't have to build millions and millions of drones tomorrow. What we have to do is get on a path to be able to do it at least a few years out. And I think what our strategy is, and we're not the only ones to do this, right? We've talked about need to be a scaled provider of these systems, right? Developing and having exceptional technology is a requirement, but it's not sufficient. You have to put the operating side of the business together.
And as we're doing that, others are going to do it. These are market forces, but policy like the drone dominance program is a brilliant example of them saying, 'Hey, there's a cottage industry here. This is all great. We know you're patriotic. We know you're engineering and you do cool things. You're not doing it industrial scale. And you're not useful to us unless you can do it industrial scale.' And when you fast forward that means you have to have few suppliers. So you're going to see similar dynamics in most of the systems whether they're counter-UAS, strike drones, maybe longer endurance ISR, the ground vehicles. You're going to see that same pressure because we need to be able to deliver at scale at the right cost. And as you start to consolidate the vendors then those big contract manufacturers can interface in a much more efficient, cost-effective way. And that becomes a virtuous cycle in and of itself. So we're in a market where all of the aspects of our businesses are flywheels and we're transitioning from developing the technologies to delivering them. And there's a lot of, I've seen a lot of investment cycles and the capital is going to be there. I know because we're demonstrating that investors want to invest in this cycle. They're mission-driven but there's profit incentive and there's a lot of money to be made reindustrializing America, which is a good thing.
For sure they are and we have a bunch of partnerships. One we've announced recently which is a very exciting one is Heidelberg. And Heidelberg's a great example. Now we say this story has been well reported. Germany, the policies and the macroeconomics have driven everything from Germany to China, right? Their auto industries are under a lot of pressure just like ours is and other industries. And at the same time the Europeans have been through a long period of time of relying on the US for defense and security and that's clearly changed. And that changed about 12 months ago when JD Vance went to the Munich Security Conference and it was really a demarcation line and everything's different. And initially the Europeans were pushing back on this. But very quickly they realized the benefits of resiliency which is actually very bullish for their economy. They can reindustrialize. And they're doing that.
So you're seeing like Heidelberg is a wonderful company. They build big systems, complex systems primarily around printing machinery. They're the best. It's a big business. I think they have a couple billion dollar revenue and employ a lot of people. They're global. So they know how to build stuff. But they're also looking at the national service they can do and it's imperative to say, 'Hey, in reindustrializing, protecting the country of Germany but also greater Europe is something worth doing.' So they want to do it. So they're going to work with us. We're going to bring systems. They're going to be able to build them. They're going to help us sell and distribute and service the systems. And I think we can bring other partners in either there or elsewhere. So I think it's very exciting. And the paradigm in Europe, not just for Anduril but all American producers of defense technologies, you have to localize and that's not easy. And I think we've figured out business and operating models to do it. So you're going to hear more about Heidelberg as we've told you you would. So stay tuned.
The short answer is yes. But I don't want to set any expectations. We'll have to see. But I think they are relevant. If I had to say the lidar sensor vis-a-vis batteries, you know, I think at the moment if we were going to be supportive of the ecosystem, I think the battery vertical is actually becoming more interesting because we do have to localize that capability here. We have to bring scale to it. But that's just the way I think about it. I have nothing to announce on that front but it's interesting.
And what you see us do if we're not making control investments or acquisitions, we do find benefits of, so firstly if we can find a related right part of our ecosystem that we can invest in if we think we can be financially rewarded, that's a good reason to do it. But as important if not more important, making a financial return is a requirement. But ideally what we're also focused on and be able to leverage is helping identify leaders throughout the ecosystem for other investors. Because we're subject matter experts. When I say we I'm talking about my team which is exceptional, right? They're technology experts, they're market experts, they're systems integration experts, they're customer use case experts and so forth. So we think we do a pretty good job of understanding the valuable technologies and leadership teams that are critical to our ecosystem growing because that has to support companies like us as we get big. And if we can invest and then co-invest, bring other investors into these situations, that company becomes stronger and as a tide they help us raise the tide. So that's the thought process when we think about these products.
You're right. I'm 24/7 and so when you're a global investor, money never sleeps. But my business never sleeps because security never sleeps, right? So I guess that's my orientation. But as an investor you're in the information game. So you're just taking this is where you're taking the information. One of the biggest most important parts of your job is to make sure you're filtering out the information that's not useful, right? But because this is so encompassing, I don't really have the luxury of sort of thinking about my personal time.
But most of the things I'm interested in, and prior to founding Anduril and getting this plan and all this incredible management team together and these investors to support us, I was not a technology expert. I was more of a macro thinker. I would invest around investment themes and cycles. And today, at least from my, if I pull my investor hat, the sort of perspective I have on technologies and how they can be made valuable for markets, customers and investors is really a powerful set of learnings. And it'd be great to be able to deploy them. And I see some things but I can't become an expert in them because I have to do this.
None of the failures are funny. I wish they were. I mean you look back and there's some certainly some crazy things. But you have to understand when you talk about deep technology, it's all hard work. And so the amount of blood, literal blood, sweat and tears and personal sacrifice to get something to the point we are today, it's like, the failures you have, and you're right there are a lot, it's hard to communicate what that disappointment is. Right? Because of that level of energy we put into it. At the same time that makes the successes all the more gratifying because the road is not an easy one. So I guess that's the way I would frame it is that what do you learn? We learn a lot because failure is important, right? And you want to also always push your technologies and capabilities to the edge so you understand what your limits are. You're also testing yourselves in real world environments because at the end of the day customers have to have that. So you're going to fail and it's actually part of the process but each one is really, really disappointing.
There's a lot out there. I do hear about them. And in this environment I hear about even more. So I think about heavy lift and long endurance, right? Logistics type stuff. I think some of the longer endurance stuff is still, it's orders of magnitude more complex. There's regulatory challenges that have to be solved for but I think there's reason to be optimistic. You'll see more of that stuff mature and be operational. I think like a lot of these things, these are dual use. When you think about heavy lift and logistics, but there's an imperative now for military, homeland security type of use cases for them to become operational. And I think that's going to accelerate that activity.
I'd also add that, you probably maybe it's a language and communication thing, but you're starting to see maybe mid-size drones, maybe they're exactly what we're talking about, but this mothership concept where you got a drone that can carry payloads. And the payloads might be supplies. It could be gravity bombs. It could be other drones, right? That the bigger, say quadcopter or fixed wing, will go into the battle and then the smaller drones that we still have the same endurance because they don't have the same size, they can't carry the battery, but then they're more tactical strike or swarming. They come off the mothership. I think you're going to see those technologies develop and become more visible to the public over the next 12 to 24 months because they're there.
Operationally, it is a challenge. So that's where the ground vehicles become very relevant. So yeah, I think what we've really done in our industry and I think we can say that's successful now is we've matured the technology stack around the basic technology stack and even more so more than basic around command and autonomy. Now, it's going to continue to evolve. We're always going to try to make the drones fly faster and be more productive. But the core is there and now you're starting to see extensions of the core and that's the mothership is one extension. The ground vehicle is another extension of the core and how you integrate them from a systems of systems standpoint is where things get really interesting and that's again, why we do this. You know, why we've communicated the vision we have. It's all about this is the next evolution and it's very valuable. It's valuable for customers.
