Ethan Thornton dropped out of MIT at 19 to build weapons. The first one, a hydrogen-powered system he prototyped with parts from Home Depot and Amazon, didn’t work out — “hydrogen was just a bad bet in general,” he told me this past week at TechCrunch’s StrictlyVC event in Los Angeles. Three years later, his company, Mach Industries, is running six weapons programs and earlier this month closed a $300 million Series C round at a $1.8 billion valuation. The startup has now raised roughly $485 million altogether.
Thornton grew up in Burnet, Texas, a town with roughly 6,500 residents, in a family with deep military ties. Around 2017 or 2018 — when he was still in his early teens — he started becoming, by his own account, “really, really concerned” about the rise of China and what he saw as an impending great-power conflict. That concern eventually sharpened into a conviction that unmanned systems were about to redefine warfare, and that the U.S. was moving too slowly to meet the moment.
What that looks like in practice, midway through 2026, is those six simultaneous weapons programs and a company that has a lot to prove instead of focusing on one thing, getting that right, and then expanding. Thornton is aware that Mach’s diffuse focus creates some lingering questions for outsiders. “It’s very hard,” he volunteered Thursday night. But he doesn’t think defense rewards the kind of single-minded focus that rocket launch, say, demands. “It is a chess game you’re playing with an adversary,” he said, “with hundreds of different products that need to be shipped if we want security.” Pick just one, he suggested, and you’ve already lost the game.
These aren’t simple products. Mach is working on a vertical-takeoff strike aircraft, a long-range anti-ship missile, two stratospheric systems, a cheap surface-to-air interceptor built to kill drones, and — announced earlier this week — a 40-foot, roughly 4,000-pound Navy logistics-and-strike aircraft that takes off near-vertically and flies over a thousand miles with a thousand-pound payload.
That last one is a real jump for a company whose biggest aircraft to date has been about 13 feet long. And none of the six is in full-rate production yet. Thornton says Mach has won around 13 government contracts, most sitting in the middle stage of defense procurement — past initial design, into testing on a government range, but short of the rate-manufacturing tier that fewer than 10 programs industry-wide have ever reached.
He says several systems should see operational deployment by the end of this year, and that his goal is to push three of the six into rate manufacturing in that same window — which would mean going from hundreds of units a month to hundreds of thousands, at a factory that Thornton says Mach plans to stand up soon.
It’s an aggressive timeline laid on top of an already aggressive bet. But Mach’s underlying thesis is that the U.S. can’t out-manufacture China so it has to out-create it — find the first-mover advantage the way Ukraine has against Russia, despite being outproduced. “I don’t think we’re going to outmanufacture China,” Thornton said. “The thing America continues to do well, time after time, compared to China centers on creativity and productization.”
Thornton argues — as do other defense tech startups — that the true bottleneck isn’t the various platforms being built — it’s the supply chain beneath them. “The hard part is actually getting the stuff into the building,” he said: jet engines, solid rocket motors, radar. Mach built and fired two jet engines from scratch in about eight months, a process he says traditionally takes four years; it also in May acquired a 24-year-old solid rocket motor company, Exquadrum, for $50 million, beating out roughly eight other bidders per its own telling. Selling components, not just vehicles, now accounts for about half of Mach’s revenue.
Mach’s approach differs sharply from some of its peers. Shield AI, founded in 2015, spent years as essentially a one-product company around its V-BAT drone before unveiling a second platform, the autonomous X-BAT fighter, last October — and even that is being positioned as one large, deliberate bet, not a portfolio. Saronic, founded in 2022, builds only autonomous surface vessels, scaling one unified autonomy stack across hull sizes from six feet to 180 feet.
Both have been rewarded for that discipline: Shield AI raised $2 billion this year at a $12.7 billion valuation; Saronic raised $1.75 billion at $9.25 billion.
The company Mach’s strategy more closely resembles is Anduril — which is bigger, older, and the one company against which every other defense-tech startup gets measured, fairly or not. Thornton draws the comparison himself, though he argues there’s a meaningful difference between the two companies. “Anduril’s playbook has been very much top-down, starting with the software stack,” he said. “We’re very much bottom-up, starting from the hardware stack and then starting to wrap software around it.”
It’s a distinction, yes, but Mach is still inevitably operating in Anduril’s shadow. Anduril raised $5 billion in May at a $61 billion valuation — more than 30 times Mach’s — and in March it landed a 10-year, $20 billion-ceiling Army enterprise contract consolidating over 120 separate procurement actions. Whatever Mach is building toward, Anduril got there years and tens of billions of dollars earlier.
Thornton insists the field isn’t zero-sum. He points to the scale of the problem: China reportedly builds something like a thousand cruise missiles a day; the U.S. builds roughly one every three days. “X company and Y company and Z company could all go build these things and it still wouldn’t be enough production,” he said. He also argues the Pentagon structurally won’t allow a monopoly — that it deliberately keeps two or three vendors alive in each category rather than picking one winner.
Whether or not that’s a generous reading of the competitive landscape, I put it to him that Anduril’s most famous co-founder, Palmer Luckey, has never, as far as I can tell, acknowledged Mach publicly. Thornton shrugs off any suggestion that Anduril isn’t interested in making room for Mach, telling me he respects Luckey, and that they’re “on the same team,” fighting for the same goal of Western sovereignty.
No doubt his investors, including Sequoia, Khosla Ventures, and Ribbit Capital, couldn’t care less. Strip away the founder-prodigy framing — the Texas workshop, the MIT dropout story every profile leads with, including this one — and what’s left is a genuinely interesting experiment led by a founder who seems, at least, to know what he doesn’t know.
Thornton has been candid that the hardest part of running Mach changes every six months: engineering first, then sales, and now manufacturing at scale, which he expects to dominate the next year. He says he tries to protect four or five hours a day to think and “war game the future,” sometimes pulling colleagues off their work to do it with him — which, he admits, “can kind of frustrate them sometimes.”
On the question of who pushes back on him — who keeps a fast-rising founder honest — Thornton said the most valuable feedback doesn’t come from investors or even his executive team, who can end up in the same echo chamber as the CEO. It comes, he said, from the people actually doing the work.
He described routine company-wide forums, his COO’s idea, where employees get microphones and ask him anything. It started with Thornton quietly recruiting a few trusted colleagues to ask aggressive questions. It’s since evolved into something harder to control — and, he suggested, more useful for it. “I basically stand up there for like an hour,” he said, “and get asked the most aggressive possible questions by people in the company.” He seems to relish it.
For more, you can watch our sit-down with Thornton below.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
A social commentator, Dogo Nanzing, has weighed in on the ongoing debate over indigeneity in Jos North Local Government Area, cautioning against what he described as attempts to alter Plateau State’s historical narrative following a recent High Court judgment on the issuance of indigene certificates.
Nanzing made his position known in a video posted on his social media platform and monitored by Jos Events, where he expressed concern over the controversies generated by the court ruling involving Fatima Baba Akawu and the Jos North Local Government Council.
The debate stems from a judgment delivered by Justice C. Donglong of the Plateau State High Court, which held that Fatima Baba Akawu, a Hausa woman born and raised in Jos North to a father recognized as an indigene of the area, is entitled to be issued a Certificate of Indigene by the local government.
Reacting to the ruling, Nanzing described the situation as an “existential battle” for Plateau people, alleging that some individuals were attempting to rewrite the historical realities of Jos North.
“Plateau in recent times has been going through what I call an existential battle. Certain people are desperately trying to rewrite our history and create narratives that are not true, especially as it relates to Jos North,” he said.
While emphasizing that his comments were not intended to promote ethnic division, Nanzing maintained that discussions surrounding land ownership, identity, and indigeneity must be grounded in truth and historical accuracy.
“This is not meant to cause division. I have many Hausa friends whom I respect, but when it comes to the issue of the land, I will always stand for the land,” he stated.
The commentator commended former Plateau State Governor, Senator Jonah Jang, for what he described as his consistent advocacy on matters affecting the identity and interests of Plateau communities.
He also praised the Plateau Indigenous Development Association Network (PIDAN) for swiftly responding to the judgment and pursuing legal steps to challenge the ruling through the appellate process.
According to Nanzing, historical records and reports from previous commissions of inquiry should serve as the basis for public understanding of indigeneity issues rather than emotional arguments or politically motivated narratives.
He argued that claims suggesting Jos North originally belonged to Hausa/Fulani communities are inconsistent with available historical accounts, insisting that the indigenous ethnic groups of the area remain the Berom, Afizere, and Anaguta peoples.
“If anyone says Jos North originally belonged to Hausa/Fulani, then they should explain at what point in history the Berom, Afizere and Anaguta people took the land from them. History must be based on facts,” he said.
Nanzing further dismissed speculation linking the judgment to any political arrangement, insisting that there was no evidence connecting Governor Caleb Mutfwang to such allegations.
He called for renewed efforts to document, preserve, and teach Plateau history in schools, warning that future generations risk losing touch with their heritage if historical facts are not properly safeguarded.
Meanwhile, PIDAN has formally appealed the High Court judgment, arguing that the case raises broader constitutional and legal questions concerning indigeneity, ancestry, citizenship, and the rights of indigenous communities in Plateau State.
The association maintained that while every Nigerian has the constitutional right to reside and engage in lawful activities anywhere in the country, the determination of indigene status should continue to be guided by established historical, constitutional, and legal principles.
As the controversy continues to generate debate across Plateau State, stakeholders are closely monitoring the appellate proceedings, which are expected to further shape discussions on identity, citizenship, and belonging in Jos North and beyond.
Director of News and Political Editor at Arise Television, Sumner Sambo, says the opposition political parties need to show capacity ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Sambo made this statement on Monday when he appeared as a guest in an interview on Arise Television’s ‘Morning Show’.
He was speaking on the recently concluded Ekiti State governorship election, where the incumbent governor, Abiodun Oyebanji, was declared the winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
According to him, the elections have shown that opposition political parties have to put in the work, stressing that they need to show capacity.
“Judging from the political angle of the election in Ekiti, the opposition didn’t give a very good performance.
“We need to question the facts coming out of the election. What exactly was the opposition doing to the extent that results coming out do not reflect what happened in the 2018 and 2022 elections, which were very much intense,” he asked.