“SpaceX is built for mass; we are built for speed.” — Bachar Elzein, CEO and Founder, Reaction Dynamics

Nearly 20% of Canada’s economy depends on space systems. Yet, Canada cannot launch satellites into orbit from domestic soil. It is the only G7 country without sovereign launch capabilities. This leaves our economy and security in the hands of foreign partners, primarily the United States and SpaceX.
Reaction Dynamics is one of three companies chosen by the Department of National Defence’s Launch the North program to develop Canadian sovereign launch capabilities. Its competitive advantage is speed, ease of transport and storability, targeting a responsive-launch capability in just a few hours.
“Future projections suggest that the global space economy may grow to as much as $2 trillion by 2040.”

“I don’t need a heavy launch spaceport to launch from. I can launch from a forest.”

Aurora is the company’s pathfinder and first orbital launch vehicle, a two-stage rocket designed to deliver 250 kg to sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) or 200 kg to low Earth orbit (LEO). Unlike rockets that use cryogenic propellants, Aurora uses storable propellants, reducing the need for launch infrastructure.
Aurora is designed to be transported fully fueled in shipping containers by truck, rail, air, or sea, and stored for up to five years ready to launch. The rocket can then be deployed without the permanent launch sites that traditional rockets require. The target launch price is approximately $10,000 to $15,000 per kilogram.

The plan is to leverage this pathfinder as a qualification platform for its medium-lift vehicle to carry larger loads to orbit; more information is expected in the coming months.

“Once you can reach orbit, the world is your oyster.”

The startup aims to help Canada and its allies replenish and reconstitute constellations, restore communications, and deploy new capabilities without waiting for foreign launches. The team believes that space infrastructure and its disruption can determine a conflict before a bullet is ever fired.
Responsive launch can also support space manufacturing and time-sensitive biological or pharmaceutical payloads.

Alongside launch capabilities, Reaction Dynamics is building Hermes, a satellite propulsion system that manoeuvres satellites quickly in orbit. This platform gives operators greater flexibility to reposition satellites and safely deorbit them at the end of their missions.

“No modern army can fight without its space assets.”

Reaction Dynamics has received an initial C$8.3-million award through Launch the North, has completed Phases 1 and 2 of NATO DIANA, and has secured its first contracted revenue with a Direct-to-Phase-2 SBIR contract under the U.S. Space Force’s Tactically Responsive Space program. The startup has now raised nearly C$50 million in capital, and says that the value of its letters of intent is now in the billions. Interest is coming from large allied-country space companies, including operators that are producing hundreds of spacecraft and serving the U.S. Space Force.
Orbital launch for the Aurora is targeted for Q4 2028.

“You are not necessarily missing anything by building in Canada. Canada is a great place to start a company. It is difficult, but starting a company is never easy.”

“Talk to your customers early and do not give a fuck about what your VC tells you.”

I spoke with Bachar Elzein, the CEO and Founder of Reaction Dynamics, about rapid launch, satellite warfare, Canadian capital, and why this country must build a company that can compete with SpaceX.
He wants Canada to become the launch partner of choice for its allies.

“Canada was starved of defence support for a long time. We survived the past decade through tremendous sacrifice and effort. Other deep-tech and defence companies could have existed but do not because the support was not there.”

Jesse Mikelberg, Reaction Dynamics’ Director of Business Development & Strategy, also contributed to the conversation.

What is Reaction Dynamics building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“We are building storable, containerized rocket systems with orbital-launch capabilities. Think of it as: SpaceX is built for mass; we are built for speed. This technology can apply to light-lift all the way up to medium lift.
Nearly 20% of the Canadian economy depends on space infrastructure or space-based assets, yet we do not have a way to reach orbit on our own. All Canadian satellites or Canadian assets are launched on foreign or allied rockets. That highlights how vulnerable we are as a country.”

Advertisement — Marconi Technologies

The Canadian Explorers is proud to be supported by its Founding Lead Partner, Marconi Technologies.

Could you walk me through the product lineup for someone without a rocketry background?

“We are working on Aurora, which is our first orbital rocket. It is poised to fly in Q4 2028. That rocket will serve multiple purposes. First and foremost, it will validate our ability to reach orbit. It will also demonstrate our concept of operations, specifically responsiveness, short lead times and the fact that we are using storable propellants. Nothing beats an orbital launch to demonstrate that.
Second, we have Hermes, an in-space propulsion system for satellites derived from our hydrogen-peroxide-based propellant. Those satellites can be propelled by high-test peroxide (HTP), a concentrated form of hydrogen peroxide, which decomposes through a catalyst into superheated steam and oxygen to create thrust.
Last but not least, we have a medium-lift vehicle that we will talk about more in the next few months.”

What does Hermes do that alternatives cannot?

“Hermes is chemical propulsion, so it can impart a change in velocity on a satellite much faster than the electrical propulsion that is typically used.
Electrical propulsion is characterized by a very high specific impulse, which means you can get more overall velocity change for the same mass of propellant. However, that change in velocity happens over a long time. If you want to manoeuvre your satellite quickly or change its altitude quickly, chemical propulsion is key.
Most existing monopropellant propulsion has been based on hydrazine, which is very toxic. Our alternative has a very similar density impulse, but it is not toxic. We benefit from the advantages that we like with hydrazine without having to deal with the toxicity.”

Could you contrast Reaction Dynamics with the other Launch the North companies? Can all three survive in the Canadian market?

“My wish is that everybody finds a way to serve a segment of the market. Launch is capital-intensive, highly competitive and heavily regulated. The margins are not great. It is a very tough business.
The companies that survive will be the ones that can be polarizing. In an ideal world, every customer would have a very cheap launch with very short lead times that is extremely precise, can deliver all their satellites and gives them control over their destination and schedule. But it is never like that. You are always making compromises. There will be a market for the cheapest launch. If you are building a rocket that can be the cheapest, you have a market. If you are building an extremely precise rocket that can reach a very specific orbit or can offer a dedicated launch, there is a market for you. If you are none of those things, it will be difficult.

I genuinely hope all three companies survive. I talk to Hugh (Canada Rocket Company) and Rahul (NordSpace) almost every week. We are competitors, but we also help one another where we can because we all want the same thing: to provide launch to this country. Reaction Dynamics has advocated for launch sovereignty for almost 10 years. It is exciting that we now have friends carrying the same message and adding weight to the importance of launch.
Every rocket is defined first and foremost by the propellants it uses. If you use LOX methane, you will build a very different rocket than if you use LOX kerosene. Those technical choices define the vehicle, whether you like it or not. Each has advantages and disadvantages.
That is the key distinguishing feature. Every company has strong engineers and believes it has an edge, which is appropriate. This is a tough business. But the selection of propellants defines the technical toolbox you have. How you leverage the advantages of that toolbox is what will make the difference.”

What capabilities are unlocked by storable propellants, particularly for shipping and storage?

“You have to emphasize storability and storable propellants. Cryogenic propellants have advantages, notably when it comes to specific impulse, but they also add constraints to the concept of operations. A rocket using cryogenic propellants will never be able to launch from a remote area or a forward-deployed base without heavy launch infrastructure. If you do not have that infrastructure, the rocket cannot operate.

Those are problems we do not have with storable propellants. I do not need a week to fuel my rocket. I can launch fuel-ready. I do not need to chill down my engine. When you deal with liquid oxygen, liquid methane or anything cryogenic, the propellants are boiling off continuously. We do not have to deal with that. We do not have to vent, and we do not have valves freezing.
We lose a little specific impulse, which we knew and understood. However, we are dealing with very dense propellants, so density impulse compensates for much of that. With the right design decisions and architecture, we can still carry a significant payload. At the end of the day, customers do not care whether you are burning liquid oxygen with kerosene, hydrogen or methane. They care about the result: the vehicle’s features, characteristics and price.
If a rocket is expensive, you cannot compete on price. If it takes too long to manufacture, you cannot compete on lead time. If you do not have fine-tuned precision in thrust-vector control, you cannot compete on precision. If you can reduce complexity without compromising reliability, customers can benefit from a convenient, dedicated launch at a reasonable price. That is exactly what we are doing.”

What does responsive launch mean? How fast can a rocket go from storage to launch, and where can Aurora launch from?

“We are targeting 72 hours for Launch the North. Will that be the standard service? I would not say that, but it could become a specialized service for some defence customers. We could likely bring that timeline down significantly. It is feasible.
I also do not need a heavy launch spaceport to launch from. I can launch from a forest. The rocket and its propellants can be carried. The rocket, at the light-lift scale, is containerized. We only need a safe place to launch and a way to track the rocket, which can be delivered through multiple means.
For replenishment and reconstitution, these are important advantages. Applying the same approach to rockets carrying four to six tonnes or more could enable us to launch larger payloads from remote locations that are well positioned to reach particular orbits. With less dependence on cryogenic infrastructure, launch location becomes a strategic advantage, giving commercial and government customers more options to reach the orbits they need, when they need them.
Jesse led an interesting customer study a couple of years ago to understand what customers could unlock with responsive launch. It opened our eyes. Some companies work with biological assets for medical or pharmaceutical research. They need to launch quickly because they are dealing with live material and need a short lead time.
Other companies need a certain number of satellites operating in orbit. We are speaking with companies that have a high attrition rate and need to replenish frequently. You do not always know which satellite you will lose, which orbit it will be in or which inclination it will use. Some companies launch spare satellites, while others cannot afford to do that or face technical constraints that make it impossible. Responsive launch is not merely an incremental improvement for them. It is a paradigm change. We learned what customers want while developing smaller rockets, and we are now applying those lessons to medium lift.

No customer has complained about a shorter, faster and more convenient service when it does not compromise reliability or price. Nobody has told us they want to pay more or wait two years to launch. Satellite companies will find new ways to use a service once it is available. If a company can integrate a satellite with a rocket in days instead of months, it will operate differently. We are excited to see how customers use capabilities that current launch solutions cannot offer because they do not combine responsiveness, short lead times and pricing.”

How do you view the future of war in space?

“No modern army can fight without its space assets. All modern armies rely on space assets and infrastructure. If you can disrupt those assets, the war can be won before a single bullet is fired. As a country, Canada missed the age of the aircraft carrier, but it is not too late for us to have assets in orbit that protect us. There is nothing you will launch to orbit that will be more expensive than the cost of war on Earth. Anything you launch into orbit will be cheaper than fighting a war on Earth. If space assets allow you to pre-empt, avoid or deter an adversary from waging war on your country, that is exactly what you seek. But if we cannot reach orbit on our own, what can we do? Access to orbit is a key defence priority. In an ideal world, we would never have wars, but that is not the world we are in.”

Reaction Dynamics has publicly reported C$340 million in letters of intent. What is the business model and how much will launch cost?

Jesse Mikelberg: “We now far exceed the number that is posted online. We’ve collected several billion dollars worth of LOIs and MOUs. The customers showing the most interest are not necessarily domiciled in Canada. They include some of the largest and most successful international space companies in allied countries. They can identify ways our service will, in turn, change the services they provide to their customers for the better.
I cannot name those customers at this time. They include operators producing hundreds of spacecraft, serving the U.S. Space Force, running major operations and having raised hundreds of millions of dollars. These are credible operators that want a service that is relatively cost-effective but, more importantly, delivers assets where they need to be, when they need to be, with as few pain points as possible. They want rapid integration, rapid deployment and a fast solution to maintain or enhance constellation assets. It is easy to think of our assets as products, but in reality we provide a service: consistent and safe access to orbit on very fast timelines.”

Bachar Elzein: “The target price per kilogram, as we speak, is roughly $10,000 to $15,000.”

How can Canada back more moonshots like Reaction Dynamics?

“We need time. The right decisions have been made to foster companies like ours and our competitors. But you cannot invest capital into the ecosystem and expect to reach orbit, build fighter jets and build everything in-house overnight. It takes time. We are not asking for 20 years; it takes a couple of years. I think the government has done what could be expected from a government looking to support its defence ecosystem, at both the federal and provincial levels. We are fortunate to be in Quebec. The province has done a lot for us.
Private investors now have to follow. We are seeing more traction than in the past, but it is easy for me to say that investors must take more risks. What we need is to show that taking risks pays. We need to show that companies in Canada can succeed. We talk about Shopify a lot. Shopify was 10 years ago. We should have a company in Canada that can compete with SpaceX. We should have a company in Canada that can compete with Anduril or Palantir.

When investors see that the people who committed to those companies were rewarded, it will become more compelling for others to follow. Canada was starved of defence support for a long time. We survived the past decade through tremendous sacrifice and effort. Other deep-tech and defence companies could have existed but do not because the support was not there, and they may not have shown the same staying power.
Canadian success stories will make it easier for investors to commit in the future. I hope and believe that Reaction Dynamics’ success will make it easier for the companies coming after us. In a couple of years, we can show that we can reach orbit here, ITAR-free, with Canadian solutions, Canadian engineering, Canadian ingenuity and engineers trained at Canadian universities.
Defence is not an end case; it is leverage. The phone I am using relies on technology that was initially developed for defence. We do not see the warfighter and the farmer as different. Both are key stakeholders. When you think of defence as leverage, defence is the economy. The industrial base is the economy.

From our perspective, the government has provided what we need. There are still issues such as pathways to procurement, but those are known and are being addressed. The larger step is with private investors. Successful Canadian companies will build a more compelling case for defence investment.”

Jesse Mikelberg: “For the first time in my professional history, we are seeing government funding move at the pace of, or faster than, private capital.”

What have you learned from building Reaction Dynamics, and what advice would you give to a young Canadian deep-tech founder?

“You do not build a company to be understood necessarily. Your most important frame of reference should be your customers. They will guide you through their problems and pain points. If customers like what you are building, that is what matters. Money will come. Investors will come. You also have to build a great team. Building an exceptional team is one of the most important things you can do.
It is not easy. If building a company were easy, everybody would be an entrepreneur. It has to be difficult because you are creating something that does not exist. You have to fight many forces to put something into a market where you compete against infinite capital and infinite talent. Those forces are designed to ward off fragile ideas, business cases and business models that are not robust. It takes a fight, and that is okay. Talk to your customers early and do not give a fuck about what your VC tells you. That is really it.”

What do the next 12 months look like, and if everything works, what does Reaction Dynamics become over the next 20 years?

“In 20 years, I hope Canada becomes the launch partner of choice for our allies because of our geographic position and our reliability as a partner. I hope Reaction Dynamics spearheads that by bringing a new paradigm to launch: on-demand, responsive, affordable, strategic and reusable. Access to orbit will be key if Canada wants to benefit from the two-trillion-dollar economy everybody talks about. Once you can reach orbit, the world is your oyster. If you want to integrate vertically, you can.
What we have always been about is guided propulsion: giving customers the ability to move something from one orbit to another, from one place to another or from one area to another. Will that expand into a more vertically integrated business? Maybe, maybe not. We will see.

For now, we are absolutely focused on reaching orbit by Q4 2028. We have many ideas about what happens after that, but we are not committing to them because much can change.
I want Reaction Dynamics to change the launch paradigm and, just as importantly, become a success story that Canadians can look to and say: we can do this here. We can build quantum computers here. We can build world-leading AI companies here. We can launch from here. You are not necessarily missing anything by building in Canada. Canada is a great place to start a company. It is difficult, but starting a company is never easy.”

Jesse Mikelberg: “I like the 20-year vision of becoming the launch provider of choice for our allies because it goes beyond Reaction Dynamics. It is not only because we have built a great rocket or provide a great service. It is because Canada becomes the incredible environment we all need it to be, with the regulator, the Department of National Defence, the government, Transport Canada and the Canadian Space Agency, all working together and investing in the ecosystem the right way. Our architecture must work in unison with a much larger ecosystem that is coming together. Everybody feels there is a moment in time for Canada, and many of us are stepping up.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

“This is not a game for tourists.” — Josh Ogden, Co-Founder and CEO of AVSS

Drones are quickly changing the way humans live. According to some estimates, over 90 percent of frontline Russian casualties in the Russo-Ukrainian war are from drone attacks. Meanwhile, companies are expanding drone-delivery services across the United States. Walmart and Amazon already deliver consumer goods in select markets, while Uber Eats has announced plans to launch drone-based food delivery.
In Canada, startups such as FireSwarm Solutions use heavy-lift drones to fight wildfires; ENVGO, Pelagos, and Open Ocean Robotics are developing autonomous marine vehicles, while Sentinel R&D is manufacturing drones at scale for the modern battlefield. As robotics and automation continue to advance, demand is rising for the scalability and cost advantages that unmanned systems can provide. Humanity’s reach is being extended.

“AVSS is building sovereign robotic solutions from the ground up.”

Aerial Vehicle Safety Solutions (AVSS) is a Canadian drone company founded in New Brunswick in 2017 by Josh Ogden (CEO) and Josh Boudreau (CTO). They believe that Canadian sovereignty requires owning the full stack of production and intellectual property, rather than licensing or reselling foreign systems.
The company found success building drone safety components, such as parachute recovery and flight termination systems, to help commercial drones operate safely over people. The team is now expanding into new product lines, including the Precision Avalanche Management System, which uses SnowDart hardware for avalanche control; guided delivery systems; and the Flying Beehive, an air-launched system that can release multiple drones in flight. AVSS develops its own components and retains its IP and manufacturing knowledge in-house, reducing its exposure to global supply-chain disruptions. The company says that it can now compete with and beat Chinese and American competitors on price, regulatory compliance and capability.

“As a Canadian, and especially as a Maritimer, sometimes you lack the confidence to make that big leap, and you’re told to play only in your small sandbox.”

AVSS’s philosophy is that hardware takes time, and money is not a substitute. The company has watched competitors raise more money than it did and then fail. There is no way to skip the harsh reality of the slow and gruelling physical engineering required to build great products.
Since 2017, AVSS has raised only $2.2 million, with its last financing round completed in 2022. Over the past year, the company has grown from 15 to 55 employees, funded by revenue. It has manufactured more than 2,000 systems across its commercial and dual-use product lines year to date, with approximately 75% of its commercial revenue coming from international markets.

“If you only started when the Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS) was announced, you’re already three years behind.”

I spoke with Josh Ogden, Co-Founder and CEO of AVSS, about building Canada’s drone stack, procurement and what Canadian self-reliance requires.

“A Canadian company can compete and can win in the robotic space, but you have to build from the ground up, and you’ve got to put your time in.”

What is AVSS building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“AVSS is building sovereign robotic solutions from the ground up, making sure we source copper, steel and other materials and that they are made by Canadians, with no licensing and no reselling foreign goods.
It matters for Canada because of the economic impact and the fundamentals of manufacturing versus reselling versus licensing. When profits stay in Canada, more tax dollars are generated, more jobs are created, and Canada becomes more prosperous.

When you resell somebody else’s goods, you make less gross margin, maybe 10%, 15% or 20%. When you license, you pay a fee to a foreign entity. That eats into your operating costs, whether it is 10% of every unit sold or a large down payment for access to the technology. When you manufacture from the ground up, you spend the money on R&D and build a knowledge set. That can allow you to generate gross margins of 40% to 70%, maybe 80% if you are very good at building hardware and components. It keeps dollars here, and it keeps knowledge here.
Some people want to make quick money by licensing and reselling other people’s goods because they do not want the risk or the effort of three years of R&D. But when their supply chain is disrupted by a pandemic, conflict or China banning products in the drone sector, the person using the tool no longer knows how to fix it. They do not know what chip is inside or how it was designed for modification. Designing and building here provides economic benefits and a protective mechanism in a future conflict.”

Advertisement — Marconi Technologies

The Canadian Explorers is proud to be supported by its Founding Lead Partner, Marconi Technologies.

When did AVSS decide to expand into defence?

“AVSS did not start with the intention of entering defence. AVSS entered robotics through drone safety systems. It evolved into guided systems because it was our own problem.
Four or five years ago, we looked around and realized we were working with the top drone manufacturers in the world. We supply their safety devices. We do not only sell hardware; we work through regulatory approvals with the FAA, CASA in Australia and authorities in other countries. We have a unique perspective because we see products before they are fully baked. We work with manufacturers’ engineering teams, give feedback and tell them when a structure is not strong enough. We realized we were competent and capable. Today, we are shipping nearly 100 units a week around the world to export markets because we built that competency.

As a Canadian, and especially as a Maritimer, sometimes you lack the confidence to make that big leap. You are told to play only in your small sandbox. Based on experience and a proven record, we felt we could do more. A couple of years ago, AVSS decided we were going to be the default robotic-component supplier for the Canadian Armed Forces. We could build components and solutions that others could use, just like our parachutes, and take them to export markets. Manufacturers that do not need our safety devices may still need Canadian-made motors, electronic speed controllers and cameras.
In August, at the Area X.O./CJFC event in Killaloe, we were among a select group of Canadian manufacturers demonstrating our products, and we publicly displayed a number of these products for the first time. Normally, we are cautious about what we show while it is under development. ‘Fake it till you make it’ is a terrible strategy in this industry. We felt the time was right because we had spent years developing them and could supply them.

The timing aligns with the Defence Industrial Strategy, but we were implementing these plans before it was fashionable and before the strategy was announced. If you only started when the Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS) was announced, you are already three years behind. ‘One child takes about nine months to develop, but nine women cannot have a baby in one month.’ That is the problem with engineering speed. People think that if they keep adding engineers, they will solve the problem faster. It does not work that way. I’ve tried it many times. It doesn’t work. I stopped because it’s stupid. A team of 50 engineers will not necessarily build one product faster than a team of eight. It takes the time it takes, the testing it takes, the repetitions it takes and the crashes it takes. AVSS is almost 10 years old. To play at this moment, you had to prepare in the past. From 2020 to 2025, we built 14 products. In 2026, we built 14 products. We’ve doubled our product suites because we’ve been building all these capabilities.”

Could you walk me through the product lineup, and explain how everything fits together?

“We can break it down into components, integrated systems and full solutions.

Components are the ground-up pieces that many companies buy from other suppliers: motors, batteries and thermal cores, for example. We are taking on the work of building components from the ground up so the platforms we design for specific use cases can be cost-competitive. When companies only buy from other people, they add bloat instead of becoming efficient in manufacturing and design. Our component line will be available to allied countries that want Canadian-made components. Those are the enabling technologies. We are the only Canadian company working directly with the engineering teams of the world’s top drone manufacturers.

In the Canadian market, we are also building integrated and full solutions. Integrated systems include our parachute systems, drop systems and avalanche-mitigation system. Full solutions include Flying Beehive, the training drones within Beehive and the AROD system. The AROD system is a one-way rocket drone designed for avalanche management at Rogers Pass; it is not necessarily an interceptor drone. It is designed for one-way missions in a specific use case.”

What operations become possible through AVSS’s drone safety and avalanche-management systems?

“The parachutes have already changed what is possible. Parachutes are now a smaller share of our business, but they are sold around the world and enable flight over people. We sell to police departments, engineering services and drone-delivery companies that fly missions over people. Imagine inspecting a bridge in downtown Vancouver. The government says a single point of failure cannot result in a certain type of injury, so you need a backup device. Our thesis began in 2017, and the product reached the market in 2020. We wake up to sales; it is a predictable business that continues to grow. Today, we are the number-one seller of commercial-drone parachutes to the largest manufacturers. The line is growing, but it is becoming a smaller percentage of the business as we expand into components and integrated systems.

PAMS is the Precision Avalanche Management System. It is designed to drop different sizes of explosives from drones for avalanche mitigation. It is a purpose-built product with product-market fit, and it also gives us baseline technology for kinetic delivery and initiation systems. We were the first company in Canada to receive government approval to drop explosives from drones. We have also held import and export licences for three or four years because of the original parachute business. That paperwork took roughly three or four years. We worked with Parks Canada, Transport Canada, Natural Resources Canada and National Defence on the avalanche product. People are now presenting at conferences about how they use it. It will not replace every existing tool, but it can augment operations, and this is how we used it in Jasper.”

What is the Flying Beehive, and what makes launching multiple FPV drones from another aircraft valuable?

“Flying Beehive is an air-launched effect. It has been proven and is going through procurement for additional contracts so it can be implemented in new use cases.
The goal is to air-launch first-person-view (FPV) drones, address the 100-kilometre kill-zone problem and build solutions around different aircraft, whether a helicopter or another drone. We have shown that we can launch drones and gliders, release multiple drones in flight and use timed delays. The technical problem has been demonstrated; the next step is the Canadian Armed Forces incorporating it into missions.”

Is drone delivery possible in Canada?

“One thing you have to remember with any repetitive robotic-delivery use case is that you have to be mindful of our environmental conditions compared with California. Autonomous vehicles have accumulated many miles in places such as Las Vegas and California partly because the climate is more favourable.

Drone delivery will come to Canada. I expect Victoria or Vancouver to see it first because of the climate. Under current regulations, backyard drone delivery is probably another four or five years away, but rural delivery can come sooner. Canada introduced lower-risk beyond-visual-line-of-sight rules last November, and lower risk is defined partly by population density. We will see long-range rural deliveries before backyard delivery.”

What do “Product of Canada” and “Made in Canada” mean, and can Canadian companies compete on price?

“‘Product of Canada’ generally means 98% or more of direct production or manufacturing costs are Canadian and the last substantial transformation occurred here, like maple syrup or steel. ‘Made in Canada’ uses a 51% threshold; it is also about the final transformation and where the material is sourced. There are nuances, including textiles, but it is fundamentally a cost calculation. The problem is that entrepreneurs sometimes find what I would call unethical, creative ways to game the calculation. A company can import a foreign product from Alibaba, add a 50% margin or a small amount of labour and then try to present it as Canadian-made. Being a Canadian company also does not mean the product is Canadian. A Canadian company can buy maple syrup from Vermont and resell it; the syrup was still made in the United States.

To me, “Made in Canada” comes down to three questions: Where are your profits? Where is the product made? Where does your IP reside? It should be a trifecta: more than 51% Canadian materials and labour, profits and taxes staying in Canada, and intellectual property staying in Canada, so the knowledge is growing. The legal definition does not include all this.

On price, Canadian companies can compete if they build their products themselves. I do it right now. I am beating Chinese competitors on compliance and regulatory approvals, and on price point. You can compete with the Chinese; we beat the Americans out of the parachute market. We spent two years redesigning the electronics, certifying and testing them. That stack can now be reused across multiple products. A Canadian company can compete and win in robotics, but it must build from the ground up and put in the time. We have been doing this for a decade now; I tried the shortcuts. Thank God for our CTO, who said, ‘No, we are not going to use off-the-shelf flight controllers to control our parachutes because of the cost, supply-chain risk and form factor. Let us take two years to redesign the entire electronic stack ourselves, go through certification and testing, and then we will have something we can use across multiple products.’ That decision during COVID gave us the foundation to build 14 products in a year.”

How did AVSS fund its development?

“Pure luck. No, historically, we have only raised $2.2 million, so we have only eaten what we have caught. We grew the company from revenue, which creates discipline.
We grew from 15 to 55 employees in a year, but we stayed at 15 for about five years while building the technology suite. Our whole team was technical except three of us for five years. Twelve people were engineers and technicians. The supply-chain manager, my vice-president and I handled marketing, sales, HR, recruitment and everything else. We had to grow sustainably, so we developed a survival instinct rather than relying on other people’s money.

We are now open to raising money to scale because we are ready and have product-market fit across multiple products. We are an outlier in the robotics industry. A lot of companies that raised large amounts between 2015 and 2020 are now out of business because they did not grow sustainably and raised too much. We beat competitors that have raised $30 million and $10 million; both are no longer doing parachutes, and that’s just an example of having conviction, discipline and not rushing.
In software, a bug can be fixed with an overnight update. Hardware does not get that luxury. When we ship, we do not want customers calling because something failed. We have been around for 10 years; we only have a part-time customer support person, because that’s how few calls we get. We built a product that just works. We sell safety devices; they have to work. Imagine grabbing a fire extinguisher and wondering whether it will work today.”

What is working in Canada’s defence-drone procurement, and what still needs to be fixed?

“We are in a government-build stage. Existing programs such as Innovative Solutions Canada have supported 20 or 30 drone companies over the years that are scaling up. If you want to know who has been working in drones, look at companies that completed ISC innovation challenges and the smaller group eligible for additional prototype sales. Those programs need to be properly funded and executed. Public Services and Procurement Canada needs more resources and procurement officers to accelerate the work. The new initiatives require an “ask me in a year” answer. There are many: MINERVA, the drone marketplace and other procurements. Right now they are at the application stage. The proof comes when contracts are awarded, and companies get to deliver.”

What do the next 12 months look like for AVSS?

“Execution. That is the goal.
We are going from shipping more than 2,000 units to more than 7,000 units, and eventually to 20,000 units across different drone components and products. We are beyond the invention stage for the products we are scaling. We continue to invest heavily in R&D; it is a never-ending machine. The main focus is ramping up production. We have tripled the production team and put the infrastructure and equipment in place. Last year was our year of building. This year is our year of execution. Then we will build again for the next level of scale.”

What is one Canadian national-interest startup worth watching?

“AVSS, of course. But we’re not a startup. We’ve been around.

It is not about the startups. It’s about those who have been around. Pay attention to the 10 or 15 Canadian drone companies that have been here for more than 10 years and ground through the period when there was no money. They will be here while there is money, and they will still be here when the money dries up in five years.

Focus on the companies that have been building and delivering into National Defence, oil and gas, and policing. Some do not get the same attention because they are not in Ottawa or part of the startup hype cycle, but they are executing.”

What advice would you give to a founder starting in this space?

“Be patient and be decisive. If you want to play in this space, go for it, but do not rush it. Money helps you acquire resources, but money alone will not build products.
Anyone coming into this space needs to know that this is not a game for tourists. It is for people willing to spend more than 10 years. I hate the Silicon Valley mentality of building a company, selling it after three years, then doing another. Nothing gets built in hardware in three years.

Build a 10-year plan. If you want to play in dual-use technology, defence or robotics, make a 10-year commitment with your co-founders. Do it one contract at a time. Find product-market fit, then raise. We need more sustainable businesses with a long-term view.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

Canada is the only G7 country remaining without sovereign access to space. If Canada wishes to launch a satellite, it must rely on a foreign partner (primarily the United States). This concern has led the Canadian government to list space as a key sovereign capability in the Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS).
Budget 2025 committed $182.6 million over three years to the Department of National Defence (DND) to establish sovereign launch capability, including a $105-million multi-year grant program supporting Canadian-designed launch vehicles and related technologies.

“Demand is going to be almost 300x over the next 10 years.” — Hugh Kolias, Founder and CEO of Canada Rocket Company

Canada Rocket Company sees this moment as an opportunity to develop a sovereign and globally competitive medium-lift launch capability from Canadian soil. The mission is to make Canada a launch provider for the world’s middle powers. CRC emerged from stealth in January 2026 and has since raised $22.5 million in total capital, assembling a team of 32 from companies including SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, ArianeGroup and Tesla. It has recently begun planning a 500,000-square-foot manufacturing facility.

“Once you own the rails to space, you really have this call option on the business.”

The team is concentrating on the R-2, a reusable Falcon 9-class medium-lift rocket powered by liquid oxygen and methane. The vehicle targets a payload of 12,500 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit (SSO). Canada Rocket Company believes medium lift represents a much larger global opportunity than the crowded small-launch market. Capital is the immediate bottleneck. Canada Rocket Company estimates that it needs roughly eight years and $500 million to develop this capability.

“At the end of the day, it is more of a capital problem than it is a technical or engineering problem.”

Hugh Kolias is the CEO and founder of Canada Rocket Company. He previously sold Yuhu in 2022, a multifamily-property SaaS platform, and is now returning to the space ambitions that brought him into engineering in the first place. Hugh believes that by demonstrating intense ambition from Canada, he can build a talent advantage and turn Canadian brain drain into brain gain.

“I would love to see a Canadian launch vehicle take a Canadian lander that goes to the Moon and helps build out lunar permanence.”

In Explorer Spotlight #14, I spoke with Hugh about why CRC is moving directly toward medium lift, what it takes to finance a Canadian rocket company, lunar permanence, dreaming big, and how an ambitious mission can reverse Canada’s brain drain.

“The more ambitious you are, the more people will match that ambition.”

What is Canada Rocket Company building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“Canada Rocket Company is building a Falcon 9-class launch vehicle for Canada. That matters from a sovereignty perspective: Canada and its allies need access to space. It also matters from an economic perspective. It represents over half a billion dollars in investment and more than 1,000 jobs, all in engineering and advanced manufacturing. It is a dual-track benefit for the nation.”

Advertisement — Marconi Technologies

The Canadian Explorers is proud to be supported by its Founding Lead Partner, Marconi Technologies.

You built and sold a SaaS company, Yuhu. Can you explain what it was, and how different it is from building a Canadian space company?

“Yuhu was a multifamily SaaS platform before AI was a thing. We provided an end-to-end service, essentially tip-to-tail, from prospects and leasing through to residents within apartment buildings. We were the operational layer behind the scenes: processing payments and helping sign leases. We had over 200,000 apartment units across Canada. Building a rocket company is similar, but different.

The similarity is that it’s all about building a team: happy people build happy rockets, and it was the same on the software side. It’s about attracting the best people globally. The obvious difference is that this is highly capital-intensive: about half a billion dollars over eight to ten years. With SaaS and software, in theory, you just need a couple of people in a garage or, at this point, Claude, which you can leverage on the engineering and development side. Ultimately, it’s about building an MVP (minimum viable product). For us, our minimum viable product is building a vehicle that can get to orbit and can service both the national and commercial needs. That’s why we’re building a Falcon 9-class vehicle, capable of carrying roughly 12,500 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit. It is very similar in thrust class and size to Falcon 9. As SpaceX retires Falcon 9 in favour of Starship, there is a huge global opportunity to fill that void. Outside the US, there aren’t any credible replacements at the moment. Most of them are expendable and large government programs. It is a huge opportunity for Canada, not only to address its sovereignty needs, but to build the next Shopify, except providing rides to space.”

What makes this moment right for Canada Rocket Company?

“At first, the whole world assumed launch costs would go down to, Elon says, $10 per kilogram or something wild. But interestingly enough, in the last six to 12 months, the opposite has been happening: demand is going to be almost 300x over the next 10 years. This demand is partly from orbital data centers, but a lot is from sovereign constellation sets from countries and the lunar missions over the next decade; I think it’s like 70 or 80 launches that are estimated.
All of that demand, combined with underinvestment in launch, has created this perfect storm: there’s a massive commercial need for vehicles of this size. No one’s been investing in them over the last 10 years because everyone thought light-lift or smaller vehicles would be complementary to SpaceX.

But it turns out those business models don’t really work, and don’t work from a venture-scale perspective, because your operating costs are effectively the same across both vehicles; the amount of mass that you can take directly relates to how much revenue you generate per vehicle. And it becomes very difficult to create a venture-sized or venture-scale outcome. Then you couple that with the sovereignty movement of decoupling from the US and essentially focusing on that middle-powers initiative. You have these two tailwinds pushing in the same direction. When I saw everything coming together, I thought: who doesn’t want to build rockets? This was like a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Doing it in Canada is almost unheard of. Canada is actually the place to build this because we’ll effectively be the first company in a nation that really wants this capability. Therefore, there are a lot of advantages in terms of accelerating legislation.

We got temporary foreign worker permits accelerated for us as well. That is important because no one in Canada has built a launch vehicle before. We have to bring in that expertise and use it to train Canadians over the next decade. So we really couldn’t have built this anywhere else. It’s like a big, audacious, hairy thing to go after. Everything fell into place. Now that everyone’s talking about orbital data centers, it turbocharges the need for launch globally. And it’s just really cool to be able to do that in Canada, where historically, we have been okay with partnering with NASA or the US or the European Space Agency. We’re still partnering with them, don’t get me wrong, but this has opened up the ability to pursue something ambitious.”

What is CRC’s product lineup?

“We’ve simplified our roadmap. We’re really just focusing on the R-2; we’ve upsized that vehicle. When we first looked at the idea, we thought 6,000 kilograms to orbit was the right number. That seems to be the sweet spot where there’s decent constellation activity, because you don’t want to compete with a Falcon 9; you want to be complementary. The average utilization of a Falcon 9 fairing is about 3,000 to 4,000 kilograms, but that is mainly because it’s also volume-limited. We’re making sure our vehicle is wide enough to accommodate other payload requirements to utilize our mass capabilities further. We’re going to start with and end with the R-2. Simplicity is really important.

You need roughly half a billion dollars to get a medium-lift vehicle to orbit. That’s where we have high confidence, given the tailwinds globally, in terms of this being a massive market opportunity, but also within the Canadian ecosystem. There are a lot of initiatives at the federal and provincial levels, as well as within the venture ecosystem, supporting something like this. Six months ago, I think it would have been absolutely impossible.

We haven’t publicly announced it, but internally, we’re focused on that medium lift design, because that’s what the government wants. That’s what we strongly believe is required to make this venture investable, and all of our engineers agree. We’ve spoken with 150-plus engineers around the world who have worked on orbital launch programs, and every single one has said to build the end product that you want to use and don’t waste your time with the suborbital or smaller vehicles, because you’re not de-risking as much as you think you are. At the end of the day, it’s more of a capital problem than it is a technical or engineering problem.”

Why skip light lift?

“As we talked with more engineers globally, and as we saw the needs shift: when we started, data centres in space were being discussed, but they were not a major focal area, and SpaceX had not yet announced that they were bringing down the cadence of Falcon 9 flights, eventually retiring it and stopping rideshare flights. The market also dramatically shifted over the last six months, which made building a Falcon 9 equivalent vehicle make sense, not just in the Canadian context, because the Canadian market likely isn’t large enough to sustain a singular provider.

You’ve got to go international if you want to grow a massive company; Shopify is a great example of that. We have such a huge opportunity, both because we’re politically stable and because people love trading with Canada. So if we can provide and be the de facto service for the middle powers, we’ll also get overflow from the US. As much as people talk about us tussling, at the end of the day, there are going to be substantial market needs based on the growth rate of payloads, constellations, and lunar missions. There’s not enough launch capacity globally. A lot of payload operators don’t really care where you’re situated, as long as you have the product, you’ve got the reliability, you’ve got the scheduling or the cadence, and your economics make sense. The world needs a Falcon 9 equivalent. We’re going to build in reusability and leverage customer-driven, customer-purchased flights to work on the reusability components. That lowers the balance-sheet risk and allows us to bring in a world-class team that has seen it and done it before. Then we execute, which is what we’ve been doing for only seven months. We’ve raised $22.5 million and built a team of 30; most are relocating internationally and have worked on global launch programs.”

What is the difference between light, medium, heavy and super-heavy launch?

“To use a transportation analogy, you’ve got your Uber parcel point-to-point delivery. Then you’ve got maybe a semi-truck, and then you’ve got a cargo plane. That would be the delta between light, medium and heavy lift. Then super heavy would be massive; it’s like a skyscraper that’s going to space. So really, it’s all about finding what fits the market. As an example, Telesat Lightspeed: each of the satellite buses is plus or minus, let’s just say, 800 kilograms. So a light-lift vehicle capable of carrying 1,000 kilograms could take one Telesat Lightspeed satellite bus up at a time. But that’s really inefficient because you’re going to spend more dollars per kilogram or per satellite, and it’s going to take you years to send up 150, or however large their constellation set is. It would be like Apple shipping iPhones using small cars and small boats around the world, shipping one iPhone at a time versus taking large pallets and sending them to distribution centers.

Economies of scale, obviously, come in through here. That’s why you must size the vehicle correctly so you can take as much of that constellation and stack it up into space. The world has also diverged from singular, bespoke, really large school bus-sized satellites to smaller satellites which are closer to Earth, and now there are groupings of satellites. Depending on the constellation, they vary in terms of number of satellites. But to make and participate in the larger end of the market and market opportunity, which is all these constellation sets, you need a vehicle that’s large enough to take a meaningful amount of that constellation into space.

The closest light-lift example would be Rocket Lab Electron. It’s maybe like 10% of the commercial market, if that. And it just doesn’t justify the capital expense that you’d be putting into the vehicle because most constellation providers and a lot of what Canada has put up in the past require a much larger vehicle.

How does CRC plan to finance a $500 million rocket program?

“It’s a lot, but it’s also not a lot. 500 million dollars over a five- to 10-year time frame is not a ton of money in relation to a lot of other projects that get funded. We see a 50-50 split essentially: 50 percent government, 50 percent private investment. On the government side, we’re also looking for anchor contracts and modelling that approach after NASA’s COTS program because contracts provide financial visibility and help de-risk the riskiest part of the project: the first few launches, one or two of which are likely to fail. If those launches are funded and the development program has a backstop similar to what NASA provided through COTS, it helps de-risk that development phase. Other global launch programs have also had anchor contracts for their first few launches. That’s what we’re working with the government on. Then, ideally, we could fund this whole thing with Canadian capital, and if there’s ever an opportunity to do that, that’s right now.

But we are a bit of an odd duck in the venture world because we’re seven months old. You need $500 million, most of that upfront. We want to build a 500,000-square-foot facility and break ground in the next few months. That’s $100 million to $200 million right there. There is also a test site that we want to develop, and we have announcements coming in the next couple of weeks. There’s a significant investment on that front as well, and you need to do that now if you want to be able to have the launch vehicle in a plus or minus eight-year timeframe. This is unique because Canada does not have that infrastructure but is also committing to sovereign launch. Whereas you look at Europe and the U.S., they have that infrastructure that you can go out and lease; it’s ready to go.

But this is the fun part of starting any company: starting something from nothing. What I found is the more ambitious you are, the more people will match that ambition. The government has been fantastic and incredibly helpful. We would not be able to do any of what we’re doing without the support of the Department of National Defence and other areas of the government. And then, of course, on the private investment side, a year ago, people would have laughed if someone said, hey, someone’s going to raise $22.5 million in seven months, bringing 30 of the top rocket scientists and engineers to Toronto. Everyone would have thought you were nuts. We’re just going to 10x that ambition and keep going. Now’s the time to try it, and it gets easier as you get the snowball moving.”

Can Canada’s historic brain drain become a competitive advantage?

“We are definitely seeing that. There are a lot of Canadians across many of the top tech and engineering companies. We’ve brought nine folks and their families home, and if it’s not them, their partner is Canadian, and we brought them home that way. We’re very excited to be part of the brain gain now. I think the biggest thing is they’re attracted to the ambition, and they’re attracted to the mission. They understand that it’s important for the country. Everyone eventually wants to put their roots back in Canada. But they have not ever really had the opportunity, whether it’s pay, opportunity, or the mission, that you’re actually working on. Ambition attracts ambition. If you want to attract the top Canadian engineers who have been away from the country for 10-plus years, you’re not going to bring them back if you’re building just another AI company or just another defence company. It’s got to be incredibly ambitious, where they’re like, wow, I want to move my family. There is a lot of friction in uprooting everything and coming to Canada for a seven-month-old company pursuing this ambitious goal of building launch capability for Canada.

It also attracts international talent. Most of our team is from Europe, Australia or the US. They also see it as an opportunity to do something for the first time in a country that’s never done it before. There’s an element of making history and helping another country or an ally build the capabilities that they need. It’s been equally exciting to see the excitement of folks who want to come to Canada and do something like this.

We’re directly contributing to Canada’s sovereignty. We’re directly contributing to our ability to be a great trading partner with Europe, Asia, and our allies. And at the same time, we’re building this launch vehicle in a country that’s never done it before. You can attract some very special people. That creates the foundation of bringing in more folks and more experience, and it just becomes this flywheel. Then all of a sudden Canada’s got one of the preeminent aerospace clusters of talent, and it all stems from one crazy and ambitious goal, backed by execution and financials.”

What do the next 12 months look like? What do you want CRC and Canada to look like in 20 years?

“In the next 12 months, we’ll have an engine component hot fire. We’ll be close, but not quite there, to having an integrated engine without the turbopump. We’ll have broken ground for our 500,000-square-foot facility to bring that online. We’ll hopefully have completed phase one and maybe phase two of our engine test site, which we’ll announce the location of and details in a couple of weeks here.
A year from now, we’ll probably be 60 to 70 people. Over the next eight years, the goal is to get this vehicle to orbit, prove the capability, build relationships with our trading partners and commercial companies, and become the service provider for middle powers.

In 20 years, I would love to see a Canadian launch vehicle take a Canadian lander that goes to the Moon and helps build out lunar permanence. Seeing that level of ambition matched at the space agency and really participating in those mission sets, that would be fantastic. Then, obviously, once past the Moon, Mars, etc., building that muscle and ecosystem in Canada would be amazing. The midterm goal is not just to advance science and exploration, but to build a world-renowned talent base and a globally recognized company. You see people wearing NASA t-shirts all around the world. We can have people wearing Canada Rocket Company because they see the level of ambition we’ve been able to accomplish and to inspire the next generation of engineers, technicians, and mechanics. It’s important to think beyond just borders, but using and leveraging Canada as a base and exporting not just products, but hopes and dreams.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup that you think is worth watching?

“Dominion Dynamics. Obviously, what Eliot and the team are doing is fantastic. North Vector, too. I know you said one, but then Kepler, not just because Mina’s on our advisory board, but because what they’re building, the Internet of space, is super ambitious.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

“Power is the great enabler.” — Daniel Sax, CEO & Founder, Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation

Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation (CSMC) is a Waterloo-based company founded in 2020 that is developing portable nuclear microreactors and infrastructure for the Arctic and Space. This includes quantum sensing systems for locating critical resources and LunaPure, a water purification system for the Moon. CSMC sees both Arctic and lunar systems as synergistic; they both share similar design pressures: remote, thermally harsh, logistically constrained, and highly sensitive to mass.

“We are here to build national, critical, and strategic technology for Canada, and to compete globally.”

Power is the base layer for developing Arctic infrastructure, sovereignty, mining, defence, and economic development. CSMC’s Low Enriched Uranium Nuclear Reactor (LEUNR) is being developed as a factory-built, transportable nuclear reactor the size of a shipping container. A factory could build tens to hundreds per year, and the reactor can be deployed in a modular and scalable fashion, with the potential for multiple units per site.

“We need to move at the speed of relevance.”

The immediate competitor to LEUNR is diesel shipments. These are costly, difficult to transport and not scalable, requiring delivery every summer. CSMC is seeking to place a small reactor in the Arctic that does not require refuelling for five to ten years. The company has built an unfueled version of the reactor and is targeting a demonstration in 2028 and deployment in the Arctic in 2029 or 2030. Canada does not currently enrich uranium, so CSMC expects to rely on allied suppliers in the United States or Europe.

“Diesel cannot scale right now. We cannot bring more diesel up.”

CSMC was selected for the NATO DIANA 2026 cohort and has been active in both private and public capital. It has raised multiple rounds of angel and venture capital and is working on more. In July 2026, FedDev Ontario announced a $4.5-million investment in CSMC to advance its micro-nuclear power technology for the Arctic. Earlier in the year, CSMC won the Aqualunar Challenge, led by the Canadian Space Agency in partnership with Impact Canada, and received $400,000 to advance LunaPure.

“We need to make this the most competitive place to do business. Period. Full stop.”

I spoke with Daniel Sax, founder and CEO of Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation, about portable nuclear power, Arctic sovereignty, lunar infrastructure, financing strategic deep tech, and building in Canada.

“It does not make me want to run. It makes me want to build.”

What is CSMC building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“CSMC is a space and defence company building nuclear reactors for remote and extreme environments. We are looking to replace diesel generators in the Arctic. Canada is constrained in its ability to build new infrastructure in the Arctic, and there is no baseload energy solution.
CSMC is building a microreactor, a nuclear reactor that is very small and capable of being transported into the Arctic, to replace diesel generators and power Canada’s sovereign posture in the North, as well as its economic desires up there.”

You began as the Canadian Space Mining Corporation. How has Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation changed?

“I don’t know that the company’s mission ever really changed, to be honest. When I look back at what we started out doing with the Canadian Space Mining Corporation, it was always dual-use technologies for space and Earth. There was always this tie between our need to build long-term capabilities in space that could power lunar settlements, the technical gaps required to do that, and finding a synergy with our needs on Earth today. That spanned both the civil side and the defence side.
Our first product to come out of that was really nuclear power. That is where our microreactor work stemmed from. As we grew our portfolio between nuclear and quantum, the question always came back to what it had to do with space mining. Reflecting on that, I don’t think space mining was the right descriptor.

The Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation is, in many ways, what we always were. It is just a better crystallization of that ethos: building key technologies core to national strategic objectives.”

Advertisement — Marconi Technologies

The Canadian Explorers is proud to welcome Marconi Technologies as its Founding Lead Partner.

You are working on nuclear reactors, quantum sensors, and a lunar water system. How do these technologies work together?

“You are always opportunistic and looking at the evolution of landscapes and opportunity sets as they come about. We see a lot of opportunities in both space and defence that could make sense if they fit with our synergistic mandate.
They are all long-term, base-layer infrastructure. When we began working on lunar water, it was clear that you had to mine it, process it, and purify it. That is our water piece. The quantum sensor was how you identified that water, so you are moving another layer down the infrastructure stack. If you go all the way to the base, you need nuclear power to power all these things.
That is how we see them as related. They are core pieces of the infrastructure stack, but no company, whether on the Moon or on Earth, is going to own every piece. We have focused on areas where we thought we could be competitive, where we have been competitive, and where we saw an opportunity.”

What is the LEUNR microreactor, and how does it differ from alternatives?

“There are a number of alternatives in the energy space: wind, solar, hydropower, batteries, and other core technologies. Some of these spaces are very dogmatic about it being either all this or all that, and that all other technologies are terrible. We are not part of that philosophy. We see all of these functioning within a grid environment in the right weighting based on your location, what is physically available, the infrastructure, demand, and other conditions.

Micro-nuclear reactors are really just very small nuclear reactors, no different from what powers the grid today in many places, only a very small version. We are all familiar with CANDUs, the large reactors. If you look at an SMR, the SMRs are only slightly smaller than a large reactor but with significantly less output. The BWRX-300 being built at Darlington is a 300-megawatt reactor versus a reactor closer to a gigawatt, but it takes up about 75% of the footprint of a large reactor. It is trying to compete for grid electricity in an area with significantly less demand, with the promise that it can be built cheaper, but it is not actually small and not modular.
Microreactors are about building something transportable that can be moved and potentially factory-built, where you build a number of them off a line. That is what we are building toward with LEUNR: a shipping-container-sized nuclear reactor deployable in several forms out of a factory, where we could build tens to hundreds a year and deploy them in a modular fashion. We could scale up a site with reactor, reactor, reactor, reactor.

Nuclear is the baseload. Unless you have hydropower available, there is no baseload power option. You either have an unstable grid with solar, wind, and battery backups, which present challenges of their own, or you are burning gas or diesel. We are competing against gas and diesel, which are unsustainable, logistically challenging, and have a number of logistical weak points for militaries. Right now, Canada flies diesel into the Arctic. The military brings diesel into the Arctic every summer. That is a whole military operation throughout the year: barging it and then flying it on military aircraft to the 300 communities in the Arctic, most of which do not have roads. We are seeking to put a very small reactor in these places so that you can bring it up and it does not require refuelling for five or ten years. You no longer have the carbon output, and you have a more reliable power source.”

How would the reactors be shipped?

“We are somewhat agnostic. We are making them compact enough to be transportable on a military aircraft, but it depends on the location and what options are available. Boat, freight, car, or truck are all possible depending on the location. I think our main architecture would be to fly them on a military aircraft.”

What stage is the reactor at today?

“We have built an unfueled version of the reactor. We are pushing things through the design and engineering process. We are working toward a fuelled demonstrator, or criticality demonstration, in 2028, with a deployment into the Arctic in 2029 or 2030.
Before demonstrating it in the Arctic, we will likely demonstrate it through a pilot project in the South. That is what we are working toward right now.”

What can one reactor power?

“We would see one reactor as a minimum viable product: enough to get a minimum town or base loaded. Some bases may require a handful of units. As we think about Canada’s needs, it is anything from forward operating bases and remote sensor sites to large ports and other pieces of infrastructure over time.”

Does Canada have the fuel supply it needs?

“It is a challenge for Canada. Microreactors require enriched uranium because of their compactness, and Canada is not enriching uranium right now.
There are partners around the world conducting enrichment activity from whom we can procure and are in talks with. Some of those partners are in the United States, which presents one set of challenges. Some are in Europe, which presents another set of challenges. There is also enrichment capacity in Russia, which is not a viable option for the foreseeable future.”

By replacing diesel in the Arctic, what new capabilities are unlocked?

“Diesel cannot scale right now. We cannot bring more diesel up. Full stop. From an economic-development perspective, we are capped. If we need to scale, we need to do so with nuclear. The question is how.
We believe we have the safest, most secure, and most mature solution domestically and within NATO outside the United States. Our goal is to scale into Canada, power all of the infrastructure in the Arctic, get to a scale where we are powering, let’s say, 300 communities with nuclear reactors, and then scale across NATO and allied countries looking for non-US options.”

Do you see the Arctic becoming a larger part of the Canadian economy through scalable power?

“For sure. If you look at the money the Canadian government is allocating to Arctic infrastructure, that will drive opportunity. As it brings roads, ports, and more connectivity through fibre and satellites into the North, it will create more opportunities.
Right now, Indigenous communities in the North are economically constrained. They are constrained by a lack of connectivity, logistics, and power. You cannot build a factory if you cannot power it or bring the materials up there. These things are inextricably linked.

Power is the great enabler. We need to provide a safe, secure, reliable, and scalable power source for Canada’s Arctic to drive economic activity. It provides opportunities for Indigenous communities and others that are not there right now.
If we think about reconciliation, the real reconciliation is having the ability to pursue economic development. I think Indigenous communities see that as a path forward. They want jobs. They want to build their own jobs, not just be handed a job, but build their own businesses. Without power, that is impossible.”

What makes operating in the Arctic and on the Moon similar or different? How much would an Arctic reactor need to be adapted for the Moon?

“Originally, we adapted a Moon reactor for the Arctic. There are challenges in the thermal environment, remoteness, and connectivity, and both are fundamentally mass-limited markets.
In the Arctic, there are a limited number of logistical options. On the Moon, there are even fewer, and you are paying per kilogram. Launch is effectively a cost per kilogram. We see these environments as synergistic because they provide design constraints that help us be creative and innovative in our solutions. Our team is fantastic at that.”

CSMC has secured substantial non-dilutive capital. What have you learned about what governments are willing to back?

“Hopefully I have learned something along the way. Governments are willing to back things that fit what they believe are critical gaps, both domestically and internationally; companies that can deliver on time and on budget; and projects that drive economic and social opportunities beyond themselves. Government funding, non-dilutive funding, and contracts do not become easier. They remain hard. It is a challenge for anyone to go out and win them. We have been a mixture of lucky and successful in winning these things, with really bold ideas, a ton of hard work, and a little bit of creativity.”

How do you view private and venture capital compared with government funding?

“They are both necessary. Private capital is always necessary. If you can bootstrap a business all the way, that is great, but it is hard to do in deep tech. You need both government and healthy, functioning capital markets. There is talk of free markets and the invisible hand. In deep tech, you are competing against companies and countries that have the full backing of government. There is no even playing field.
You have multiple facets: government support; government as an end user and customer; and private and public capital markets. You can have no government support but fully healthy capital markets, both public and private, where the cost of capital is low, and there is a great deal of available capital. If you have less of that, you need more government support if you want to compete globally.

Both are necessary. We are always talking to capital, raising capital, and looking for the right partners. We have raised a couple of rounds of angel and venture capital and are working on more. It would be good to see more capital flowing through the Canadian VC system, which has been fairly dysfunctional over the last couple of years. I think everyone is waiting for the first shoe to drop in these spaces.”

What is the biggest lesson you have learned from founding CSMC, and what advice would you give to a founder building a deep-tech startup today?

“In many ways, it all comes back to people. Whether they are in government, on the investor side, on the team, or partners, people are important. How you treat people is always important. Finding the right people is important. You will find people who are philosophically aligned. The hard thing is finding out who is and is not. It is never an easy process.

My recommendation to a deep-tech founder is to find something that matters to you. This is hard. It is harder than doing other things. You need to be doing something that matters to you, but you also should not fall in love with your idea. You need the right level of conviction in the idea, the ability to hear feedback and product-market feedback when appropriate, and the ability to ignore that feedback and follow your instincts at other times. There is no right answer. It is always a risk weighting, but trying to maintain objectivity about your own business is important.”

What do the next 12 months look like for CSMC?

“We are building and growing. The last year has been incredibly busy. It has felt almost nonstop. Apart from a couple of personal vacation days, I feel like I have not taken a breath. The next year will be much the same. That means engineering, driving business development, hiring the best people, and growing the team. We have tripled since the start of the year in terms of scale and revenue.

We will be working through challenging markets: business development, an innovation-resistant nuclear industry in Canada, and the machinations of government as it tries to adapt to moving faster. All of these will be challenges, along with capital markets and marketing. It is a really exciting time at the company. We have added four amazing people in the last two weeks and are trying to add another 15 to 20 people this summer. I am very excited about what we are building.”

What drives you to create such an ambitious company? How can Canada move faster and think bigger?

“Looking back at my career, I was always attracted to these things. Part of that may be that I have one or two screws loose. I did a master’s degree in real estate and was always attracted to really big, complex projects. I look at nuclear and its scale, and everyone says it takes forever. Nuclear is so long. How will you do that?
I started my career working on real estate development in Calgary. I am on the board of a project that is still going on all these years later. The scale and timeline of real estate align quite well with the scale and timeline of doing things at a national and strategic level. To me, the timeline and scale are not a challenge.

How we do more of this in Canada is a fundamental question. Things are moving in the right direction, but we need to move faster. We need to move at the speed of relevance. We are good at patting ourselves on the back and saying, “We are moving fast now.” Are we moving at the same speed as our international competitors? If not, then we need to get to work. We need to figure out how to move faster, reduce regulatory barriers, get out of our own way, and have conviction in ourselves, especially on the capital-market side. That is a huge missing factor.
We need to make this the most competitive place to do business. Period. Full stop. Not simply better than we were. We fell off. We got lazy. We got complacent. Small improvements are not going to make the difference. We need wholesale change across policy, government, the way government does business, the way it approaches the private sector, the way it works with the private sector, and the way it champions the private sector.”

Why build in Canada?

“This is home. I love this country. I think it is the greatest country in the world, and this is where I want to build. I spent a lot of time living and going to school in the United States. Canada is a fantastic place. The ethos here is incredible. It is challenging to build here. It is more challenging than it is in some other places, but we have a fantastic ecosystem and an amazing country.
There is a need for people to build more at this moment. The sentiment can be quite negative right now. You speak to your friends, and they want to leave Canada. They think the economy is shit, tax rates are high, public safety is low, or their car gets broken into. We are all hearing these things in our friend groups. It does not make me want to run. It makes me want to build, and to build the best Canada we can. When the going gets tough, the tough get tougher.

That is why we show up at CSMC every day. That is why the team is motivated by the strategic mission. We are here to build national, critical, and strategic technology for Canada, and to compete globally.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup you are watching?

“There are so many good ones. I am a big fan of Paul Ziadé at North Vector Dynamics. He is very sharp, very motivated, a real driver, and a good friend. I think it is a great company, and they will do great things.
I am watching the launch companies. Between the three of them, they come from very different angles. It is a key capability for Canada. There are also many great quantum companies, and there is what Eliot Pence is trying to build at Dominion Dynamics.

But if I had to pick one, I’d pick Paul.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

Canada needs to monitor its northern territory effectively. This is what Dominion Dynamics is solving. The company was founded in Ottawa on the 81st anniversary of D-Day, June 6, 2025. Just over a year later, it raised C$139 million in the largest Series A in Canadian defence history and the second-largest defence Series A globally. Dominion is positioning itself as the next Canadian defence prime and is moving fast.

“We’re building the operating system for pan-domain command and control.”

Dominion is focused on two core systems. AuraNet combines sensor, communications and operational data across domains into a common operating picture. In February 2026, during Operation NANOOK-NUNALIVUT, Dominion deployed AuraNet alongside the Canadian Rangers for eight weeks, travelling 5,200 kilometres through the High Arctic. The second core system being developed is Dominion Scout, an Autonomous Collaborative Platform (ACP). Dominion Scout is an uncrewed aircraft specifically designed to operate alongside fighter jets in the harsh conditions of the Arctic.

On August 14, 2026, Dominion announced its ACP Advisory Board and shared a progress report on Dominion Scout.

“We need dozens of Canadian defence companies to exist for us to be successful.”

Dominion recently moved into a 25,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Kanata. The next year will involve hiring hundreds of people, finding additional real estate, building prototypes and continuing to earn the trust of military operators. The Canadian buyer can be slow and bureaucratic, with major defence procurements taking an average of 16 years. Since Dominion’s Series A, however, contracting has accelerated. The company has now secured three government contracts across two services.

“Can you go from $50,000 to $5 million to $50 million in the course of 12 months? If you can’t do that, then we haven’t solved the contracting problem.”

Founder and CEO Eliot Pence led global growth at Anduril from 2018 to 2022 and is co-chair of the Alliance of Canadian Defence Companies. I spoke with him about turning private capital into military capability, building a Canadian defence prime and whether Canada can move quickly enough to become Dominion’s first major customer.

“It’s important that Canada demonstrate that it believes in itself.”

What is Dominion Dynamics building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“We’re building the operating system for pan-domain command and control. It matters for Canada because we have the largest territory per capita of any country in the world. And we need technology that can compress what’s called the kill chain, so the sensor-to-shooter bridge.”

Could you walk me through your core product lineup, and the expected revenue model?

“We’re focused on two things. One is called AuraNet, and another is called Dominion Scout. AuraNet is our command-and-control software. What that allows you to do is, as the term suggests, command and control autonomous systems across domains, from seabed to space. Dominion Scout is a physical capability. It’s a drone that can sense, interdict or kinetically defeat any threats to the Dominion (to Canada). We are essentially a defence contractor, so we work on behalf of governments. We are focused on the Canadian government. Our revenue is dependent on the government trusting us and giving us projects to work on.”

Where is Dominion Scout today, and what will it be able to do that existing alternatives cannot?

“Today, we’re building an advanced simulation environment to support the government’s options analysis. At its core is a physics-based engine that allows us to model real-world threat scenarios, test different technologies against them, and determine which combinations are most effective. That gives the government a much clearer picture of what capabilities it needs to address specific threats.

We are building the team for Dominion Scout. Benoit Breault, formerly of Wisk and Bombardier, has joined as our SVP of Aerospace Engineering and leads Dominion Scout. There’s no alternative right now being built for the Arctic. Most collaborative combat aircraft are focused on a very specific mission set, which is really the South China Sea and Indo-PACOM. What we are able to offer is something that is unique and specific to the Arctic threat context. I would say the differentiation that we bring is really the focus on the Arctic and the distances, ranges and problem sets specific to the Arctic.”

Dominion has been forward deploying into the Arctic. What has this taught you, what was unexpected, and what have you changed with Dominion’s approach?

“The Arctic is unlike any operating environment on Earth. Many of the technologies that defence primes and neoprimes have perfected don’t work in the Arctic for a variety of reasons. Communications are challenging. The ability to power assets is extremely challenging. Things that you take for granted, like the stability of the ground: the Arctic is basically permafrost, and permafrost changes from season to season and then year to year. The electromagnetic disturbances because of the aurora borealis are unique and different. The fact that the sun sort of sits on the horizon is problematic for sensors. Telemetry and basic data are much more challenging than anybody, I think, assumes. Obviously, logistics and the cost of getting things up and down are really hard, so you’ve got to be pretty precise in how you architect things.

I’m not sure we’ve learned anything that we didn’t know, other than what I’ve just said. The reason we’re building in the Arctic is that we know it’s hard, and that was the moat. A lot of what we’ve learned has been confirmation of what we knew, which is: it’s different, it’s hard, and that’s the opportunity.”

You’ve said there is a 50% chance that Dominion’s first contract comes from the US. How long can companies like yours wait for Canada to start buying?

“We can’t wait. I’m obviously very focused on Canada. It’s why I’m here. I just moved my family up this weekend. But we’re a business, and businesses go to where they are wanted and needed.”

Canada launched the Defence Drone Initiative. What does this change for Canadian startups like yours?

“I do think it’s headed in the right direction, for sure. The intent is there. The challenge is less about whether the intent is there. It’s whether we can do the things necessary to execute on that intent. For the drone initiative, it’s essentially like a verified-vendor list, which is good and fine. The next thing is contracting. I’d love to see more evidence that we want to do in-year contracting that is assessed on a week-by-week basis, not on a month- or year-by-year basis, and that contracting offers a ramp to larger contracts. Can you go from $50,000 to $5 million to $50 million in the course of 12 months? If you can’t do that, then we haven’t solved the contracting problem.”

A substantial portion of your Series A came from foreign investors. Should more Canadian defence founders look abroad for capital?

“I’d say one thing. We have been intentional from pre-seed to Series A about both seeking and getting commitments from Canadian investors. That will continue to be the most important thing that we do. It’s important that Canada demonstrate that it believes in itself. The vast majority of the equity is still held by Canadian investors and the executive team of Dominion. That being said, the problems Canada has, and the problems that we are seeking to solve, are relevant for international investors. We were intentional in getting what we believe to be the best international investors in our space: Valor and Atreides, Bessemer, Lakestar and Expeditions from the European side. That cap table, I think, is the best diversified cap table of any defence-tech startup in history. It’s reflected in the amount that we raised, which I think is the most of any Canadian defence company at our stage. Arguably, if not the most, then the best diversified cap table of any defence-tech startup globally.

I think maybe Helsing had a slightly higher Series A, but the cap-table construction was one major investor, Daniel Ek. I don’t know if that necessarily is better or worse, but it is what it is. For Canadians, it’s really important that Canadians back Canadians. When people ask me, ‘How do we get foreign investors involved in our company?’ I push them back to Canadian investors and tell them to focus on bringing in the pension funds. One of the things that I think we did really well was make sure that Canadian institutional capital came in early because, ultimately, for us to succeed, we’re going to need to have growth capital. Canada has some of the best institutional investors in the world.”

Are you looking to raise more capital?

“We’ll obviously do more capital raising. For us to do what we need to do, we need more capital, probably $500 million to $1 billion to build out the platform that we’re looking to build out. Is it right away? No. But we want to be opportunistic and intelligent in how we engage with capital markets, for sure.”

You personally were debanked. How common is this for Canadian defence founders? Is it still happening?

“It’s still happening. We’ve been debanked twice. I think the banks still don’t know what to do about defence. I don’t think they have the expertise. I think, generally speaking, they’re thinking about the wrong things. We need a new bank that is just focused on defence and resilience. I’m an investor in a bank called Erebor in the US. I think we need the same sort of thing in Canada. I’m not convinced the banks will figure out in time how to finance the sector or its entrepreneurs.”

Do you see this as a representation of the culture we have in Canada?

“I think it’s a representation of culture. I think it’s a representation of history. I think it’s a representation of regulation. I think it’s a representation of everything.”

Dominion has discussed partnerships, acquisitions and acquihires. What are you looking to acquire or partner with?

“The first critical partnership criterion is alignment on going big. We’re in this to change the country. I’ve been pretty consistent on this message: I want to change the trajectory of this country. To do that, you have to have ambition, vision and clarity about what it’s going to take. That’s a big focus for us when we look at and assess teams. The second is complementarity. Are we bringing something to the table that is unique and different from what they’re bringing? The third is more practical. From an M&A perspective: do they have contract vehicles? Do they have a relationship that is built on trust? Are they respected? Is the integration going to be straightforward?”

What advice would you give a young Canadian technologist considering starting a defence company?

“We need dozens of Canadian defence companies to exist for us to be successful. The most important thing, if they can do it, is to build what they know and then get it deployed with a user. Find a way to get it into the hands of a user, ideally an active user, and have them co-develop with you. If you can get the user to co-develop with you, that’s 80% of the problem.”

Which founder, company or historical figure has most influenced how you are building Dominion?

“It’s probably some composite of the people who built companies like Canadair, Bombardier, the Hudson’s Bay Company, Avro and de Havilland. What I admire about them is that they were willing to take real risks and invest in capabilities before it was obvious there would be a market for them. They had conviction in what they were building and were prepared to put a lot behind it. That’s the kind of approach I’m trying to bring to this business.”

What is the number one advantage Canada has compared to other countries, and why build in Canada?

“We have the technical expertise. We have the capital here. And we now have the demand signal. When you’re looking to invest in defence, you need those three things. You need the capital markets to exist. You need the demand signal, which clearly exists. And we have the technical talent. One gap is: can the government figure out a way to execute on a procurement timeline, and can it trust its own private sector to do the same?”

What do the next 12 months look like for Dominion?

“We’re going to be hiring hundreds of people. We’re going to look for more real estate somewhere in the country: Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Halifax, Nova Scotia. We’re going to build prototypes. We’re going to continue to build the trust of the user. A lot of what we’re doing right now is going to be building the foundations for execution, because that’s what comes next.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

The financial environment for startups in Canada is not ideal. It is a big reason why Canadian founders have consistently moved south of the border. In 2025, Leaders Fund found that only 32.4% of high-potential Canadian-led startups launched in 2024 were still headquartered in Canada. In Q1 of 2026, Canadian Venture Capital (VC) saw the lowest deal count of any quarter since 2017 (though it is starting to show signs of life). All while American (and global) venture capital is on pace to reach all-time highs. Anduril is reportedly in talks to raise a new round at a valuation of roughly US$100 billion.
Canada is falling behind in one of the greatest opportunities of this generation. The Canadian economy is being transformed through its largest defence buildup since World War II. Assuming Canada reaches its 5% of GDP commitment by 2035, annual defence spending would reach $230 billion, nearly 13 times its 2015 level. Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy aims to raise the share of defence acquisitions awarded to Canadian firms to 70% over the next decade.

The Canadian defence industry has been hit particularly hard. Until December 2025, the Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) had restricted some of the VCs it backed from investing in companies that made or sold military-related products. BDC is Canada’s largest venture investor and most active LP. As of the end of 2023, BDC was a limited partner in private independent VC funds representing 62% of the capital actively investing in Canada. Furthermore, defence technology has long been considered taboo and avoided by many firms across the country.

Since Canada's Defence Industrial Strategy was released, BDC has launched a defence platform of up to C$6 billion across financing, venture investment, advisory services and ecosystem support. Yet, Canadian private capital generally remains wary, whether due to risk aversion, SaaS-focused models, procurement cycles or long timelines. The capital gap remains.

On June 30, Dominion Dynamics raised C$139 million for its Series A, marking the largest-ever Series A round in Canadian defence history (and second-largest in the world). More companies from this new generation of Canadian deep-tech startups are expected to follow.

While Dominion has been focused and intentional about raising Canadian capital, a large chunk of this round still came from foreign investors. When I spoke to Harley Finkelstein, the President of Shopify, Canada's largest technology company, he told Canadian founders to start raising capital internationally. While Canadian ownership is important, sometimes Canadian investment is not possible. In venture, foreign investors took part in 56 percent of later-stage rounds, up from 30 percent a year earlier.

“That is the lens we have to remove from the Canadian ecosystem: ‘I’m here; I must raise from local people.’ If you’re in Oshawa or Trois-Rivieres or Calgary, and the product or business is ready for funding so you can grow it, go and try to raise from anywhere in the world. Every venture capital firm today is geographically agnostic.”

I believe this opportunity for innovation is the greatest Canada has had in a generation, both from a sovereignty perspective and through Canada's brand as an exporter. It would be a missed opportunity for investors not to get involved in this moment. This includes banks, successful Canadian entrepreneurs (who may have left Canada to build), and Canadian pension funds, which were once significant sources of capital for domestic venture funds. CPP Investments invested 74% domestically in 2005; today it is 12%. In a recent conversation, Dominion Dynamics founder and CEO Eliot Pence told me:

“For Canadians, it’s really important that Canadians back Canadians. When people ask me, ‘How do we get foreign investors involved in our company?’ I push them back to Canadian investors and tell them to focus on bringing in the pension funds. One of the things that I think we did really well was make sure that Canadian institutional capital came in early because, ultimately, for us to succeed, we’re going to need to have growth capital. Canada has some of the best institutional investors in the world.”

Investment in Canada should not be made simply for political reasons, but because it can be profitable. There is no simpler mantra in investing than "buy low, sell high" or "buy when there's blood in the streets." Yet, Canada tends to be extremely risk-averse. This creates an opportunity for those who are willing to take that risk. First movers have the opportunity to become a dominant force in an industry. If investors wait for the perfect timing, it will be too late. To compete with international companies, we need international cheque sizes and to operate with the speed and boldness that can compete globally with American, Chinese, and European firms.

There is very limited defence/deep tech capital in Canada. This is something I want to be more involved with. But if Canadian founders want to create generational companies, they must meet the world where it is. Many of the founders I speak to do not know where to look for capital. So I made a list of the firms actively investing in Canadian defence and frontier technologies.

Deep Checks is a resource suggested by the CEO & Co-founder of North Vector Dynamics, Paul Ziadé. By uploading a pitch deck, it matches deep-tech founders with VCs.

This guide focuses on defence, aerospace, space, autonomy, energy, advanced manufacturing, and other capital-intensive frontier technologies.

View the full list below:

This article includes:

1. Canadian Venture and Strategic Capital

2. Government and Non-Dilutive Capital

3. Foreign Venture and Strategic Capital in Canada

4. Accelerators, Testbeds and Strategic Programs

5. Canadian Angel Networks

Updated August 2026. Investment mandates, cheque sizes and program requirements can change; founders should verify current terms directly with each organization. Inclusion does not imply endorsement.

Canadian Venture and Strategic Capital

Many Canadian financiers publicly appear positive toward Canadian defence and frontier technology. However, few have acted on the opportunity. The firms below have already made direct investments in companies operating in defence, dual-use technology, space, autonomy, quantum security, or other strategically relevant frontier sectors. Although many of these were unusual investments for the firm, a past investment represents a strong signal.

Business Development Bank of Canada

Headquarters: Montréal, Quebec, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics, Landing Zones Canada, Lastwall, Canada Rocket Company, Irréversible

Stage: Seed to Growth

Lead: Yes

Focus: Canadian defence, dual-use technology, deep tech, security, sovereign capability and seed-stage technology

Typical initial cheque: StrongNorth: C$1 million to C$20 million; other BDC vehicles vary

Note: Dominion Dynamics is listed as a general BDC investment. Landing Zones Canada, Photonic and Lastwall were backed through StrongNorth. Canada Rocket Company and Irréversible were backed through other BDC Capital vehicles under the Defence Platform. StrongNorth is a C$300-million fund. BDC’s broader Defence Platform can mobilize up to C$6 billion across financing, investment and advisory services. BDC also maintains other relevant funds, such as the C$100-million Seed Venture Fund.

Carvalho Capital

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Mission Control, Wyvern

Stage: Pre-seed

Lead: No

Focus: Dual-use systems: defence tech, autonomy, ISR, and infrastructure security. Core space economy enablers: propulsion, energy, edge compute, robotics. Founders with technical depth, geopolitical literacy, and long time horizons. Companies building critical capabilities for sovereign nations and off-world logistics

Typical initial cheque: C$25,000 to C$250,000

Cold Capital

Headquarters: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Relevant investments: Canada Rocket Company

Stage: Seed

Lead: No

Focus: Not publicly disclosed

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Deloitte Ventures Canada

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Seed to Series C

Lead: No

Focus: Emerging technology aligned with Deloitte’s clients and services

Typical initial cheque: C$2 million to C$10 million

Feld Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Early-stage

Lead: No

Focus: Early capital for category-defining founders. AI, defence, fintech, and frontier systems

Typical initial cheque: C$750,000 to C$3 million+

Frostbite Capital

Headquarters: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics, Building Bloc Systems, North Vector Dynamics, Lastwall, Irréversible, Palitronica

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: No

Focus: Canadian defence, national security, Arctic capability, secure networks, AI and deep technology

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Garage Capital

Headquarters: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics, Canada Rocket Company, Canadian Strategic Missions Corporation, Kepler Communications, North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Earliest-stage Canadian and Y Combinator companies

Typical initial cheque: C$250,000 to C$1 million

Georgian

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Series B to Series D

Lead: Yes

Focus: High-growth B2B technology companies across the AI stack

Typical initial cheque: US$25 million to US$50 million

Note: Georgian normally invests from Series B to Series D; Dominion was a Pathfinder exception.

Golden Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics, Xanadu

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: North American technology companies at the earliest stages

Typical initial cheque: US$500,000 to US$2.5 million

NordSpace Ventures

Headquarters: Markham, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Wyvern, North Vector Dynamics, Greypoint Industries

Stage: Not publicly disclosed

Lead: No

Focus: Canadian space, defence and dual-use technology

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Northside Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Canada Rocket Company, North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed

Lead: No

Focus: Vertical AI, AI infrastructure, frontier tech

Typical initial cheque: US$500,000

Note: Where is the White Space for Canadian Defence Founders? — Northside Ventures

OMERS Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Series A to Series C

Lead: Yes

Focus: Technology companies capable of reaching institutional scale

Typical initial cheque: US$5 million to US$25 million

ONE9

Headquarters: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Seed to Growth

Lead: No

Focus: National security, defence, dual-use technology, cyber and critical infrastructure

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Panache Ventures

Headquarters: Montréal, Quebec, Canada

Relevant investments: Canada Rocket Company, Nord Quantique

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Broad Canadian early-stage technology

Typical initial cheque: Up to C$1.5 million

Quantacet

Headquarters: Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

Relevant investments: Irréversible, Nord Quantique

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Quantum technology and enabling technologies across the quantum value chain

Typical initial cheque: C$300,000 to C$1 million

Ripple Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Canada Rocket Company, North Vector Dynamics, Daedal Systems

Stage: Pre-seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Advanced technologies in critical industries, including aerospace and defence, AI infrastructure, AI and science, energy and natural resources, and software transforming legacy industries. Canadian and US startups selling globally.

Typical initial cheque: US$250,000 to US$1 million

Note: On August 17, 2026, Ripple Ventures announced Fund IV, targeting founders “developing sovereign capabilities with frontier technologies.”

RISC Capital

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: Skygauge Robotics

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Deep tech startups in Canada

Typical initial cheque: C$250,000 to C$400,000

Tidal Venture Partners

Headquarters: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Relevant investments: Undisclosed

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Industry-generalist technology companies in Atlantic Canada. Its planned Sovereign Technologies Fund targets defence, cybersecurity, quantum, AI, autonomous systems and digital governance

Typical initial cheque: C$200,000 to C$400,000

Two Small Fish Ventures

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Relevant investments: ENVGO

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Vertical AI, physical AI, AI infrastructure, advanced computing hardware, and smart energy

Typical initial cheque: US$1 million to US$3 million

Vanedge Capital

Headquarters: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics, AquaEye, Nucleon

Stage: Early-stage

Lead: Yes

Focus: Hard Tech, AI & Analytics

Typical initial cheque: C$1 million to C$15 million

Honourable Mentions (Regional)

Accelerate Fund

Headquarters: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Relevant investments: Wyvern

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Leading tech startups that are private, incorporated, and have a head office and more than 50% of employees located in Alberta. B2B technology companies with proven product demand

Typical initial cheque: C$250,000

Note: Requires matching dollars from angel or private co-investors.

British Columbia Investment Management Corporation

Headquarters: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Series B to Growth

Lead: Yes

Focus: Enterprise software and cloud infrastructure; defence technology; and disruptive technology, including AI, quantum, automation and robotics

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

New Brunswick Innovation Foundation

Headquarters: Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

Relevant investments: Lastwall, AVSS

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: New Brunswick-based innovation and technology companies

Typical initial cheque: C$25,000 to C$1 million

Note: NBIF’s C$1.5-million investment in Lastwall was its largest single investment to date

University of Alberta Innovation Fund

Headquarters: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Relevant investments: Wyvern

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: No

Focus: Companies with a University of Alberta connection. AI, health, energy and agriculture

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Government and Non-Dilutive Capital

Canada is comparatively strong in non-dilutive support. This capital can preserve founder ownership, create relationships with government customers and help technical companies survive long development and procurement cycles. It is not always fast, and many programs reimburse costs after they are incurred.

Canada’s Ocean Supercluster (OSC)

Type: Collaborative ocean-technology project funding

Eligibility: Canadian consortia developing and commercializing an eligible ocean solution; projects must include at least two industry-investing organizations and directly include or benefit at least one Canadian SME

Support: Reimbursement of up to 40% of eligible project costs for projects worth at least C$1 million; minimum OSC contribution of C$400,000

Timing: Continuous intake; projects must end by October 31, 2027

Requirements: At least 75% of the industry match must be cash, no participant may provide more than 80% of the match, participants must initially pay project costs, funded organizations must join the cluster and sign a project agreement, and 12.75% of the reimbursement is redirected to ecosystem-building activities

Canadian Space Agency Space Technology Development Program (STDP)

Type: Space-technology contracts and non-repayable contributions

Eligibility: Canadian organizations developing technologies that fit an active Canadian Space Agency call

Support: Varies by call. One 2026 small-business call offered up to C$350,000 and up to 75% government support

Timing: Call-specific and milestone-based

Requirements: The applicant must fund the remaining project cost and meet the technical readiness, ownership and reporting rules of the call

Note: The earlier AO closed March 13, 2026. AO 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3 are open in the 2026 cycle. This is not standing funding; verify which calls are live before relying on it.

CanExport SMEs

Type: Export-development contribution

Eligibility: Canadian small and medium-sized businesses that generally have C$300,000 to C$100 million in annual revenue and at least three full-time employees

Support: C$10,000 to C$50,000 toward a C$20,000 to C$100,000 export-development project, generally covering 50% of eligible costs for 2026-27

Timing: Annual intake and project period set by the program

Requirements: A defined new international market, eligible sales-development activities and applicant cost sharing

Innovation for Defence Excellence and Security (IDEaS)

Type: Defence R&D contracts, contributions, contests, sandboxes and test programs

Eligibility: Varies by challenge; generally Canadian innovators, companies, researchers and consortia addressing a published Department of National Defence problem

Support: Competitive Projects can provide phased support up to C$6.75 million; other mechanisms and award amounts vary by challenge

Timing: Milestone-based and challenge-specific

Requirements: Must respond to an active challenge and satisfy its technical, security, contracting and reporting requirements

Innovative Solutions Canada (ISED ISC)

Type: Challenge-based R&D funding and pre-commercial procurement

Eligibility: Generally, Canadian for-profit companies with 499 or fewer employees; individual challenges may impose additional Canadian ownership, workforce or R&D requirements

Support: Phase 1 commonly provides up to C$150,000 over six months, with some challenges allowing C$300,000. Phase 2 commonly provides up to C$1 million over two years, with some challenges allowing C$2 million. The Testing stream generally permits contracts up to C$1.1 million, or C$2.3 million for military innovations

Timing: Challenge-specific; the Testing stream begins when a department selects a late pre-commercial technology to buy and test

Requirements: Must respond to an open challenge or Testing stream opportunity; the company normally retains the intellectual property it develops

Mitacs

Type: Industry-academic R&D support

Eligibility: Canadian companies working with an eligible university researcher, student or postdoctoral fellow

Support: A standard four- to six-month Accelerate unit combines a C$7,500 partner contribution with a C$15,000 research award. The Defence and Security call supports projects for up to two years and 30 units; a master’s or PhD unit is C$20,000 with a C$10,000 company contribution, while a postdoctoral unit is C$25,000 with a C$12,500 company contribution

Timing: Four months to two years, depending on project structure. The Defence and Security call closes August 17, 2026, with decisions in late 2026 and projects starting in early 2027

Requirements: Academic partner, research plan, company contribution and eligible research personnel

Next Generation Manufacturing Canada (NGen)

Type: Advanced-manufacturing project funding

Eligibility: Canadian manufacturers and technology companies responding to an active NGen funding opportunity; eligibility varies by program

Support: Program-specific. The currently open Industrial AI Readiness Program reimburses up to C$15,000; larger collaborative funding calls open periodically

Timing: Program-specific; Industrial AI Readiness applications are assessed first-come, first-served until funding is exhausted

Requirements: Current applicants must be incorporated Canadian manufacturers with fewer than 500 employees, be NRC IRAP eligible, obtain an Industrial Technology Advisor reference, select an eligible AI service provider and complete a readiness assessment, implementation plan and final report

NorthX Climate Tech (formerly CICE)

Type: Non-dilutive climate hard-tech project funding

Eligibility: Canadian companies advancing TRL 4-9 greenhouse-gas reduction or removal technology with a clear commercialization path; preference is given to projects with the greatest impact in British Columbia

Support: Average grant of C$600,000, covering up to 50% of eligible project costs through milestone-based reimbursement

Timing: Continuous intake; EOI decisions within 30 days, detailed proposals due within 30 days if invited, and funding decisions targeted within 60-90 days of a detailed proposal

Requirements: Applicants must fund the remaining project costs, begin within six months of signing and finish within the earlier of two years or June 30, 2029; standalone studies, research projects, software and digital solutions are ineligible

NRC Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP)

Type: Non-repayable project contribution and technical advisory support

Eligibility: Incorporated, for-profit Canadian companies with up to 500 full-time employees that are developing and commercializing innovative technology with a plausible benefit to Canada

Support: Project-specific; no universal public maximum. Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy allocated C$244 million to a Defence Industry Assist stream delivered through NRC IRAP

Timing: Project-specific

Requirements: The project and contribution are developed with an Industrial Technology Advisor; applicants must show technical, commercial and management capability

NSERC Alliance Advantage

Type: University-industry research grant

Eligibility: Canadian university researchers working with eligible partner organizations; the academic researcher applies

Support: More than C$20,000 up to C$1 million per year for one to five years; NSERC can provide two dollars for each dollar contributed by recognized partner organizations

Timing: One to five years

Requirements: Academic-led application, partner contribution and a defined research program with economic or societal benefit

Regional Defence Investment Initiative (RDII)

Type: Interest-free repayable contribution delivered through regional development agencies

Eligibility: Canadian businesses undertaking projects that increase defence production, commercialization, supply-chain participation or related industrial capacity; regional rules apply

Support: Businesses can normally request C$125,000 to C$10 million, covering up to 75% of eligible project costs

Timing: Project-based; repayment normally begins one year after project completion. Intake status varies by region

Requirements: Incremental and measurable outcomes, applicant cost sharing and a credible project plan

Note: Intake and minimum amounts vary regionally. Southern Ontario paused intake on April 17, 2026. PacifiCan is accepting commercial project applications between April 1, 2026 and March 31, 2028. Check each agency directly before assuming a region is open.

Regional Development Agencies (RDAs)

Type: Grants, non-repayable contributions and repayable contributions

Eligibility: Companies undertaking eligible regional commercialization, manufacturing, productivity or market-expansion projects

Support: Varies across the seven agencies — FedDev Ontario, FedNor, PacifiCan, PrairiesCan, Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions and CanNor

Timing: Program- and region-specific

Requirements: Regional economic benefit, eligible costs, matching capital and measurable project outcomes

Scientific Research and Experimental Development Tax Incentive Program (SR&ED)

Type: Federal tax credit

Eligibility: Canadian companies conducting eligible experimental development or scientific research

Support: Base federal rate of 15%; most eligible Canadian-controlled private corporations can receive 35% on up to C$6 million of qualified annual expenditure for tax years beginning after December 15, 2024; excess expenditure is generally eligible at 15%

Timing: Claimed after the company’s tax year

Requirements: Evidence of technological uncertainty, systematic investigation and eligible expenditures; refundability and provincial credits vary

Foreign Venture and Strategic Capital

As Canada becomes a stronger international player, it is also becoming a destination for foreign investors. Its geography, allied relationships and demand for sovereign capability create a distinct competitive advantage. Canada is the first non-European country to join SAFE and is in technical negotiations to join the NATO Innovation Fund. European, American and Asian investors have already begun investing in Canadian defence and frontier-technology companies, often more aggressively than Canadian investors.

Afore Capital

Headquarters: San Francisco, California, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Early-stage software companies across industries

Typical initial cheque: US$500,000 to US$2 million+

AIN Ventures

Headquarters: New York, New York, United States

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: The intersection of deep-tech and dual-use; Aerospace, space, life sciences, resiliency, AI/ML, defence, cyber and national security

Typical initial cheque: US$50,000 to US$1 million

Atreides Management, LP

Headquarters: Boston, Massachusetts, US

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Not publicly disclosed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Technology and consumer companies across public and private markets

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Bessemer Venture Partners

Headquarters: Redwood City, California, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics, Xanadu

Stage: Pre-seed to Growth

Lead: Yes

Focus: AI & ML, Biotech, Cloud, Consumer, Cybersecurity, Crypto, Data, Deep tech & Defence, Developer, Fintech, Healthcare, Marketplaces, Vertical software

Typical initial cheque: US$3 million to US$100 million+

Canaan Partners

Headquarters: Menlo Park, California, United States

Relevant investments: Kepler Communications

Stage: Seed to Series B

Lead: Yes

Focus: Enterprise, consumer, deep-tech, frontier, fintech, and healthcare technology

Typical initial cheque: US$1 million to US$20 million

Class 5 Global

Headquarters: San Francisco, California, United States

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: High-growth technology companies across emerging markets

Typical initial cheque: US$500,000 to US$3 million

Costanoa Ventures

Headquarters: Palo Alto, California, United States

Relevant investments: Kepler Communications

Stage: Seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Applied AI, data infrastructure, cybersecurity, fintech and national security

Typical initial cheque: US$2 million to US$5 million

Draper Associates

Headquarters: San Mateo, California, United States

Relevant investments: Reaction Dynamics, Xanadu

Stage: Pre-seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Industry-agnostic; Frontier technologies that will define the next century, such as AI, robotics & automation, crypto & blockchain, healthcare & biotech, aerospace & space, unconventional ideas

Typical initial cheque: Flexible; US$500,000 to US$5 million

Drone Fund

Headquarters: Tokyo, Japan

Relevant investments: AVSS, SkyX Systems Corp.

Stage: Seed to Series B

Lead: Yes

Focus: Drones, air mobility, robotics and related infrastructure

Typical initial cheque: US$1 million to US$5 million

Expeditions

Headquarters: Warsaw, Poland

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Early-stage

Lead: Yes

Focus: European security, defence, resilience and deep technology. Including cybersecurity, intelligence, autonomy, AI, quantum, privacy, communications solutions and space

Typical initial cheque: €1 million to €25 million

Forum Ventures

Headquarters: New York, New York, United States

Relevant investments: Sentinel R&D

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Agentic AI, vertical AI, healthcare, fintech, supply chain and frontier technology

Typical initial cheque: Varies by program; US$250,000 to US$1 million through its pre-seed fund

Industrious Ventures

Headquarters: Denver, Colorado, United States

Relevant investments: Volta Space Technologies

Stage: Seed to Series D, primarily Seed and Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Aerospace, national security, autonomy, robotics, manufacturing, supply chains and logistics

Typical initial cheque: US$100,000 to US$5 million, with a reported sweet spot around US$1.5 million

JDY Capital

Headquarters: New York, New York, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Early-stage and private investments

Lead: No

Focus: Aerospace, defence, space energy, deep tech and real estate

Typical initial cheque: Not publicly disclosed

Lakestar

Headquarters: Zurich, Switzerland

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Seed to Growth

Lead: Yes

Focus: European software, resilience, defence fintech, deep tech and frontier technology

Typical initial cheque: €500,000 to €50 million

MaC Venture Capital

Headquarters: Los Angeles, California, United States

Relevant investments: Wyvern, Volta

Stage: Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Frontier technology, financial innovation, enterprise solutions and consumer products

Typical initial cheque: US$1 million to US$4 million

Side Door Ventures

Headquarters: San Francisco, California, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Pre-seed to Growth

Lead: No

Focus: Deep tech, space, defence, robotics, climate and unconventional markets

Typical initial cheque: Up to US$500,000 through its Seed Fund; up to US$5 million through its Opportunity Fund

Silent Ventures

Headquarters: Dallas, Texas, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Early-stage

Lead: Yes

Focus: Aerospace, defence, national security and deep technology

Typical initial cheque: US$1.5 million to US$3 million

Squadra Ventures

Headquarters: Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Relevant investments: Wyvern

Stage: Pre-seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Cyber, defence, national security and dual-use technology

Typical initial cheque: US$1 million to US$4 million

Tech Horizons

Headquarters: Prague, Czechia

Relevant investments: North Vector Dynamics

Stage: Seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Across NATO and allied countries—security, defence and resilience. With a focus on dual-use and deep tech. AI, cybersecurity, automation, robotics, logistics, mobility, energy, biotech, medtech, advanced computing, systems for critical infrastructure management and protection – including the application of radars, ground and aerial drones, lasers, and sophisticated sensors. Both software- and hardware-enabled products

Typical initial cheque: €300,000 to €3 million

Tofino Capital

Headquarters: Washington, D.C., United States

Relevant investments: Irréversible

Stage: Pre-seed to Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Technology companies serving emerging and frontier markets; Fintech, logistics, digital commerce marketplaces, and frontier technology.

Typical initial cheque: US$50,000 to US$500,000

Note: Tofino Capital was founded by Eliot Pence, the CEO and Co-founder of Dominion Dynamics

Uncork Capital

Headquarters: San Francisco, California, United States

Relevant investments: Wyvern

Stage: Seed

Lead: Yes

Focus: Companies using AI and emerging technologies to create leverage, unlock scale, and push industries forward. B2B applications, developer tooling, infrastructure & security, Consumer & marketplaces, Frontier tech/hardware

Typical initial cheque: US$3 million to US$5 million

Unpopular Ventures

Headquarters: Miami, Florida, United States

Relevant investments: Wyvern, Volta Space Technologies

Stage: Pre-seed to Series A

Lead: Yes

Focus: Sector-agnostic technology companies pursuing non-consensus ideas, overlooked markets, underestimated industries or difficult technical challenges

Typical initial cheque: US$25,000 to US$1 million

Valor Equity Partners

Headquarters: Chicago, Illinois, United States

Relevant investments: Dominion Dynamics

Stage: Seed to Growth

Lead: Yes

Focus: Technology and technology-enabled companies; small early-stage investments used to build relationships before possible growth-stage investment

Typical initial cheque: US$10 million to US$30 million

Accelerators, Testbeds and Strategic Programs

These organizations offer combinations of funding, mentorship, testing infrastructure, strategic partnerships, government access, operational feedback and industry connections. Participation does not guarantee investment or procurement.

Aerospace Accelerator Program

Headquarters: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Type: Aerospace accelerator operated through Innovate Calgary’s Aerospace Innovation Hub

For: Early-stage aerospace startups led by a full-time technical founder who can reside in Calgary and maintain a company presence at the Aerospace Innovation Hub. The company must have been incorporated in Alberta or nationally less than two years ago, or have raised no more than C$500,000 in dilutive funding. No University of Calgary affiliation is required

Funding: Up to C$200,000 in non-dilutive funding, including founder salary support

Duration: Two years

Value: Technical infrastructure, expert support, business training, intellectual-property support and access to the Aerospace Innovation Hub

Area X.O

Headquarters: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Type: Controlled testbed and commercialization facility operated by Invest Ottawa

For: Companies developing autonomous vehicles, drones, communications, smart mobility and defence systems

Funding: No universal standing cash award

Duration: Project-specific

Value: Controlled testing infrastructure, demonstrations, technical validation and customer engagement

Calian VENTURES

Headquarters: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Type: Corporate defence innovation and systems-integration program

For: Mature Canadian small and medium-sized companies with proven technology relevant to defence, public safety, space, cyber or mission-critical systems

Funding: Case-specific; Calian announced a C$100-million strategic initiative, not a ring-fenced third-party venture fund

Duration: Partnership-specific

Value: Co-development, systems integration, validation, customer access and support scaling sovereign capabilities

Centre for Ocean Ventures & Entrepreneurship (COVE)

Headquarters: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada

Type: Marine technology accelerator, testbed and industry hub

For: Marine and dual-use companies seeking mentorship, infrastructure, demonstrations, customer access and international networks

Funding: No universal standing cash award

Duration: Program-specific

Value: Waterfront infrastructure, marine testing, industry connections and defence-market support; COVE also hosts the pilot Maritime Defence Innovation Secure Hub

Creative Destruction Lab (CDL)

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Type: Equity-free accelerator and mentorship program

For: Dual-use companies addressing operational needs in defence, national security or critical-infrastructure protection; the Defence stream emphasizes TRL 4–7

Funding: No guaranteed cash investment

Duration: Nine months

Value: Mentorship, objective setting, investor access and commercialization discipline

NATO Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA)

Headquarters: London, England, United Kingdom

Type: Allied defence accelerator and test-centre network

For: Dual-use companies incorporated in eligible NATO countries and responding to an active challenge

Funding: €100,000 contractual award for the initial six-month accelerator; selected companies can receive up to an additional €300,000 through the Mission Track

Duration: Six months initially, with a possible six-month Mission Track

Value: NATO mentorship, allied market access and access to more than 200 test centres

Vimy Forge

Headquarters: Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

Type: National defence and security innovation accelerator

For: Early-stage Canadian small and medium-sized companies developing defence, national-security and dual-use technologies

Funding: No direct cash award publicly specified; no equity taken, and participants receive significant in-kind support. ACOA’s C$997,000 investment funds the accelerator, not participant companies

Duration: 12-week sprints, including a five-day in-person focus week; the current program runs from March 2026 to March 2027

Value: Mentorship, operational feedback, interpretation of defence requirements, validation and deployment pathways, investor connections and engagement with military, government and industry stakeholders

Canadian Angel Networks

Angel investors are high-net-worth individuals who invest their own personal capital in startups. As such, these investors are typically more open to early-stage investments in deep-tech, defence, and frontier technologies. Many Canadian national interest startups have raised rounds where a majority of their capital comes from angels.

Angel One Investor Network

Headquarters: Burlington, Ontario, Canada

Focus: High-growth companies, with particular access to founders in Southern Ontario

Anges Québec

Headquarters: Montréal, Quebec, Canada

Focus: Technology, deep tech, clean tech, medical devices and biotechnology. The company is generally headquartered in Quebec or raises alongside an angel group outside Quebec

Capital Angel Network

Headquarters: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Focus: Canadian technology companies across sectors

Golden Triangle Angel Network

Headquarters: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Focus: High-growth technology companies connected to the Waterloo Region ecosystem

Keiretsu Forum Canada

Headquarters: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Focus: Sector-agnostic companies presented to individual accredited investors

VANTEC Angel Network

Headquarters: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Focus: British Columbia-based technology companies

York Angel Investors

Headquarters: Markham, Ontario, Canada

Focus: High-growth technology companies across sectors

Expected Soon

Defence, Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB)

Status: Canada is leading the initiative. On July 7, 2026, the leaders of Canada, Albania, Belgium, Greece, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Türkiye and Ukraine declared their shared intention to establish the bank, with operations targeted as early as 2027

Type: Proposed multilateral defence-finance institution that will be headquartered in Canada, with a European hub in Luxembourg

Focus: Expanding access to capital, reducing financing costs and increasing defence industrial capacity across member countries by leveraging a strong credit foundation

NATO Innovation Fund (NIF)

Status: Canada is in technical negotiations regarding participation; it is not currently an open Canadian founder program.

Type: A standalone venture capital fund backed by 24 NATO allies, deploying €1 billion+ in deep tech

Focus: Defence, security, resilience and enabling deep technologies

If you know a fund, program, accelerator or Canadian angel network that belongs here, leave a comment on this article.

Leave a comment

Research Acknowledgements

Thanks to Melaniia Volkodav, Naomi Walch, Lucas Chan, Chris Crowell, Chris Magazzeni, Darren Thomson, Chloé Archambault, Matej Luhový, JJ MacLean, and Samuel Burrell for confirming information about their respective firms.

Thank you as well to Kath Intson (Sentinel R&D), Matthew Lombardi (The Icebreaker and ONE9), Paul Ziadé (North Vector Dynamics), Hugh Kolias (Canada Rocket Company) and Melanie Bitner (FireSwarm Solutions) for their perspectives.

Wyvern is an Edmonton-based space intelligence company which launched the world’s first commercial hyperspectral satellites in 2023. While traditional satellites can provide an image of what a target looks like (shape, size, and colour), Wyvern’s hyperspectral satellites can reveal what the target is made of (material and chemical signature). This allows Wyvern to detect camouflage and provide operators with more information for decision-making. Hyperspectral imagery can detect what is invisible to the human eye.

The company was founded in 2018 by Chris Robson, Kristen Cote, Kurtis Broda, and Callie Lissinna, and now serves industries including agriculture, defence & national security, forestry, energy, ESG, and mining. The use cases can range from detecting methane leaks and monitoring wildfire damage to identifying threats in military environments. Its primary defence application is ship identification, distinguishing vessels that disable their transponders, obscure their identities or operate secretly.

“Space is a war domain. And if we can’t deploy assets there, then we’re vulnerable.”

In Winter 2022, Wyvern participated in the world’s largest startup accelerator, Y Combinator (YC) (which briefly removed Canada from its list of approved incorporation locations earlier this year). In 2022, Wyvern used that momentum to raise capital from American investors while remaining headquartered in Canada. More Canadian-founded defence-tech startups have since joined YC, including Greypoint Industries in the Summer 2026 batch.
As Canada undertakes its largest increase in defence spending since the Second World War, Wyvern represents a successful example of a Canadian company maintaining its roots. It has done so despite explicit pressure from investors to relocate to the United States.

“There’s no reason why you can’t raise capital in the United States and stay in Canada. That’s what we did.”

Wyvern’s Dragonette constellation began launching in 2023. The company is now selling data and intelligence services in defence and agriculture. NASA selected Wyvern in June for its Commercial Satellite Data Acquisition program, allowing authorized U.S. government users to purchase its archived data and task its satellites. BetaKit reported that Wyvern is the first pre-Series A company admitted to the program and the second Canadian-headquartered participant after GHGSat. In February, NordSpace Ventures, the investment arm of Canadian launch company NordSpace, announced a strategic investment in Wyvern, opening a pathway toward future Canadian launches and closer partnership.

“There’s never been a better time to be a space company in Canada.”

I spoke with the CEO and co-founder of Wyvern, Chris Robson, about identifying deceptive vessels from space, selling into Five Eyes markets, resisting pressure to relocate to the United States, Canada’s launch vulnerability and why Canadian founders can raise American capital without leaving the country.

“The only way you can do that is by building here and trying to build the future you want to see.”

What is Wyvern building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“Wyvern is building space-intelligence infrastructure, particularly focused on very-high-resolution hyperspectral and other intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. Right now, Canada relies on foreign governments and foreign assets for its intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. We really only have the RADARSAT Constellation Mission for synthetic-aperture radar, but it’s very limited. When I say limited, let’s imagine that you’re trying to help Ukraine, you’re a soldier in the field, or you’re looking at what’s going on in Iran. Synthetic-aperture radar will tell you the shape of something; that something is there. What we’re doing, high-resolution hyperspectral imagery, will tell you what something is, because we can detect, identify and measure the chemical and material makeup. Some good examples are that we’re able to uniquely identify ships, measure nitrogen in a crop, and tell you the species and subspecies of a tree. These are all really important for Canada’s defence and security, but also its economic success. We’ve got the largest coastline in the world. We’re a huge nation, and we don’t have the capability to monitor or measure it as thoroughly and as regularly as we need to. There’s no Canadian capability that exists.

The other reason why we exist is that our technology allows us to launch things that are much smaller and much cheaper than if you launched a regular telescope. We have this technology called deployable optics. That means we can launch on Canadian sovereign launch vehicles without having to rely on somebody like SpaceX, Blue Origin or some of the other launch-vehicle providers.”

Which markets are showing the most demand?

“Defence and intelligence, and agriculture.”

What capabilities are you unlocking for those industries?

“Right now, the biggest capability we’re unlocking for defence and intelligence is ship identification. There are tons of dark ships in the world. They skirt international sanctions and operate in a clandestine fashion. Deception is the way modern warfare is waged these days. Hyperspectral sees through deception. We can identify a ship based on the fingerprint it makes in light. That’s what hyperspectral allows you to do. You could have a ship that says, ‘I’m X.’ With our hyperspectral imager, we can say, ‘No, that’s not X. They’re lying to you. This is Y.’ That’s the biggest capability we’re providing to defence and intelligence right now.

For agriculture, the data is primarily being used for fertilizer and input identification in the crop to increase crop yield. That’s the biggest application at the moment.”

What are the alternatives to hyperspectral imagery, and when do they work better or worse?

“The closest alternative to a hyperspectral satellite, aside from a hyperspectral drone or airplane, is either laboratory tests or a multispectral satellite. Multispectral satellites are limited because they can tell you that something is there, but they can’t necessarily tell you what something is. If you look at a camouflaged tank with a multispectral satellite versus a hyperspectral satellite, one will tell you it’s there, and the other will just see a forest.

Laboratory tests are expensive and not scalable. You have to be in the field. If you’re looking at something over denied airspace or in a place where you’re not welcome, then you can’t gather the data.”

Which customers are you selling to, and what is your revenue model?

“I can’t name specific customers, but I can tell you that we’re working with a number of governments and militaries in the Five Eyes. We’ve got two types of pricing structures. We’ve got subscriptions for our intelligence services, things like ship identification, where we charge an annual subscription. We also have a usage-based model for our data sales. You buy data and pay for the data you purchase. That’s it.”

Do you see Canada’s position in the world as an advantage when exporting to allies?

“It is. We’ve got really great relationships with a lot of countries outside the United States, while at the same time being able to export into the United States in a way that other countries can’t.”

NASA selected Wyvern for its Commercial Satellite Data Acquisition program. What does that mean?

“First, we’re the only pre-Series A company I know that has been selected for it. It’s difficult to get into. You have to have functioning satellites and data coming down from space. It took us about a year. It allows us to sell to NASA and all other parts of the U.S. government. They can buy our data, task our satellites and buy our archive.”

You joined Y Combinator in 2022. How did you remain Canadian, and what advice would you give another Canadian founder considering Y Combinator?

“When we started Wyvern, we wanted to build a Canadian space ecosystem, particularly in Alberta. We didn’t want to live in the United States or anywhere else. We wanted to live and work here. We love Canada. It’s interesting to see things play out this way because it fits well into the reasons why we wanted to do it in the first place. We always get asked whether we’re moving to the United States, or told by investors that we should. We’ve also had some say that, if we wanted a term sheet, we would have to have plans to do so. We’ve managed to avoid it.

Part of the reason with YC in 2022 is that it was during COVID and was still a remote batch. I suspect the urge to move would have been a lot higher had we gone there and worked in the United States. There are good reasons for that. The United States has better mechanisms to buy services from its startups, support its industry and grow its deep tech than Canada does. They’ve also got more access to investment. We managed to stay here partly because it was remote, but also because that’s how we started Wyvern. We wanted to stay here.”

What should a Canadian founder do if they want to remain in Canada but are struggling to raise capital?

“There’s no reason why you can’t raise capital in the United States and stay in Canada. That’s what we did. The great majority of our investors are from the United States. That’s just a normal part of international business. I would encourage Canadian founders to look at the advantages of staying in Canada. There are a lot, including access to talent that is often overlooked and far more capable, and living in a place with a much better cost of living.

The people who work for Wyvern can have much better lives because the cost of living here is so much cheaper than in San Francisco. You can actually buy a house here. You don’t have to live in a studio apartment while also getting paid $400,000 a year. There are a lot of advantages to living in Canada, and there’s no reason why you can’t raise money internationally. I don’t think the Canadian investment market is yet at the place where it will support the sort of scale we need from our startups, but it is catching up.”

Canada is the only G7 country without sovereign launch capability. What risk does that create?

“It’s always been a risk. The risk for Wyvern is that we lose access to launch capability because it’s in somebody else’s country. Whether there’s an emergency, market pressure, or unique advantages placed on launch companies that we won’t get access to because they’re foreign launch companies, those are all real concerns.

It is a risk for Wyvern. From a commercial perspective, it’s definitely not as big a risk as it is to Canada from a security perspective. We need to be able to launch our own satellites without relying on foreign launch. Space is a war domain. And if we can’t deploy assets there, then we’re vulnerable.”

What does NordSpace’s strategic investment unlock?

“It opens up a number of partnership opportunities for NordSpace and us. It allows us to work more closely together to build future missions and potentially launch with NordSpace. That’s one of the big reasons why we did it. We’re really interested in NordSpace’s capabilities, and we’d love to launch with them. Wyvern is definitely looking more toward Canadian suppliers. We would like to get to a point where the entire satellite supply chain could be sovereign. Partnering with NordSpace is one of the steps we took to get there.”

What advice would you give someone starting a Canadian space company today?

“It’s going to be hard. It’s going to be tough. You’re going to be at a slight disadvantage, but it’s worth it because you’re doing something for a greater purpose. You’re doing something that’s hard. There are also advantages to starting in Canada that people often overlook. You become far more tenacious. You become far better at operating and building something. Because of that, you can also scale something really huge. You get subjected to pressures that others don’t, and that pressure transforms you and your company. Canada’s defence and security posture is changing. It’s opening up a ton of opportunities, and now is the time to get involved. That directly impacts space. There is so much Canada wants to do with space right now. There’s never been a better time to be a space company in Canada.”

What do the next 12 months look like for Wyvern?

“We’ve got another satellite going up in February. We’ve got other plans in motion for our next generation of satellites that I’m hoping we’ll be able to announce soon. We’ve got expansion plans in progress as well. The biggest thing for us is rolling out our ship-identification product more fully, publicly and to other customers in other countries.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup worth watching?

“NordSpace. I’m not saying that just because they invested in us, but because they’re genuinely different from most other Canadian startups in how they do things, what their plans are and their tenacity. That’s definitely one I would be watching.”

Why build in Canada?

“I love Canada. I want to live and work here. I want my children to grow up here, and I want to see Canada become stronger. The only way you can do that is by building here and trying to build the future you want to see.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

Leave a comment

The Author: Nikhil Malhotra, CEO and co-founder of New Frontier Robotics

New Frontier Robotics is a startup located in Guelph, Ontario. We are building Mercury, an adaptive mobile manipulator designed to operate within the harsh environments of mining, manufacturing and defence.
The ultimate multiplier for human reach, aptitude and productivity lies in AI-powered robotics.

Canada lacks sovereign capability in physical AI. Our mission is to make Canada a world leader in physical AI, not only at the research level but also in industrial adoption. With the recent interest in developing our Northern Frontier, it is time to discuss what this could look like.

The Canadian Frontier

Distant and unforgiving, a fitting description for both space and the Canadian Arctic. Surprisingly, the Kármán line is only 100 km above Toronto, while Iqaluit is 2,300 km away. But you can still reach the people of Iqaluit without a rocket, and a region this important should be taken care of. It is not. In 2007 we announced an Arctic naval facility at Nanisivik, and this spring (after spending C$110 million) we quietly shelved it without ever fully opening it.¹ A head of lettuce in a fly-in community costs nine dollars,² and while the territory’s existing homes remain overcrowded, the average wait for public housing exceeds five years.³ These problems are driven by the harshness of the Arctic, forcing a hard minimum capability for any solution to work. Today, for the first time, that capability exists: portable compute, capable AI and robots that work.
A world-class city in the Arctic is feasible. But do we have the ambition to build it? What does it mean for the people who already call the North home? What would it provide for a country that says it wants to defend the Arctic?

Iqaluit, February 10, 2036

On a windy February morning, alpenglow-lit clouds cover the sky. The snow blows over the desolate icy desert. The engines roar as a windowless cargo plane drops out of the clouds towards a clean runway. In a nearby control tower, an operator watches the plane land and confirms a good landing at her station computer. She looks up at a lone LED panel near the runway, which displays “-42°C”, then walks to the coffee machine while her two colleagues are nearby reviewing the weather forecast. While the hot coffee pours, the hangar opens, and the plane enters. Inside, a dozen robots move out to meet the plane. The airframe is inspected, a fuel line is coupled, and pallets are pulled out of the cargo bay and onto a conveyor. As quickly as the plane was emptied, it is filled with pallets for its return trip. The plane leaves the hangar just as smoothly as it entered, and it is back on the runway, taking to the sky. The only sound outside is the wind and engines.

In the freight hall next door, automated systems break the pallets apart and re-sort them onto small trucks. These routes are programmed using real-time manifests that confirm the contents of the pallets after they have been broken down. The day shift crew watches from a warm mezzanine. Their job is managing the exceptions. Trucks will fill up and leave as they are needed. The crew will finish their shift without lifting a box.

One of the trucks reaches an intersection where the light died overnight. Nothing about it is sudden. The fault was tracked the moment it happened; the intersection has been running as an all-way stop since every vehicle in town was notified; a robot is already out with the replacement. The truck waits its turn behind a pickup and rolls through.

Its first stop is the farm, cut into the rock on the north side; its shell is built for the cold. Inside, it is warm, bright, and busy. Gantry-mounted robot arms move trays up and down the ten vertically stacked shelves of peppers and strawberries. The researcher in a lab space barely looks up. She has spent the last six months working on a new strain of plant that is more flavorful, more nutritious and requires fewer resources. The robots run the harvest so she can focus on her experiments. The farm doesn’t have a storefront, just a terminal to an underground corridor. People in town order online. At the terminal, delivery robots are filled with produce and head out to their destination around town.

The corridor runs beneath the whole town, wide and lit, warm enough for shirtsleeves. Outside it is -40 degrees Celsius, a temperature so cold that any exposed skin is subject to frostbite in 5 to 10 minutes.⁴ People walk to work; kids walk to school. Neighbours stop and talk. A pharmacist takes a sealed tote at her service door and hands a prescription across the counter. The cold side and the warm side of the town never meet.

At the edge of town, the truck pulls into a charging bay off the reactor line. The reactor is licensed, staffed, guarded, with a control room crewed around the clock. The on-site robots are on standby with predefined protocols if anything goes wrong. The reactor is what lights the farm, keeps the corridors warm and charges everything. Diesel still arrives for the backup gensets, kept in a few drums, tested, rarely burned.

At the depot, a repair robot has taken itself out of rotation. A week ago, it flagged a servo in its arm drawing more current than it should, weeks from failing, but reported early. A technician has it open on the bench. They swap the servo, run the arm through its range twice, and mark the robot fit for duty in the system. Once online, the robot goes back to its charging station on its own. The dead traffic light from the morning sits on the same bench, with a cracked lens and a burnt driver board. In twenty minutes, the light is repaired and placed on the shelf. The maintenance backlogs stopped growing years ago.

On an empty lot, a new block of houses is being built. Robots cut the foundation, ignoring weather that would end a normal human-operated season. The same crew that could only pour concrete in July can now run the job year-round, from a heated portable at the edge of the lot. The waiting list for a home lasts a season, not half a decade.

Two hundred kilometres out, a fleet of robots is working on a caribou survey, reading collars, servicing trail cameras, counting and moving on without crowding the herd. The biologists are in town, reviewing the latest observational data sets. Farther out, a robot stands a storm-flattened weather pole back up and swaps its dead sensor. Back at the weather station, an operator sees the sensor pole come online and marks the work completed on their console.

By late afternoon, another cargo plane has arrived and left. The tower counts them: the freight, the mail, the medevac that leaves the moment it is needed. The lights hold steady under the snow. The town eats what it grows and fixes what it owns. It reaches as far as its robots can go. The people carry the judgment. The robots do the rest.

This city is not the Arctic of today, but the gap is smaller than it looks. The pace of technological development has pushed autonomous robotics out of science fiction and into reality. Driverless four hundred-ton trucks already haul ore around the clock through Fort McMurray winters.⁵ A cargo plane has already flown with nobody aboard, and the first paid uncrewed routes are expected this year.⁶ Reactors sized for a single town are entering licensing.⁷ A community in Nunavut has been growing strawberries through the polar night since 2019.⁸ None of it is finished, but every piece of that city is already running somewhere. We can close the gap, and we are building the robotics to make it happen.

The people in the North are the supply chain, the repair crew, and the fallback system all at once. They are paying for it: infants are hospitalized for lung infections at the highest rates ever recorded in the world, driven by overcrowded housing.⁹ Meanwhile, children and teenagers in the North die at five times the rate of their southern peers.¹⁰

We talk a mean game about defending the North. Land cannot be defended if the people on that land are not thriving. Other nations, like China, are eyeing the Arctic waters. Our path requires a strong population and infrastructure that can support it. The hard places are where technology matters most. Prosperity comes not from doing the easy things, but the hard ones. Canada is already building the robotic arm for the Moon’s Gateway station.¹¹ If we can build for the Moon, we can build a city in our own Arctic.

Nikhil Malhotra

Nikhil Malhotra graduated from the University of Waterloo Mechatronics Engineering program, worked in the automotive industry, helped launch an assembly line for portable respirators during the COVID pandemic, and programmed in Canadian biotech. He cofounded New Frontier Robotics, whose first product is Mercury, an adaptive mobile manipulator designed for autonomous task execution. Mercury is being built in the lab today. The bet is that the technical ecosystem is finally ready to push advanced robotics into industry.

New Frontier Robotics is pre-seed and building toward its first field pilots. If you’re an investor, an operator with a hard, cold job that needs automating, or someone who lives the northern reality this essay describes, Nikhil wants to hear from you: nikhil@nfrobotics.ca

If you are a founder building frontier technology for Canada and would like to publish an essay or opinion in The Canadian Explorers, contact me at contact@ethanmarcoux.com.

Sources

1. Nanisivik Naval Facility: announced 2007; $110.2 M spent; moved to non-operational caretaker status in May 2026 without reaching full operation. Department of National Defence and BNN Bloomberg.

2. Northern food prices: CBC News and National Observer.

3. Nunavut public-housing waitlist, 3,700+ applicants, average wait five-plus years: Nunatsiaq News and CBC News on the Auditor General’s report. Overcrowding and hidden homelessness: CBC News and Gov’t survey highlights hidden homelessness in Nunavut

4. Exposed skin can freeze in 5 to 10 minutes at wind chill values of minus 40 and below: Environment and Climate Change Canada wind chill index.

5. Driverless 400-ton haul trucks operating around the clock near Fort McMurray: Suncor and International Mining.

6. Cargo plane flown with nobody aboard (2023) and paid uncrewed routes expected: Alliance for Aviation Across America and National Defense Magazine.

7. Town-scale reactors entering licensing: Westinghouse eVinci microreactor targeted for Saskatchewan and Canada’s first grid-scale SMR under construction at Darlington.

8. Naurvik growing station, Gjoa Haven, Nunavut, producing through the polar night since 2019: Canadian Space Agency and The Globe and Mail.

9. Inuit infants hospitalized for severe respiratory infection at the highest rates reported in the world; overcrowded housing raises admissions: Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto and The Conversation.

10. Children and teenagers in Inuit Nunangat die at five times the rate of the rest of Canada; injuries are the leading cause: Statistics Canada study and Pediatrics & Child Health.

11. Canadarm3, Canada’s contribution to the Lunar Gateway outpost at the Moon: Canadarm and Gateway.

The global space economy is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by 2035, up from $630 billion in 2023.

In 1962, Canada became the third country in the world to design and build its own satellite. Yet after more than six decades in space, Canada is the only G7 country without domestic space-launch capability. We are still dependent on foreign partners for access to orbit, primarily SpaceX. The question is, what if one day they shut it down?

On August 5th, Rahul sent an update: “As of this week, SpaceX has actually shut down bookings past 2028. We are not able to manifest our next set of satellites, and the industry is entering panic mode.”

“One day, it hit me that the US does not need somebody like me.”

Rahul Goel is the CEO and Founder of NordSpace, building Canada’s national pathway to space. Founded in 2022 in Markham, Ontario, NordSpace is creating Canada’s first end-to-end space-missions company. This includes rocket engines, launch vehicles, satellites, lunar robotics, its own Atlantic Spaceport Complex, an investment arm, and more.

In March 2026, NordSpace was selected as one of three Phase 1 winners in the Department of National Defence’s Launch the North program, receiving $8.33 million alongside Reaction Dynamics and Canada Rocket Company. The three-round competition has $105 million in planned funding and targets initial Canadian light-lift launch capability by 2028.

“It’s my home. It’s not really a question for me. I don’t know where else I would build. I thought once about building in the United States, and it just didn’t feel like home. This is all I know. I care about my country, and I want it to be successful.”

NordSpace is not Rahul’s first successful company. In 2014, he founded PheedLoop, a SaaS company focused on enterprise-grade event-management software. He intended from the very beginning to leverage this success to finance his own Canadian space company. PheedLoop remains bootstrapped and now employs more than 50 people. Rahul has used that success to help build out NordSpace’s 60,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Markham while developing Tundra, an orbital launch vehicle being optimized to carry 1,100 kilograms to low-Earth orbit.

Space is challenging. Anything worth doing is challenging.

Canada was once a world leader in space. Rahul wants us to lead again. The ambition extends beyond launching rockets. One in four STEM graduates from Waterloo, U of T, and UBC are leaving Canada, including 66% of software engineering grads. It is time to recognize that great talent does not aspire to mundane goals. Canada has spent decades helping other nations reach space. Now it has to build its own way there.

“We need to make permanent the ability to tolerate risk and invest in high-scale, high-impact ideas, founders, and companies.”

I spoke with Rahul about why Canada lost its ability to reach orbit independently, the business behind NordSpace, what makes its launch architecture different, and why he came home to build it here.

“We’ll have two ground stations set up that haven’t been announced yet. One is in the Arctic. We’re very excited about it, and it provides a unique opportunity for Canada and the world.”

“While all other animals are prone, and fix their gaze upon the earth, he gave to man an uplifted face, and bade him stand erect and raise his eyes to the stars.”

— Ovid, Metamorphoses, Book I

What is NordSpace building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“NordSpace is building Canada’s only end-to-end space missions company. Canada doesn’t have access to space, and that’s primarily what NordSpace is unlocking for the country.”

What is PheedLoop, and was the plan always to use it to build NordSpace?

“PheedLoop is a software-as-a-service company focused on enterprise-grade event-management software for conferences, trade shows, and things of that nature. I founded the company in 2014. It is completely bootstrapped to this day. We worked on it to be as profitable and successful as it possibly could be. It is run by a great team of more than 50 people.

The plan was always to leverage the success from PheedLoop to start NordSpace. I’m glad I was able to do that. Finding the capital is very tough in the Canadian context to build something like this, and I’m not interested in early dilution of a company of NordSpace’s magnitude and vision. I wanted to put considerable amounts of my own capital into the formative years of NordSpace to get us to a point of success.”

How did Canada become the only G7 country without sovereign launch capability, and what does that dependence mean?

“There are so many potential answers to that and so many complexities. Until perhaps recent years, access to space on our own terms was not perceived as something critical for Canadians. We were the third nation to build a satellite that ended up in space, which is great. But in general, we’ve always been very risk-averse. For some good reasons, rockets and launches at least seem to be risky activities, so I think Canada has always shied away from that. But we, as a country, have shied away from a lot of things. Obviously, that’s not my style. I like taking educated risks and building great things. I think it is culturally a challenge for a country like Canada.

We also have an incredible neighbour just south of us that has been an awesome ally for the longest time. They offer us access to space and many other things. Unlike other countries that may not have that luxury and such a relationship with a powerful and culturally similar nation, Canada did. Perhaps for that reason, we slipped on developing critical capabilities of our own. Fast-forward a few decades, and we’re at a point where our lives, economy, security, and sovereignty depend on space. It has suddenly become obvious to Canada that investing in access to space, and space capabilities more generally, is important.”

What inspired you to start NordSpace?

“Like a lot of people in my category, space captured me at a very young age, probably when I was a toddler. There were lots of influences in my life: visits to planetariums, reading *The Adventures of Tintin*, pursuing aerospace engineering, and building planes, satellites, rockets, and robots. Then there was more advanced robotics and space-systems work through university. It was never a question. It was always part of who I am and something I’m good at. I’ve always been very passionate about my country, really the only country I know or deeply care about. I was born and raised here in Toronto. It always felt like something I was born to do and something that was necessary for Canada.

There were obviously lots of twists and turns along the way. One of the moments came when I decided I was going to move to the United States and work there on space systems. I lived in my car for about two years, travelling around the US and other places. One day, it hit me that the US does not need somebody like me. There are already very ambitious, passionate, and successful people there. I found that to be completely opposite here in Canada. Obviously, we have great entrepreneurs and amazing leaders, but on a relative scale, it felt like my country needed me more than another. I came back home and haven’t left since. I’m very proud to be doing what I know I’m good at and what the country needs.”

What is Launch the North, and what does it mean for NordSpace?

“Launch the North is an amazing investment by Canada. For a country that has been so hesitant and resistant to developing launch capabilities for decades, it completely broke and shattered that mould and expectation. Canada decided to put a small but important amount of capital toward building launch. Significant credit goes to the Department of National Defence. Part of that was the Launch the North competition, dedicating $105 million over three years to developing launch capability for Canada. It is a good start for the country. NordSpace was very grateful and honoured to be selected as one of the three winners for Phase 1. That phase is dedicated to advancing critical technologies.

The goal of Launch the North is to get to initial operational capability for a light-lift launch vehicle by 2028. That is our focus here at NordSpace: to achieve that goal and timeline. The layer that is important to us beyond that is achieving launch in a sustainable, commercially viable, and scalable way. When I say sustainable, I mean economically sustainable and viable. This is critical. Countless launch efforts have failed even after reaching orbit. We’re very careful with how we capitalize, our technology decisions, how we build infrastructure, who we partner with, what we invest in, and who we take investment from. We’re working very hard to build a real business where launch is a means to an end, but not the end in itself. Launch the North has helped accelerate that.”

What differentiates NordSpace from Reaction Dynamics and Canada Rocket Company?

Reaction Dynamics and Canada Rocket Company were the other two winners for Phase 1 of Launch the North.

“Reaction Dynamics, from a technology standpoint, is very different. They’re working on hybrid rockets. Rockets typically require two propellants, an oxidizer and a fuel, and they have a solid-and-liquid combination. We use a more traditional liquid bi-propellant system. We chose that path so we can scale and rely on proven technology. Technologically, that’s a big difference. From a business standpoint, they are, from my understanding, focused entirely on launch and launching small assets. I think they are in the 50- to 100-kilogram payload class. Our area of interest is closer to one tonne, scaling up to a couple of tonnes in the medium-lift category. From a business standpoint, we’re a vertically integrated company. We operate our own launch site in Newfoundland. We operate our own test site. We build our own satellites. We build our own robotic systems. Launch is the moat that surrounds everything else we’re developing.

For Canada Rocket Company, I don’t really know anything about them. They were only formed earlier this year. I’m looking forward to learning more about them, but I have no real knowledge of their operations or technology.”

Canada Rocket Company will be coming soon to the Canadian Explorers.

Subscribe now

What is NordSpace’s core business, and how do all the products work together?

“The core business is end-to-end space missions. You come to a company like NordSpace with a mission requirement, and we deliver on that end-to-end. We’ll build the space system or satellites, launch it, and operate it. We’re following companies that have been demonstrably successful. The two companies that have really achieved that are Rocket Lab and SpaceX. Both are heavily vertically integrated. They operate their own facilities and build their own space systems. SpaceX, for example, gets 70% of its launch business from launching Starlink. A significant amount of its revenue comes from non-launch activities, but launch is critical to making all of that successful. Rocket Lab, the New Zealand-based company and second-most-successful launch company after SpaceX, has built the vast majority of its business around space systems and satellite products. It operates its own facilities and spaceports in New Zealand and the United States. Again, launch is a moat.

For us, it is a similar path. There is no economically viable route that we can determine where you can just build a launch vehicle and be successful, unless the model is to rely continuously on government subsidies. Our goal is to be a real business. Our business is building high-scale space systems for companies and countries and launching them on our own accord. That vertically integrated model is where we’re producing the most value as we prove it out over the coming years.”

Is the revenue model based on helping countries build sovereign launch capacity?

“Not just sovereign launch capacity, but sovereign space capacity. There is a medium- to long-term goal for NordSpace where, given our eventual expertise in a vertically integrated model, in the mid- to late 2030s we could box all of that up and offer what we call “space agency as a service” to new countries looking to develop their own science and space capabilities. As new countries come online and develop resources but don’t have the institutional knowledge or supply chains, we can show up and do all of that for them. However, a lot of our current focus is on the actual capabilities that exist in space, and then leveraging our launch capability to make sure they have assured access to space.

A big challenge in the industry right now is the one company that really offers reliable and frequent access to space, SpaceX, shutting down the rideshare program that even we rely on for our first satellite, Terra Nova, which is launching later this year. Rideshare takes a group of satellites in bulk to low-Earth orbit. That is what has allowed costs to come down and frequency to go up. For SpaceX, this is not a profitable business, and it is inevitable that they will shut it down. As a result, there will be a significant lack of capacity for access to space. Providing assured access to space to countries and companies through a launch program, while providing them with space-systems capabilities, is the model. Satellites will be our priority.”

What payload capacity, cadence, pricing, and timeline are you targeting?

“Tundra is our first orbital rocket. In its optimized form, we would be at 1,100 kilograms to low-Earth orbit. That could take the vast majority of the types of payloads Canada will ever produce or is known to produce, and certainly anything else in the small-satellite to medium-class-satellite categories. The interesting sweet spot we’re targeting is one where we can service small-constellation missions and take a group of those satellites up, but it is also a large enough capacity to take one or two medium-class satellites, such as MDA’s roughly 500-kilogram AURORA bus or a Telesat Lightspeed satellite. Those companies will, in the near term, rely on a company like SpaceX to deploy perhaps a couple of dozen satellites in one launch. Once their constellations are in place, they will be looking for constellation replenishment, and they will not buy an entire massive rocket to do that. Smaller- to medium-sized rockets like ours can take up individual satellites in the larger class and reconstitute constellations in times of crisis, or once a satellite has reached the end of its life. We can carry bulk quantities of small satellites and smaller quantities of medium-to-large satellites.

In terms of cost, it really depends on whether somebody is on a shared mission with other customers or is getting a dedicated flight. You will hear numbers quoted for companies such as SpaceX where it is $10,000 or $100 per kilogram. As customers of SpaceX, Blue Origin, and others that are launching our payloads for now, I can tell you that those numbers are only accurate in very specific scenarios. In our case, we’re targeting somewhere in the range of about $10,000 per kilogram as a generic description of what a dedicated mission using our entire rocket for one customer might cost.”

What is NordSpace Ventures’ mission, and what do you look for in a founder?

“NordSpace Ventures is an arm of NordSpace through which we’re making strategic investments in companies. We’ve invested in about half a dozen companies and are looking to accelerate that significantly. Our goal is to convert our experience with NordSpace Ventures into acquisition opportunities. We have several companies in early due diligence that we’re looking to acquire and use to grow NordSpace’s capabilities. The way we see our business being successful is through vertical integration, acquisition, and consolidation, bringing a wide range of space-based capabilities under one roof. It is very tough in the space industry to be commercially successful and viable as a standalone business. More companies are starting to realize that, and you’re seeing more consolidation. If you’re a satellite company, you’re afraid you won’t have an option to launch. If you’re a launch company, you’re afraid you won’t have the margins or enough customers. Internalizing supply and demand is critical. NordSpace Ventures is serving a primary purpose: we’re making strategic investments in companies we want to see succeed because, if they’re successful, we’ll be successful. They are highly complementary to what we do.

Companies we’ve already publicized include Wyvern Space in Alberta, North Vector Dynamics, also in Alberta, where we were one of the first cheques, and Volta Space in Montreal. There are several others we’ll announce publicly soon. We’re refocusing that experience and energy toward acquisitions. An eventual IPO is also something we’re interested in, potentially in the early 2030s.

What I look for in founders is a focus on building a business. One of the biggest challenges space, aerospace, and even defence companies have is that they’re built during hype cycles. They create products that perhaps meet one customer’s requirements and are based on grants or government life support. They’re not real businesses. I’m interested in founders who care about revenue, profit, and unit economics; who have a practical understanding of their business and growth opportunities; and who have real cash flow. Those are the businesses and founders I care about and look to invest in.”

What does Canada need to do to become a global leader in space?

“We need to take risks and invest. It is really that simple. We look at countries and companies that have done this successfully, and that is precisely what they do. Space is challenging. Anything worth doing is challenging. If we can’t absorb that risk and understand that not every project, company, or initiative will make it across the finish line, and that is okay, it will be very difficult. I’ve seen early signs that this is changing. I’m also starting to see early signs that it was only a temporary, ephemeral moment and that it is changing back again. We need to make permanent the ability to tolerate risk and invest in high-scale, high-impact ideas, founders, and companies. We need to take a chance on them and put sufficient dollars behind them to get them off the ground. That is how any national capability starts.”

What do the next 12 months look like for NordSpace?

“A lot is going on at NordSpace on many fronts. We’ll have several launches of our suborbital rocket. We’ll have test-fired and significantly expanded our Hadfield-150 orbital engine. We’ll have several of our primary structures complete, including fairings, interstages, and Tundra’s primary tanks. At SLC-01, Space Launch Complex 1 at the Atlantic Spaceport Complex in Newfoundland, we’ll have all the concrete and major steel structures. We’ll have advanced SLC-02, which is still under construction right now. We’ll have two ground stations set up that haven’t been announced yet. One is in the Arctic. We’re very excited about it, and it provides a unique opportunity for Canada and the world.

Our team will have grown substantially. We’re just about 50 now. We’ll be about 70 by the end of this year. In the next 12 months, we should cross 100. Our new factory, which we opened a couple of weeks ago in Markham, will be fully equipped with every piece of equipment we need to produce our orbital engines and primary rocket structures at the unit level. Our new test site and test cell will be complete as well. We’ll also be sharing significant new investments, business growth, and revenue in the next couple of months.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup worth watching?

“I’m a big fan of Xanadu. Xanadu is definitely a company that excites me greatly.”

Why build in Canada?

“It’s my home. It’s not really a question for me. I don’t know where else I would build. I thought once about building in the United States, and it just didn’t feel like home. This is all I know. I care about my country, and I want it to be successful. Most importantly, I see that there is so much unrealized potential. I might have felt differently if it were my home, but there was no potential here: if we didn’t have the economy, supply chain, industrial base, political will, or regulatory frameworks. But we have all of that. We have the history. We have everything we could possibly need to do anything we put our minds to, and we’ve done so many great things in this country.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

To partner with The Canadian Explorers, contact: contact@ethanmarcoux.com

May 6th, 2026 — Paul Ziadé, CEO & Founder of North Vector Dynamics (Podcast)

North Vector Dynamics is building precision, low-cost missiles to protect Canadian and allied skies. In Chapter One of Canadian Explorers, I sat down with Paul Ziadé to discuss developing a Canadian neo-prime, sovereign capability, startups, and what it means for Canada to start building again.

June 3rd, 2026 — Samuel Witherspoon, CEO and Founder of ANVIL (Article Spotlight)

Sam Witherspoon was building ANVIL a decade before defence was ‘cool.’ In the first Explorer Spotlight, I speak to Samuel Witherspoon at CANSEC about his experience building a sovereign defence company for over a decade, bureaucracy, procurement, and speed.

June 12th, 2026 — Karl Holmqvist, CEO and Founder of Lastwall (Article Spotlight)

Lastwall was StrongNorth’s first cybersecurity investment. In the second Explorer Spotlight, I spoke with Karl Holmqvist at CANSEC about cybersecurity and the opportunity to build from Canada.

June 17th, 2026 — Glenn Cowan, Founder and Managing Partner of ONE9 (Article Spotlight)

Glenn Cowan is a former JTF 2 Squadron Commander in Canada’s special forces and the founder of Canada’s first national security venture capital firm. We discuss customer discovery, domain expertise, founder traits, and thinking big.

June 25th, 2026 — Parth Mahendru, Founder and CEO of Prandtl Dynamics (Article Spotlight)

Prandtl Dynamics placed second in two Department of National Defence Counter-UAS Sandboxes, earning $750,000 in total prize money. Its acoustic technology can detect drones before they are powered on. We discussed acoustic counter-UAS technology, manufacturability, and what it takes to build a national-interest company in Canada.

June 29th, 2026 — Alain Cohen, CEO of Marconi Technologies (Interview)

Marconi Technologies became the first Canadian company to win business supported through SAFE. I spoke with CEO Alain Cohen about what this means for Canadian defence exports and how Marconi plans to work with Canadian startups and SMBs.

July 2nd, 2026 — Dr. Mike Peasgood, Founder and CEO of ENVGO (Article Spotlight)

ENVGO is building six-foot autonomous surface vessels designed to travel four times farther than conventional electric boats. I spoke with Mike Peasgood about building a new class of defence vessels, transferring aerial autonomy to the water, and what Canadian founders need to understand before entering defence.

July 9th, 2026 — Dr. Harvey Hawes, Founder and CEO of Building Bloc Systems (Article Spotlight)

Building Bloc Systems is building forward-deployed medical microfactories for war zones, disaster response, and remote environments. I spoke with Hawes about rebuilding medical supply chains, designing a company for both defence and civilian healthcare, and manufacturing what patients need where they need it.

July 10th, 2026 — Harley Finkelstein, President of Shopify (Interview)

Shopify President Harley Finkelstein backed ONE9’s defence-focused fund in 2022, when few Canadian investors wanted anything to do with the sector. We discussed what Canadian founders need to do differently, why they should look beyond local capital, how to reverse Canada’s brain drain, and why Harley believes the country is entering a new era of entrepreneurship.

July 14th, 2026 — Samuel Witherspoon, CEO & Founder of ANVIL (Podcast)

ANVIL is an Ottawa-based, 100% Canadian-owned defence technology company. Its platform links intelligence, operations, and planning. In Chapter Two of Canadian Explorers, I sat down with Samuel Witherspoon to discuss persistence, national security, and the decade-long path to building ANVIL.

July 16th, 2026 — Brandon Robinson, Founder and CEO of Horizon Aircraft (Article Spotlight)

Horizon Aircraft is building a hybrid-electric VTOL designed to take off like a helicopter and fly like a conventional aircraft. I spoke with Brandon Robinson about building a Canadian aerospace company, what capabilities the Cavorite X7 unlocks, private vs public capital, and the advantages of gliding.

July 21st, 2026 — Matthew Lombardi, Founder of the Icebreaker and Director at ONE9 (Interview)

Matthew Lombardi is the co-founder of The Icebreaker, Canada’s defence innovation network and newsletter, and a director at Canada’s first national security venture capital firm. I met with Lombardi to discuss what early-stage defence founders need to prove, Canada’s procurement problem, and whether more companies can reach Dominion Dynamics’ scale.

July 23rd, 2026 — Kath Intson, Founder and CEO of Sentinel R&D (Article Spotlight)

Sentinel R&D is automating the manufacturing of unmanned systems for the next generation of warfare. I met with Kath to discuss what Sentinel is building, why Canada and its allies need it, and what it takes to overwhelm adversaries with scale.

July 30th, 2026 — Alex Deslauriers, Founder and CEO of FireSwarm Solutions (Article Spotlight)

FireSwarm builds drone-agnostic autonomy for ultra-heavy-lift aircraft to fight wildfires and move critical loads through contested environments. I spoke with Deslauriers about the loss of his family’s properties, what the company is building, his perspective on the Canadian landscape, and how drones can fit alongside traditional aircraft systems.

Next Up:

NordSpace: Founder and CEO, Rahul Goel

Wyvern Space: Founder and CEO, Chris Robson

Dominion Dynamics: Founder and CEO, Eliot Pence

CSMC: Founder and CEO, Daniel Sax

Canada Rocket Company: Founder and CEO, Hugh Kolias

and more…

Subscribe now

Contact me: contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

More posts below:

Co-founders Alex Deslauriers and Melanie Bitner are life partners. On August 18, 2023, their family properties were among 56 destroyed near Gun Lake, British Columbia.
For two weeks, they watched helplessly as air crews fought the wildfires during the day and left each evening. Night-time conditions made flying too dangerous.

“It became a life mission to bring about a change to wildland firefighting.”

Later that year, Deslauriers and Bitner founded FireSwarm Solutions with David Thanh, an emergency-response and wildfire-logistics specialist. Instead of putting humans in harm’s way, FireSwarm decided to leverage ultra-heavy-lift drones to fight wildfires autonomously and fly when others can’t. They call it the ‘pickup truck of the sky.’ Its core technology combines a drone-agnostic swarming algorithm, command-and-control software, and onboard edge-processing hardware. The mission is to use drone swarms for repeated water delivery when conditions are too dangerous for people to operate in, including smoke, low visibility, and complex terrain.

“Drones do not have a home to go back to at night or a family to go back to the next day.”

FireSwarm is a dual-use company and is now part of NATO DIANA’s 2026 cohort. It is positioning itself beyond just wildfires, into defence and critical logistics. Intended applications include moving equipment through contested environments and, eventually, evacuating casualties. The product is currently ready for prototype operations and will be deployed in multiple exercises in the coming year.

I spoke with Deslauriers, FireSwarm’s founder and CEO, about losing his family properties, what the company is building, his perspective on the Canadian landscape, and how drones can fit alongside traditional aircraft systems. He believes that autonomous systems should extend humanity’s ability to protect, respond, and sustain.

“I dream of a world where disaster is no longer deadly, where autonomy carries life-saving aid to every community on Earth and outpaces the growing size and frequency of disasters before they can become a catastrophe.”

What is FireSwarm building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“FireSwarm is building integrated mission capability, including hardware, software, autonomy, and operational systems. This will enable ultra-heavy-lift drones to automatically execute missions in contested environments related to equipment transfers in wartime environments, and also, in time, casualty evacuation from advanced positions to field hospitals.”

What was the moment you realized that you needed to create FireSwarm?

“FireSwarm came about as a company based in B.C. to bring a solution to wildfire using ultra-heavy-lift drone swarms in 2023. It was born in the days between watching wildfire grow closer and closer to our community and then watching everything burn at night when it was unsafe for crews to fight to save our homes. Since 2025, we have been involved as a NATO DIANA innovator to bring about a swarming algorithm for ultra-heavy-lift drones as it pertains to national defence priorities for Canada.

On August 18, 2023, my family lost two properties along with over 50 of our neighbours in the area of Gun Lake, B.C. At that point, as an aerospace engineer, search-and-rescue technician, and commercial pilot, it became a life mission to bring about a change to wildland firefighting and emergency response.”

How big is Canada’s wildfire problem, and how much worse is it getting?

“The planet is getting warmer. The amount of fuel available in our forests is increasing, and the likelihood of forest fires becoming larger than they have been in the past is just increasing exponentially. Meaning, we need technology available today to support crews in forest management and early suppression to alleviate conditions where a fire left unattended will have cataclysmic results.”

Video: The founders’ family properties during the 2023 wildfire.

Why are drones the best way to address this?

“Through the use of AI drone autonomy, we’re able to extend the reach of firefighters and emergency-response crews across the provinces and around the world. When crewed aviation is unsafe, especially during nighttime fire-suppression operations, leveraging drones that do not have a home to go back to at night or a family to go back to the next day is a logical next step. We can leverage this technology to save humans, property, and values at risk, especially knowing that drone autonomy will have a cost per hour much lower than that of a helicopter of the same water-carrying capacity.”

What does FireSwarm actually build?

“We are terming ourselves as a 60% R&D company and 40% services company. In terms of the R&D, we are building the swarming algorithm and the onboard edge-processing device that is actually fitted on ultra-heavy-lift drones. We’re, by definition, a drone-agnostic solution, meaning any ultra-heavy-lift drone can be adjusted to fit - or we can adjust our solution to fit a variety of drone platforms. That is how we are setting ourselves up for success here, knowing that the ultra-heavy-lift drone category and uncrewed vehicles are nascent and will grow over time.

We are perfectly positioned to enable that autonomy in other adverse conditions and emergency-management use cases as well. We do need, as a technology company building end-to-end mission capability, a services arm that enables pilots and operators to execute on prototype projects with NATO, allies, and also wildfire agencies.”

Will FireSwarm be able to coordinate across different autonomous systems?

“We see a future where a common operating picture provides all of the data needed for our swarm algorithm to make decisions on the priority of missions and the safe travel of multiple types of drones in congested airspace. Our tech is then able to provide those solutions back to the common operating picture for a user (human on the loop) to oversee the situation of the drones being autonomously controlled.”

What stage is the product in, and what is preventing deployment and scale?

“The product itself is ready for prototype operations. We are deploying with a number of exercises this fall and into 2027. We are responsible for the full capability stack; however, we are not drone manufacturers. We are reliant on ultra-heavy-lift drones entering the market in order for our AI edge-computing device and our swarm algorithm to manage these machines. The first machine that is available is built by ACC Innovation in Sweden. The ThunderWasp is currently being sold commercially, and we are working with ACC to enable that machine to be flown autonomously in adverse conditions. We have two other drone manufacturers that we are currently in discussions with to bring about automation for those additional machines as well.”

Does FireSwarm replace existing wildfire aircraft or support them?

“Currently, wildfire suppression is executed by helicopters, airtankers, and water skimmers, all managed by a human flying in a bird-dog aircraft and humans on the ground managing the air operation. We see FireSwarm fitting in initially by supporting crews with rapid response logistics and also during nighttime suppression hours, when the ground or flight crews are getting some rest. These machines can take over fire-suppression efforts in nighttime hours while conditions are more favourable for suppression, yet they are too risky for humans to execute.

We see FireSwarm as a complement to existing wildfire aviation, not a replacement. Helicopters and aircraft will remain critical, but autonomous heavy-lift systems can add capacity, reduce risk, and help deliver certain missions more cost-effectively by operating around the clock. Our hypothesis is that a scalable swarm of three or more ultra-heavy-lift drones could provide the payload capacity of a medium helicopter while offering greater flexibility, persistence, and operational efficiency.”

What feedback are customers providing?

“The feedback we’re receiving from the wildfire industry is that this is a brand-new vertical that we are creating, and it is going to require time and effort to work through the regulations and also to work through pilot projects to ensure our solution is safe to be operated by wildfire agencies. In parallel, we are working with NATO to bring about our solution within the NATO concept of operations for slinging ultra-heavy-lift loads and, potentially in time, bringing casualties back from advanced positions.”

What do the next 12 months look like for FireSwarm?

“The next 12 months are focused on expanding prototype deployments, proving operational value with wildfire customers and our NATO Allies, and building the foundation for commercial adoption.”

What other Canadian national-interest startup is worth watching?

“A Canadian startup called SenseNet. A North Vancouver-based company has gone from innovation to commercial adoption and now is moving at a pace that will enable commercial success outside of Canada. They are to be watched because they have a great business model, great technology needed for early detection of not only wildfires, but also any situation that is worth keeping an eye on.”

Why build in Canada?

“Canada is perfectly positioned as the defence-innovation hub in the decades to come. We also have a massive wildfire problem that requires attention. The dilutive funding opportunities for Canadians are not as good as they are in the U.S., but we are working with Canadian companies and funds to bring about this sovereign capability for Canada specifically. We have been pulled in other directions, but we are staying true to bringing innovation that is Canadian-built for Canadians.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

This company is Sentinel R&D, a Hamilton, Ontario-based startup founded in 2024 that is building UAVs (drones) for the modern battlefield. Sentinel is automating composite manufacturing for unmanned systems cheaply and at scale for the next generation of warfare. The vision is that wars will be won not purely on what you can build, but on how much of it you can build.

“We’re building a manufacturing company masquerading as a drone company.”

In May, Canada’s Department of National Defence and Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence announced an arrangement establishing a joint venture between Sentinel and Ukraine-based Airlogix. With support from both governments, the partnership plans to manufacture Ukrainian drone systems in Canada for Ukraine’s Armed Forces and establish sovereign manufacturing capabilities for Canada.

“We need to fix the national mindset that, because we’ve had the privilege of living in peacetime, peacetime will continue forever.”

The company’s first drone is ReKam, the attritable reconnaissance and kamikaze platform. This is a modular, payload-agnostic fixed-wing drone that “flies like a bat out of hell,” designed to be reconfigured in the field in minutes between ISR, loitering strike, electronic warfare, and counter-UAS. The ReKam 3.2 has a range of over 500 km, with a top horizontal speed of 180 km/h+ and >300 km/h in a dive. The ReKam 5.0 is expected to have a range of over 800 km.

“I’m not going to let our ego about our systems get in the way of building great drones for anybody.”

Sentinel was co-founded by COO Chris Pye, CTO Anders Intson, and his sister and CEO Kath Intson. During Startupfest 2026 in Montreal, I met with Kath at World Trade Centre Montréal. We discussed what Sentinel is building, why Canada and its allies need it, and what it takes to overwhelm adversaries with scale.

What is Sentinel R&D building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“We’re building a manufacturing company masquerading as a drone company, so we're definitely focusing on the drone space. The reason this matters for Canada is that within Canada, and even within NATO, we don’t have mass-manufacturing capabilities in this space in an era of mass-saturation warfare.”

What was the moment that made Sentinel necessary?

“A lot of credit goes to my brother (Anders Intson) here. He’s our CTO, and he’s been a lifelong defence and miltech nerd. When he came to me with this, after a few years of research in Russian Telegram channels masquerading as a Russian aerospace executive, and said, “I think we need to build this,” a couple of decades of trust and his having previously proven out his theses to me in this space compelled me to join the team.”

What differentiates Sentinel’s manufacturing approach?

“There are a lot of drone manufacturers. I don’t even know what the numbers are. I’ve heard 4,000; I’ve heard 10,000 within NATO alone. The truth is that anybody can build a flying thing. You give a couple of high-school kids ChatGPT, and they can build a flying thing. The real rocket science is how you build a lot of flying things. Our differentiation is that, from the outset, we think about how you can build 10,000 a month of something. That goes into the design. It goes into our thoughts in terms of how we would actually scale an aircraft from prototyping. NATO has been focused on exquisite systems. Even within the drone space, we see a lot of drone designs that are over-engineered and really difficult to manufacture. When we see a new design come out from a company, we often think, “How are they going to make 10,000 of those things?” That is built in from day one when we take on a project.”

So the differentiator for Sentinel’s drones is that they can be manufactured cheaply and at scale?

“Correct. That’s a better way of putting it.”

Will Sentinel remain focused on aerial drones?

“Let’s define drones, because I think we’re talking about UAVs right now. There are emerging areas of UGVs and USVs that I think are where we will turn our attention next. I’m really interested in the UGV space because we’re at the very beginning of conducting the first military operations in that space. I’m definitely watching that closely. Drones are the focus in the near term, but not necessarily UAVs.”

Generally, unmanned systems?

“Unmanned systems and flying things. Flying things could also be interceptors. They could also be missiles. We’re starting our first preliminary pokes into that space. Long term, the focus will be on flying things and autonomous things.”

On the significance of UGVs in warfare

“In terms of logistics and rescue operations - deliveries, supply management, and safely sending a vehicle into territory to take people out - this has already been proven in Ukraine. The first rescue operations have been proven in rescuing civilians or soldiers from occupied areas. I’m really interested in that space.”

Is it a similar model to what you are doing now?

“They’re made out of the same materials. The flying drones are made out of the same materials as the ground drones, so I don’t see why not.”

On the joint venture with Airlogix

“The partnership came about almost by default. A few folks are going to be upset by me saying this, but it’s the truth: nobody is building flying things end-to-end in Canada besides Sentinel. We’re the only ones building fixed-wing drones in Canada end-to-end, from the airframe to full integration. We were the default choice for this partnership. We built some good contacts in Ukraine. We met Airlogix at CANSEC in 2025. It was not something that was on our minds at that time, but we’d known them from being in the space and thought very highly of them. It’s kind of a dream. We really admire the company. They’ve been doing amazing things, and the people there are great. There was also a great cultural fit between the companies. You have to be careful who you start a joint venture with because it’s a marriage.

NATO overall needs this mass-manufacturing capability. I don’t care whose systems I build. We build great proprietary drones, but I’m not going to let our ego about our systems get in the way of building great drones for anybody. Having the capability to manufacture lots of systems is of sovereign importance to any country and to NATO overall.”

Was Airlogix specifically looking to partner with a Canadian company?

“Yes.”

Is manufacturing in Canada a particular draw compared with other NATO countries?

“Many countries are looking to onshore manufacturing right now, so I don’t think we’re necessarily special in that regard. When I look at other companies building in the autonomous space, I’m not aware of anybody else, besides the 3D-printing companies, focused on scalable manufacturing with composite and fibreglass airframes, which is what most of the world’s attritable airframes are made from.

Russia has been successful in scaling that manufacturing, but they do it with a lot of manual labour. Figuring out how to do that without a lot of manual labour is important for NATO overall and for the sovereignty of any country. We would go to any allied country and help them stand up their manufacturing.”

Can you give an idea of the cost of Sentinel’s manufacturing compared with alternatives?

“It comes down to a few different things, and you have to do the analysis system by system. Overall, we’re faster. You have to think about how much space an airframe occupies in a factory, and for how long, before it is ready. That goes into the cost analysis. Then there are materials. We manufacture using less material. Because it’s automated, you will have fewer defective products, so your quality control will be better. That goes into the cost savings. Most importantly, there is labour: if you can remove a lot of the labour from what is traditionally a very labour-intensive and time-consuming process, that cuts costs.

Then you have to consider how many systems you’re making. If you’re only making five drones, why would you move to fully automated manufacturing? That’s why nobody has done it. If you look at a 777, there are only going to be so many 777s made. It doesn’t make sense to have a dark factory making 777s. But when you look at something producing 120 systems a month, automation begins to make sense. At 10,000 a month, it makes a lot of sense.”

How scalable is the process? How quickly could a new facility be opened in Canada?

“It depends. If I were being optimistic, four months. You can build a factory in four months. The question is how quickly you can get that factory to manufacture lots of things. That is really hard to do.”

How important is direct Ukrainian battlefield feedback?

“We’re in Ukraine all the time. It was a foundational piece of what we’re doing. Companies in defence love to build things and then try to go over and sell them. That was not our approach. We went over and said, “If we have this capability to manufacture a lot of things, what would be on your wish list? What would the features look like? What cost point would get end users and ministries of defence excited?” We designed our product based on the feedback we received, not the other way around. We didn’t design something we thought was awesome and then approach end users and try to sell it.

Being collaborative with militaries from day one is important. It’s also how you build trust. We’ve seen companies donate things just to get the “tested in Ukraine” check mark. That means nothing if the product is not consistently used there. The question is: why isn’t it being used? Is it the price point? Is it the efficacy? Building something efficacious at the right price is how you build trust with end users.

My advice to founders looking to get into Ukraine is: go.”

Where is the battlefield going?

“I’m not in charge of the R&D pipeline. Unfortunately, I’m not smart enough to forecast the future of warfare, but I’m good at finding the people who are and hiring them. I think it’s going in the direction of whoever can build the cheapest drones. This is a war of economics. Close-quarters combat is a war of economics to some degree because air-defence systems are more expensive than drones.

Some companies are starting to develop cheap missiles and cheap interceptors, but the cost of the drones themselves will be driven down again, and there will be another cycle of innovation. For the foreseeable future, I think we’re facing a mass-saturation drone-warfare battlefield.”

What does Canada need to fix?

“We need to fix the national mindset that, because we’ve had the privilege of living in peacetime, peacetime will continue forever. We exercise a lot of soft power as a nation by being a capable ally. The first thing any foreign military says to me is how much they love working with the Canadian Armed Forces and our special forces. They tell me how capable and collaborative they are. I wish we had talked about it more because the capabilities of our military have allowed us to exercise a lot of soft power as a middle-power nation. The rest of the nation needs to wake up to the fact that having a capable military is what protects us. We have to stay at the edge.

I was delighted by how popular this drone deal was in Ukraine. Like anybody else, we lurk on the Reddit posts made about our company. It was endearing to see that Russian bots saying, “They’re pissing off the wrong person,” were downvoted into oblivion. It wasn’t just Canadians saying, “No, we need to be building drones.” The rest of the world was defending the deal. I looked into it more. Canada is one of the most popular nations in the world socially. There are many countries like Canada. It ranks up there with Switzerland and a few other nations. I had forgotten how well-liked Canadians are. I was thrilled to see that the deal was supported globally.”

What do the next 12 months look like for Sentinel?

“Just executing. We’ve got to execute. This deal has not been without controversy. Some Canadian businesses have been vocal about being disappointed that we were the chosen company. Little, tiny Sentinel was the only company building drones end-to-end within Canada. We’ve got to make sure we build all the drones, build them on time, and that they work on the battlefield.”

What other Canadian national-interest startup is worth watching?

“Dominion, of course.”

Why build in Canada?

“Because we’ve woken up.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

Through The Icebreaker, Lombardi has co-founded the Canadian Defence Investor Network with ONE9, launched Canada’s first defence tech hackathon, and recently produced a joint study with the BDC (Business Development Bank of Canada) on SME participation in defence. The mission is to make Canada a net exporter of defence technology by 2030.

Lombardi has personally invested in Canadian defence companies, including Dominion Dynamics and North Vector Dynamics. He argues that Canada already has the talent, stability, and resources to produce serious defence companies. What Canada lacks is a reliable pathway for companies to put their technology into the hands of Canadian troops.

During Startupfest 2026 in Montreal, I met with Lombardi to discuss what early-stage defence founders need to prove, Canada’s procurement problem, and whether more companies can reach Dominion Dynamics’ scale.

“I’ve invested in a Canadian drone company that found it easier to put their drones into the hands of Ukrainian troops than Canadian troops.”

In one sentence, what is The Icebreaker, and why does it matter for Canada?

“The Icebreaker is Canada’s defence innovation network. We’re focused on providing opportunities for startups working in the defence and dual-use space to have greater access to opportunities, ultimately to equip Canada’s Armed Forces. Our goal is to make Canada a net exporter of defence technology by 2030. The burning platform here, the real need, is that the nature of conflict has changed. The nature of the threat landscape has changed. The conflict in Ukraine really shows us that we do need frontier technologies for Canada to achieve a better level of deterrence.”

How do The Icebreaker and ONE9 fit together?

“I co-founded The Icebreaker just over a year ago. Through that Icebreaker network, we’ve done a lot of initiatives to build up the defence-tech ecosystem, from hackathons to proprietary data and research collection that fed into the DND Defence Industrial Strategy. More recently, we produced some proprietary data on defence financing that The Icebreaker did in conjunction with BDC.

Through these initiatives, I’ve been angel investing on my own as well. Sometimes I invested in companies that I’d known for a longer time; other times, I was angel investing in companies that I met through The Icebreaker. For example, I’m personally an angel investor in Dominion Dynamics. I’m personally an angel investor in North Vector Dynamics and a handful of other companies, some that you’d have heard of, some that are stealth, but all of which are Canadian sovereign defence tech. In the course of investing my own personal money and working on various initiatives through The Icebreaker, I started to run across Mike, Glenn and the team at ONE9. I just really liked them. I liked them first as people. I liked them as investors. I liked their investment philosophy. When I found out that they were raising a second fund, it felt like a really natural fit.”

How does Canada convert technical talent into companies and contracts?

“That is the multi-billion-dollar question. We do not have an innovation problem in Canada. What we actually have is a buyer problem. We need more pathways for Canadian companies to put their technology into the hands of our troops to get those iterative feedback cycles quickly.

I’ve invested in a Canadian drone company that found it easier to put their drones into the hands of Ukrainian troops than Canadian troops. That says two things. One, it says great things about that specific company, that they were willing to do what it took. But it says really bad things about the Canadian landscape for innovation that we have this incredible technology, and there’s just no pathway for our own military to buy it. That’s what we really need to change. It’s not about money. It’s not about innovation. It’s about pathways to procurement.”

What traits do you look for in an early founder?

“Great question. One of my favourite questions. In early-stage investing, when you’re pre-revenue, sometimes you’re just at the prototype stage. The TRL number might not be particularly high. It really is about: has this person built a great product? Will they do whatever it takes to get it into the hands of potential customers and users? Have they created an opportunity for themselves and their company to find a pathway to getting a buyer? For a lot of Canadian defence companies in the past, that has meant a foreign buyer. A different NATO military would be their first buyer. The ones who want to hustle and have been able to work at it successfully, in spite of our broken procurement system, have managed to do amazing things. We have an incredible history of military innovation in this country. What I look for is those three things and a combination of them that can really have a bias to action.”

What’s the number-one advantage that companies have by operating in Canada?

“There are so many advantages. We have an incredibly educated population, full of engineering talent, proximity to academic institutions, relative stability and peace in the country, which no one should take for granted with the way the world is these days. There is plenty of access to capital if you know where to look for it, and increasingly, Canadian institutions are starting to embrace defence, so there will be more capital. We have every advantage you can imagine. We just have to start to convert it into contracts for our own companies.”

Can Canada become a global leader in innovation?

“We already are a global leader in innovation. If you look at some of the most successful companies in Silicon Valley, a disproportionate number of them are founded by Canadians. We just need to be able to embrace that mentality here at home.”

Dominion just raised C$139 million. Do you foresee more Canadian defence startups reaching this scale?

“Absolutely. I think we’re going to see at least 10 to 15 Canadian defence techs achieve the same valuation or greater. And we have to. We absolutely have to.”

What is the most underrated national-interest niche?

“It’s not an underrated niche anymore, but for quite a long time, I’ve been trying really hard to learn about and pay attention to the quantum space, and specifically quantum cybersecurity. I think everybody is alive to the risks of what they call Q-Day, when quantum can sort of decrypt current internet cybersecurity writ large. It’s rapidly approaching, and I think a lot of organizations need to work hard to get prepared for it. It doesn’t just mean the military. It means critical civilian infrastructure, power grids, water-treatment plants, you name it. Q-Day is coming, and it’s an enormous risk.”

What do the next 12 months look like?

“I just started at ONE9, which I’m very excited about. It’s my third week on the job. My plan for the next 12 months is: one, we’ll close the fund; and two, there’s an incredible pipeline of Canadian companies that we’re looking to diligence and back.”

What’s one Canadian national-interest startup that you’re focused on?

“Right now, I’m strongly focused on North Vector Dynamics, which is Canada’s only precision-missile company out of Calgary. I was just in Calgary two days ago, meeting with them. Just an incredible technology, an incredible group of technical co-founders, and frankly, missile defence is a huge gap in Canada’s sovereign stack.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

Its patented HOVR Wing design uses 12 lift fans embedded in the wings for electric vertical takeoff. Once the aircraft reaches sufficient altitude and speed, sliding panels cover the fans, reducing drag so the aircraft can fly like a normal gas-powered plane. The aircraft recharges its lift-fan batteries in flight and can then land vertically on a helipad or use a traditional runway.

Horizon Aircraft is a Canadian aerospace company based in Lindsay, Ontario, co-founded by CEO Brandon Robinson and his father, Chief Aircraft Architect Brian Robinson. Brandon served in the Royal Canadian Air Force and has spent over two decades as a fighter pilot, including as a Top Aces Fighter Pilot. Horizon Aircraft (HOVR) began trading on the NASDAQ in 2024 and currently has a market cap of over US$100 million.

The Cavorite X7 is designed for operations including medical evacuation from isolated areas, organ delivery, time-sensitive cargo in underserved remote regions, ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and search and rescue. It burns less fuel than a traditional aircraft conducting similar missions, and as battery technology continues to advance, Horizon expects to transition to fully electric flight.

The aircraft is designed for a maximum speed of 450 km/h and an 800 km range, with capacity for six passengers plus a pilot and a 1,500-pound useful load. According to the founder, the aircraft can fly twice as fast and twice as far as a helicopter at up to 75% lower cost per unit mile. The underlying technology is working today, and Horizon will begin assembling its first full-scale aircraft “imminently.”

“We are always limited by the slowest aircraft in the fleet.” — Brandon Robinson

I spoke with Brandon Robinson, CEO and co-founder of Horizon Aircraft, about building a Canadian aerospace company, what capabilities the Cavorite X7 unlocks, private vs public capital, and the advantages of gliding.

“There’s a reason why you don’t see large birds with these tiny little propellers on top.” — Brandon Robinson

What is Horizon Aircraft building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“We are building a hybrid electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft that can take off and land just like a helicopter, but travel about twice as fast and be up to 75% cheaper to operate per mile and much safer and quieter than a helicopter. So, a pretty unique piece of kit.”

What does hybrid-electric VTOL unlock that traditional aircraft cannot?

“About half of the helicopters simply go from point A to point B in this world. And that’s, you know, a 70,000-helicopter fleet. Half of them simply go from one place to another. We thought building, with some revolutionary new technology, essentially a helicopter capability that was twice as fast, again, up to 50 to 75% cheaper per mile than a helicopter, much safer and faster, was a winning combination.

Initial use cases: imagine getting someone to the hospital from an emergency medical situation. Getting them to the hospital in half the time, or from twice the distance in that golden hour. So emergency medical services are a really exciting sort of initial use case. Alongside any sort of critical cargo you need to go from point A to point B, to a remote location, and/or between two points that don’t necessarily have a runway on either side. But it’s going to be a very compelling machine.”

Where do you see the strongest defence application?

“I flew two decades in the Royal Canadian Air Force as an F-18 fighter pilot. At the peak of my career, I was planning and leading NATO coalition strike missions in training to go and practice taking people out of harm’s way. Maybe it’s a pilot who had to eject beyond enemy lines. We go get them, practice going and getting them, and we’re bringing them back home to safety. Maybe it’s dropping off troops, special forces troops, in difficult locations. Or maybe it’s resupplying forward operating bases.

All of those missions require VTOL aircraft that can land at unprepared locations. We are always limited by the slowest aircraft in the fleet. The X7 is essentially a helicopter with that same capability, but it’s much, much faster. That would have been extremely useful for all of those missions that I mentioned, and is going to be broadly applicable for dual use, unquestionably.”

Are you working with military operators or government customers?

“We are. We won a prestigious United States Air Force AFWERX contract for high-speed vertical takeoff and landing aircraft a few years ago that helped us expedite our large-scale prototype that’s already successfully flown and been through transition, and inform the design that we’re currently working on, for which we’ll have a full-scale aircraft here in the next six to nine months.

We’re hearing that if the aircraft does what you say it can do, or even close, then we’re very interested. As one would be, right? Essentially, a helicopter that’s twice as fast and has a lot of other operational advantages. It’s lower sound, a lower radar cross-section on the military side, is a lot safer than helicopters are, a lot cheaper to operate, which actually does matter to a lot of militaries. We’re hearing interest from the U.S. Department of War, as well as from militaries in Europe and beyond. Our phone is ringing off the hook, essentially.”

What does remote and all-weather operation mean for Canada’s North?

“What I would say is it’s designed as a traditional commercial aircraft, able to operate in any condition. You fly up to 10,000 feet; it’s much colder up there. You fly in any sort of clouds, and it might have some icing. This is not a good-weather machine. We wanted to come from a very practical space. I spent 20 years flying jets in the Air Force. I wanted a machine that was built for the real world. It’s not necessarily specifically designed for remote, icy and bad weather conditions, but it’s just designed to be really, really tough and to operate in any sort of commercial environment. A lot of helicopters can only operate in very good weather conditions. A lot of people don’t realize this. Any sort of clouds, they avoid; any sort of icing conditions, of course, they will avoid.

There are a lot of reasons for that, but that leads to a lot of helicopter accidents where they’re trying to fly low underneath the clouds, or they’re trying to avoid flying into clouds during bad weather operations. So we’ve designed a tougher, more robust commercial aircraft than a traditional helicopter. And our configuration is uniquely designed for that.”

On helicopter safety

“I think helicopters are amazing. They’re incredible machines that defy physics. Well, they don’t defy physics; let’s be honest. They defy common sense from a certain perspective. They’re very, very, very good at taking off and landing vertically, at hovering in one place for a long time. They move a lot of air, sort of very slowly, and that makes them very efficient in hover. But they pay an incredible penalty for that design configuration throughout the majority of their trip from point A to point B. They are incredibly inefficient.

There’s a reason why you don’t see large birds with these tiny little propellers on top. Nature would have figured that out. Natural wing-borne lift is the most efficient way to get from point A to point B for any sort of flying machine at scale. We wanted to design a machine that could take off and land vertically, but primarily, for 98% of the trip, it would be just like a normal commercial aircraft that everybody knows. Again, flying in bad weather, cold weather, in clouds, and leveraging an incredible lift-to-drag ratio: 10 to 1 versus 4 to 1 on a helicopter.

For all of those missions that require long-duration hover, we have not invented anything better than a helicopter. They will continue to do good work in the future. I just want to be clear about that. But for any mission that requires helicopter capability to get in and out of a place that doesn’t have an airport, this is going to be an extremely disruptive machine in this space.”

The advantage of gliding

“From a safety perspective, again, a helicopter cannot glide. I’ve been in a helicopter in an engine-out scenario, and it’s called an autorotation. You’re basically falling like a brick. You build up enough energy in the rotor system to then, at the end, sort of do this crazy maneuver and land in sort of a 45-degree cone that’s underneath you. If there’s unfortunately no area to land, you’re going into the trees. If you’re lucky enough to have a flat space, you can land. If not, you can’t glide at all in the helicopter.

With our aircraft, in the worst-case scenario, if the engine fails, you’ll be able to glide just like a normal aircraft. Then you pick any spot. Glide 10 miles over that way, pick any spot, and then be able to open the wings and land using the electric propulsion that’s on board. From a safety perspective, it’s a helicopter with an order of magnitude more safety aspects that are keeping people safe.

From a redundancy perspective, if the one main rotor fails on the helicopter, bad news. A helicopter also has mast bumping. It’s a fancy word for it cuts off its own tail. Every once in a while, that happens; it’s in the news, tragically. The helicopter, if it cuts off its own tail, can’t survive. Our aircraft can actually lose a bunch of the rotors and still be able to land vertically. And by the way, it’s flying around just like a normal aircraft, so it has to actually lose a wing or something to have any sort of big issue. From a safety perspective, a lot of different ways that this aircraft will be a lot safer than a traditional helicopter.”

Why go public instead of raising private capital?

“You have to really know what you’re doing. If you’re going to go public, you need to have a strong story, and you need to have the right market conditions in order to do that. We knew what we were getting into. It wasn’t my first rodeo when it came to public market experience. And we found the right partners to make it make sense. It is a difficult thing to do. Back in 2024, and even further than that, because it takes quite a long time to prepare it, so call it 2023, post-COVID, there was not a lot of capital in the private markets for investment in deep tech and hard tech companies.

Everyone was trying to figure out what was going to happen post-COVID, and they were keeping all of their money sort of on the sidelines. There was a lot of dry powder, quote-unquote, that was not deployed on the venture capital side, especially in Canada. On the private side, especially for aerospace, deep tech, and hard tech, there was not a lot of capital available. So the public play made a lot more sense than it would now.

Fast forward to a company that has amazing defence tech and amazing commercial potential, and we’ve proven it. If it were right now, like July 2026, I might not make the same decision, but we’re pretty happy where we ended up. We have $78 million in the bank. We have a couple of years of development capital. We’ve managed to avoid major dilution events that a lot of other microcaps have suffered. I’m pretty happy it all worked out, and I’d have to reevaluate if it was right now, whether I would do it in these current market conditions, which are more favourable for support of private companies.”

Where is the technology today?

“The technology is working today, which is amazing. We have main propulsion units. They’re spinning up, producing for us from a vertical lift perspective. Aerodynamics are looking great. Structure is looking great. We will have the main structural elements, the main structure in the hangar, in the next few months, which is pretty cool. And we will start to put together an aircraft that looks like an aircraft. The empennage, the fuselage, the main wings, and the canards will all be finished and rolling in pieces into the main hangar shortly. And we’ll start assembling our first full-scale aircraft imminently, which is pretty exciting.

We could have pre-sold thousands of these aircraft already. We decided to say no until we were a little further along. A lot of the other companies have these massive order books, loosely binding LOIs with no down payments and all sorts of communications that look great from a PR perspective. But we decided not to play that game. Now that we’re further along and we’re going to have a full-scale aircraft that’s coming out of the hangar pretty soon, we’re basically starting to talk to partners that are a little more serious. Maybe putting non-refundable down payments down, maybe booking solid slots in the early production line. More to follow on that.”

How much cheaper, and what is the expected aircraft cost?

“Up to 75% cheaper per unit mile.
This will only apply to the first few customers, but after some early customer discounts, it’ll be in the US$6 million to US$7 million range.”

What is the manufacturing plan?

“Many of these companies are planning on selling 1,000 to 2,000 of these aircraft per year and producing that many. We’re taking a more traditional route. It’ll be 200 to 300 aircraft and a very profitable production line. I think the key to note is that we’re not becoming an operator at the same time. So we are only manufacturing a really awesome airplane. We’re not also trying to build out an operational arm or become like an advanced air mobility airline at the same time. So that allows us to focus and keep things very efficient.”

Was there a specific moment when you knew this needed to exist?

“At the peak of my career, I’d been planning and leading NATO coalition strike missions in training or recovery missions in training where we go and practice taking pilots from beyond enemy lines. We’re always limited by, and doing some other special forces infiltration, exfiltration and some other missions, we’re always limited by the slowest vertical takeoff and landing aircraft in the fleet, which is a typical helicopter, like a Black Hawk or even a Chinook or something like that.

Fast forward to when we got Ospreys, it was amazing because we could essentially get 1.5 times faster with those Ospreys. But they’re $85 million a copy. And if you want four Ospreys to take off, you plan on eight of them trying to take off because they’re so complicated that they break a lot. So this would have been an order of magnitude cheaper, just as fast, and could have provided a lot of operational utility on the military side. There are tons of missions. I’m just scratching the surface of where this thing would have been amazing. The Marines for resupply, ship to ship, all sorts of really, really cool stuff that you could do with it. Anti-submarine warfare, dropping sonobuoys. Again, without any prepared infrastructure, you can take off and land from the ship, and you can go twice as far, twice as fast. That’s just scratching the surface. It’s going to be an exciting military machine.”

Advice to Canadian hardware founders

“I think what I would say is that the times are changing a little bit. Ten years ago, five years ago, you’d take your amazing idea; you’d go south of the border, where it’s much more aggressive, much more competitive, but the winners get disproportionately rewarded. In Canada, the ethos has always been that they’d rather give 10,000 companies $1,000, which is going to do nothing, than give two companies $5 million to actually do something useful and make them much more competitive. In the States, it’s the opposite. It’s much more competitive, but you can get meaningful capital to start your business: deep tech, hard tech.

Canada, I think, is starting to change, which I love. I love being supported by the government. And, of course, with any sort of military angle now, the increased requirement for defence spending is going to help companies with dual-use technology, which is fantastic. But I would say to any other Canadian entrepreneur, hang in there. It’s changing. You don’t necessarily have to go south of the border. As attractive as it is.”

Why build in Canada?

“Selfishly, I’m just a Canadian patriot. I love the country. I think in many ways we’re just a very solid group of people who don’t change our minds from day to day. We’re a pillar of moral character in a time when it seems to be drifting a little bit. I love Canada. I think it’s a great place to build a company. I think it’s a bunch of great folks who have a lot more tenacity than the world realizes. And we’re just a stable place to build some really great tech. I’m a bit of a patriot, having spent a couple of decades in the military. I love the place. I think it’s got a lot of potential. It needs a few tweaks to unlock its full potential from an economic powerhouse perspective. We’ve got the people, we’ve got the technology, we have the natural resources, and we’re afraid to use all of those things. But I think that fear is starting to go away, and I think the mechanisms to enable true Canadian explosive growth are starting to happen.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

ANVIL is an Ottawa-based, 100% Canadian-owned defence technology company. Its platform links intelligence, operations, and planning. It structures mission-critical data and enriches it with AI to support military and national-security decision-making. Sam now projects that ANVIL will reach 600–700 employees, all in Canada, within the next two years. The company is completely bootstrapped.

Last month, I spoke with Sam at CANSEC about procurement, bootstrapping, and what new founders misunderstand about defence. This conversation goes deeper into the founder's journey of how he got here.

Sam wanted to become a historian, studied engineering, graduated during the Great Recession, and then entered law. He started ANVIL under a different name to build legal records-management software. The court wanted the product but had no budget or authority to run a pilot. A later pivot captured part of the family-law market and led to an investigation and litigation with the Law Society. Eventually, the team turned toward national security.

There were many points where Sam could have quit. ANVIL exists because he stayed persistent.

“It’s hard to hit a home run if you’re not at bat.” — Samuel Witherspoon

Fortune Favours the Bold.

Topics Discussed

00:00 - Cold open

00:45 - Introduction

01:29 - What ANVIL is and its thirteen-year path

02:42 - Finding purpose in defence and national security

04:44 - Childhood: history, war films, and engineering

09:18 - Entrepreneurship and Sam’s grandfather

13:49 - Graduating into the Great Recession and choosing law

17:49 - The Federal Court and first exposure to national security

19:40 - ANVIL’s first product

21:19 - The Law Society investigation and pivot

24:13 - Persistence and entering defence through services

26:02 - Escaping the services-to-product trap

29:36 - Early product contracts with PHAC and DND

31:41 - US SOCOM and operational deployment

33:01 - What Canada underestimates about itself

36:02 - Ottawa’s GovTech opportunity

38:33 - Canada’s inferiority complex

39:02 - Cities, housing, transit, and attracting talent

43:59 - ANVIL’s next chapter

45:40 - Projecting 600–700 Canadian employees

46:18 - Pray for peace, plan for war

47:43 - Resilience and taking another swing

At Startupfest in Montreal, after his onstage conversation with former UFC champion Georges St-Pierre, I spoke with Harley about building in Canada. He joined Shopify in 2010, when it was still an early Ottawa startup, and helped build it into Canada’s largest tech company, now worth over US$150B. He is also an active investor in Canadian founders, including as a backer of ONE9’s Special Mission Fund I, Canada’s first security-focused venture capital fund.

We talked about what Canadian founders need to do differently, why they should look beyond local capital, how to reverse Canada's brain drain, and why he believes the country is entering a new era of entrepreneurship.

“Do things. Tell people.”

Recorded at Startupfest in Montreal on July 8, 2026

Canada’s global technology leaders

“I look at ONE9. I look at Dominion. We’re killing it on the defence side of things. If you look at every vertical, every industry vertical, Canada has one of the leaders. Whether it’s Cohere or Wealthsimple or Plusgrade or Super.com or Shopify, in every category of business and entrepreneurship, there unequivocally is a leader that’s based here in Canada. That wasn’t always the case. That is a new phenomenon. The difference, I think, is that thanks to people like you, we’re celebrating those winners. I’m running around telling everyone who will listen to me how amazing Dominion is, or how amazing Ada is, or how amazing Wealthsimple is, because I believe they’re genuinely amazing. That is a new phenomenon here in Canada, where we all celebrate each other’s success.”

Investing in ONE9 while defence was still taboo

“Nobody cared about defence in 2022. But I got a chance to meet Glenn and Mike and the founders, and I was like, these guys are going to build something incredible. They come from industry. Glenn served in the forces. That type of context, plus that type of conviction, I love betting on people like that.”

Becoming too good to ignore

“We had something on our wall in the early days of Shopify. It said, ‘Do things. Tell people.’ Canadians have always been incredibly good at doing things. You look at Nortel, you look at RIM, you look at these amazing companies. We’re good at building stuff. We have not always been good at the tell-people side of it. We have to be louder about what we’re doing and celebrate each other.

The second thing that I think is super important is that we have to shed the perspective that ‘If I’m living in Ottawa, I have to raise money from an Ottawa VC.’ No. Shopify’s first investors were not Canadian. We thought we were building an amazing product in Ottawa. We looked at who was investing in SaaS at the time. It happened to be Bessemer Venture Partners. We contacted them; they led our Series A and our Series B, and Jeremy Levine from Bessemer is still on our board. That is the lens we have to remove from the Canadian ecosystem: ‘I’m here; I must raise from local people.’ If you’re in Oshawa or Trois-Rivieres or Calgary, and the product or business is ready for funding so you can grow it, go and try to raise from anywhere in the world. Every venture capital firm today is geographically agnostic. Some of it is just getting over ourselves. The more we talk about success, the more we have role models. I’m hoping one day Shopify will be one of those role models. Maybe we are already. It gives other people hope. You cannot become something that you don’t see.”

Canadian founders staying in Canada

We need to do things and tell people; we have to have more role models here. I meet with a group of entrepreneurs, founders of some of the most important private companies here in Canada. The discussion is around how to become large-scale independent companies, whether that’s through an IPO or some other financing model. And they want to stay here. I was born in Canada. I grew up in the U.S. It would have been really easy for me to move back to the U.S. I want to be in Canada.

I think Canada is the best place to live and the best place to raise a family. There’s a joie de vivre. There’s an energy in this country and a culture that is - especially in Montreal, my favourite city in the whole world. I think you can build world-class companies from here.”

Reversing brain drain

“Be too good to ignore. That’s an easy one. Make your company so good that no one wants to go to someone else’s company. Shopify is not competing with another Canadian company for talent. We’re competing with every company in the world. We’re competing with NVIDIA. We’re competing with Apple. We’re competing with OpenAI and Amazon.

Our job is to be so good that people still want to work at Shopify. It’s not to lament that it’s easier somewhere else, or taxes, or bullshit. Be too good to ignore. Not just from an ambition, customer, client, or product perspective, but also as an employer. Make your employer brand so strong that people want to work for you and are willing to move to Canada to work for you. We are creating a reverse brain drain at Shopify, where people are leaving their countries in Europe and the U.S. and moving here. We need more of that.”

Building globally from Canada

“If you can build a global company from Canada and live in Canada, it is the best setup possible. As someone who lived in the U.S., there’s no place I’d rather live.

In 2026, you do not have to be in any one particular location to build your company. You can be anywhere you want. Yes, you have to take trips down to the Valley from time to time to have meetings. You have to go to VivaTech in Europe to meet companies there as well. You can travel around. I still travel 100 nights a year, but I’m doing it while being based here in Canada. I’m very proud of that.”

A new era of Canadian entrepreneurship

“Brand Canada is the best it’s ever been. In my view, we have a prime minister who’s super supportive. The mayor of Montreal just came onstage with me. I meet with her fairly regularly. All she asks is, ‘How can I help?’ I’ve never had that before. No mayor, no politician ever asked me that. Now everyone’s asking, ‘How can I help?’ I think we’re in this new era of Canadian business and entrepreneurship, and I think it’s going to be the most glorious one ever.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it: contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share

Building Bloc Systems is developing a decentralized platform for medical manufacturing, designed to make production faster and cheaper in austere environments such as war zones, disaster response, remote and low-resource communities, post-conflict recovery, and the Arctic. The company is assembling factories which can produce medical devices, consumables, surgical instruments, and replacement parts at the point of care, where a custom prosthetic can be produced in as little as 22 minutes. This reduces the need to predict and ship every item frontline healthcare teams may require. Its hardware can range from suitcase-sized field units to ruggedized container factories and permanent manufacturing facilities.

Building Bloc is working with Ukraine’s Ministry of Veterans Affairs on a proposed network of prosthetics manufacturing sites. It estimates that four factories could add capacity for approximately 15,000 prosthetics per year.

Founded in 2024, the team is led by CEO and founder Dr. Harvey Hawes, an experienced trauma surgeon with 20 years in trauma care and health-system development across Canada’s North, Fiji, and East Africa. He currently works clinically as a civilian trauma surgeon and serves as Provincial Trauma Medical Director for British Columbia. He describes Building Bloc as the “factory that builds factories that build products.”

I spoke with Hawes about rebuilding medical supply chains, designing a company for both defence and civilian healthcare, and manufacturing what patients need where they need it.

In one sentence, what is Building Bloc building?

“We’re building a decentralized platform for regulated medical-device manufacturing that will allow our customers to have medical-supply certainty.”

When did you realize microfactories had to exist?

“I spent six years as a humanitarian surgeon, working in places that had a lot of donated equipment. There were these massive graveyards of unusable capital that just needed repair. At the time, additive manufacturing was just coming on board, and I started thinking we could rehabilitate this wasted capital and try to solve some of the inequity in healthcare that I was seeing from low-resource centres to high-income countries.

Then I was doing some humanitarian mission work and some combat work, and I was seeing that it’s not the pointy end of the spear all the time. Although funding and interest are going towards defence spending and defence innovation like drones and weapons, what happens after that, or even during prolonged engagements, is really important too for the communities, the civilians, the governments, and the economies after war. Rehabilitating health infrastructure became really interesting to me, both during acute combat operations and in the immediate aftermath. Deploying medical manufacturing specifically geared to rehabilitate health systems was the first real interest I had in this.

Then, as additive and other technologies got better, and software became easier to integrate, I started thinking about the real supply chain: actually making the stuff that you need to provide healthcare anywhere in the world, to really get over those inequities that I was seeing. It came full circle back to more of a humanitarian aspect, but certainly it touches on disaster management and defence, which I believe in.”

How does it work? What can it manufacture, and at what scale?

“We’re designing very small, agile, mobile, almost suitcase-sized manufacturing systems that, with the right software and training on top of them, could make some medical devices or repair equipment in the field. That’s really the use case for the very agile units or for supporting special forces operations.

Then we can scale up to standard shipping-container-sized units. Those can make medical-device consumables, surgical instruments, and things that you need in remote or austere environments for the types of medicine that you need to perform there. They can make about 75 percent of what’s needed to really cut down on medical-supply-chain complexity. You just need to ship precursor material, and you can make many different things from a digital catalogue, versus trying to package everything you think you need.

Those facilities can make thousands of parts per day. You can support operations at a small- to mid-sized mobile health facility, maybe disaster response or a Role 2 NATO-style facility. That’s the deployable side. They don’t have to be containerized, mobile, or agile. They can be on factory floors, and you can design bespoke factories to do high-volume, more traditional manufacturing as well.

The software is the key that links it all together. It orchestrates multiple units around the world into a supply chain. You can do things like load balancing, sensing, and demand matching. It’s designed to be scalable. It’s the same platform, but the location, size, scale, and intended use change.”

Is the containerized platform the main product offering?

“It was the main initial product offering, for sure. But as we understood our customers more, not only defence customers but the civilian market as well, onshoring sovereign manufacturing for healthcare in Canada is a big deal. We import 70 percent of our medical devices here, and most countries import at least that much, some of them more. Being able to produce at a national scale is really important, and our system lends itself to that. Remote, rural, and Arctic places would need more of the containerized, ruggedized footprints that we have.

3D printing is just one modality of manufacturing. Any digitally controlled manufacturing process can be incorporated into our software system. The main focus of the company is to build that integrated software system, put digital work instructions into it, put training and regulatory management into it, and orchestrate multiple units across geographies.

3D printing is a natural fit because, with a limited number of feedstocks such as resins or filaments, you can print thousands of different things. It’s a lever that you can use for manufacturing. It’s not the best manufacturing method, nor do we think it’s going to be the only one we use long-term, but it’s one of the tools we use. There are many others. The company is software-first, with hardware to be integrated. That could be on-table injection moulding, extrusion, or CNC. When you combine those modalities, you can make quite a bit, pretty quickly.”

Where is the technology today?

“We started the company in December 2024, so we’re fairly new. We’ve built our first factory that’s making our first factory. We’re a factory that builds factories that build products.

Our first factory is in Burnaby, B.C., and we’re building our prototype containerized unit for demonstration and validation. Our medical-supply manufacturing product is at technology readiness level 6 (TRL 6) right now. When we deploy and validate, which we’re planning to do in the winter with civilian use cases in Northern B.C., we’ll hit TRL 8 at that point. That will be the unit that we go around and show to defence customers and healthcare customers.

We have another deployment opportunity in East Africa that’s being developed. That will be the same kind of thing in a different country, to validate it in a different context. One of the projects we’re developing is a network of mobile prosthetics clinics and factories for Ukraine and other countries. We’ve been working with the Ukrainian government on designing the system. The mobile prosthetics clinic and factory system is currently at TRL 8, and the first unit could be in-country within nine months of an order.”

What does the MOU with Ukraine’s Ministry of Veterans Affairs cover?

“During the Invictus Games in Vancouver last year, one of our champions in government invited the Minister of Veterans Affairs from Ukraine and the ambassador’s office to visit us in Vancouver as part of their tour. Ukraine was showcased at the Invictus Games. We understood the need for prosthetics. I trained as a war surgeon, and I know that amputation rates are incredibly high right now in Ukraine. From the modern face of war, it’s more of a maiming war than a killing war. If soldiers or civilians have amputations and don’t get prosthetics early, then they are placed on the sidelines or become a burden to their families or the economy. With new prosthetic technologies, it’s possible to provide prosthetics early, manufacture them at scale, and manufacture them custom. Traditionally, they’re hand-formed. People have to wait several months, if not a year, in some places in Ukraine, to get a prosthetic. If they get them late and the limb has atrophied, they don’t have the same functional outcome.

Using 3D scanning and 3D printing for portions of the prosthetic, you can do it quite rapidly: taking a six-month waiting list and turning it into one day, where you see the patient, scan the patient, fit the patient with the prosthetic, and get them on the road to recovery essentially right after they leave the hospital from their amputation. That’s going to have better functional outcomes and better economic outcomes for Ukraine. When they came to visit us in Vancouver, we made them a custom prosthetic in 22 minutes and handed it to them. They said, “This is the kind of thing that we need. How many can you make?” We designed our system to double the annual prosthetics capacity in Ukraine at the time, which was about 15,000 prosthetics per year. We could add 15,000 prosthetics with four of our factories deployed.

We can move our factories around. One of the struggles they have is access for patients who live in the east. Travelling across the country is challenging, especially if you’re a new amputee. Being able to move the facilities where they’re needed was of great importance to the minister. They liked what we were doing, and we chose to explore it further. We have an MOU that is basically to develop the system and seek funding support to deploy it. We’re going through the Canadian government’s available Ukraine-assistance funds. We think this would be a great way for Canada to support Ukraine without sending weapons or drones, but by helping with the rebuild and helping civilians and soldiers get back to life. We’re very close to that. I think we’re likely to have significant support from the Canadian government and be able to bring this to Ukraine to have a real impact there: a Canadian-led innovation and an all-Canadian team delivering something for the citizens of Ukraine.

How is a defence customer different from a civilian healthcare customer?

“There are some similarities. Civilian healthcare around disaster management and disaster response is probably the most similar to the defence customer base. Defence expeditionary forces and responding to an earthquake or wildfire are, from a logistical standpoint, similar. But civilian healthcare is very restricted in terms of dollars. The adoption barriers in the civilian healthcare world are very different from those in defence.

Defence, especially nowadays, is much more innovative and much more willing to change as they see the face of war changing quickly and looks for solutions to adapt. We see the synergy for a company like ours that’s dual-use from the outset. We’re not a dual-use company that’s dabbling in defence or dabbling in another thing. We were built that way from the beginning. Leveraging the defence spend and the defence-innovation drive that we’re seeing now, then building off that to showcase a more advanced product to healthcare, which is much slower to change, is really important. That should help us gain adoption in healthcare.

Then that cycle will come back to military medicine as well. As healthcare adopts it and physicians are trained on it and start to understand it better, those physicians go into the military and naturally bring the technologies they want with them. This could be one of those. We see it as a circle.”

What’s one trait you think a founder needs to succeed in this market?

“Be a glutton for punishment. It’s horrible. This is not consumerism. This is not building an app. Both aspects of what we do are highly regulated.

Regulation, probably rightly so, scares off a number of startups because it is complex. But it’s also deterministic. You can understand the regulation and solve for it. It’s really a documentation and engineering challenge. If you’re willing to be patient with it and build that in from the outset, then it’s no different from any other challenge that a startup faces. The real struggle, and it’s changing but hasn’t quite changed yet, is adoption, funding, and procurement. You hear that from every startup, and they’re probably the worst in defence and healthcare.

You have to be in it for the long haul. You probably need the right connections from the get-go, or need to find people with the right connections who believe in your product. Otherwise, trying to be a startup and sell to healthcare, governments, and defence is really, really hard. I think mostly impossible.”

What’s the biggest obstacle preventing you from scaling right now?

“Just capital.

I’ve worked in the U.S.; I spent some time in the U.S. and trained in the U.S. as a physician. It’s not where I want to focus my efforts or innovation. From a pure business standpoint, if I were in this company to make money, then obviously I would have gone to the U.S. a while ago, raised money, and worked in that market.

But I really want to build capacity for Canada. I think Canada could be an innovative country. It’s moving in that direction. We see the need, and we seem to have this new nationalism, in a healthy way, that shows we have what it takes to succeed in the global market. I want to be part of that.

It’s not about politics or what’s currently happening south of the border. Building up Canada’s innovation ecosystems is where my heart lies. We’ll stay here, but it’s also hard because we don’t have the capital infrastructure. The innovative spirit is slowly coming around, but it’s not there yet. The adoption and government-procurement cycles are very limiting.

Those are the barriers. But the promise is that we’re a highly educated country and very diverse. We see needs globally, outside of just the neighbour to the south. Products that address global concerns are often supported by the federal government; that’s a big plus for me because I came from a humanitarian-surgery background, and that was why I started this company. I don’t think I would have gotten that in the U.S.”

What do the next 12 months look like for Building Bloc?

“Continuing to build out the proof point. The R&D is largely settled. We’ve addressed the major hurdles and the regulatory hurdles. We have a roadmap to finish the software and the demonstration units. It is such a foundational change in the way healthcare systems work. Typically, you procure what you need from distributors and large manufacturers. If you need a repair part, you put in a request and wait three or four months.

What we’re saying is that you don’t have to do that anymore. If you need something, you take it off the shelf, and our system replenishes that stock. If something is broken, you make the repair part on site within a day.

It’s a new way of thinking. Healthcare systems don’t understand that. It’s not really in their lexicon to manufacture what they need. Showing that this is simple, easy to use, guided, and safe is the hurdle to adoption. That’s what we’re doing in the next year: building those demonstration models to show that this is something they can do.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup worth watching?

“I mentioned Sentinel R&D, but the other one that really interests me, and it’s also local to B.C., is FireSwarm. It’s another real dual-use company that has a great civilian impact. They build super-heavy-lift drones that carry water and can service wildfires almost autonomously. It’s incredible. Those airframes, that use case, and targeting it with surveillance systems and multiple data sources are really cool. I like what they’re doing. The list that you have includes many of those companies. I think they’re great too.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share The Canadian Explorers

ENVGO is a marine technology startup founded in 2021. Its core team came from Aeryon Labs, an early drone industry innovator acquired by FLIR Systems in 2019. In June 2025, ENVGO raised a C$2.7-million seed round to build the NV1, an electric hydrofoil boat that uses retractable foils to lift the hull out of the water, reducing drag and improving efficiency.

Now, ENVGO is shifting its focus to Canadian defence and public safety, building autonomous, intelligent micro-USVs (Unmanned Surface Vessels) for rapid response, persistent ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance), and maritime domain awareness.

ENVGO’s next platform is the XV2, a six-foot-long, hand-launchable, electric and autonomous boat to keep personnel out of dangerous or contested waters. It is designed to produce a lower wake and reduce visual, thermal, and acoustic signatures. The team is currently engaging with the Canadian Coast Guard and Royal Canadian Navy to discover which new capabilities this technology can unlock, including anti-submarine sensing.

I spoke with Mike Peasgood, ENVGO’s CEO and co-founder, about building a new class of defence vessels, transferring aerial autonomy to the water, and what Canadian founders need to understand before entering defence.

What is ENVGO building, and why does it matter for Canada?

“ENVGO is building a critical piece of a maritime defence shield, which is necessary for Canada because we’ve got the longest coastline of any country in the world. Defending that is becoming a bigger and bigger priority as the world order changes.”

What did you build with NV1, and how did it lead to the XV2?

“What we built with NV1 was a really unique capability in a high-performance, zero-emissions, futuristic and very intelligent boat. It feels more like an airplane than a boat because it flies over the surface of the water on a hydrofoil.

What we realized was that this has a huge value proposition in the defence space for very different reasons, but using the same technology. That high speed gives us a rapid-response capability with a small vessel, which you can’t normally achieve without a much bigger craft. Which means we can apply more of them and build a fleet of small systems that can respond really quickly compared with conventional craft.

The other big piece that we’re taking away from NV1 is autonomy capability: the ability to be aware of its surroundings and respond intelligently. We’ve now built an uncrewed variant of NV1, which can be remotely piloted by somebody who doesn’t have to be on board. We’re packaging that now into the small XV2, which lets us remotely control it and keep the crew out of harm’s way. The fact that we can package all of that into a small platform that can also operate in really big sea states is what sets us apart. It’s using all of that capability that we’ve built in hydrofoiling, clean technology, and electric drivetrains, which now gives us a quiet response. The high-speed autonomy delivers ISR, eyes-on-target capabilities from a really small package.”

What benefit does the hydrofoil deliver for USVs?

“The hydrofoil enables fast and efficient transport over the water, and it provides a smooth platform for EO/IR (Electro-Optical/Infrared) cameras and sensors. The initial motivator was really around the speed of response and capabilities in larger water. We can get about four times the distance and range on an electric, battery-powered craft than we could with a conventional boat. That enables a response out to 100 kilometres of range instead of 25 for an equivalent battery size. That opens up a whole lot more capabilities for our hundreds of thousands of kilometres of coastline that we need to cover. With a rapid response, we can move up to 25 knots, which would burn an immense amount of power on a conventional craft. That’s the enabler. The hydrofoil also lets us surf over really big waves, getting ourselves into big sea states which would swamp a normal craft. We’re bringing that capability to surf up and over and down the other side of those waves to maintain a high-speed response.”

What can small uncrewed vessels do that larger vessels cannot?

“One of the key things we’re able to bring is a distributed capability: many small craft. That is not possible when you’ve got larger vessels, where you need the larger vessel because you’ve got people inside it. By using small unmanned craft, we can create, for example, a distributed array of underwater sensors which can do anti-submarine warfare sensing, which you can’t do with a manned craft. You can’t do it with larger craft because you want to spread a lot of sensors around a large area and have them all listening and collaborating together.

Another one is a meshed, distributed network for resilient communications. That’s just not possible with a single craft. You need a fleet of small vessels which can distribute a communications mesh network across a large area. Supplying that capability is uniquely possible with small unmanned vehicles.”

How is the experience from Aeryon Labs being leveraged?

“I was a co-founder of Aeryon Labs, and we were building small drones back in 2007, before drones were really a thing. We got really, really good at system integration, at flight control especially, and at building lightweight ISR systems which are easy to use.

We’re repackaging all of that for the marine space. The flight-control skills that we built up in that team apply directly to the hydrofoiling capabilities and high-speed transit. Aerodynamics translates directly to hydrodynamics. The ISR capabilities transfer directly in terms of building stabilized platforms for EO/IR cameras.”

What are the lessons from bridging civilian technology to defence?

“One of the big takeaways is there’s a lot of value, especially in the Canadian market, in building a dual-use company because it lets you leverage those two markets to their different benefits.

The commercial and industrial markets can buy more quickly, while defence has a longer procurement cycle but greater stability once you’re in it. It lets you ride through the ups and downs that you might get in the consumer and industrial markets. Being able to smooth out and balance those different business cycles is really valuable.

On the supply-chain side, there’s a challenge because there are different requirements for defence versus consumer or industrial applications: requirements for building in Canada, for building with a fully sovereign supply chain. The challenge that comes along with that model is that we need to effectively build maybe two different supply chains to fulfill those two different needs. The defence market needs that sovereign capability, which might cost more or have different timelines, but there are different priorities for that customer.”

Navigating procurement

“It’s a process, and it helps to understand the procurement process to be able to work through it. There are definitely efforts and high-level strategies to make it faster and easier, but it’s going to take time for those to roll out. Working with the systems that are there, ISED (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada) provides funding for early-stage trials of technology, which is at the prototype stage but not yet commercialized, called ISC (Innovative Solutions Canada).

We work through ISC funding, for example, to collaborate with a partner organization in the government that wants to purchase our technology early on. ISC will help fund that, and that then enables future procurement to happen much faster.

We’re working with DIANA (Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic), which is the NATO organization that is supporting development in defence innovation. That also provides some funding, but more importantly, it gets us exposure in the rest of the NATO countries, which would be aiming to leverage our technology in the same space. We need to do that so we can build a bigger base of customers beyond just the Canadian government.

It really depends on an international strategy, starting with Canadian innovation funding, building that through to validation with the end customer, then moving that into a procurement cycle through the Canadian government while, at the same time, building an international market for the same technology.”

Advice to other dual-use founders

“The biggest one is: talk to the end customers as much as you can, as early as possible, through organizations like COVE, DIANA, and ABCDMI (Association of British Columbia Defence and Marine Industries). Really understand what their challenges are in terms of the procurement process they need to go through from their side. What does it take for them to be able to buy what you’re selling? And what are you providing that uniquely targets the requirements they have?”

How directly are you working with operators, and how do you generate product fit?

“It comes down to, like any good business-development project, understanding the needs of your customer really, really well, and then working with them on solving their end-use problem rather than just building one cool piece of technology. What is the rest of their infrastructure that they need to be able to plug this into? What is the rest of their networking infrastructure? What are their CONOPS (Concept of Operations)? In our case, what kind of ships do they need to be able to carry these on and deploy them from? How are they going to get them back onto the ships?

It’s working through all of the actual use cases and their challenges, then including them in the design exercise so those requirements get in early and we don’t show up to the table with what we think is a fully baked product, but have missed some of their key requirements.”

Manufacturing and Interoperability

“[Scalable manufacturing] is just going to be a necessity. Right now, we’re starting to build out that network of Canadian vendors who can help build this. One of the big messages that I’m getting is that it needs to be manufacturable wherever we are and easily repairable. And it’s got to plug into whatever other gear we’ve got. There’s been so much development of new tech in isolation that I hear the end user is really frustrated. It’s like, “I don’t need another widget. I need a widget that can plug into the rest of the infrastructure that I’ve already got.” It’s got to plug into my network system. It’s got to talk to my ATAK (Android Team Awareness Kit) console. It’s got to talk to my existing WAVE radios; otherwise I can’t actually use it. Thinking about all of those end-user requirements as we’re building and designing is critical.”

What are ENVGO’s plans for the next 12 months?

“The real goals are to build that relationship with the end customer and demonstrate capabilities, open up their eyes to what’s actually possible, and start building that integrated solution for the final operational capability they need rather than just the cool piece of technology. It is taking that hydrofoiling platform and starting to build on the sensors, whether they’re IR sensors, communications networks, or underwater acoustic sensors; building on the communications-link network capabilities they need; and tying into their existing infrastructure.”

What is one other Canadian national-interest startup worth watching?

“I would definitely keep an eye on Dominion Dynamics. I think Eliot is doing an awesome job of setting a high bar for the rest of the community to step up to.”

Why build in Canada?

“For me, I was born here. I’m going to stay here, and we need to defend this country. We’ve got some amazing talent to do it, so let’s have at it.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share

On June 16, Marconi announced it had been selected, alongside Polish defence integrator Enamor International, to deliver Orion X650 tactical radios to the Polish military. The contract supports Poland’s defence modernization under the EU’s Security Action for Europe, or SAFE, a €150 billion defence procurement and lending instrument.

Canada is the first non-European country to participate in SAFE. Marconi is now the first Canadian company to win business under the agreement.

I spoke with Marconi CEO Alain Cohen about what this means for Canadian defence exports and how Marconi plans to work with Canadian startups and SMBs.

What is Marconi?

“Last month, in May, we basically carved out the division that I was running at Ultra I&C, which is a defence and dual-use company. We carved out the Tactical Communications division. That means our operations that were already here in Montreal, designing, developing, and manufacturing Orion radios and Archer troposcatter terminals, as well as our UK business located in Tring, which was manufacturing Hunter SATCOM terminals, will be coming under one brand name.”

How significant is this SAFE contract for the Canadian defence market?

“For us, the SAFE contract is a big one because Poland is a really strategic market. It's our second win in Poland, but definitely the first one where our products are being pulled through SAFE funding with the Polish partner. And yes, it was the first one for a Canadian company, so that's really exciting. We were really grateful for the support of the Canadian government, trade commissioners, Global Affairs Canada, and the defence attachés as well. It's really a team effort when it comes to exporting defence and dual-use products. What it does for us is that it lands our very latest-generation tactical radio with a very good client and customer who is very sophisticated on the Eastern Front.

We look forward to more opportunities being created through SAFE for other Canadian exporters, too. We're pulling along the supply chain with us, as the announcement mentioned.”

What must a Canadian founder understand before selling into Europe?

“First of all, nothing substitutes for going on the ground and seeing for yourself. If you're a startup leader or entrepreneur, you've got to hear the client firsthand. You've got to walk a few days in their shoes. In the defence industry, you literally do that by going out in the field and seeing where the problems are and what needs to be solved. You need to develop that end-user empathy very deeply. Once you do that, a European client will see that you're invested, personally keen to solve their problems, and responsive. That's where a relationship begins, and that does matter.

Finding a local partner is the next most important thing. You cannot do it alone. Some markets are very idiosyncratic. Some have complex and specific acquisition rules subject to that jurisdiction. You need trustworthy local partners who can help you navigate, are technically competent, and are credible with the end user. I'd say that's the second thing that matters most.

The third is knowing that the Government of Canada has really stepped up. We're seeing our government take a whole-of-government approach. Trade commissioners, defence attachés, and embassies are great resources to help Canadian entrepreneurs when there is a good market fit. There will be forums and opportunities like sponsored trade shows. You don't need a huge booth to be present, but getting known through those forums does spark conversations with potential local clients.”

What relationship does Marconi want with Canadian startups?

“Partnering with startups is absolutely something we do. I’ll share a personal story. Last night I was working at a coffee shop until about 11 o’clock. I was walking home, and somebody pinged me from California, a Canadian expat in his late twenties developing a really cool counter-UAS technology, but thinking of entering the Canadian market and looking for help on the communications side. I took the call right away. We’re in touch now, and we’re going to see how we can help them create resilient links for their new products.

We're always open to anything that makes sense, but I know what I'm not looking for right now: a strict supplier-client relationship. I think those are things of yesterday. Sometimes, depending on the tier of the component, you do need a relationship that is more commodity-based, but that's by exception.

What we're looking for are partnerships that push the technology. Our engineers feed on challenge. If a partner, an SME, or a startup comes in and says, "We've got this really cool technology, but we're looking to solve a difficult communications challenge or a data-fusion challenge," we can do that. That's going to push our engineers and keep pushing our engineers. It creates a problem-solving dynamic for both sides, and we feed on that.”

What does Marconi look for in a startup partner?

“There are a few things that will always catch my eye.

The first is: does the startup or new partner introduce a potential new concept of operation that we hadn't thought of before? Basically, is there a new type of application that we can help solve for? That is exciting. It gets us going and accelerates our own roadmaps and technological advantage.

The second thing is: Is there an IP nugget that we haven't developed before? Something where you say, "Wow, that's really clever. I wish we could partner with them, because that plus our thing equals three." That's the IP gap you're looking to fill.

The third one is talent. I love working with really talented people, and my team is the same way. Sometimes it's almost agnostic to what product line or application they're in. If the talent is there, there are always sparks that lead to good outcomes. We like to surround ourselves with partners who can push thinking and unlock things together.”

Why operate in Canada?

“Marconi established a corporation here in 1903, and it was a well-known name in the industry for a very long time until it was sold to foreign interests. I joined five years ago. Bringing this division under Canadian ownership was never going to be a sure-shot outcome. It was just, "At some point, this company will be sold, because that's what investors do with portfolio companies." The question was: wouldn't it be nice if, in addition to finding a good home, that home, from a headquarters and ownership standpoint, was in Canada? That has been a dream for many of the employees in the company, and certainly for me too. We could have sold to another strategic investor. But what an amazing outcome that we brought this back home to Canada.

The underlying theme is that it was a little bit mission-driven, too. We felt like Canada needs some anchors. We have the ambition to grow this company into a globally recognized, Canadian-headquartered and Canadian-owned technology company at scale. Historically, we succeeded as a business, and I'm going to be really frank here, despite being in Canada, while being in the defence industry. We had to be that good from an IP standpoint for clients around the world to come and buy from us. The defence industry can be cyclical. When you're in a trough, sovereign primes in other countries have their home market to fall back on. We never had that. The IP had to be that much better. We will continue using our IP advantage as the number-one differentiator.

We have a purpose and mission to bring the ecosystem along with us. I really do mean that. We'll be exporters, and they'll be re-exporters by virtue of that. Last year, we were still exporting about 90 percent, if not 95 percent, of our revenue. That's a big deal. From an economic-impact standpoint, the multiplier on exports, especially IP-intensive exports, is very high. We're proud of that contribution to the overall economy.

There’s a societal effect around the acceptability of investing in defence. When I worked at Export Development Canada, supporting defence companies was a no-go. It’s a complete 180.”

Are there any particular early-stage companies or startups operating in Canada's national interest that you're watching?

“I want to watch as many of them as I can. I'm inspired by the grit, audacity, boldness, desire to innovate, and desire to build on the competitive advantages we may already have. I've met with rocket companies and companies doing things you never thought were possible here.

My message to you, Ethan, more than an answer, is that what you're doing here is amazing. You are creating awareness and education. My note to the ecosystem and startups is: if you think there is a fit to work together, don't hesitate. We're here, and we want to work with you.

I don't want to call out favourites. What I'll do is name companies I've spoken with very recently. I want to shout out to the team at ARA Robotics. Sentinel as well. I think they're absolutely crushing it, and we look forward to collaborating. There is also a Montreal-based firm with quite a few years under its belt, but it is now picking up and taking off: Octasic. I'm really impressed with how it is breaking through markets in Europe, the United States, and Canada.”

If you’re building something in Canada, I want to hear about it. contact@ethanmarcoux.com

Share