A microturbine doesn't need to be efficient. It needs to be cheap enough and fast enough to build that losing one doesn't matter. That's the only thing we're optimizing for.
The micro-turbine industry has spent 40 years optimizing efficiency. We optimize for something else.
An engine that's 5% less efficient but ships in a fifth of the time wins every attrition scenario that matters.
We choose materials and processes that stay available under wartime and export-control conditions — not whatever tests best on a spec sheet.
We size engine life to the mission, not to an airline overhaul schedule.
Every part starts as an LPBF design — not a machined part later ported to a printer.
We scale production by adding printers, not by cutting new tooling for every batch.
TD-18, TD-40, and TD-200 share the same design — qualify your airframe once, not per engine.
Short-range, single-use, built to fly fast and not come back.
ISR or strike missions that need jet speed at a price you can afford to lose.
Bigger payloads, longer missions, same platform.
Most propulsion startups scale by hiring. We think that's the wrong problem to solve first.
A small team that builds for cost from day one gets to a working engine faster — and keeps it cheap once volume shows up.
If you're evaluating propulsion for a UAV or loitering-munitions program, we'd rather talk specifics than send a deck.
danny.lee@thrust-dynamics.com →