Thinking Strategically: AM Industry Consultant Tali Rosman on AM for the Defense Market

By now, more or less everyone in the AM industry seems to grasp the central role in accelerating AM adoption played by the defense sector in general, and the U.S. military in particular. Nonetheless, as was highlighted in this recent 3DPrint.com interview with Mike Shepard of 3D Systems Corporation, there still aren’t that many true broad-based experts in AM for the military.

Tali Rosman is one such expert. The onetime CEO of Xerox’s Elem Additive, which was ultimately acquired ADDiTEC, Rosman has written a number of reports for Additive Manufacturing Research, including multiple studies specifically on the AM market for defense. Her opinion is sought out by AM companies and trade associations around the world.

At Additive Manufacturing Strategies 2026 (February 24-26 in New York City), you can see Tali moderating a panel on “The Future of Metal Parts for Aerospace & Defense,” as she and the panelists dive in to what looks like it will remain one of the key demand drivers for the AM industry for years to come. If you haven’t registered for the event yet, this is a perfect time to do so — the standard registration deadline expires December 10th.

To get an idea of what kinds of themes will be discussed at the panel, and during the Aerospace and Defense session as a whole, Tali shared her valuable insight on some important topics currently animating the world of military AM.

Matt Kremenetsky: For at least the last year or so, everyone focused on AM for defense has been paying the most attention to the Navy. Which applications beyond maritime are you most focused on?

Tali Rosman: The Navy has rightfully taken the spotlight for its work in shipboard AM and the SIB program, but AM is being used compellingly across the DoW. On the Army side, I’m equally excited about both expeditionary and ground logistics applications, including:

• Forward-deployed part production for vehicle repair, unmanned systems, or base infrastructure — especially in contested logistics environments.
• Part repair at both the tactical and depot levels to reduce long lead times and improve readiness.
• Additive construction, such as 3DP concrete for barracks, walls, and shelters — which is quietly moving from pilot to capability.

The Air Force, meanwhile, has several interesting use cases in MRO and sustainment, spanning AM technologies. We’re also seeing growing cross-branch momentum in warfighter medical applications — from surgical models to custom orthotics — where AM’s ability to personalize and deliver quickly is a clear differentiator.

MK: How is what’s happening in defense a model that can be applied to successful AM adoption in other sectors?

TR: Defense has become a real-world test bed for de-risking AM at scale — taking technologies out of the lab and into some of the most demanding environments. That’s valuable far beyond the military. In particular:

• Qualification pathways: The structured, rigorous part vetting in defense can inform frameworks for aerospace, energy, and other demanding industries.
• Distributed manufacturing models: What the DoW is piloting across depots, bases, and afloat ships can serve as a blueprint for remote or multi-site industrial operations.
• Public-private collaboration: Programs like DIU show how stakeholders with very different timelines can still align on shared goals — a valuable lesson for any large OEM trying to partner with AM startups.

Bottom line: defense isn’t just an early adopter — it’s building the playbook for scaling AM under real-world constraints, and that playbook translates directly to other high-consequence sectors.

MK: As someone who has worked with the US military, what’s some advice you can give companies who are hoping to enter the government market?

TR: Breaking into the DoW isn’t just about selling a product — it’s about learning to operate inside a unique procurement and decision-making ecosystem. My top pieces of advice:

• Start small but strategic — a successful prototype via an SBIR or a DIU pilot can be your wedge into much larger opportunities. We’ve seen success when programs give innovators a clear path into sustainment — like the Navy’s CRADA with FormAlloy at FRCSW, which turned a pilot repair process into a funded capability. Streamlining standards across branches would multiply those kinds of wins.

• Get fluent in “DoW-speak” — align your value proposition not to “better printing,” but to operational readiness, cost avoidance, or logistics reduction.

• Bring in someone who’s walked the halls — hiring or partnering with a former DoW insider dramatically accelerates the learning curve, from navigating procurement rules to finding the right champions. For example, in 2024 Nikon appointed Admiral Mike Mullen (Ret., USN), former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as a Strategic Advisor — and recently announced a partnership with the U.S. Navy to expand maritime AM.

• Be patient but persistent — timelines are long, budgets are cyclical, and success comes from continuously aligning with shifting program priorities.

MK: As military AM adoption steadily expands, do you see cybersecurity as an increasingly important issue?

TR: Absolutely — and I’d actually broaden it to include both cybersecurity and sourcing integrity. As we digitize more of the defense supply chain, the attack surface is getting wider — not just in terms of data, but also in terms of the machines we’re relying on.

• On the cyber side, AM introduces real risks: design files, process parameters, monitoring data — they can all be tampered with in ways that are hard to detect but catastrophic if they fail in the field.
• On the supply chain side, we’re still seeing companies label things as “Made in the USA” while quietly reselling imported machines — including systems with unknown firmware and connectivity risk. It checks the compliance box but misses the point entirely.

Bottom line: in AM, the machine is the factory, and if we’re serious about national security, we can’t treat the digital and physical layers separately. It’s not just about securing files — it’s about securing the full stack: hardware, software, sourcing, and the ecosystem around it. Securing the file is table stakes; securing the factory is the real challenge.

MK: If you had the ability to change one thing about how defense procurement works in the context of AM, what would it be?

TR: Only one thing? I have a few in mind, but to pick one, I’d start with streamlining the qualification and procurement standards across branches. Today, you can qualify a part with one service and start back at square one with another — even if the material and application are nearly identical.

This fragmentation slows innovation and frustrates suppliers. A more unified approach would accelerate adoption and reduce redundant cost and effort.

MK: Do you see AM for the US military moving more in the direction of one business environment that works across the whole department, or do you think the military’s AM activity will always be primarily siloed into each branch/agency?

TR: Realistically, some siloing is inevitable, given the unique mission sets and platforms of each branch. But I do think we’re seeing momentum toward a more interoperable and connected AM ecosystem:

• Shared repositories for qualified parts.
• Common materials libraries and testing protocols.
• Cross-branch pilots and consortiums.

Even if we can’t avoid silos entirely, we should ensure that knowledge, data, and parts can flow between them — especially in joint operations or contested logistics scenarios. We don’t need full uniformity — just interoperability. That’s what will make AM truly scalable across the services.

If you’re interested in more of what Tali thinks about the current state of the AM industry, catch her on this episode of Printing Money. And don’t forget to register for AMS 2026!

This interview was originally seen in AMS: The Preprint.