t68
Well-Known Member
Yep 3D printing is coming up I leaps and bounds and some of the more unusual things doing with it.
Delage Type-S: The 103-year-old grand prix car saved by a 3D printer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
General Aviation Thread
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
Delage Type-S: The 103-year-old grand prix car saved by a 3D printer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #22
wooki and I were both involved with 3D printing with a titanium based ceramic. a number of years ago. at that stage australia via CSIRO were leading the world in symmetrical and complex printing of shapes. a few years later they were able to print out a 3D sintered metal dragon for a sick girl who loved dragons - now they are commercially printing out titanium based body parts. I know of only one other country that can do this
once they bring down the cost of 3D scanning and make it easier to integrate that into 3D printing then the gates will open up
eg the USN is looking at 3D printing spare parts for out of production components
Blue Jay
Member
Just curious, how would these 3D printed spare parts perform if they are components that need to undergo high stress? Since it is additive manufacturing, wouldn't the parts fall short in quality?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #24
I am assuming that they are components that aren't under critical failure conditions.
eg you can print off in plastic, sintered metal and titanium ceramic - all have different load and sheer tolerances
2007yellow430
Active Member
That may well be, but since those parts haven't undergone an engineering analysis, and aren't PMA you would need either a field approval, an STC or change your registration to experimental in order to be legal in the USA. Until the FAA changes its rules (along with foreign goverment's similar agencies) making your own parts could be trouble, rendering your plane unairworthy.
Art
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #26
au contraire
when we forming up parts on the printer they were subjected to sheer and impact tests
ie the same tests that would be done against a billet artifact
(and I am talking about maritime and land warfare applications specifically)
2007yellow430
Active Member
I see. I was referring to general aviation applications. The FAA as ridged rules regarding replacement parts on certified aircraft. Berm there with them more than once with my plane.
Art
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #28
I just don't know what to say....
New Photos And Video of Iran’s Homemade F-313 “Qaher” Stealth Jet Have Just Emerged. And Here’s A First Analysis
https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/...have-just-emerged-and-heres-a-first-analysis/
there is so much wrong with this .....
New Photos And Video of Iran’s Homemade F-313 “Qaher” Stealth Jet Have Just Emerged. And Here’s A First Analysis
https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/...have-just-emerged-and-heres-a-first-analysis/
there is so much wrong with this .....
Wrong with the jet itself or with the article commenting on it?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The jet itself, their PhtoShop guy needs lessons from the F/A -37 Talon designer.
The wings look a bit like the ones on the Russian fighter Clint Eastwood stole in Firefox Down. Maybe this is where the Chinese got their inspiration.
Blue Jay
Member
Hello everyone,
I'd like to reach out to the pilots in these forums and ask about flatspin recovery procedures, as I recently had a discussion involving this and there was conflicting information coming from different people, and wanted to get a third input. I personally have no real-world flight experience save for flight simulators, for what that is worth.
First of all, I am referring specifically to flat spins. Frisbees. Not generic spins.
Now before I entered into the discussion I mentioned above, I thought that general procedure would be to set throttle to idle, not to touch the ailerons, to set rudders to full opposite of the spin and keep them there, then push down on the stick to try and pitch your nose down. The idea would be to counteract your spin and eventually get your aircraft into a dive, from which you could recover from the stall. This is in line with PARE developed by NASA.
One of my interlocutors, however, told me that PARE was for generic spins. He asserted that in a flat spin, you'd want to apply full power in order to increase airspeed. Elevator down to decrease AoA and further increase airspeed with gravity's help. Then you'd want to apply rudder into the spin to further enable increasing airspeed (opposite rudder would increase drag). This made sense to me, but went contrary to my previous knowledge. The only thing we agreed on was that we'd need to burn a lot of altitude either way.
Any input from you guys?
I'd like to reach out to the pilots in these forums and ask about flatspin recovery procedures, as I recently had a discussion involving this and there was conflicting information coming from different people, and wanted to get a third input. I personally have no real-world flight experience save for flight simulators, for what that is worth.
First of all, I am referring specifically to flat spins. Frisbees. Not generic spins.
Now before I entered into the discussion I mentioned above, I thought that general procedure would be to set throttle to idle, not to touch the ailerons, to set rudders to full opposite of the spin and keep them there, then push down on the stick to try and pitch your nose down. The idea would be to counteract your spin and eventually get your aircraft into a dive, from which you could recover from the stall. This is in line with PARE developed by NASA.
One of my interlocutors, however, told me that PARE was for generic spins. He asserted that in a flat spin, you'd want to apply full power in order to increase airspeed. Elevator down to decrease AoA and further increase airspeed with gravity's help. Then you'd want to apply rudder into the spin to further enable increasing airspeed (opposite rudder would increase drag). This made sense to me, but went contrary to my previous knowledge. The only thing we agreed on was that we'd need to burn a lot of altitude either way.
Any input from you guys?
2007yellow430
Active Member
Some of the earlier training in Beechcraft Barons resulted in flat spins which were not recoverable. I have not, nor will I engage in any flat spin training in a Baron, since I don't think they are recoverable.
I don't know of any civilian schools which teach flat spin recovery, as most of them are not recoverable.
Art
I don't know of any civilian schools which teach flat spin recovery, as most of them are not recoverable.
Art
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Interesting piece on a new supersonic civilian demonstration jet. The article does not mention any new anti-sonic boom development. One has to wonder if flying at twice the speed of sound can justify the higher cost. Will it be higher or lower than Concorde? The project seems well funded and apparently there are people willing to buy 76 of them.
http://www.intelligent-aerospace.co...gines-carbon-fiber-3d-printed-components.html
http://www.intelligent-aerospace.co...gines-carbon-fiber-3d-printed-components.html
2007yellow430
Active Member
It's going to hold 55 passengers. Expect costs 2, 3, 4, maybe even 5 times Concorde's costs, probably more than a private jet. This won't work. People who can afford that cost will get their own fast jet. Several on the drawing boards with deposits.
Art
A new 3D printing system offers great capability and significantly reduced costs. This system is a horizontal print system rather than the current vertical print systems, meaning that theoretically there is no restriction upon the length of printed items.
3D Printing Could Provide Mass-Production Flexibility For MROs, OEMs
3D Printing Could Provide Mass-Production Flexibility For MROs, OEMs
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Airbus will buy a controlling stake in Bombardier's C-Series. Jets for the US market will be built in Alabama. The Canadian government will have to approve this. It appears Boeing has screwed themselves and taxpayers in Quebec and to a lesser extent Canadians in other provinces won't have to be funding Bombardier.
Europe's Airbus to buy majority stake in Bombardier CSeries program - Business - CBC News
Europe's Airbus to buy majority stake in Bombardier CSeries program - Business - CBC News
t68
Well-Known Member
Well that's a win for Trump, he can now show that his policy are working manufacturing is returning to the US. And the plane will have to compete without government subsidies.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
It might be a win for Trump but it is a loss for Boeing.