well, there are supposed to be some plastic materials that can withstand ambient temps of 150 degrees celsius and made by an american company. But then again, withstanding that doesnt mean it can withstand whatever forces this material also went through.
Basically just buy the fucking original part, especially if you're flying the airplane
A lot of in-house prototyping of things, as well as making certain shapes that conventional molds can’t or have a very hard time doing. It’s a fantastic technology who’s uses are quite limited for most people who aren’t big-time hobbyists or working in manufacturing. I’ve done prototyping projects in the past, being able to create a close approximation of a part/product (especially housings) that allowed me to test certain facets of a design without getting the part made in a more expensive way, especially if a part goes through a lot of iterations.
I've printed replacement knobs for my oven when they broke. That was pretty handy when all it cost me was a couple cents of filament and some print time.
There's a Chinese company that has a website that lets you generate a 3D model from a single image and it does a pretty good job of filling in details it can't see.
I work in a rubber molding plant where we make aerospace parts, and the quality control on them are far more strict than the parts we make for automotive. The material matters more than any flaws in the molding. Not all rubbers can be used for the same application. I'd barely trust a 3D printed volume knob for the radio, what kind of retard would use a 3D printer to make an engine component?
Apples to oranges, the instruments wouldn't let him nose up, and it was a brand new plane. The flight plan was handed to him that day, which was already outside protocol due to it being an airshow. I'm not saying he's 100% innocent, but he has a valid argument.
after its plastic air induction elbow, bought at an air show in North America, collapsed
Air show was in USA. Was this written by AI or are BBC doing some weird newspeak?
Apparently the printed part was claimed by the seller to be made from plastic that melts at 220 F, which was higher than the official part at 180 F, but whoever printed it used the wrong plastic so it melted at 120 F. It also didn't have a metal insert to prevent collapse even if it did melt like the official part.
So 3d printing wasn't entirely the issue except you're trusting a rando individual instead of a business that has multiple customers and probably at least one employee involved that doesn't want to go to jail.
Before AI, it was 3D printing that was supposed to revolutionize the planet and make manufacturing jobs obsolete.
There are certain things you shouldnt print. Heavy load bearing objects or high heat environment objects
Amazing that this retard 3d printed plastic and put it into a hot engine bay.
well, there are supposed to be some plastic materials that can withstand ambient temps of 150 degrees celsius and made by an american company. But then again, withstanding that doesnt mean it can withstand whatever forces this material also went through.
Basically just buy the fucking original part, especially if you're flying the airplane
Materials Engineering 101.
He bought the part, he didn't 3D print it himself.
The semantics are irrelevant. The item was 3D printed. It failed. Shocked Pikachu face. Literally all that matters.
Arguably even more retarded
3D printing is amazing, this guy’s just an idiot without even an entry level understanding of material science.
Has it been used for anything other than overpriced plastic objects that are suppose to be impressive because they came out of a 3D printer?
A lot of in-house prototyping of things, as well as making certain shapes that conventional molds can’t or have a very hard time doing. It’s a fantastic technology who’s uses are quite limited for most people who aren’t big-time hobbyists or working in manufacturing. I’ve done prototyping projects in the past, being able to create a close approximation of a part/product (especially housings) that allowed me to test certain facets of a design without getting the part made in a more expensive way, especially if a part goes through a lot of iterations.
Its also useful when you need to have something that only you would want
Good for replacing niche things as well. Would I anchor my bookcase with 3d printed anchors? No.
Would I repair the casing on my dishwasher, or replace my gear shift handle? Yeah sure.
I've printed replacement knobs for my oven when they broke. That was pretty handy when all it cost me was a couple cents of filament and some print time.
The next new thing will be 3d printing Ai slops
There's a Chinese company that has a website that lets you generate a 3D model from a single image and it does a pretty good job of filling in details it can't see.
And it turns out, just like 3D printing, AI does nothing except make everything a bit (or maybe a great deal) worse.
I work in a rubber molding plant where we make aerospace parts, and the quality control on them are far more strict than the parts we make for automotive. The material matters more than any flaws in the molding. Not all rubbers can be used for the same application. I'd barely trust a 3D printed volume knob for the radio, what kind of retard would use a 3D printer to make an engine component?
Knobs are fine
For a car radio, but an airplane radio is essential for keeping people alive.
No radio is OK, depending on the airspace. Still wouldn't use 3D printed parts for radio knobs or any part in a plane.
See this is why I am hesitant about self driving flying vehicles.
Because you know some idiot like this will jury rig a repair and we'll have to deal with a 9/11 every friggin day!
There's a saying in aviation, "There are no stupid pilots".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CdVTCDdEwI
Clearly, you aren't familiar with the aptly named Michel Asseline.
He maintained his innocence.
Ah, I guess OJ should have become a pilot then.
Apples to oranges, the instruments wouldn't let him nose up, and it was a brand new plane. The flight plan was handed to him that day, which was already outside protocol due to it being an airshow. I'm not saying he's 100% innocent, but he has a valid argument.
You can't just blame "the instruments". Everything I've seen points at him as the guilty party, and the instruments didn't fail for anyone else.
Sounds like a cope.
I recommend that you look into the case before you comment, instead of being a Goebbels.
I'm glad the grass is alright.
Air show was in USA. Was this written by AI or are BBC doing some weird newspeak?
Apparently the printed part was claimed by the seller to be made from plastic that melts at 220 F, which was higher than the official part at 180 F, but whoever printed it used the wrong plastic so it melted at 120 F. It also didn't have a metal insert to prevent collapse even if it did melt like the official part.
So 3d printing wasn't entirely the issue except you're trusting a rando individual instead of a business that has multiple customers and probably at least one employee involved that doesn't want to go to jail.
Hope the loss of the entire airplane was worth the savings from buying some bullshit part for cheaper.