Can't wait to 3D Print a bootleg PATRIOT system.
Patriots use solid fuel. Additionally nothing on a Patriot missile used 3D printing. There is no benefit for 3D printing.
Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
181–190 of 288 posts
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not shipping people into space with this tech yet. As such, even if QA were missing, which we don't really know much about, the need for QA is way less than you make it out to be. It's not a big deal if a cargo rocket blows up, and so far it hasn't even blown up. Together, this is why your line of comments is unqualified.
I sincerely hope you are never involved in any aerospace projects.
Like I said originally, when you run out of arguments, not that you ever had one really, you resort to forms of attacks that are not substantiated by any logic. You don't know me or what I would do if I were or were not involved in aerospace. Maybe you want to go taunt Elon Musk for how many rockets his company has blown up.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#183If you take a look at a real rocket engine you will see hundreds of parts that cannot be printed Raptor 1, 2, and 3: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/07/spacex-further-improve...
For very simple pressure fed engines (which this appears to be) it's actually cheapest to additively manufacture (3D print) engines as you can integrate the cooling channels. On engines like Raptor you have pumps, which notably need to move so while you still use 3D printing (Raptor uses a ton) you can't print it in a single piece.
3D printing is already an industry standard and nothing this company did with relation to its engine manufacturing is anything special. They also appear to have lied that no post-manufacturing qualification is required.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#184[dead]
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't do qualification of their hardware? Why would you put that on YouTube?
i dont know about that part, but they 3d print i don't honestly believe there's anyone building a rocket like this that isn't concerned about the rockets success
Why are they saying they don't need QA then?
Sure, you can use whatever appropriate manufacturing processes you want. But none of them can replace QA.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
this works for munitions, but not for payloads that anyone cares about.
Not sure exploding rockets on their launch platform is such a good thing when they're carrying a bunch of highly explosive / fragmentary warheads (in addition to the rocket itself, which is plenty dangerous). Unless this was something like a cruise missile dropped at altitude where a failure isn't a big deal.
I'm sure even in this case, risking the air-frame of the bomber or friendlies on the ground below is not ideal. Bear in mind cruise missiles are usually launched from friendly territory.
Also, failures might reduce the accuracy of the missile, leading to potential civilian causalities.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
this works for munitions, but not for payloads that anyone cares about.
Not sure exploding rockets on their launch platform is such a good thing when they're carrying a bunch of highly explosive / fragmentary warheads (in addition to the rocket itself, which is plenty dangerous). Unless this was something like a cruise missile dropped at altitude where a failure isn't a big deal.
>> cruise missile dropped at altitude where a failure isn't a big deal.
If failure isn't a big deal, then the weapon should no have been used. An ALCM costs millions. The destruction it causes is part of a larger battle plan. Should it not work properly then friendly forces may die. Should it work properly then enemy forces may die. The effectiveness of such a weapon is never not a big deal.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sincerely hope you are never involved in any aerospace projects.
Like I said originally, when you run out of arguments, not that you ever had one really, you resort to forms of attacks that are not substantiated by any logic. You don't know me or what I would do if I were or were not involved in aerospace. Maybe you want to go taunt Elon Musk for how many rockets his company has blown up.
If you don't understand that rocket hardware needs QA, please stop talking about the subject. It is like a software engineer who believes that software should be shipped without any testing.
>You don't know me or what I would do if I were or were not involved in aerospace
True. I still hope that you are never involved in any aerospace or remotely safety critical project.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#189That's super cool. India has enormous potential and it is amazing to witness the rise of its tech scene.
I wouldn't jump to praise so quickly. Additive manufacturing (aka 3D printing) is standard in the industry and the time is dependent on the size (and to some extent the mass) of the engine. They then further claim you don't need to do any post-manufacturing qualifications, which is absolute nonsense. So it's either misreporting or it's an indication of Indian incompetence/lying.
I wonder where Indian incompetence/lying falls on the Elon scale.
Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
OSHA has a nice pamphlet regarding hazard identification and hazard controls. The least effective method of protecting workers is to put the risk on the worker to protect themselves. Your view has a similar vibe to "well they weren't wearing their hard hat and so it's their fault," a view that has been rejected across the board for safety in favor of the view that even letting the situation get to that point is a fai…
If a driver is using any driver assistance feature they need to be paying attention all the time. Not only is it stated in all vehicle manuals, it is the intelligent way to use the features given that automated driving is still far from perfect. Your analogy makes no sense given that the risk is always on the driver whether there are driver assistance features or not.
Unfortunately it is very difficult to remain vigilant when the automated system seems to be doing a great job. Eventually you will become distracted.
Even in accident cases, remember that the Teslas involved are not new - they have had dozens or hundreds of successful drives before the accident.