The Pentagon said that 3D printing provides enormous opportunities for the creators of hypersonic weapons

Keith Devries, deputy director of the US Department of Defense's Manufacturing Technologies Office, said yesterday that 3D printing has made "huge leaps" over the past few years and has opened up new possibilities for creating new weapons and components.

According to Devries, additive manufacturing is especially useful when designing new systems, allowing operations to be completed much faster than traditional manufacturing processes. It is also used to create disposable spare parts for the repair of certain systems. Otherwise, there would be a long wait for the replacement component to pass through the slow supply chain, the official noted.

We've even seen bird strikes repaired on airplanes overnight or in days using additive manufacturing

- Devries said.

The Pentagon official also said 3D printers can quickly create new tools that would typically take a long time to produce using traditional methods. According to him, the scale of objects that can be printed on a 3D printer is increasing, to the point that entire structures can be built this way.

The US defense department believes that hypersonic weapons are a prime example of a program in which additive manufacturing can be useful.

3D printing of hypersonic weapon components provides enormous opportunities for the creators of these weapons

- Devries noted.

True, the Pentagon official did not say where exactly those hypersonic weapons from American manufacturers were, which managed to pass the necessary tests and end up in service with the US Army.

Comments

[alexoff]

3D printers have a large number of disadvantages; using them in such subtle matters as hypersound is presumptuous. But I heard that lobbying is legalized in the USA; perhaps the son of this big boss acquired shares in some 3D printer manufacturer.

[Plate]

I wonder if in 10 years you will be complaining that Russia is lagging behind the United States in additive technologies? I remember they wrote here that Musk’s partially reusable rockets are bullshit, time-tested Soyuzs are all... And the topic of UAVs met with a lot of skepticism before the SVO.

[Gorynych1976]

..life does not stand still, but everything needs an integrated approach..

[TermNachTer]

All the smart people said that UAVs are a good thing, but they will not replace manned aircraft, at least in the near foreseeable future.

[Plate]

Smart people say a lot of smart things, but some are still ready to resist until life puts everything in its place, simultaneously giving kicks to everyone who finds themselves in the wrong place.

[alexoff]

3D printers appeared quite a long time ago; there was a hype about them. Musk has unlimited funding, no one has seen his accounting. But you better tell us about lasers, which in the Soviet press put an end to tanks and cruisers a hundred years ago. And the list of things that didn’t take off is much longer than what did take off.

[Plate]

It’s better to invest in something that won’t take off than to miss out on something that will eventually take off.
I think the printers will still show themselves. But yes, conditions are needed: methods for processing surfaces of such complex shapes as printers can produce, materials suitable for this method of producing parts... Well, any technology needs external conditions for its implementation. The same lasers will not find use in combat without compact energy sources. However, these sources, I believe, will also be delivered in the next 20 years for sure. Work is underway. There will be no cross on tanks and cruisers, of course, but there will still be a lot of benefit (and harm :D).

[Foma Kinyaev]

It's obvious, captain... close the rattle already... and Musk's rockets are made without the use of any kind of fraudulent techniques - casting and stamping...

[lukash66]

Yes, we see how you jumped there in hypersound. It can be seen very widely, the pants are torn.)))

[rocket757]

According to Devries, additive manufacturing is especially useful when designing new systems, allowing operations to be completed much faster than traditional manufacturing processes.

. So yes, it is easier to produce parts of complex shapes. The question is... the price and quality of the products.
For experimental designers of their work, this is not so important... for mass production, it is unlikely, the technology is only just developing and a tangible economic effect will come later, as soon as possible.

[tralflot1832]

Well, as long as a 3D printer prints for the Pentagon instead of hypersound, it doesn’t matter.

It’s better if they pay me 1 millionth part, for hypersound I will show this five-finger design to the Pentagon in the morning.

[Navi Vonavi]

In my humble opinion, the official’s conclusion was made up from thin air. Well, what “huge” opportunities can 3D printing provide to developers of hypersonic weapons? No more than the same for small arms manufacturers: the frame or stock can be printed, even the magazine, but the mainspring and barrel cannot. That is, these will be some non-critical parts, the production of which using 3D printing will not affect anything, well, maybe if it is a little cheaper than traditional methods.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Navi Vonavi

In my humble opinion, the official’s conclusion was made up from thin air. Well, what “huge” opportunities can 3D printing provide to developers of hypersonic weapons? No more than the same for small arms manufacturers: the frame or stock can be printed, even the magazine, but the mainspring and barrel cannot. That is, these will be some non-critical parts, the production of which using 3D printing will not affect anything, well, maybe if it is a little cheaper than traditional methods.

There, like bee, space rockets are already being printed in fact. Rocket Lab regularly sends its rockets into space.
Therefore, what is missing?

Or here from an article from 2019.

How has additive technology developed since you began using it in the design of your engines?

We started using 3D printing in rocket production very early. I remember when we announced our Rutherford engine at the National Space Symposium 4 years ago, people responded with phrases like, “That looks outrageous!” Look at the situation now: if your company's rocket engine doesn't have 3D printed parts, you might be considered a backward company. We've sent more than 50 additively manufactured Rutherford engines into space, more than anyone in history. There is no barrier to doing this once, but to successfully send 50 engines into space requires a different level of understanding of the manufacturing, quality control and launch processes.

[alystan]

We've sent more than 50 additively manufactured Rutherford engines into space, more than anyone in history.

Probably because no one else is doing this except them. I mean rocket engines.

[alexoff]

But others don’t and get by just fine. You can recruit only gays for production and also tell how they do a good job of sending something into space.

[TermNachTer]

This is it, it will be cheaper or it will be a “goldfish”.

[alystan]

The Pentagon said that 3D printing provides enormous opportunities for the creators of hypersonic weapons

In addition to achieving this very hypersonic speed...)))

[TermNachTer]

It may create opportunities))) but the weapon itself is not yet in sight)))

[bone1]

Wow, who would have guessed? - and it seems they themselves just guessed - well, where is your hypersound?