Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

no_name

Colonel
siegecrossbow said:
It appears that China is currently in the lead when it comes to 3D laser printing of large aircraft parts. This technique shaves off 90% of the cost since it utilizes the raw material (titanium and aluminum alloy, in this case) in a more efficient manner. .
Click to expand...

I think the old way involves starting with a block of the finished alloy and then bore away at it until you get the parts you want.

So imagine making a teapot by starting with a block of fired clay, then rounding the edges and drilling a big hole in the middle.

Whatever bits that are removed cannot be used to make another part, and so this process is wasteful.
With laser printing, you do it layer by layer with raw material, so basically you only use as much as the part requires.

This was posted in another thread with the scientists saying they could make a piece as big as 5m^2 cross sectional wise. (i.e. the stacking plane). They've since then said that 5m squared is no longer the limit.
 
P

Preux

Junior Member
Quickie said:
Most of us heard too many of the comments that the J-20 is big and, I guess, are somehow influenced to automatically assume it's a bit too big for carrier operation.

In the videos, I recall the takeoff distance of the J-20 isn't any noticeably different from the J-10A and the JF-17. I seem to recall, in one of the videos, the J-20 even has the shorter takeoff distance than the J-10. My guess is, with more powerful engines, the J-20 could just turn out to be capable of operating off the carrier afterall. If not off the skijump, then it could possibly operate off the catapult.
Click to expand...

That isn't useful of itself, you have no idea what load it is carrying when taking off, and the prototypes aren't even carrying a full load of avionics.
 
A

A.Man

Major
A New Photo

27110323e34a2dba42ec30c.jpg
 
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
Preux said:
That isn't useful of itself, you have no idea what load it is carrying when taking off, and the prototypes aren't even carrying a full load of avionics.
Click to expand...

All the prototypes, production aircraft are not carrying payloads and a lot of fuel. In that sense, they're comparable. The flight control avionics are the same since it's necessary to carry out the flight tests for all the aircraft. Other than that, the fire control avionics/electronics and radar, especially the former, shouldn't contribute so much to the weight, as would the operational weapon payload and fuel load.
 
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
no_name said:
I think the old way involves starting with a block of the finished alloy and then bore away at it until you get the parts you want.

So imagine making a teapot by starting with a block of fired clay, then rounding the edges and drilling a big hole in the middle.

Whatever bits that are removed cannot be used to make another part, and so this process is wasteful.
With laser printing, you do it layer by layer with raw material, so basically you only use as much as the part requires.

This was posted in another thread with the scientists saying they could make a piece as big as 5m^2 cross sectional wise. (i.e. the stacking plane). They've since then said that 5m squared is no longer the limit.
Click to expand...

I was thinking whatever bits, debris that were removed, can be recycled to be reused. The only thing is, I guess, the recycling of the metal itself is expensive.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Quickie said:
I was thinking whatever bits, debris that were removed, can be recycled to be reused. The only thing is, I guess, the recycling of the metal itself is expensive.
Click to expand...
The leftovers don't all fall out in chunks. A lot of that mass becomes powder which disperses or is much harder to recover.
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Quickie said:
I was thinking whatever bits, debris that were removed, can be recycled to be reused. The only thing is, I guess, the recycling of the metal itself is expensive.
Click to expand...

Not really, and it pays to pick it up, I picked up some used iron with my son in law a year or so ago, and it brought 210.00 dollars a ton, rusty, holes, dents, dings, no problem, they melt it all down anyway.. brat
 
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
Air Force Brat said:
Not really, and it pays to pick it up, I picked up some used iron with my son in law a year or so ago, and it brought 210.00 dollars a ton, rusty, holes, dents, dings, no problem, they melt it all down anyway.. brat
Click to expand...

I meant the cost of the whole cycle of recycling is expensive, from picking up the pieces of the metal to transporting, cleaning and sorting them and processing it into the slab of metal ready for the forging process. That is still cheaper than processing them from the raw material but the point is that it still pays, and quite a lot at that, to reduce the wastage, the amount of debris, during production as much as possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top