XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.electronics.design   
      
   In sci.physics John Larkin  wrote:   
   > On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 18:02:47 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
   >   
   >>In sci.physics David Mitchell  wrote:   
   >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> And about the only place where weight matters that much is in things   
   >>>> that fly and in that case useless mass is already gone from the design   
   >>>> without the expense of 3D printing.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method.   
   >>>   
   >>> "Nobody needs more than 640K"   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't really think it's sensible to say "never" wrt technology - you're   
   >>> judging a very immature technology   
   >>>   
   >>> The biggest problem wrt printing vehicles will, I suspect, be the   
   legislation   
   >>> governing safety.   
   >>   
   >>Nope, economics.   
   >>   
   >>It takes a fraction of a second to stamp out a sheet metal automobile body   
   >>part out of standard sheet metal stock.   
   >>   
   >>I fail to understand why geeks think 3D printing is the ultimate answer   
   >>to manufacturing when it is in fact slow and expensive.   
   >   
   > There is one very successful additive manufacturing process: casting.   
      
   Because it is fast and cheap.   
      
   --   
   Jim Pennino   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)