Comments on: Tomorrow’s Insta-Weapons

By: anonymous

anonymous — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:44:25 +0000

>CNC-processing of ballistic steel will continue >to be more expensive than current processes, not >because of the material cost, but because of the >wear on the tools from cold cutting. Moreover, >without further heat-processing, you will lose >much of the material hardness after you cut the >steel.
Wire EDM, Laser and Water jet, one of these must be possible.

By: UncleBen

UncleBen — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 21:47:55 +0000

I’ve been to the Int’l Manufacturing Technology Show for the last 11 years, and proliferation of CNC is not a problem.
What you will NOT see at an IMTS is all the interstitial stuff. It is what goes on BETWEEN the CNC that hides all the real value. If the Norks sold the “digital” files to build a missile, there would still be enormous gaps that would have to be filled by experience. The customer would still be faced with hundreds of thousands of man-hours dealing with all the hand-off variables between the CNC steps.
Recall that the leading edge tools do not make the weapon (AK-47 or W-31) they make the tools that make the weapon. That indirectness will hold true for a long time to come.
Finally, getting the “Formula 1″ of machine tools to work in an unimproved environment is somewhat optimistic. The stellar costs of these things mean that even a Hollywood terrorist (inifitely crazy & rich) would have a hard time making a go of it.
This isn’t really a story yet. Should be pondered over, not paniced about.

By: john

john — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 09:10:56 +0000

The MAGIC (Modification and General Invention Company)UNICAT amphibious trackable vehicle is a prime example of CAD-CAM technology being made available to opposing regimes. Designed to be built as the ‘AK-47′ of vehicles, it will pose a huge problem for forces who are pitted aginst it. It is built as a digital file, able to be built anywhere there is numerically controlled machinery. In terms of capability, it leaves the HMMWV for dead.

By: Ronen

Ronen — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 01:01:47 +0000

Free to use, Creative commons licensed, downloadable designs of accessories and lighting at my website:
http://www.ronen-kadushin.com/Open_Design.asp
welcome!

By: jimmy wu

jimmy wu — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 20:44:16 +0000

Like George said earlier, the proliferation of CNC machinery will fill only a certain niche in the manufacturing of machinery.
The reason sand-casting and die-casting is still around, after many years of CNC-machinery, is because they are much cheaper for mass manufacturing than CNC, and that is not going to change in the short term.
CNC-processing of ballistic steel will continue to be more expensive than current processes, not because of the material cost, but because of the wear on the tools from cold cutting. Moreover, without further heat-processing, you will lose much of the material hardness after you cut the steel.
WRT aerospace applications, there are some parts that you will need to use a forging process because of the material properties required.
A cutting process like CNC will not let you achieve the specific properties.

By: csven

csven — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 18:33:09 +0000

I’m with Michael. It’s not CNC as much as it’s additive processes. And I’m thinking it’s not steel, but some new material that’s developed which makes steel obsolete for many applications.
In addition, there’s no reason to think of future weapons systems as being large (in a relative sense). A swarm of wasp-size robots carrying lethal doses of poison could wreak havoc on an enemy… and the military is already working on intelligent swarming UCAV technology. Eventually, I believe we’ll have kirkyan weapon systems ( ref: http://blog.rebang.com/?p=998 ). Not true AI, but self-optimizing systems. Just part of the trend toward mass customization.

By: Doug Geiger

Doug Geiger — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:54:42 +0000

No question that the proliferation of cheaper, smaller manufacturing systems will make it easier to make any type of product (including weapon systems) anywhere in the world. But high-precision manufacturing of complex parts still isn’t easy, especially of hard to machine materials which still often require grinding operations. While hard turning is making that unneccesary in some cases — to obtain the precision required for aerospace and other high-precision parts you still need a machine tool with much higher static and dynamic stiffnesses that your typical ‘desktop manufacturing’ system can provide. Certainly the trend is only going to accelerate down that path — but AK-47’s are already easy to manufacture anywhere, as are things like unguided rockets and the like. I think the idea that a terrorist cell could download plans for North Korean or Iranian missiles and run over to their CNC lathe/water-jet/machining center and pop out a bunch of medium or long range missles on short order is a bit alarmist. Rockets are one thing, liquid-fueled guided missles are another. As noted , simply being able to run a machine tool doesn’t mean you have the infrastructure to build and test something on that scale.

By: Nicholas Weaver

Nicholas Weaver — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 02:06:17 +0000

Also, george, it is already being used. The Mobile Parts Hospital has been running for a while now, and although it can’t Mad Max a Humvee (big armor plates are not its specialty), it is being used for odd upgrades, like gun mounts and other smaller but more complex pieces.
I suspect its success will grow in the future, as more systems are designed from the start to be built with CNC-based prototypes/parts. Often the limitation is either no computer model (so the part needs to be scanned) or the part wasn’t designed to be CNC-ed, but was something like sand-casting, die-casting, or other technique which can produce a different shape.

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:04:03 +0000

Good Afternoon George,
The intent of what I said was not a mobile production line in a combat zone, but as a way to speed equipment to those who need it, to speed inovations to equipment that is the result of the lessons learned in combat and to reduce the invantory of seldom needed parts.
As to your concerned regarding CNC machinery and its cost those are droping every year. That million dollar CNC mill of 2000 is now a hundard grand. I remember hearing this same argurment regarding the use of lap top computers by soldiers in the mid 90’s. Some one made the crack to me, “I suspose that you would want one in every Jeep’” I replied, “Well, of course.” Even at its most expensive this equipment would be little more the pocket change and in the case like the war in Iraq it could be left behind for use by a local start up business.
Regarding materials 5/8″ (16mm) cold rolled steel plate is a pretty universal item world wide.
The use of CNC machinery for production is fairly common, I will refer you to the Bretta (HK) plant in Columbia South Carolina. This plant turns out M-16’s, mostly for the Marines and nearly all of the fabrication is done on CNC machinery that for the most part is unmanned during the tooling process.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

By: George Skinner

George Skinner — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 23:33:53 +0000

Byron,
I don’t think CNC machines would’ve done much to speed up-armoring of HMMWVs. CNC machines are expensive, and machining a part from raw stock is time-consuming and expensive as well. That’s OK for a few prototypes, as the author was suggesting, but not a good way of mass-producing upgrades. The problems become even more pronounced if you’re machining hard materials of the sort used for armor. If you’re serious about mass-producing something, you need to invest in castings, forgings, tooling, and perhaps other specialized machinery to speed up your process and reduce the unit cost. It might make sense to use CNC to build certain parts on demand rather than stocking them, but unless logistics were truly horrendous, it’s hard to see how the cost of putting units in the field could beat manufacturing the parts at home and shipping them out quickly.