15 ms·

The US Marines' Love Affair with 3D Printing

• evrydayhustling 9y ago
  An army officer once gave me an amazing rundown of the ways deployed units have to recreate so many layers of infrastructure we take for granted. Military units really have to carry a whole version of their civilization with them, and how long they can maintain it determines their effectiveness (which is why most of military history is about logistics improvements creating newly dominant forces). The challenges have a lot in common with space travel - not surprising that 3D printing has spurred so much imagination on both sides. Side note: there's a quote in the article where Gen. Walters is envying what young engineers can do with this stuff. That's one of my favorite signals for tech that's not hype -- when it makes successful pros wish they were born a little later.
  • seastonATccs 9y ago
    The US Military is a logistics organization that happens to fight wars.
    • toomuchtodo 9y ago
      Many years ago, I worked with a gentleman who was a reservist with the air national guard. For one of their weekend sorties, they had an entire platoon parachute out, and one of the other transport aircraft dropped equipment for creating a runway. At the end of the weekend, they flew back to land and pick everyone and the equipment used to build said runway, and then flew back to the base. Truly a work of logistical and infrastructure art.
      • exabrial 9y ago
        Wow, what was the runway material?
        • ctdonath 9y ago
          Tangent: I've long wondered when we'd see invention of drop-in roads - transportable segments of self-leveling roadways, robust enough for heavy use & a substantial lifespan yet easily disconnected & replaced (unlike current stubbornly permanent structures). In that context, I'm interested to the answer to your question.
          • tumba 9y ago
            These do exist. They are used all the time for land-based oil rigs. Search for oilfield temporary roads.
        • jdietrich 9y ago
          Probably Marston mat or one of its successors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marston_Mat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marston_Mat
        • deleted 9y ago
          [deleted]
        • jeffcore 9y ago
          Don't know the specifics of the GP's story, but nowadays, it's mostly aluminum sheeting boards that lock together which are painted with a non-slip paint. It's actually quite impressive, seamless joins, etc. The old Martson matting worked, but were FOD hazards as well since sand and rocks would often come up through the joins. You definitely don't forget landing on one though, really wakes you up as the aircraft shakes itself like crazy on roll-out.
        • toomuchtodo 9y ago
          I believe they simply graded earth using a grader. Hauling in their own gravel or other material would've been cost prohibitive.
          • bb611 9y ago
            Are you sure they built a runway? Sounds more like a FARP for helicopters. Pretty much all US combat aircraft are tarmac bound due to low mounted engine inlets, with the exception of a couple transports and the A-10.
      • UncleEntity 9y ago
        We did that a time or two, jumped out of the same aircraft that later picked us up. Battalion sized operation because that's the smallest jumps we would do. We didn't have to build a runway or anything like that, they just landed the C-130s on the dirt runway we "tookdown". --edit-- Now that I think about it that's when we were doing a lot of training on taking down small runways for the War on Drugs -- between the Panama Invasion and Gulf War I. The mission was to jump in, cause a world of hurt to the cartel and then get picked up and fly home.
    • jcranmer 9y ago
      Yes. During the American Revolutionary War where the Americans moved the artillery from Fort Ticonderoga to Boston over the winter of 1775-6 (still an era where the military response to winter was to hunker down somewhere and wait for spring before doing anything), and then proceeded to install them on heights overlooking the harbor overnight. In WWII, the US managed the astounding feat of supplying the majority of the logistics on what was effectively three separate fronts (North Africa and later the Western Front via the semi-interdicted Atlantic, the Eastern Front via the Northwest Staging Route and Siberia, and the Pacific Theater, including mainland China via the Hump). It was the experience of The Hump that led the military to try relieving Berlin by air, which almost everyone thought impossible at the time but instead turned out to be a smashing success.
      • afarrell 9y ago
        Note that in this era, if a farmer wanted to move west in search of cheaper/richer farmland, you would do it in the winter. Without paved roads, loading all of your stuff into a cart and driving it in the summer would mean you could get stuck in the mud. It was a far better option to load a sled in the winter. The King's troops, growing up in a climate where snow doesn't (well, in 2018. I don't know about 1756) really stick to the ground, probably indeed would not have expected this.
        • mc32 9y ago
          It's my recollection people heading west to Oregon and beyond would aim for making it to Independence Rock, WY before independence day in the summer to avoid having to attempt traversing the Rockies in winter.
          • evgen 9y ago
            In the era in question westward movement was towards and over the Adirondacks. Formidable obstacle for ox-drawn sleds, but nothing like the Rockies...
            • 9y ago
    • icelancer 9y ago
      Indeed. One could also argue that fighting wars is primarily a logistics problem that sometimes involves using weapons.
    • 0xdeadbeefbabe 9y ago
      I'm trying to think of a logistics company that doesn't fight wars. Maybe USPS or Fedex?
      • jstarfish 9y ago
        UPS could easily pivot; they have a ton of ex-military in their ranks. Only now do I understand why!
      • mey 9y ago
        Walmart
      • wizardforhire 9y ago
        FedEx was started by a marine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_W._Smith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_W._Smith
      • DoreenMichele 9y ago
        Waffle House https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/if-waffle-house-is-closed-its-time-to-panic/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/if-waffle-house-is-clos...
      • phowat 9y ago
        Formula 1 teams ? Moving all that equipment around the world, a lot of times on tight deadlines must not be easy.
      • adrianpike 9y ago
        Amazon.
      • Crespyl 9y ago
        Sears, a few decades ago.
      • sexydefinesher 9y ago
        McDonalds
      • selectout 9y ago
    • hguant 9y ago
      >"Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics." - Gen. Robert H. Barrow, USMC (Commandant of the Marine Corps) noted in 1980 >"I am tempted to make a slightly exaggerated statement: that logistics is all of war-making, except shooting the guns, releasing the bombs, and firing the torpedoes." - ADM Lynde D. McCormick, USN
    • Animats 9y ago
      The US military, and especially the USMC, is able to mount operations almost anywhere on the planet on reasonably short notice. Very few other countries have the capability to field a sizable force far from home. Most can't operate far from their permanent bases. Even the UK has trouble - they've downsized so much. That's what makes the US military so expensive. On the other hand, the US does so much of this that everybody knows the US can do it. The USMC tries for a high tooth-to-tail ratio, which is great for short wars, and not so good for really long ones. (Wars seem to be either week long or decade long now. Not much in between.) China is working on getting more capability in force projection, but it's slow going. The USSR had a reasonable capability, which ran down after the breakup of the USSR. Russia is trying to build it back up.
  • walshemj 9y ago
    There was fascinating BBC documentary covering the Napoleonic wars and how the British had organic logistics where as the French had to split up to forage. And to this day British vehicles have a variant of a Crimean war piece of kit to heat water / food - which is/was an object of envy of US forces
• Pigo 9y ago
  From contracting with the Air Force, I can tell you that they have a love affair with spending money. Most of the projects I seen revolved around making sure everyone spent as much as possible, so that they could get more.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • unit91 9y ago
    Well, there's a huge difference in the mindset of deployed grunts vs stateside red-tape laden behemoths. When you're deployed and something important breaks, you have a BIG problem. The impact is usually somewhere between you being absolutely miserable for weeks to costing you your life. When you're stateside and something important breaks, you have a reason to expand your empire at next year's budget meeting.
    • Pigo 9y ago
      It's just a shame most people don't know that there is such a difference. I wouldn't feel so bad if all that money was going to important things. But I witnessed so much waste, and so many people who do literally nothing but wait for retirement. It's upsetting that that money doesn't go to the soldiers who need it.
  • mikerice 9y ago
    This is common with every large organization.
    • masklinn 9y ago
      It is also in part a factor of the way procurement works, many beancounters still can't grasp that needs vary and problems happen, so you get a budget, if you come up below budget you lose the extra and may get your next budget lowered to match, and getting more budget is a hard fight. As a result, departments want to have a budget as close as possible to a worst-case scenario, spend the entire year thrifting in case something major occurs and then have to blow it all up right before EOY.
• DanielBMarkham 9y ago
  The only hitch? The parts weren’t approved for installation on an aircraft. “I said, put the button on,” Neller told the National Defense Industrial Association last week. “Print a bag of them and hang them there.” This is a great story about disruption. The Marines seem to be on top of trying to continue thinking outside the box. That turns out to be very difficult to do in any large, old organization. I heard an interview with the Commandant last week. They asked him what kind of tech he wanted most. "Better batteries" Bingo. Better batteries would change everything, not just the Marine Corps. There are few technologies like batteries. Cost-to-orbit tech is one of them. If we change those technologies, we change the entire rest of the economy. I believe the service used to call things like that "force multipliers". It's neat to see 3D printing _perhaps_ becoming a force multiplier in many areas. Putting on my cynic hat, expect to see a lot of pushback form the establishment where this technology disrupts the most. Those folks with button standards aren't going to go down peacefully.
  • meritt 9y ago
    Marines think outside of the box because we rarely have enough boxes and the ones we do get don't have lids. That's why we have the unofficial motto of "Improvise, Adapt, and Overcome".
  • paulmd 9y ago
    Intercom buttons are one thing... I was less enthused to read about the impeller fan. It's all fun and games until it shatters under load and blows up a turbine.
    • dsfyu404ed 9y ago
      Well it's being used to clean the air filter so presumably any failure will be caught by said filter.
      • CompelTechnic 9y ago
        I would think that a fan that has the purpose of cleaning the filter would have to blow in the reverse direction to blow the trapped dirt out. It would probably be on the clean side of the filter in that case, and any shrapnel it spewed off would go right into the turbine inlet.
• joncrane 9y ago
  I love the Commandant's attitude. He seems to get it. I've come across many Marines in my personal history as a diplomat brat (Marines protect all US Embassies abroad) and worker (the best boss I've ever had is a Marine). I've only met one I don't respect and/or admire, and he was drunk and belligerent on the Metro (not towards anyone in particular, just being a loud ass).
• chriselles 9y ago
  This is probably one of the very few topics I may be able to add value here on Hacker News. As a service, the USMC are approaching bottom up innovation very seriously. https://mobile.twitter.com/marinemakers https://mobile.twitter.com/marinemakers The USAF is also very active in bottom up innovation. Another program is Hacking 4 Defense founded by Steve Blank, Pete Newell, and Joe Felter(leave of absence now performing role of US Assistant Undersecretary of Defence for South & Southeast Asia). Pete Newell(retired Army Colonel) stood up the Rapid Equipping Force a numbe of years ago to rapidly accelerate the development and deployment of tools to mitigate IED related casualties. Hacking 4 Defense(H4D) is running across a growing number of University campus to solve complex Defense problems using the Lean Start Up methodology using a modified lean canvas called the Mission Model Canvas. https://www.h4di.org https://www.h4di.org I am working to expand the use of H4D/MMC down here in Australasia. Happy to share more if anyone is interested. It’s great to see Marines given the latitude to experiment. It’s also great to see the often inaccurate stereotypes of Marines being rigidly disciplined and inflexible in thinking give way to the reality that Marines have very often conducted comprehensive tactical experimentation and innovation.
  • sandworm101 9y ago
    Except that bottom-up development doesnt always work in the context of complicated systems. OK, the button works but does it work in all conditions the aircraft is designed for? Maybe a button here or there isnt much, but there are potentially hundreds of such instances on an aircraft. Small defects add up. Eventually something gives. It may sound cool to reduce costs and scream independance, marines like such things, but aircraft remain safe due to a religious dedication to parts managment. Start chipping away at that and you are asking for trouble.
    • rubidium 9y ago
      Nobody is saying there isn't a place for good parts management, solid systems engineering, and quality control. But there's room for bottom-up ideas and rapid prototyping too.
    • chriselles 9y ago
• surgeryres 9y ago
  Another use would be 3D printed surgical instruments. There is already a proof of concept paper written on this topic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27822724 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27822724
  • jessaustin 9y ago
    Having recently purchased ~400 dental surgical instruments from some dude in Pakistan for less than $2000 including shipping, and received them in less than a month even though they were manufactured after I ordered them, I can imagine no possible purpose of 3D printing surgical instruments. They are stainless steel and will last approximately forever.
    • totallynotcool 9y ago
      >Having recently purchased ~400 dental surgical instruments from some dude in Pakistan Might want to look up the IFU or AORN standards for those. I know many places either toss them out of their kits or are single use only. Something about pitting and the metal they are made of.
• solatic 9y ago
  In an era where global overnight civilian shipping is taken for granted, that it takes the military so long to ship parts that 3D printing parts of questionable ability to meet spec is considered an "innovative" solution is just more evidence that the military's logistics are sad and ineffective. Forget buttons for a second, the article references fans that took a week to 3D print. Yes, the military has to special-order a wide variety of parts and products with no civilian market. This makes the argument that some products may be more expensive. If the cost of manufacturing can be dramatically decreased through 3D printing, then properly account for cost by front-loading R&D costs, open-sourcing the designs which were developed with public money, and buying from the cheapest contractor which meets spec. If that contractor uses 3D printing to offer the lowest cost, cool. If lowest cost doesn't require 3D printing, who cares? Buy more than the military needs, but not so much as to be inordinately wasteful, to keep the part constantly in stock across a variety of globally distributed warehouses close enough to people who would need that part to be able to deliver requested parts within a week. It's a hard problem to be sure but more or less solvable (for reasonable optimizations in the absence of a constantly renewing solution to an NP complete problem). Yes, the military has to be able to supply forces in areas where no civilian infrastructure exists. And if you want to argue for 3D printers somewhere like Antarctica where supplies can only be delivered for a few months of summer out of the whole year then that would make sense. If you want to argue that setting up a full warehouse with all parts which may ultimately prove necessary in a brand-new FOB in a war zone is at the very least a very difficult problem because of the difficulty of keeping track of everything that goes into that FOB not to mention keeping sufficient stock levels then I may agree with you. Arguing that it's reasonable to wait for months or even more than a year for parts to be delivered from a warehouse in the continental US to large, major, permanent bases located within the continental US? No, hell no, no freaking way, no way to excuse that other than general incompetence. Militaries are never going to be nearly as efficient or as quick as UPS / FedEx / DHL for all their usecases. And that's fine. But taxpayers should not allow that to serve as an excuse for perennially poor logistics performance relative to what should be expected in comparison to the private sector.
• phkahler 9y ago
  I'm imagining climbing into a helicopter and seeing the panel with buttons and switches that were printed in various bright colors - whatever they had on hand when each part was made - and thinking I'm flying with Fisher Price.
• bb88 9y ago
  Brilliant. In some cases you don't want someone tearing apart a $300k radio to figure out what's wrong with it, but on the other hand, a small fix to save $20k is awesome.
• spacestuff387 9y ago
  The more each marine knows and the more tools each has at his/her disposable, the more flexible each individual and unit will be. Flexibility can be important in fighting. A Marine unit with multiple materials and multiheaded 3D printers could print more than replacement parts for downed war fighting machinery. Specific weapons or other gear could be adapted to fit the situation. For example, a particular part isn't working (like the altimeter in the previous comment) due to poor design in bad testing. Marines with access to the raw CAD files of the part could modify the cowling/housing shape to make it more visible. The finished model could be stress tested in a physics modeling program. When it passes, a metal part could be printed and installed. A thermistor could even be added to provide heat to stop frosting. If it works in one plane, it could be duplicated to the whole squadron. And this quick adaptability in changing design method could be applied to anything: backpacks that are the incorrect shape and cause backpain, bump stocks that cause damage on the recoil, or a new water checkvalve screen could be designed to better force water out of soaked boots and stop foot rot. The design work could even happen remotely back on the mainland with more design resources. This could happen within 24hrs from a supply unit stationed just off the front lines doing most of the work. At the end of a 6month engagement, the vehicles, equipment and gear could all be substantially different than how they started. This extreme adaptability could end up being a huge advantage.
• chad_strategic 9y ago
  When I was in the Marine Corps, we didn't need a 3D printer, we just improvised. Best job I have ever had.