Despite the tech-cool factor of the project, Tom’s Hardware does not condone making your own weapons system at home.
He built this in a cave, using scraps?
Submitted 16 hours ago by alleycat@feddit.org to 3dprinting@lemmy.world
Despite the tech-cool factor of the project, Tom’s Hardware does not condone making your own weapons system at home.
He built this in a cave, using scraps?
Honestly I figured an open container of gasoline and a Roman candle could do the job but requires placing the gasoline can.
Gasoline is an explosive.
Many people don’t really know this. They think it’s like alcohol or lighter fluid.
It is not.
Ignoring the legal repercussions of this:
Most of this makes sense. Stingers go back to the late 70s (?) and most of what we see used in Ukraine is closer to a decade old than not (and based on even older tech). Tech advances and what used to be hard becomes cheap.
That said? I would be very curious how this handles inclement weather. Wind and rain are a mofo and that (among other reasons) is why model rockets and the like are only ever really flown on beautiful clear days. And I don’t know enough about how the communication with javelin et als work these days but wifi seems REAL questionable.
Still. This is a really cool project and really speaks to the changing nature of warfare. And, once again, highlights the real reason so much money has gone into FDM processes.
GitHub gives 404. Only the tracking nodes is available.
I wanted to see if they actually made something.
github.com/…/MANPADS-System-Launcher-and-Rocket
That link on the video is bad. Just look at his profile.
einkorn@feddit.org 15 hours ago
Cue politicians calling to ban 3D printers in 3 … 2 …1 …
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 14 hours ago
Sure, ban hardware stores after that.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 3 hours ago
While I am fully opposed to a 3d printer ban (and abhor the efforts of Bambu et al to sneak that in), it is very important to understand why that is not a fair comparison and, if anything, sets a threshold that can be used to argue FOR a ban.
I’ve ranted in detail before so I’ll do the short version this time:
You are not going to make a barrel or springs yourself. And the good news is that you don’t need to. None of that is a controlled/registered part (for the vast majority of guns) and you can literally buy those at a walmart equivalent. And there at least used to be pre-packaged bundles available online for your ghost gun needs.
So that mostly leaves the receiver and fire control unit. I will bet you money that giving a rando off the street 24 hours to figure out how to go to the local communal machine shop and make even a frigging sten and they will fail miserably. Whereas there are videos (fuck vice for how they abused their workers but old-vice has a really good video where they literally made the gun Luigi allegedly used) of people going from 0 to glock in 12 hours of print time and 4-5 hours of filing.
And that is the big difference. How much that matters when you are considering a country where you can buy the same gear that Tier 1 Special Forces use to abduct (admittedly really shitty) world leaders for under a thousand bucks is a HUGE question. But from the “ghost gun” perspective? There is VERY much a big difference between having a CNC and machining a receiver+FCU versus doing the same with an Ender 3.
GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 6 hours ago
Reminds me of a time when I went to a maker space open house, and they were showing all kinds of cool stuff, including fairly advanced 3D printers for time. They mentioned there was programming to halt prints of things like gun parts, so it would be very hard to make guns using them. I commented, “Besides, you can make better ones in the metal shop in the other room.” He replied, “Yeah! <brief pause> No!”
TootSweet@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Stop. Giving. Them. Ideas.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 hours ago
Philip A. Luty smiles
daannii@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Already trying to
FatherPeanut@pawb.social 14 hours ago
Washington state already started making moves against it, as an attempt to prevent 3D printed firearm components. Specifically, it requires 3D printers sold within the state to have firmware-based scanning to cancel prints it suspects are used for firearms.
NutinButNet@hilariouschaos.com 12 hours ago
California is joining in too with AB-2047 and New York has AB-2228 requiring a criminal background check for buying a 3D printer.
CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
I’m imagining a bunch of first amendment challenges to these laws
pennomi@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Good fucking luck. That’s completely impossible