Why Should You Use Aluminum Military Parts? Many of the government’s military equipment and weapons are manufactured and made with aluminum parts or die casting parts. There are many advantages when using aluminum to create military parts, and in this article, the most common advantages will be enumerated and explained.

• When forging the military parts using aluminum, the manufacturers are able to produce more complex parts with thinner walls and sections, low finishing costs, and have coring that is normally not feasible in forging. This means that one is able to produce parts that are more difficult than their predecessors but are more tolerable, durable, and of course less costly.
• Aluminum is a more durable, stronger, and more dimensionally stable alloy to use than when using plastic moldings to create military parts. This is because aluminum parts are able to prevent radio frequency, electromagnetic emissions, and other possible effects that could damage the parts. So if you want your military equipment to remain stable and strong despite constant use, this is the kind of alloy and the kind of molding to be used.
• Normally extrusions are used to produce the parts and to give it shape, but with aluminum die casting, the parts are produced faster in terms of speed and with more net shape than usual.
  
  

Pressure Die Casting Aluminum Military Parts vs Extrusions. Die casting is a process wherein molten aluminum is injected into a mold with great pressure. Afterwards, they are then set to water cool. When they are opened, they are then ejected. Aluminum military parts are created through this simple and inexpensive manufacturing process. As compared to other processes like sand casting, gravity casting, forging, extrusion, plastic injection moldings and stamping, die casting is inarguably the most efficient process for molding aluminum military parts.

Pressure die casting parts are more recyclable as opposed to forgings and extrusions. Aluminum die casting is efficient and economical when it comes to maintenance, refurbishing, remanufacturing, and repair for extending its life. It is non toxic and practical, and can readily be used again and again.

Pressure die casting is produced faster compared to extrusions. It has more net shape, which means that more features, depressions and angles can be placed in one operation. You can create more complex shapes, have thinner sheets, and more accurate dimensions with high pressure die casting for aluminum military parts. Holes can be cast in place rather than machining them later, adding to a higher production cost. There will be fewer waste products in pressure die casting aluminum military parts as opposed to extrusions.

About ten years ago, two men named “Brian” and “Ron” working for a machining company in Orange County, California contacted Kinetic Die Casting Company to quote a “Project” for a simple die casting tool to produce from 5,000 to 23,000 sets of parts.

Each set would make up a “Night Vision Goggle Device”.

These sets consisted of seven (7) separate parts; the machining company would machine and assemble.

Brian needed these parts delivered very fast. The cost of the tooling needed to be inexpensive in order to be competitive.

We decided to make a “unit die tool” because of the low quantity potential and chose a good toolmaker in the Los Angeles area to make the tool. We opted to trim the parts with a simple “push through trim die” and to hand finish the parts. In order to make the tooling, we used 3D files from their Mastercam to produce IGES files. We added the shrinkage and draft necessary in order for the die casting tool to function properly.

The project went very well. In fact, Brian won additional contracts to produce more Night Vision Goggles. For a few years we were producing up to 5,000 sets or 35,000 parts every week. For three years straight this company was our top customer company and for five years a very good customer indeed.

At the project conclusion Kinetic Die Casting Company had produced over 400,000 sets of parts or 2,800,000 parts from that simple die casting tool for our good customer. This was a huge success for our customer because they grew in sales over 5x in those five years.

Defense industrial base identifies with general manufacturing, tooling misconceptions
Friday, November 6, 2009
By Joe Brown
Military Lower Tier Suppliers Experiencing Same Frustrations as Automotive

Military suppliers and the industrial base they are a part of, currently face similar circumstances to those in the Machine, Tool, Die and Mold (MTDM) sectors. Like several previous articles in T&D, the mass misunderstandings about the importance of a viable manufacturing base in the U.S. do not exist in a vacuum.

Many in the MTDM industry are clamoring for a new “manufacturing policy” in America to prevent mistakes of past generations which have eroded crucial functions of manufacturing. What I found interesting is the increasingly louder whispers in Military and Defense supplier-circles debating the potential need for a new “industrial policy” mandated from the Pentagon to stem the rising uncertainty several suppliers–including certain MTDMs.

A recent article from the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) military manufacturing publication, National Defense Magazine, caught my attention because of the fundamental flaws in perception are exactly the same in Defense tooling as it is in Automotive.

The Pentagon is concerned with the sustainability of certain suppliers if they don’t have programs to keep them busy. They know there are specific skills and trades in the supply chain that must be salvaged. They just don’t know which ones…..

“The engineering and weapons-design work force is a critical asset that the Pentagon can’t afford to lose, but nobody really has defined what specific skills within that work force are the essential ones to keep,” according to Gerald Abbott, professor emeritus at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces.

Two elephants-in-the-rooms in MTDM for quite some time have been the aging workforce and ever-widening gap in the skilled trades’ labor pool. Government and Military suppliers can attest to that.

Source: Toolanddieing

CHICAGO (Dow Jones)–The surprise selection this week of Oshkosh Corp. (OSK) to build a high-priority truck for the U.S. military highlights a sea-change in defense procurement.

The maker of iconic fire trucks is the latest example of the Pentagon’s increasing preference for contractors with can-do capability over defense industry giants geared for lengthy peacetime procurements.

The extended conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have created demand for specialist equipment and services that previously attracted little interest from Pentagon planners or traditional defense contractors.

“There’s been such an immediate demand for new equipment, it’s outstripped the ability of the normal contractors to deliver it on time,” said Dean Lockwood, an analyst for Forecast International Inc., a defense consulting firm in Connecticut. The Pentagon has “completely thrown out the normal procurement process.”

Navistar International Corp. (NAV), the commercial truck and engine maker, and diversified manufacturer ITT Corp. (ITT) are among a band of companies that have won large contracts for military hardware to counter specific threats to U.S. troops.

The prospect for further military sales has bolstered Navistar and ITT’s stock prices in recent months. Navistar has surged 169% off its 52-week low in November, but early Thursday was trading down 4.53% at $40.59 a share after failing to win Tuesday’s contract. ITT, meanwhile, is up 35% off its March low. The stock was recently trading down 4.01% at $43.28.

Oshkosh won out over rivals bids from consortia including BAE Systems PLC and General Dynamics Inc. (GD) for the $1.06 billion contract to build 2,244 armored all-terrain trucks for U.S. troops Afghanistan.

Oshkosh already makes large and medium-size cargo trucks for the military, but had little previous experience with a high-priority program like the patrol trucks, which are expected to help U.S. soldiers pursue Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan’s rugged, mountainous landscape.

“We took a measured risk,” said Oshkosh CEO Robert Bohn in an interview. “This will help us get through the worst recession we’ve seen in our lifetime.”

He credited the win to an all-out effort by the company’s engineering staff and Oshkosh’s ability to leverage its existing truck components and its production capacity.

Oshkosh, whose brands include Pierce fire trucks and JLG self-propelled work platforms, has struggled in recent quarters because of falling demand for construction-related equipment. Oshkosh’s sales for the fiscal first half ended March 31 fell 18% to $2.68 billion. The company reported a $1.21 billion loss amid large charge-offs, compared with income of $109.9 million, or 1.47 a share, in the same period a year earlier. About 17% of the company’s work force has been laid off since last year.

In 2008, defense sales were Oshkosh second largest business unit, accounting for 27% of its $7.13 billion in net sales.

The company’s stock has more than doubled since the beginning of the year, including a 27% increase on Wednesday. Oshkosh was recently up 2.17% at $18.83 amid a marketwide selloff.

Navistar stunned the defense industry two years ago by raking in billions of dollars worth of contracts for mine-resistant, ambush-protected trucks, or MRAP. The company impressed military planners with its use of a readily available commercial truck chassis and engines for a heavily armored truck that could survive roadside bomb blasts in Iraq. Like Oshkosh, Navistar was able to deploy its own assembly lines to expedite production of the vehicles. Warrenville, Ill.-based Navistar built more than one-third of the 16,000 MRAPs purchased by the military.

Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services put Navistar and its customer financing arm on watch for a ratings downgrade Thursday as the outlook for North American commercial truck demand remains bleak for this year and next. S&P said Navistar’s inability to win Tuesday’s contract for the new military truck eliminated a potential revenue offset for lower sales of commercial trucks.

The MRAP and the smaller, more mobile variant of the MRAP being built by Oshkosh were developed and tested in six months. Observers note that many traditional defense contractors are at a disadvantage in such accelerated procurements because they typically rely on outside contractors for components and production work outside of their core specialties, such as building aircraft or ships.

Meanwhile, ITT’s defense electronics business has been growing at a 28%-a-year pace since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. In 2008, ITT’s $6.3 billion in military sales accounted 54% of the company’s total annual revenue, up from $1.7 billion or 32% of revenue in 2003.

ITT’s other businesses, which include pumps for water treatment plants and automotive components, have struggled in recent years amid lower end-market demand and a downturn in the economy.

The White Plains, N.Y., company, which makes a variety of radio equipment and night-vision goggles, is the U.S. military’s leading supplier of electronic jammers to disrupt the radio signals used to detonate improvised explosive devices (IED) that target trucks carrying U.S. troops.

ITT has built some 40,000 truck-mounted jammers. Prior to the wars, such jammers were primarily used on aircraft, rather than trucks.

“The Department of Defense did not view IEDs as a weapon that could or would be used effectively by our enemies,” said Bob Pergler, director of business development for ITT’s electronic systems.