this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
475 points (97.8% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

39015 readers
5611 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
475
Jesus nut (infosec.pub)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by GreenDust@lemmings.world to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pipe01@programming.dev 179 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It'll work for the rest of your life!

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 37 points 1 month ago

Only if you’re otherwise unlucky, as you’re not leaving the ground

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 15 points 1 month ago

It'll break before it gets of the ground.

[–] gigastasio@sh.itjust.works 118 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As someone who tests materials and parts like this for a living, I can look at that part and say with 100% certainty that it will last for a period of time.

[–] funkajunk@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nanoseconds are technically a period of time, yes.

[–] Neondragon25@piefed.social 21 points 1 month ago

I think we can get a bigger number if we just measure in femtoseconds. And bigger number is better.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 67 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As a sacrificial cast right?

[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 54 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah! But he's the sacrifice.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, lost casting could work. It should be thoroughly tested before relying on it for your life though.

[–] bizarroland@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I doubt they're gonna be doing lost casting in high tensile steel.

Probably just gonna like melt down some aluminum soda cans and say it's good enough.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

They could with stainless, but you're probably right.

[–] Zorcron@piefed.zip 52 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Funny joke, but before anyone assumes this is real and criticizes the print quality:

Both of these photos are edited from the picture on the Wikipedia page for the rotor retaining nut. The one on the right doesn’t even look like a real 3D printed part: the lines on the top surfaces aren’t parallel, in addition to it being incredibly messy overall.

Wiki Page

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's almost like it's a joke

[–] Zorcron@piefed.zip 5 points 1 month ago

Yes, but this has been posted a couple times before, and people always act like it’s real. Instead of responding to any of the folks here, I figured I’d just make my own comment.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I assumed the one on the right was greased and ready to use.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jia_tan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That is the most awful 3d print I have seen in my entire life. And I have seen benchys printed my cheap prusa clones.

[–] jia_tan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

How did they even manage to finish the print with filament chunkier than a homeless persons cum and bipolar ahh nozzle temperature

[–] asbestos@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

saved this comment so I can laugh again when I remeber to check saved

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] obbeel@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

Thank you for this.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Helicopters freak me the fuck out.

At least planes can glide if the engines die.

If a helicopter fails, you're dropping like a stone.

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I have flown in helicopters most of my career, and we regularly did auto-rotation emergency drills, where we cut the engines output back (to simulate dual engine failure) and then "glide" to a particular spot, using the air pressure from descent to drive the blades.

With a good pilot, you just kind of go zero-g for a second or two, and the. A somehwat faster than normal descent, followed by a big flare (tail down, nose up, like a diving bird pulling back and fanning its wings out) at around 80 feet, then quick (less comfortable) drop to the deck.

With a good pilot, it's mildly uncomfortable, with a mediocre pilot, it's some back pain and some extra maintenance inspections, but you aren't crashing.

[–] EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

100% well said. However, imo the biggest problem is doing this when failure actually happens over any terrain that isn't flat for several hundred yards.

Engine failure while flying through mountains doesn't provide enough room to descend and pull back up.

So recovering from critical failure is very dependant on the enviroment the pilot is flying in. Just wanted to add that on, as Helos are imo, basically designed to enter and exit the worst environments out there, making it difficult to counter mechanical issues even with proper training.

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Our pilots, with training, regularly can get to inside a circle patch of flat land 100 ft in diameter. They generally pick a very specific spot on the runway (like the numbers) and then aim to end up there. And they practice straight down, 90 degree left, 90 degree right* 180 degree, and on occasion 360 degree (for when the spot you want is directly below when your engines fail, and feels like you are corkscrewing to your doom). Obviously practice is different than an actual emergency, but I felt confident the pilots could get us down safely in the event of a dual engine failure.

So honestly if it's over mountainous areas, I'd rather be in the helicopter looking for a place to hard land than a fixed wing aircraft (that needs a runway or at the very least a long grassy field with no obstructions).

[–] EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Good point between the two! I'd prefer being in neither if there was engine failure over mountainous terrain haha.

Imo, the biggest difference between the two is that fixed wing aircraft have a lot more time available to them to correct for a case of complete engine failure. While it would still be an issue over mountainous areas, the plane would certainly have more time to glide and find a place to land imo. (Assuming it's at a higher altitude than a helo would normally travel). Not that this would make it easier or anything. Just that the total amount of time you have to correct for an engine failure is far greater in a fixed wing craft then a helo, generally speaking.

That being said, the training you're mentioning is excellent, and I have nothing but respect for Helo pilots. If anything, they have to be more dialed in than fixed wing pilots as there's a lot more that can go wrong quickly. So likewise, the training needed to be a good Helo pilot far exceeds the training needed to be a good fixed wing pilot. (At least imo). To that end, I would 100% rather be in a Helo with engine failure as it's far more likely the pilot actually knows what to do, and is trained for it too 😉

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Not really, the autorotation makes the blades behave like a parachute, so you can also glide down gently. You need blades to be heavily damaged for it to fall down like a stone, same with planes when the wings fall off.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I've never once seen a helicopter crash that looked anything at all like it was falling with a parachute.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

That's because the helicopter crashes you've seen were the ones where something catastrophic happened, like a midair collision or a pilot error. That's what makes the news, not the safe landings where engine failure has occurred.

[–] Magnum 8 points 1 month ago

The crashes you seen had their tail damaged.

[–] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

An auto rotation isn't a crash. An auto rotation can end up as one but usually looks like a normal landing

[–] mwproductions@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Also, a plane gliding to a landing still needs a pretty large, clear area to touchdown and come to a stop safely. Helicopters landing using autorotation need far less space.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 month ago

Not entirely,auto rotation and so,but yeah,helicopters are just machines working really hard not to explode at random

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What's the term I heard about helicopters? Something along the lines of:

A helicopter is 1000 moving parts all conspiring to kill you? Something like that.

[–] ccunix@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

I like James May's description

A plane elegantly uses the laws of physics to fly. A helicopter just beats them into submission.

Or something like that.

[–] kungfuratte@feddit.org 25 points 1 month ago

"I didn't even have to make the CAD file myself. Just prompted GPT to generate it for me."

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 21 points 1 month ago

At least if that was PLA (and not a Photoshop job) there's be no risk of it failing mid-flight. Because it would rip to shreds the second torque was applied to it.

[–] Kintarian@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

You now have the world’s first single use helicopter

[–] A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.cl 18 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I think there was a time a dude did this for real on a Cessna and crashed it as the part almost immediatly failed.

Unless you have a metal 3D print, or can print in exotic ultra strength materials, you just can't do this.

[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think even if you have a metal 3d printer, it would still not be suitable for anything where strength of the piece is critical. Iirc, metal 3d printing basically just joins metal filings together using some kind of medium, making is no much weaker than a forged or machined piece.

[–] Pissman2020@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

They use a laser to melt the top layer of a bed of metal powder, lower the bed, spread more powder, repeat. It results in a generally more porus part than cast or forged material, thus weaker, but can make otherwise impossible to manufacture geometries that can be lighter weight, which can reduce the strength requirements as well. A jesus nut is not an application you skimp on strength lol

[–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

F1 teams 3D print (laser metal sintering more specifically) their pistons these days, so I'd say at the bleeding edge of the tech you can create pretty strong parts. But indeed, anything which a consumer is likely going to be able to afford won't be nearly as strong.

[–] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They also are likely to rebuild and throw away with every race

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] b_tr3e@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

The reasonable way would be to do the prototype with a 3D printer, create a mold and cast the metal. This wouldn't work here either, but if you already have the CAD/CAM file you could just get it milled by a professional CNC outfit. If you're not too cheap with the steel, it might not even kill you and still cost less than $1600. OTOH, if you can afford a helicopter that shouldn't be an argument for you. Half an hour in the air will cost you more than that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mac@mander.xyz 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ig we just calling any rust at all "rusted out" now. Cool

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah that nut on the left is clearly still good.

[–] JoShmoe@ani.social 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oooo does it make one of those cool noises that squishy toys make?

[–] GreenDust@lemmings.world 5 points 1 month ago

It makes those terrifying noises that dying helicopter passengers make.

load more comments
view more: next ›