Arcam AB fka AMAVF

[Tom Joad]

Thank you Nobohamas, Charlie, Investorhub 123 (for directing me to appropriate sites) and pdb2.

Nobohamas posted an article from 2014 reviewing AM methods. I strongly recommend spending time reading it. Included is a statement about certification that means one should exercise due diligence in reading press releases-

The conventional mean of qualifying and certifying aircraft components is costly (>$130 m) and lengthy (15 years) (Ref 35). The development of a statistically substantiated database alone can cost $8-$15m, require the testing of 5,000-100,000 specimens, and take over 2 years.

The link from which this comes from-

AM review

Charlie, post number 2765 seems to say Avio had, in December of 2015, just completed a 2 year certification process. I'm not sure how to read that. It may be that some statements are sufficient to conclude that certification has taken place, maybe not. I spent some hours on the FAA site trying to make headway with no progress.

PDB2, like you I don't like inaccurate statements. If someone has misinterpreted something I believe it's our job to question and criticize. This has nothing to do with whether someone is making bullish or bearish statements, just the inaccuracy of the statements.

The information we have to work with can be maddening to interpret and can be magnified by inappropriate posts. So, it's maddening when as careful as I've tried to be, I just found one website that mentions the rate of EB AM Ti-Al manufacture for stage 7 of the GE9X engine, while another says Ti-Al blades will be used in stage 6 and 7 of the GE9X without saying whether or not they would be produced by AM.

That I believe pales in comparison to someone sprinkling this discussion board with inaccurate statements, then saying that too many on this list attack them when they make bullish statements. That's just false. We were addressing the inaccuracies. We don't need the noise here when it's difficult enough to mine the information.