From CAD to Cast Metal in Days, Not Months — Zero Tooling Investment | ITAR Registered | Made in USA |
Capability Statement
When an aircraft is grounded and an original casting source or wax-pattern tooling is unavailable, DDM Systems evaluates whether a tooling-free investment-casting route is technically viable within the program’s existing engineering, approval and inspection framework.
This is an accelerated feasibility-review pathway—not a promise of a specific production or delivery time. Viability and schedule depend on the available technical definition, alloy, geometry, quantity, foundry route, inspection scope, required approvals and current capacity.
This urgent-review resource is the AOG branch of DDM Systems’ broader aircraft sustainment casting support pathway. The parent hub covers planned sustainment, repair-or-replace decisions, and multi-part program review.
An AOG condition creates urgency, but urgency does not remove the technical decisions required to reproduce an aircraft casting. The immediate task is to determine whether the requirement has enough controlled information to support a casting review, whether the geometry is compatible with investment casting, and which organization has authority to approve the manufacturing route.
If the original wax-pattern tooling is lost, damaged, inaccessible or tied to an unavailable supplier, directly printed ceramic shells may remove one tooling stage from the recovery plan. They do not establish approved geometry, qualify the alloy, authorize a source or replace airworthiness decisions. Inspection and traceability requirements still need to be defined for the program.
DDM Systems can review the available package and define whether the next practical step is a directly printed shell, a coordinated finished-casting scope, a data-gap review, or a determination that the requirement is not ready for production planning.
Identify the controlling CAD model, drawing revision, material specification, critical characteristics and any conflicts among the available records. Reference-only files and physical samples should be labeled separately from approved design data.
Review part envelope, wall sections, transitions, internal passages, core needs, alloy, tolerances, surface requirements, machining allowances and expected quantity against the proposed casting route.
Determine whether the program needs a ready-to-pour ceramic shell or a coordinated finished casting, and assign responsibility for pouring, heat treatment, machining, inspection, documentation and shipment condition.
Submit the best available package in the first contact. Missing information does not always prevent an initial review, but it should be identified explicitly so the engineering team can distinguish a solvable data gap from an approval or geometry constraint.
Confirm what the files represent, which revision controls, what is missing, and how restricted information may be handled. An urgent review should not begin by treating an unverified scan or worn component as approved production geometry.
Evaluate whether the geometry and alloy fit a directly printed shell route, whether cores or downstream operations are required, and whether the request should be shell-only or a finished-casting scope.
Identify open decisions that can govern timing: design authority, material definition, qualification, foundry availability, special processes, inspection planning, customer hold points and source approval.
Define deliverables, responsibilities, technical assumptions, exclusions, inspection documents, shipping condition and the decision points required before production authorization.
Build timing from the approved technical baseline and confirmed resource availability. Mold production may be only one part of the critical path; customer review and qualification work can govern the date.
Proceed only after the responsible parties accept the defined manufacturing route, scope and approval plan. Tooling-free production changes the mold path; it does not authorize installation or service use.
The LAMP™ process is the enabling method for producing investment-casting ceramic molds directly from digital geometry. If the program already has a suitable casting source, DDM can evaluate a ready-to-pour ceramic shell. If the requirement calls for coordinated production through an agreed finished-casting deliverable, review the DirectPour™ CAD-to-casting workflow.
Company registrations, certifications, identifiers and capability details are available in the DDM Systems | Rapid Precision Castings Capability Statement. These credentials support supplier review but do not replace part-specific source approval or program qualification.
AOG status does not waive design authority, airworthiness approval, material or process qualification, first-article requirements, nondestructive examination, dimensional inspection, traceability, source approval, change control or customer-specific acceptance requirements.
DDM Systems does not assume that an existing component is an approved master, that missing internal geometry can be inferred, or that a different mold-production method is automatically interchangeable with the original process. The responsible engineering, contracting and airworthiness authorities determine which approvals apply and whether a produced component may be installed or returned to service.
Include the operational urgency, required quantity and requested delivery date, but also identify the controlling data, alloy, approval status, inspection requirements and desired scope. The first response should establish what can be reviewed and which decisions remain open.