PDA

View Full Version : Fuel as a weapon question


racedo
6th Nov 2009, 22:49
It has always intrigued me about whether a fast jet dumping fuel over a ground attack formation, followed by a second fast jet 15-30 seconds later hitting burners at last minute would ignite and provide an effective weapon.

Has it been tried or is it worthless given possible loss of 2 fast movers unless as a last ditch manouvre ?

Finnpog
6th Nov 2009, 23:05
In one sense the RAAF have 'tested' the concept with their Pigs.

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2009, 23:09
At the risk of sounding frivolous you seem to be suggesting the equivalent of "lighting farts". It's fun but, as a weapon system, rarely effective... trust me... :}

TheOptimist
6th Nov 2009, 23:09
Impossible, in my opinion.

A) The fuel would vaporize/particles would be too spread out for the fire to actually start.
B) The second jet would have to be low. Which isn't a great idea really. And I mean 15 feet low.

Inr eality the jet is moving too fast for the fuel to be combustable in a trail, and it could never be lit by the second jet unless it was practically scraping the ground.

NutLoose
6th Nov 2009, 23:17
The F111 used to do it as a decoy for heat seekers I believe, See

F-111 'dump and burn' to light up festival - Queensland - BrisbaneTimes (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/f111-dump-and-burn-to-light-up-festival/2008/08/29/1219516723547.html)


The Germans experimented with a flame thrower mounted in the tail of the HE 111 during the war as an anti aircraft weapon, it was soon abandoned as it was found attacking pilots seeing flames eminating from the back end assumed they were causing damage and pressed home the attack.

taxydual
7th Nov 2009, 05:04
The F3 guy who jettisoned both his (full) KILO fit underwing tanks (by accident) on departure from Leeming, in the mid '80's, certainly would have made a mess of any ground troops who were planning to attack the Oak Tree filling station on the A1.

Pontius Navigator
7th Nov 2009, 06:40
Racedo, I am surprised no one has mentioned the fuel/air explosive used in the Vietnam war and possibly later. Not quite what you suggest but on a much larger scale and self-ignited.

oxenos
7th Nov 2009, 07:25
You are obviously not familiar with the tactic proposed for a Shackleton, when attacked by a jet fighter. Apart from some of the early Shacks, which had a mid upper turret, our only guns were forwards firing. The trick was to let the fighter get on your tail, then jettison fuel. This would over-fuel his engine, causing him to accelerate past you. As he did so, he was easy meat for the front turret.
Another time, I'll tell you about the green paint anti- submarine ploy.

Fareastdriver
7th Nov 2009, 08:18
When doing fighter affiliation with the Valiant a two second burst with the underwing fuel jettison switch was the last ditch defence. Only 2-300 lbs a side but the wall of fuel was enough to put them off.

Double Zero
7th Nov 2009, 09:30
Has someone been watching ' Die Hard 2 ' once too often ?

It also shows remarkably quick ejection seat strap-in procedures.

'Die Hard 4' is a much better film ( seriously ) and also shows how to down an F-35B with a brick !

barnstormer1968
7th Nov 2009, 10:05
I don't know the very latest developments on this subject, but fuel air explosives
(used by ground forces) were making a big come back recently.

It involves much less risk to attacking troops to fill a building/bunker with a
'spray' of fuel, rather than having to clear each room separately with grenades and
rifle fire.

The defenders have two choices (which they know instantly the fuel becomes
apparent). They either come out, or get incinerated (that is of course if the
attackers give them the choice:eek:).

US Herk
7th Nov 2009, 10:06
I'd have the second jet simply jettison defensive flares to ignite the fuel from the first jet...:}

BEagle
7th Nov 2009, 11:59
Thermobaric weapons, including fuel-air explosives, have actually been around for quite a while.

If you Google the term, you will find some interesting information.

Airborne Aircrew
7th Nov 2009, 12:11
Thermobaric weapons

Not quite the same as the OP's proposition I say...

ORAC
7th Nov 2009, 12:12
Kilgore: I love the smell of napalm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napalm) in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like......victory....

How to make napalm (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/851030/how_to_make_napalm/)

Napalm carpet bombing in Vietnam (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3uhgb_napalm-carpet-bombing-au-vietnam_politics)

Roger Sofarover
7th Nov 2009, 12:53
Some time after we started using IR Jammers on the Puma in Northern Ireland many many moons ago, we had a bit of a major problem whilst airborne that required us to dump fuel quickly in order to facilitate a safe landing at a near bye fort (v heavy). A lynx called us to say we were on fire, lots of fire. It turned out that the fuel dump was positioned to get rid of fuel over the Jammer, which was of course super hot and we had 20 foot flames shooting from the back of the aircraft:eek:

After a quick re-appraisal and a change of under wear the situation was successfully resolved. make sure the jammers cool before you dump chaps:ok:

Gainesy
7th Nov 2009, 12:55
Stop faffing about and make some napalm, its simple, effective and really rather photogenic. If they don't like it, they should stay home and tend their goats.

Hmm ORAC beat me to it. Why the recipe though? Any Fifth Former could run you up a batch in my day, Standards, mutter, dribble.

larssnowpharter
7th Nov 2009, 13:17
I suspect it would be pretty difficult to get it to work. The difference between the LEL (Lower Explosive Limit) and the UEL (Upper Explosive Limit for kerosene is pretty narrow in terms of ppm (parts per million). If outside that band, well, to put it simply nothing happens.

Bit like a car running too rich or too lean. Doesn't start.

ORAC
7th Nov 2009, 13:22
In Korea and Vietnam every grunt/company brewed their own to protect their camp. They'd set up a ring of 50 gallon oil drum filled with a jellied 50/50 mix of gasoline and washing powder - Daz, Lux whatever, then hang thermite grenades inside the filler cap, with the pins tied to trip wires.

Air America used to make up their own as well, for when the troops called for help but the USAF said the weather was too bad. They'd stick the thermite grenade inside a jam jar stick in the filler cap. The glass was keep the lever on the grenade when the pin was pulled. They'd fly over the target position, pull the pin and kick the drum out the door and let gravity and impact do the rest....

Gainesy
7th Nov 2009, 14:02
Next, Aunty Bessie's Thermite Grenades.:)

davejb
7th Nov 2009, 18:03
If you can aim everything well enough to coat the opposition with dumped fuel, and follow up with a precision ignition source, then for ****'s sake why not drop a bomb from the first aircraft anyway?

This discussion, amusing as it is, reminds me of the bollix articles in the comics in WW2 (seen in reprint, I'm not THAT old) about the cunning plan to drop sand in enemy aircraft engines...

Nimrod self defence - try to fly up own a**e, look for thick clouds and thicker enemy pilots, wait until inferior foreign monkey dies of old age...