|
Originally Posted by Beamr
(Post 10904053)
according to google: Torpex + some TNT.
tallboy link "The Torpex filling was poured into the base of the upturned casing by hand, after melting it in "kettles". The final stage of explosive filling required that a one-inch layer of pure TNT be poured over the Torpex filling, followed by sealing the base with a 4-inch (100 mm) layer of woodmeal-wax composite with three cylindrical recesses fitted with the explosive boosters and into which (when the bomb was finally armed), a total of three chemical time-fuses were inserted." |
Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus
(Post 10906470)
The assembly of the detonation powder train of a bomb is called a "fuze"
cool mechanism as a timing device. Sorry for pedantry |
Originally Posted by RickNRoll
(Post 10906570)
Not a job I'd do. Melting explosives and pouring them in by hand.
Firework are actually more dangerous to make and require immense amount of safety precautions to do safely and they must at the same time be asthetically pleasing. In all reality, fireworks are extremely difficult to master and fireworks are more dangerous than HEX...and they are very unforgiving |
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
(Post 10906572)
"Two nations divided by a common language" :O
Just to add to the confusion there's also a fuseé which is a flare |
Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus
(Post 10906599)
Well in the case of fuze vs fuse, a fuse is the part of the the primary ignition source and the first part of a powder train...like.... fuse... blasting cap or fuse.... bursting charge. A Fuze is the complete powder train leading to the detonation of HEXs...a Fuze is most commonly associated with ordnance.
|
Originally Posted by FlightlessParrot
(Post 10906681)
In what context does that distinction apply? It is not made in normal English, either UK or US, in which "fuze" is a less frequent variant spelling of "fuse" in all senses (so it's not the -s- -z- variation, which is typically UK vs US usage, except for Oxford University Press house style, which mostly uses -z-). It might be that in the technical language of some particular part of the explosives community that distinction is made, but it would be nice to know what part. It's not a general distinction.
|
I can't believe the line that the explosion was unexpected. All sorts of perfectly pointed cameras and even drones aimed at exactly where it went off.
Regarding still finding unexploded ordnance, only a few years ago the at the gasworks which is north of the east end of the London City runway, an unexploded bomb was discovered at the bottom of one of the large gasometers, it had been laying there for 70 years underneath n million cubic feet of gas. Records showed it had been holed, not found at the time so written off as shrapnel damage. |
Originally Posted by GeeRam
(Post 10904162)
I think that wartime raid film shows this Tallboy making a splash in water, as there is a splash that is a lot smaller than the other Tallboys that clearly explode, and its a big enough splash to be a 12000lb Tallboy hitting the water and not going off.....and if you freeze frame both films and screen shot it, it does look very close to being the same one.....but I'm not an expert.
The ship would have been in front of the saw tooth dock structure that has been built since, but the jetty coming down from the two U-Boat pens on the opposite site appears to be roughly the same still. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c5520521e5.jpg |
Originally Posted by Pugilistic Animus
(Post 10905433)
TNT and RDX are very stable explosives.
|
Originally Posted by Ex Cargo Clown
(Post 10907413)
RDX isn't that stable. Surprised they didn't use PETN. Still an interestingly designed bomb. This is from a Chem MSc grad before a black Vectra pulls up outside my door. Biggest bang I've ever heard was when some idiot put H202 into the waste organic jar. Not a great idea. Took out most of the tiles in the fume cupboard. I'd assume you'd class that as a detonation.
I wish that I could have done PETN but if I ordered the reagents for it... someone would have gotten suspicious I don't have the data on RDX but the RE and brisance of RDX and PETN are close The most powerful explosive synthesized in large amounts is HMX ( Cyclotetramethylaminetetranitramine) ' fume cupboard' LOL....here in the US, it's the fume hood H2O2 oxidizing everything...:\ |
I forgot to write this above
HMX ( US) High Melting eXplosive (UK) Her Majesty's eXplosive Right up there with HMX is good ol' nitroglycerin but clearly it cannot be used due to it's sensitivity to shock... pure Nitroglycerin is still used in a few applications such as extinguishing oil well fires but generally it is stabilized by the addition of a solid medium. There are several forms of dynamites but for the most part it has been replaced by EGDN (ethylene glycol dinitrate) based Tovex... Never attempt to synthesize Nitroglycerin or EGDN!!! Both Nitroglycerin and ( rarely) PETN are vasodilators and are used in the treatment of angina. Exposure to either in large quantities can induce a migraine. One fun fact, HMX is edible. Google Aunt Jemima's explosive..it's fascinating |
"I can't believe the line that the explosion was unexpected. All sorts of perfectly pointed cameras and even drones aimed at exactly where it went off."
They knew exactly where it was - that's why the Bomb disposal team was there - they just ran the cameras as they record (remotely) the guy actually defusing the bomb. What you see is a minute or so of what is hours of recordings. |
Has this video been posted before?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:55. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.