Sign in or 
Location: Pyrotechnics
Discussion: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
BigLoki |
Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:04 AM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 22 2012, 11:05 AM EDT
There has been a bit more activity in the "goes boom" category, so it seems like maybe some of the basics should be explained. To possibly (not likely) avoid some of the discrediting; I was EOD3(SW) in the Navy. I left after 6 1/2 years due to serious injury. This actually does make me an explosives expert of sorts. I don't know everything about every single explosive in existence, but I know a great deal, and in depth. I will not give out recipes, nor detailed disarming techniques. I don't think anybody who is even slightly responsible should do it either. That said, here are some of the most common misconceptions about explosives as I see them.-1) I can make that. No, you probably can't. I probably can't either. Most military grade explosives are created in extremely controlled conditions, with chemical compounds, and techniques that aren't available to the home builder. You can find a recipe for something that claims to be the same, but it just isn't. The most common of these are napalm, and C4. Folks, you just can't make either of them, only sticky burning agents, or a compound that will sweat nitro, and likely become unstable. Reactives are different, and can likely be replicated at home, but again... an unreliable internet recipe is definitely not the way to go, and likely will not be worth the consequences of a bad mix. Some make home made fireworks. This is different. Those recipes have been refined over centuries, and are usually black powder, flash powder, and a few other reliable, and relatively stable compounds. I still don't recommend it unless you have someone experienced teaching you, but hey... they aren't my fingers, so.... ------------> 7 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you?
Keyword tags:
Artillery
Blasting
Bombs
Boom
Caps
Detonation
Explosives
Fire
Fuses
Grenades
Propellant
Rockets
|
|
BigLoki |
1. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:06 AM EDT
-2) I can disarm that.No, you probably can't. Seeing a video on youtube about the ballsy Cambodian guy disarming a simple fuzed system compression mine with a buck knife doesn't mean you can do it. That guy's been at it for decades, and that is a simple type of mine. Disassembling a claymore is a bit different... poke it with a knife if you want to... but I won't be near you. -3) C4 will explode if you light it on fire, and stomp on it. No, it won't. This story was brought about because some listings give a vague description of the detonating process of C4, citing it as heat and pressure. While this is technically correct, it's still inaccurate. You could light it on fire, and hit it with a hammer, and just end up with a sticky hammer that's on fire. It requires a shock wave to detonate. Which means a blasting cap, or a primary explosion. There is just no other way to detonate it. No matter what anybody has said, this is the reality of it. -4) Setting up landmines (which we don't even have anymore) around my perimeter will take out an advancing horde. It likely won't. Mines aren't generally meant to be widely lethal. They are designed to maim, and shock and slow an enemy force. Not to say that they won't kill, they definitely will, but primarily they are there to hurt and scare as many as possible with each detonation. When faced with zombies, this is ineffective. More realistically though... when faced with starving panicky animals... might be about the same result. Also... just because the claymore is facing away from you, doesn't mean you're safe; You can still catch shrapnel from about 5-7 meters, more depending on placement. ---------------------> 5 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
2. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:07 AM EDT
-5) It's the same as a pipe bomb.The only thing that is like a pipe bomb, is a pipe bomb. This little devil has cost more hands, and eyes than any other IED attempted to be made in the US. It seems simple enough, but as with any other explosive, the slightest miscalculation, or mistake, and you are on the business end of every piece you put into it hurtling at you at between 600 and 1200 fps. Taking an internet recipe, and following it to the letter, is still likely to get you blown up. Understanding the principles behind the device is a safer way, if you MUST. It will keep you from common oversights that cause faulty detonation. Within reason I will try to answer any questions regarding the above, or general questions regarding the topic to the best of my ability. I will NOT give you a recipe for anything. I also will not give any advice that can be misconstrued as advocating home bomb making. I am 100% against doing it, so "Big Brother" can kiss my ***. The gubmint won't be hassling ME..hahaha 5 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
Frag-12 |
3. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:15 AM EDT
Nice work Loki!1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
=jesse= |
4. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:15 AM EDT
"-1) I can make that.lol, yup! Unless of course you're MacGruber or something. Aaand this is why I won't touch explosives. I've just got this gut feeling that my extensive training in Modern Warfare won't really apply. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
5. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:16 AM EDT
"Nice work Loki!Thanks, I appreciate it. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Frag-12 |
6. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:23 AM EDT
A good example of explosives not working as planned is the Columbine High Massacre.And some of the explosives were fired upon by Harris and Klebold. Do you find this valuable? |
|
BigLoki |
7. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:28 AM EDT
"A good example of explosives not working as planned is the Columbine High Massacre.There are several incidents of people causing damage to themselves also. Another one I should have put up there is a Molotov cocktail... not exactly an explosive... but people still screw it up, and light themselves up. They think that putting a rag in the top will somehow keep the flammable liquid in the bottle, and not on them when they overhand throw the thing. So yeah.. again, if you MUST... seal the damn bottle. Thicken the liquid, there are many methods available, and make sure the "wick" seals the mouth of the bottle. Do you find this valuable? |
Medusa374 |
8. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:55 AM EDT
"Yes I can, Loki. I eat shrapnel and pineapples, and I poop grenades. :DDD But in all seriousness, I believe that this post is amazing, and beneficial to the armchair commandos who want to make c4 or whatever. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
9. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 11:58 AM EDT
"Yes I can, Loki. I eat shrapnel and pineapples, and I poop grenades. :DDDThanks, I appreciate it. I wouldn't recommend pooping grenades either though...hahaha... maybe I shoulda put that on the list. ;) Do you find this valuable? |
|
Medusa374 |
10. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 12:04 PM EDT
"There are several incidents of people causing damage to themselves also. Another one I should have put up there is a Molotov cocktail... not exactly an explosive... but people still screw it up, and light themselves up. They think that putting a rag in the top will somehow keep the flammable liquid in the bottle, and not on them when they overhand throw the thing.Hey, I have a question about molotovs. Is a chemical cocktail, like a capped bottle full of sulfuric acid with a sugar and potassium chlorate filled baggie taped to the outside a viable option if you happen to have them available? 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
11. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 12:06 PM EDT
That's what's called a reactive. It's viable. I'll PM you something.
1
out of
1 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
TreeLegs |
12. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 12:47 PM EDT
Thank you Loki. I have to hear the same crap from time to time about the same subjects and I'm glad you're trying to bring people back down to earth.
1
out of
1 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
Carnack |
13. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 12:48 PM EDT
Been waiting for this thread for a long time Loki. xD" You could light it on fire, and hit it with a hammer, and just end up with a sticky hammer that's on fire." This made me chuckle. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
14. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 12:56 PM EDT
"Been waiting for this thread for a long time Loki. xDThanks Do you find this valuable? |
AlphaOneFour |
15. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 1:37 PM EDT
An excellent thread, and I'm happy to see someone who knows quite a bit about explosives and the principle behind them letting people know the score.My comment question of the day is from a user named AlphaOneFour, and he says: "Loki, what're your opinions on using explosives such as fireworks, incendiaries and small-scale black powder devices as signals? Do the risks outweigh the benefits?" Do you find this valuable? |
|
BigLoki |
16. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 1:55 PM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 22 2012, 1:57 PM EDT
Well... thank you for the question haha.If you already have pre-made fireworks, then I see no harm in it. If they have gotten wet, or the paper on the container is crumbling, then no, leave it be. If you DO have some experience packing pyro-technics, then I think it would be a great signal system. A lot of the trick with a fireworks type of device is in the packing. the materials are pretty available, and fairly stable, as incendiaries, and explosives go. I think if the situation were to require it, either could be just fine. "Small - scale black powder devices" leave a lot open for interpretation though. If you confine it too tightly your signal is an explosive. Tannerite would be a better method. It's highly stable in it's 2 powdered form... to the point that they are essentially useless as separate components. You can only set it off with a high velocity round though. Most handgun rounds, and some low velocity rifle rounds will do nothing but make your container have a hole in it. It CAN be set off with a blasting cap, for a remote trigger. The problem with that is: most people can't buy blasting caps. You won't find them, and it takes a bit of skill to make them. If you have a high velocity round, I think that tannerite is an excellent signal option. Black powder generally just flashes out, and maybe smokes... a round mix, sometimes called "flash powder" may be a bit better than black powder too. Depends on how you intend to light it off mostly. In any of the above cases, if you have some knowledge of it, and are very careful, the risks can be minimized. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
Sharpie41 |
17. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 2:13 PM EDT
Dude, y'all never signed the Ottawa Treaty, you do have mines, maybe not as many as you used to or not at ever base, but you do.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
BigLoki |
18. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 2:37 PM EDT
| Post edited: Jun 22 2012, 2:39 PM EDT
Yes, we do, in warehouses in other countries, and set for destruction. We don't place them anymore. Closest thing we currently use to a traditional mine is the AT mine, even that has a big assed "antennae" sticking out of the top of it most times. There are a few types of air drop mines that we use... again, they aren't stored on US soil, nor manufactured here. Policy and politics of explosives isn't exactly my strong suit on the subject... but to my knowledge the US hasn't deployed "land mines" since about 1991. I know for "fact" that we haven't made any since 1997. So... if you DO happen upon one here in the US, it is likely Russian, Austrian, or Chinese; or at the bare assed minimum 24 years old, and here for no good reason due to the fact that we don't store them here. Also, Clinton elected not to sign the Ottowa treaty, but we adhere to it more strictly than many that HAVE signed it. If you read the treaty in it's entirety, it allows cluster mines which we do use. The main reason (in my opinion, if that counts at all) that it wasn't signed by Clinton is: It would have taken the claymore out of the picture aside from remote detonation. The claymore is a key tool to us, and being that it is directional, and plainly above ground for recovery, it shouldn't be banned, and taken from the military. Remote detonation requires personnel to monitor it, taking away many of the uses for the device. Had they excluded the claymore in the same manner they excluded the cluster bombs/mines that they are so fond of, we may have signed. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
BigLoki |
19. RE: Common misconceptions with explosives.
Jun 22 2012, 8:15 PM EDT
Double checked... yeah, those years are accurate.
Do you find this valuable?
|
