ravan: by icons r us (flamethrower - from icons r us)
ravan ([personal profile] ravan) wrote2006-08-10 03:05 pm
Entry tags:

"Liquid Explosives"

OK, I've read some of the articles and such about liquid explosives from the BBC. They all allude to some vague, nebulous ingredients that might be able to be combined to make a liquid explosive, or combining a liquid and a solid.

They read like bullshit, as in, as credible as "red mercury" being a nuclear material.

Yes, there are liquids that can be combined to make explosives. In order to get explosives out of these, they have to be highly concentrated. Some are considered "volatile". This means they stink.

Take acetone, a well known ingredient in nail polish remover. The concentration is low, the smell is high. If someone decided to "do their nails" on an airplane flight, they'd get lynched - that shit is vicious in an enclosed environment.

Or various acidic drain cleaners: hard to handle and package without burning yourself, or sufficiently low strength to not do anything more than fizzle. These stink too.

Hydrogen peroxide: the stuff you can buy in the drugstore is low concentration. It would have to be concentrated (not a simple process), then repacked in the original bottle. It smells when you open it, too. Hair bleach developer has a slightly higher concentration, but again has the smell problem.

Gasoline/Fuel oil: first, it smells; second, its already prohibited in aircraft cabins.

So, basically, it would take a lot of effort, coordination, and ingenuity by the terrorists, plus gross apathy on the part of their fellow passengers. Ain't gonna happen. Not when passengers that look like they *might* be doing something funky get tackled promptly by fellow travellers.

[identity profile] jemyl.livejournal.com 2006-08-11 04:22 am (UTC)(link)
I can think of two that I know of which could do major damage quite easily. One is a length of sodium based phone cable --- just put it into water in an enclosed space and wait for it to blow and it will blow, big time. The other is to simply have some pool chamical and pour DOT #3 brakd fluid on it --- Boom and fire! either of these could be done under that blanket or in a bag and only one of them is really liquid in each pair. There are others and the problem is detecting which liquid would be used for the catalyst and with which solid. I guess someone figures that eliminating the liquids and gels will eliminate at least half of the possible equation. Actually I think this ban makes a whole lot more sense than the nail clippers and crochet hooks! But then, we crazy VFD folk tend to be more aware of what will smoke, boom and burn more that what will poke, prod and cut.

I think the guy that called you a fundy christian was hilarious, so little does he know of you. Can I tell him that you have been a practicing pagan for some thirty years or more? May I, huh? LOL He also doesn't know, obviously, that you worked for many years in a chem. lab. Just shows to go ya, how quickly people are to assume when they disagree with one assertion that someone must be of a certain philosophical bent to have an opinion different from theirs. Peace, hugs and chocolate to you and to Datapard too. Tandala

[identity profile] ravan.livejournal.com 2006-08-11 05:12 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, but sealed bottles of water purchased inside the sterile zone??

One is a length of sodium based phone cable...

Oh, cripes! I thought they phased that crap out years ago and disposed of it properly. That's just an fire waiting to happen.

... have some pool chemical and pour DOT #3 brake fluid on it --- Boom and fire!

Both of those stink (depending on what the pool chemical you're thinking of is), and are nasty to handle.

Let's just say my parents never realized how cautious I was when playing chemistry in junior high and high school, and I still ended up with some very exciting and stinky reactions... I stayed away from trying to make explosives in the house because I didn't want to scare the dog.
mdlbear: blue fractal bear with text "since 2002" (Default)

[personal profile] mdlbear 2006-08-11 05:55 am (UTC)(link)
Sodium isn't reactive enough -- it'll burn, but not explode. Put a gram or two of rubidium (list price about $30/g) in a soluble capsule. Order a glass of water from the stewardess. Drop it in and put the glass down by the window. Boom.

[identity profile] jemyl.livejournal.com 2006-08-11 11:03 am (UTC)(link)
Sorry, but I have personally seen the results of a sic inch piece of phone cable (which our instructor told us was filled with sodium) placed in about a gallon of regular water in a five gallon plastic pail with another pail wedged down in it explode and send the "cover" pail 35 ft in the air and destroy the first pail completely. There is still a lot of that old phone cable in use as it is only replaced when it wears out because of the cost to find and replace all of it. This little explosion was part of our practical demonstration on the last day of our Hazmat training class.
mdlbear: blue fractal bear with text "since 2002" (Default)

[personal profile] mdlbear 2006-08-11 03:15 pm (UTC)(link)
I see where we differ. Sodium, because it burns quickly, will explode if confined. Rubidium and Caesium will explode even without being confined. A gram of caesium dropped into an open bucket would destroy the bucket on contact. It's not common, but at $30/g it's not all that hard to get.