Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
- Thread starter fx77
- Start date
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
Good thing we're stridently reacting to this emerging threat by searching even more Swedish Grandmothers, Irish tween girls and Buddhist monks.
Pretty much covers the main threat vectors.
Good thing we're stridently reacting to this emerging threat by searching even more Swedish Grandmothers, Irish tween girls and Buddhist monks.
Pretty much covers the main threat vectors.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I doubt the validity of the video. </div></div>
Yeah, the string of sparks at 3:24 would not exist with a detonation velocity of 14,100 FPS. This is not real for many, many reasons.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I doubt the validity of the video. </div></div>
Yeah, the string of sparks at 3:24 would not exist with a detonation velocity of 14,100 FPS. This is not real for many, many reasons.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 50calcruiser</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I doubt the validity of the video. </div></div>
Yeah, the string of sparks at 3:24 would not exist with a detonation velocity of 14,100 FPS. This is not real for many, many reasons. </div></div>
It is not fake. Without great discussion, the way it is made and the precaution with the rubberized tape is to prevent friction on the material as it is handled after drying. The friction precaution is not for electrostatic purposes but because of the materials highly sensitive nature to shock and heat. This is a very unstable material in the dried form and will yield well into the "high" range.
The destruction of the watermelon is also real as it is held to the post with a form of plastic kitchen wrap. If you look closely you will see it break and fall down towards the post during the slow motion portion of the video.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 50calcruiser</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I doubt the validity of the video. </div></div>
Yeah, the string of sparks at 3:24 would not exist with a detonation velocity of 14,100 FPS. This is not real for many, many reasons. </div></div>
It is not fake. Without great discussion, the way it is made and the precaution with the rubberized tape is to prevent friction on the material as it is handled after drying. The friction precaution is not for electrostatic purposes but because of the materials highly sensitive nature to shock and heat. This is a very unstable material in the dried form and will yield well into the "high" range.
The destruction of the watermelon is also real as it is held to the post with a form of plastic kitchen wrap. If you look closely you will see it break and fall down towards the post during the slow motion portion of the video.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
If that stuff is for real, every twisted jackass on the planet will be trying to find some. I just hope they left out a couple of details that would result in a nasty surprise for who ever is going to mess with that stuff.
If that stuff is for real, every twisted jackass on the planet will be trying to find some. I just hope they left out a couple of details that would result in a nasty surprise for who ever is going to mess with that stuff.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
Either way, That is why the metel detectorys are about useless and we need to be investing in the phone booth mass spectrometers for the airports/trainstations and the like.
Either way, That is why the metel detectorys are about useless and we need to be investing in the phone booth mass spectrometers for the airports/trainstations and the like.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
Simple math proves it can't be real. The video is not high speed that is clear, therefore; you are watching 29.97 frames of film per second. The slowly falling arch of sparks is clearly visible before they slow it down and for far less then one second. Lets be generous and say it was caught on 4 frames of film or was visible to the camera for .134 seconds (assuming ISO speed of 400, which is the factory setting on most point and shoot camcorders)
So we saw bright orange, near vertical falling sparks travel 6 or so inches for just over a 1/10th of a second (used the pen as a reference to judge the distance)
Now the video claims a D.V. of 14,100 to 21,500 FPS
Using the slower of the two we get a D.V. of 169,200 inches per second. So in 1/10 of a second the material that is producing the sparks would travel 16,920 inches, we watched it travel six.
And there are many, many other reasons why this is fake. Like the fact that there would not be enough oxygen left in the area to produce sparks after such a rapid decomposition. But, on the other hand the guy who lit it is wearing surplus BDU's and talking on a walkie talkie so you never know...
you know, never mind...
Simple math proves it can't be real. The video is not high speed that is clear, therefore; you are watching 29.97 frames of film per second. The slowly falling arch of sparks is clearly visible before they slow it down and for far less then one second. Lets be generous and say it was caught on 4 frames of film or was visible to the camera for .134 seconds (assuming ISO speed of 400, which is the factory setting on most point and shoot camcorders)
So we saw bright orange, near vertical falling sparks travel 6 or so inches for just over a 1/10th of a second (used the pen as a reference to judge the distance)
Now the video claims a D.V. of 14,100 to 21,500 FPS
Using the slower of the two we get a D.V. of 169,200 inches per second. So in 1/10 of a second the material that is producing the sparks would travel 16,920 inches, we watched it travel six.
And there are many, many other reasons why this is fake. Like the fact that there would not be enough oxygen left in the area to produce sparks after such a rapid decomposition. But, on the other hand the guy who lit it is wearing surplus BDU's and talking on a walkie talkie so you never know...
you know, never mind...
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 50calcruiser</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Simple math proves it can't be real. The video is not high speed that is clear, therefore; you are watching 29.97 frames of film per second. The slowly falling arch of sparks is clearly visible before they slow it down and for far less then one second. Lets be generous and say it was caught on 4 frames of film or was visible to the camera for .134 seconds (assuming ISO speed of 400, which is the factory setting on most point and shoot camcorders)
So we saw bright orange, near vertical falling sparks travel 6 or so inches for just over a 1/10th of a second (used the pen as a reference to judge the distance)
Now the video claims a D.V. of 14,100 to 21,500 FPS
Using the slower of the two we get a D.V. of 169,200 inches per second. So in 1/10 of a second the material that is producing the sparks would travel 16,920 inches, we watched it travel six.
And there are many, many other reasons why this is fake. Like the fact that there would not be enough oxygen left in the area to produce sparks after such a rapid decomposition. But, on the other hand the guy who lit it is wearing surplus BDU's and talking on a walkie talkie so you never know...
you know, never mind... </div></div>
Believe what you want, this is a sensitive subject and done with some discretion, if you look at the materials used, the camouflage, the terrain, and the method of testing (including the comms selected to clear the area), you might guess that this was done in the UK. Unless you have any experience with explosives, explosive chemistry, or modern demolition experience...well then, OK.
Concerning the sparks, oxygen is not require to make the plasma shooting out of the barrel of the pen from the molten metal of the pen body.
Additionally, the <span style="font-weight: bold">minimum </span>speed for "high" explosives is generally defined to be 3,000 meters/sec. If you accept that the FOV is 3 meters with the camera, and the speed of the explosive is "slow" at 3,000 meters per second and you have approximately 30 frames per second. Then the watermelon will disappear out of the FOV in 1/1000 of a second or 1/30 of one frame of film. If the explosive has a D.V. of twice that then the watermelon would be destroyed in 1/60 of one frame.
Just saying.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 50calcruiser</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Simple math proves it can't be real. The video is not high speed that is clear, therefore; you are watching 29.97 frames of film per second. The slowly falling arch of sparks is clearly visible before they slow it down and for far less then one second. Lets be generous and say it was caught on 4 frames of film or was visible to the camera for .134 seconds (assuming ISO speed of 400, which is the factory setting on most point and shoot camcorders)
So we saw bright orange, near vertical falling sparks travel 6 or so inches for just over a 1/10th of a second (used the pen as a reference to judge the distance)
Now the video claims a D.V. of 14,100 to 21,500 FPS
Using the slower of the two we get a D.V. of 169,200 inches per second. So in 1/10 of a second the material that is producing the sparks would travel 16,920 inches, we watched it travel six.
And there are many, many other reasons why this is fake. Like the fact that there would not be enough oxygen left in the area to produce sparks after such a rapid decomposition. But, on the other hand the guy who lit it is wearing surplus BDU's and talking on a walkie talkie so you never know...
you know, never mind... </div></div>
Believe what you want, this is a sensitive subject and done with some discretion, if you look at the materials used, the camouflage, the terrain, and the method of testing (including the comms selected to clear the area), you might guess that this was done in the UK. Unless you have any experience with explosives, explosive chemistry, or modern demolition experience...well then, OK.
Concerning the sparks, oxygen is not require to make the plasma shooting out of the barrel of the pen from the molten metal of the pen body.
Additionally, the <span style="font-weight: bold">minimum </span>speed for "high" explosives is generally defined to be 3,000 meters/sec. If you accept that the FOV is 3 meters with the camera, and the speed of the explosive is "slow" at 3,000 meters per second and you have approximately 30 frames per second. Then the watermelon will disappear out of the FOV in 1/1000 of a second or 1/30 of one frame of film. If the explosive has a D.V. of twice that then the watermelon would be destroyed in 1/60 of one frame.
Just saying.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
If it is authentic and a primary high explosive it is going to be volatile and sensative. Like guys trying to play around with TATP, they blow themselves up all the time. Its probably something with a high oxidizer in it.
If it is authentic and a primary high explosive it is going to be volatile and sensative. Like guys trying to play around with TATP, they blow themselves up all the time. Its probably something with a high oxidizer in it.
Re: Some Scary S--- Binary Explosive
Run the BS flag high on this one. Nothing with one drop yeilds the HE power shown. They filled the pen with the mix off camera to get anywhere near the blast needed to kill a watermelon.
If I run you better not be in my way.
Run the BS flag high on this one. Nothing with one drop yeilds the HE power shown. They filled the pen with the mix off camera to get anywhere near the blast needed to kill a watermelon.
If I run you better not be in my way.
