Liquid explosives are liquid BS

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Alkaline Metal and Water from the plane?

Heard it makes a big BOOM!"




Sodium is pretty good (very reactive and sufficent amount with containment could go boom), potassium is even better, but overall not very good as an explosive. You could do better with simple HCL and aluminum.
I heard peroxide mentioned on one news report, an oxidation source (albeit at laymen concentrations not that good), there are much better and easier sources.
Now 30%+ peroxide (commmerically available), yeah you could so something with that (although I am an analytical chemist, like most chemists I was into explosives as a kid:D ).
 
"Police sources told The Times that the plot by Islamic extremists would have involved a version of triacetone triperoxide (TATP),which was used for the 7/7 bombings that killed 52 passengers on the London transport system last year. The plot is thought to have involved taking several liquids or a gel form of explosive on board flights with other material and then assembling a bomb in the aircraft lavatories."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2318431,00.html

TATP itself is not a liquid, but soluble in many liquids (acetone, ether, hexane and benzene).

TATP could be made by simply mixing two common chemikals in the presence of an catalyst but experts doubt if this is possible in an aircraft lavoratory.
 
Last edited:
Liquid explosives aren't BS at all.

If you just wanted to carry a jug full o' boom onto a plane all you'd have to do is whip up a batch of <Art edit: "Stuff" :)>. I can buy all the ingredients for it at my local hardware store, and the process isn't very hard to carry out at all.

<It's an> explosive just like the TATP mentioned earlier in the thread, but it's room temperature form is quite liquid. It's also more shock stable than TATP, but I still wouldn't want to go carrying around a bottle of it in my pocket.

As a primary explosive, I have no doubt whatsoever that a liter or two of that stuff could punch a hole in an airplane, and give everybody in it a splitting headache. I'd doubt you'd be able to swat the plane right out of the sky with it, but if the terrorists chucked it into the cockpit or something they could probably take the plane out of control.

<Art comment: I'm less worried about terrorists than about teeny-bopper idiots who might get ideas.>
 
Or bomb a mall. Or something. We are a nation of soft ,softer and softest targets.

It is impossible to stop everyone intent on doing bad things. It doesn't necessarily mean our nation is soft. You have to get what you can, and accept the fallibility of human nature. It happens.

Anthony
 
Liquid explosives? Doubt it. Liquid accelerant? Hey, would you like to be in an oversized bus, 35,000 feet in the air, and someone starts pouring everclear, or even gasoline, naptha, whatever, and throwing matches?
 
There certainly are binary liquid explosives in which two non-explosive components are mixed to make the explosive. They have been around for years and I used some over 20 years ago while in the Army. I wouldn't call the components harmless, though. I can't remember the name, but I seem to recall that one of the componets was pretty nasty.
 
There are any number of liquid explosives that could be created easily, using readily available materials. Most wouldn't be classified as "high explosive" but on an airplane, it would take much.
 
On site synthesis of any explosive seems foolish but this in no way means there are not practical liquid explosives.

The organic peroxides such as TATP or MEKP as an obvious choice - TATP of course is a solid at STP but like people have said it is soluble in many solvents. MEKP is a true liquid organic peroxide. I don't know where the heck the media is getting the idea bleach is used in the synthesis. It's simply the ketone itself with H2O2 and the H+ ion.

Then trinitrated glycerin, methyl nitrate, ethyl nitrate, tetranitromethane, EDGN ext.

Then you have mixes like nitromethane with an amine or some sort of oxygen based explosive and just about any explosive that can be disolved and detonated in a solvent.

Making explosives ON THE PLANE is retarded but the idea of a liquid explosive isn't. And then you have PBX cast RDX in the form of hard colored plastic looking like a kids toy or a thick walled coffee mug(like from a tourist shop) or just about any shape you can imagine.
 
You could make MEKP or TATP on the plane easily enough. If the terrorists weren't watching your solution temperature to prevent runaway (they were planning to blow up the plane anyway, right?) you could synthesize a prodigous amount of the stuff in a very short time.
 
The triacetone triperoxide (TATP) that has been mentioned, is a solid precipitate from the mixture of acetone and hydrogen peroxide with an acid catalyst. Wikipedia has instructions for making this stuff, and it is very dangerous to make, requiring cooling to control the process and prevent explosions during the mixing.

But since we are discussing the idea of terrorists mixing this stuff on a plane, in order to destroy the plane, would they care if it exploded during the mixing process? Would the premature explosion of the mixture produce an explosion of the same intensity as the completly precipitated and dried crystaline solid?

Another explosive involving hydrogen peroxide uses methyl ethyl ketone, insteard of acetone. This produces a liquid (MEKP) that is explosive. The production of either (TATP or MEKP) of these explosives appears to involve a substantial amount of equipment, in addition to the liquid ingredients, and quite a long time to process into an explosive.

Other binary explosives use toxic components such as hydrazine.

I think it is highly unlikely that a terrorist could actually make an explosive during the flight, using the small cramped space available in the porta-potty sized restroom on the plane.

It would appear to be more likely that an explosive liquid be smuggled onto the plane, than be created on the plane. Highly sensitive liquid explosives that do not require an explosive initiator, would be likely to explode before being placed on the plane, so some type of initiating device (blasting cap or other) would also have to be smuggled on board for the less sensitive explosive.

I suspect that the information that the government has made public is intended to deceive the public; the actual nature of the explosive material, and how it would be placed on the aircraft and detonated, is information that we do not need to know, and if made public, might tempt other people to try in a copycat crime.

The government saying that the attempt would be made with TATP may even be intended to sucker wannabe terrorists into blowing themselves up, while trying to create this homemade explosive the Palestinians have nicknamed "Mother of Satan". That nickname is apparently due to the difficulty in creating it, without having it explode during the process. Once it has been sucessfully created, it still poses extreme risks, since it is sensitive to heat and pressure, and may self detonate just from its own weight.

I am very sceptical about this whole reported 'binary explosive mixed on aircraft' story. I think it is deliberate misinformation provided to the public, and the motive for that misinformation is unclear.
 
Also, if the FAA is worried about terrorists generating toxic gasses, they should start by banning airline food.
New (addtional) question for airline counter clerks to ask: "Have you eaten any Mexican food in the past 24 hours?" ;)

Though I still want to know how I would know if someone had put something in my luggage without my knowledge ........ :rolleyes:
 
I am very sceptical about this whole reported 'binary explosive mixed on aircraft' story. I think it is deliberate misinformation provided to the public, and the motive for that misinformation is unclear.

An alternative explanation is that the story is true, and that the material was a binary liquird explosive similar to Astrolite but possibly in a less-detectable form. The confusion might arise from the gov't not wanting to discuss the exact nature of the material, and the various talking heads (even those in the gov't) speculating in the vacuum caused by the lack of hard information.
 
buzz knox said:
An alternative explanation is that the story is true, and that the material was a binary liquird explosive similar to Astrolite but possibly in a less-detectable form. The confusion might arise from the gov't not wanting to discuss the exact nature of the material, and the various talking heads (even those in the gov't) speculating in the vacuum caused by the lack of hard information.

Thanks, Astrolite was the name I was trying to think of.
 
Who cares? We can't keep people from smuggling weapons and drugs into prison, its impossible to do it on airlines unless there's body cavity searches. Lets be honest if you're planning to blow yourself up I'm sure you can find a creative place to hold your explosives where they won't be found. Keeping me from drinking a soda on the flight does nothing but annoy me.
 
I was just watching MSNBC (3:50 PM est). I just caught the very end of a piece about a plane, bound for LA from New York. The plane had to turn around and go back to NY because a couple of passengers had managed to get aboard with "LIQUIDS":eek: I saw it too late to get the details, so I'm going back to the TV.
 
Dimethylmercury

silverlance,
as a chemist in training, I just wanted to correct some of the information on dimethylmercury, since we covered the case in our safety training class. The person in question is Karen Wetterhahn of Dartmouth, verifiable here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~toxmetal/HMKW.shtml

Descriptions of the events can be found here (or by googling her name):
http://www.denison.edu/collaborations/naosmm/topics/dartmouth.html

As the case details bear out, it was several months before she lapsed into a coma and then died of the mercury poisoning, not several minutes.
 
If you've ever been on the inside of a bomb scene investigation, you will notice the media review of the incident is NEVER correct. The people that write those stories are only peicing together enough info to make a sensational story without printing the boring truth. True stories rarely sell.

The average citizen will never know what really happens through media coverage. And official press realeases are media coverage.
 
Anyone ever accidently mix an ammonia based cleaner
with a chlorine based cleaner?

Ever wonder why the ammonia and chlorine bleach are
not on the same shelf in the supermarket?

Binary liquid bad stuff DOES exist.
 
Any photographers here ever clean the fixer tray with chlorine bleach?

Just pour the bleach into the tray and leave the room quickly.
 
A teacher once told me that Phosgene Gas is the result of mixing chlorine bleach and ammonia, and is why both products have warning messages on the containers. Wikipedia indicates that Chloramine is the likely result of mixing these cleaning products, and Hydrazine may also be produced.

Some people never bother to read the messages, and as a result there have been fatalities when people did mix these cleaning products.
 
I know that me and three or four of my homemade pickled eggs could prove fatal to anyone unfortunate enough to be confined in a small space with me the next day.
It's just plain ugly...

Biker
 
shell70634 said:
If you've ever been on the inside of a bomb scene investigation, you will notice the media review of the incident is NEVER correct. The people that write those stories are only peicing together enough info to make a sensational story without printing the boring truth. True stories rarely sell.

The average citizen will never know what really happens through media coverage. And official press realeases are media coverage.

I agree. I worked the Harveys Hotel bombing in South Lake Tahoe in 1980 and could not believe the BS the press was putting out. The headline "ARMY BLOWS UP HOTEL" was what pissed me off the most. The Nevada State Fire Marshal was the one who made the decision on the render safe procedure, against the advice of 9 out of 10 Army EOD techs. Nine of us said it wouldn't work if the bomb was built like the extortion letters said. The 10th tech said it might work but he didn't think so.

We did mitigate the damage by directing the resulting explosion outward and there was very little structural damage to the building. We used a lot of sandbags and mattreses in the rooms on all side if the room where the device was located.
 
Biker

You and I should never be allowed in the same room any where under a half hour before or after the other has been there.

Woody

:evil: "If they silence the sound of my voice, they'll surely hear the sound of my gun - if I decide to use something subsonic, that is!" B.E.Wood :evil:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top