GlytchMeister wrote:FreeFlier wrote:Don't tease . . . details!
Basically, you load the crop duster with something flammable... If the plane's distribution mechanism is designed for low-viscosity liquid, I recommend either gasoline, isopropyl, or ethanol, depending on what doesn't dissolve the seals, o-rings, and whatever mechanisms are involved. Acetone works too, but seeing as that stuff dissolves superglue, I doubt it's friendly to whatever crop duster you have. Naphtha, mineral oil, same category as acetone.
I'd be surprised if it would work with gasoline or similar things . . . one of the things I remember from the flamethrower research between WWI & WWII is that gasoline is too thin to carry well: it dissipates in a visually spectacular but very short-ranged "blossom" . . . IIRC, ten to fifteen meters was about the limit. Thickened fuel held together in a stream, which is why they went to napalm.
It would probably be pretty impressive looking, though.
GlytchMeister wrote:If it can handle higher-viscosity liquids, you can maybe use motor oil, tiki torch oil, or even stickier you can pump jellied gasoline.
The problem is that the heavier fuels are hard to ignite . . . motor oil is actually designed to not burn, so it's pretty hard to burn under much of any conditions.
And napalm is nothing more than thickened/jellied gasoline.
There was quite a bit of research put into this between the wars.
GlytchMeister wrote:Just be sure it won't clog. Last thing you need is a clogged nozzle with a bit of burning napalm stuck to the tip...connected to a tank strapped to the bottom of the airplane you're currently depending on keeping you alive and not splattered on the ground below.
Oh yeah!
GlytchMeister wrote:Powders are tricky in a flame-thrower configuration, be it man-portable or mounted to a vehicle. Self-oxidizing powders are easier, as you don't have to worry about stoichiometry... But it tends to burn too quickly to get the right distance you would need. Plus, I highly recommend you don't spray burning gunpowder from anything. Listen to your self-preservation instinct on this one, trust me.
Fuel-air powder methods are extremely finicky. You'll be trying to dial into a very fine stoichiometric range juuuust a wee bit off from the detonation ratio. Using fuel that will be moving at a high velocity.
Too many variables, too many ways it can go horribly wrong. Or horribly right.
I'd be surprised if you could get that to work at all. As you say, very very tricky.
GlytchMeister wrote:If you really wanna get mean, and you have absolutely no qualms about killing every goddamn thing, you can try a thermite powder with magnesium filings. But I also highly recommend you listen to your self preservation here too, because thermite is like a very angry animal. If you give it any opportunity to do something other than what you tell it to do, it will turn around and happily incinerate you, which will not only kill you but hurt the entire time you are dying.
Again, I'd be surprised if you could get thermite to work at all . . . it's hard to ignite. And the only reason the military even developed thermite grenades is destruction of material to prevent capture.
GlytchMeister wrote:If you haven't figured it out by now, I'm kinda scared of thermite. And I'm a pyromaniac. This should tell you comparatively normal people you oughta be freakin' terrified of the stuff.
It's not that bad. It's used in industry for certain welding jobs.
I wonder if you aren't thinking of white phosphorus . . . that's nasty stuff, basically self-igniting.
White phosphorus munitions
The trick here (besides finding a suitable fuel) is to install an external ignition system below and away from the fuel release, igniting the load as it falls or is propelled away as it passes, without also igniting the plane. Running propane or oxy-acetylene through a metal pipe bent in a ring-like shape around the release and slightly below with holes drilled into the inside circumference would probably do wonderfully. Some heat-shielding from a couple cars (the stuff they line the engine compartment with to keep your legs from roasting) or maybe some low-density non-flammable foam (pumice?) to keep the radiant heat from the burning weapon fuel and the ignition system from igniting your plane, and I think you'd be good to go.[/quote]
I'd use a polished stainless-steel heat shield with an air space behind it to protect the skin of the aircraft.
I'd also mix up a dyed batch of inert simulant of similar physical properties and try that . . . if you get simulant on the airframe, make changes and try again.
GlytchMeister wrote:I wouldn't do this with a human in the same plane, however. I'd look up ways to drone-ify the plane. I'd probably hack and kludge a commercially-available flight simulation program and hardware setup to create a 1:1 control (like the MythBusters did when they remote-controlled the bus).
And this is all off of the top of my head.
Remote has its problems too.
Sgt. Howard wrote:Catawampus wrote:GlytchMeister wrote:Let's refrain from sharp impacts while dealing with unstable chemicals, shall we?

And what about unstable people?
HEY! I'm back on my meds so LAY OFF!!!
Would unstable people be those that weren't born in a barn?
/flrrd/
--FreeFlier