Kinda-OT: Napalm

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Kinda-OT: Napalm

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Kinda-OT: Napalm

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 3:43:02 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Say I've got two F4Us. The first drops a couple of napalm bombs which burst and burn like they're supposed to. The next one drops a couple of 500lb HE bombs, not on top of the burning napalm, but close enough for it to be inside the blast wave.

Does the concussion from the exploding bombs snuff out the burning napalm? And if so, does it re-ignite?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

Post #: 1

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 5:06:00 PM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

Considering that they use dynamite or Nitro Glycerin to extinguish oil well fires, I'd say there is a good chance that it would.

The concussion doesn't do it, but the blast itself uses up all the available oxygen near the fire source, taking away the what the fire needs to keep burning.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 2

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 5:11:00 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Nah.

How close are other aircraft in the pattern to the first? Napalm burns and does its' thing pretty quickly. Unless there was another aircraft <5 sec. outbound from the first, it wouldn't make any material contribution to the effect of the napalm.

Those controlled explosions (well heads afire) are in a controlled area, precise amount of explosives, usually flat surrounding surfaces with no surrounding vegetation, etc. Not sure that one could mimic the same controlled effects by a crudely delivered 500lb. bomb.

Seems like a job for my wife's alma mater: The New Mexico Institute of Mining of Technology's Terminal Effects Research Laboratory. They blow stuff up REAL good.

_____________________________

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 3

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 5:42:52 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

I agree, plus I figure if it was extinguished due to lack of O2 it (and ground, rocks, trees) would still be hot enough to ignite as O2 flowed back into the area in the open air (which ought to be pretty quick with the hot air rising).

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 4

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 6:17:25 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Considering that they use dynamite or Nitro Glycerin to extinguish oil well fires, I'd say there is a good chance that it would.

Poor analogy. A well fire is single point source, but a napalm canister spreads flames over hundreds of square yards.

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 5

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 6:38:40 PM

sandman455

Posts: 209
Joined: 7/5/2011
From: 20 yrs ago - SDO -> med down, w/BC glasses on
Status: offline

It might slow it down by consuming the oxygen in the surrounding area, but you will still have lots of unspent fuel in the vacinity of your strike. Assuming the ambient air comes back into the area and there has been no attempt to decrease the residual heat, it will probably start right back up. Oil well fires are indeed put out by O2 starvation, but they work hard to cool the surrounding fuel and minimize and direct the heat from the explosives.

FIRE = O2 + FUEL + HEAT (there was nifty triangle all over the place in the Navy)

O2 - pure is great, more is good. Our atmosphere provides plenty. Wind or just blowing on stuff brings in more.
Fuel- can be anything, and I mean anything. The lower the flash point the better for starting and sustaining the fire.
Heat - must be enough to over come the flashpoint of the initial fuel. The hotter it gets the more variety of fuels.

Remove anyone of these 3 things and you will degrade and eventually put out the fire.
Increase anyone of these 3 things and you will likely end up with more fire if you don't disrupt the other two.

_____________________________

Gary S (USN 1320, 1985-1993)
AOCS 1985, VT10 1985-86, VT86 1986, VS41 1986-87
VS32 1987-90 (NSO/NWTO, deployed w/CV-66, CVN-71)
VS27 1990-91 (NATOPS/Safety)
SFWSLANT 1991-93 (AGM-84 All platforms, S-3 A/B systems)

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 6

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 9:23:31 PM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

The book Fly Boys gives some fine descriptions of JP40 use.

(in reply to sandman455)

Post #: 7

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 10:05:32 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Say I've got two F4Us. The first drops a couple of napalm bombs which burst and burn like they're supposed to. The next one drops a couple of 500lb HE bombs, not on top of the burning napalm, but close enough for it to be inside the blast wave.

Does the concussion from the exploding bombs snuff out the burning napalm? And if so, does it re-ignite?

No.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 8

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 11:26:26 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Say I've got two F4Us. The first drops a couple of napalm bombs which burst and burn like they're supposed to. The next one drops a couple of 500lb HE bombs, not on top of the burning napalm, but close enough for it to be inside the blast wave.

Does the concussion from the exploding bombs snuff out the burning napalm? And if so, does it re-ignite?

No.

I don't think so either. There was a time when my battery shot a lot in the same grid as a napalm strike, and it didn't bother it a bit. Admittedly, we didn't 500lb projectiles, but a full battery strike at a hard humping rof level didn't do diddly.

What I was taught (at Fort Sill, in 1968) was that Napalm was a 'prompt' weapon. The mixture was devised to ignite and burn very quickly. It was a flash-burn and axphixiation model. It wasn't really devsed to start fires, it was devised to 'promptly' crisp the flesh, melt the eyeballs, and burst the lungs of anyone within the central 70% area of the coverage oval. Napalm starts fires as an adjunct to it's effects, but fires are tertiary effects, at best.

When Napalm happens, it happens within 2 to 4 seconds. The Napalm accelerant burns very fiercely but very quickly. It is a myth that Napalm kills by causing fires. Napalm kills by immediate flash burns and axphixiation.

B/319th AFAR, and there's a gazillion people who post here or who are game developers who can testify to the truth of that claim.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 9

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/11/2011 11:52:14 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

what was it like witnessing a Napalm drop John? I've seen some Vietnam footage of course but i'm sure it doesn't convey the shock and awe in person.

_____________________________

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 10

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 12:06:40 AM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

pretty sure you got warm feeling without the fuzzy. Sorry could'ent help it!

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 11

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 1:20:03 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Say I've got two F4Us. The first drops a couple of napalm bombs which burst and burn like they're supposed to. The next one drops a couple of 500lb HE bombs, not on top of the burning napalm, but close enough for it to be inside the blast wave.

Does the concussion from the exploding bombs snuff out the burning napalm? And if so, does it re-ignite?

No.

I don't think so either. There was a time when my battery shot a lot in the same grid as a napalm strike, and it didn't bother it a bit. Admittedly, we didn't 500lb projectiles, but a full battery strike at a hard humping rof level didn't do diddly.

What I was taught (at Fort Sill, in 1968) was that Napalm was a 'prompt' weapon. The mixture was devised to ignite and burn very quickly. It was a flash-burn and axphixiation model. It wasn't really devsed to start fires, it was devised to 'promptly' crisp the flesh, melt the eyeballs, and burst the lungs of anyone within the central 70% area of the coverage oval. Napalm starts fires as an adjunct to it's effects, but fires are tertiary effects, at best.

When Napalm happens, it happens within 2 to 4 seconds. The Napalm accelerant burns very fiercely but very quickly. It is a myth that Napalm kills by causing fires. Napalm kills by immediate flash burns and axphixiation.

B/319th AFAR, and there's a gazillion people who post here or who are game developers who can testify to the truth of that claim.

But I was being faceatious!

I think Napalm brings along it own fuels which would keep it going, maybe the blast would spread it which may minimize the effect OR spread it over a wider area.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 12

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 2:07:27 AM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
what was it like witnessing a apalm drop John? I've seen some Vietnam footage of course but i'm sure it doesn't convey the shock and awe in person.

Closest I ever got was maybe a mile or so. It was a very fast bloom, maybe 2 seconds of intensity. The fireball was a darkish orange and soon as initial consumption was complete the area was covered by a black soot cloud. I've seen two or three strikes, but there were no real fires after ignition; just some brush stuff set off by the accelerant. It was, like, a great big phooommph !! Nothing like you see in movies. Not even a bright flash. Just a sudden dark flame that burns very intensely for a very short time and leaves nothing behind but a big black cloud.

The shock and awe was visceral. It was visual, yes, but you felt the phooommph in your body. To the grunts, it was probably like the Archangel Gabriel in all his glory. But I was a mile (mostly more) away, and nobody was shooting at me, so I could watch and see.

And it smells, especially after you get some crispy critters in the cloud. Oh gosh, you can smell napalm more than a mile away. And it don't smell good. I've talked to CAS pilots that barfed in their masks after flying through a napalm cloud. This 'napalm in the morning' stuff is strictly for Hollywood and 12 year olds.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 13

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 2:46:22 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

But, if a F4U flying at 30,000 feet jettisons its bomb over the middle of the ocean and nobody hears the explosion, did it really happen?

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 14

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 5:06:33 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
what was it like witnessing a apalm drop John? I've seen some Vietnam footage of course but i'm sure it doesn't convey the shock and awe in person.

Closest I ever got was maybe a mile or so. It was a very fast bloom, maybe 2 seconds of intensity. The fireball was a darkish orange and soon as initial consumption was complete the area was covered by a black soot cloud. I've seen two or three strikes, but there were no real fires after ignition; just some brush stuff set off by the accelerant. It was, like, a great big phooommph !! Nothing like you see in movies. Not even a bright flash. Just a sudden dark flame that burns very intensely for a very short time and leaves nothing behind but a big black cloud.

The shock and awe was visceral. It was visual, yes, but you felt the phooommph in your body. To the grunts, it was probably like the Archangel Gabriel in all his glory. But I was a mile (mostly more) away, and nobody was shooting at me, so I could watch and see.

And it smells, especially after you get some crispy critters in the cloud. Oh gosh, you can smell napalm more than a mile away. And it don't smell good. I've talked to CAS pilots that barfed in their masks after flying through a napalm cloud. This 'napalm in the morning' stuff is strictly for Hollywood and 12 year olds.

Thx. There's a sailent point right there....the smell They say nothing triggers memory harder. Thats one part of the experience you won't get from watching a documentary. Yikes.....sometimes I think Man is just a little too clever.

_____________________________

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 15

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 5:26:35 PM

Gunner98

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline

You can use HE to quench normal prairie fires etc, done that dozens of times, sometimes it dosn't work but most times it will if your quick. HE won't extinguish WP (white phosphorus) fires and I agree with JWE and doubt that it would do anything to napalm. I've only seen napalm twice at about 2Km distance - impressive. I suspect HE wouldn't do anything until all of the accelerant had burned off and the fire was burning natural fuel only, and then only if the fire hasn't taken real hold on trees, stumps, buildings etc.

B

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 16

RE: Kinda-OT: Napalm - 10/12/2011 8:33:31 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

yeah, I think you're right Gunner98. I've only seen napalm from an artillerist's perspective (far away, thank God). And what ya learn at Sill is not always the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Weapon fratricide is an interesting phenomenon, so I asked the question; and a friend at Pendleton found me an answer and it's close to Sill's.

Napalm is a teensy bit like WP. It's not a self sustaining chemical exothermic like WP, Napalm requires O2 for deflagration. But once initiated, the accelerant/fuel will combust/oxidize so long as there is any O2 anywhere in grabbing distance. That's why the flame is so dull and there's so much smoke. Initial deflagration consumes most all the local O2 which is why you get all the smoke & stuff; unburned or partially burned reaction products, 'cause there ain't a lot of O2 around.

Thinking about that kinda leads the conclusion that bombs wouldn't hurt a Napalm strike and maybe even help out a bit. As Gunner98 says, people use bombs to extinguish fires. They do that by creating a local vacuum (i.e., no O2). At the tail end of a Napalm strike, we're looking at an axphixiation model, so a bomb that sucks even more O2 from a local area should put the marginally surviving gomers down.

A very nice set of Kemistry and Fiziks in this one. Very nice question.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 17