Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith  | | Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine | There is still No Way I would choose as part of a "hobby pursuit" to manually operate a mixer standing beside it observing it and especially not using
a blender on a plastic composite containing ETN or PETN, but would do that remotely and use solid addition funnel screws also operated remotely, and
then if Murphy's Law chooses today to apply, it won't be any huge consequential issue on that operation. Even in a commercial production of such
compositions, extruders and mixers are operated remotely and there is a reason for that precaution. I have never manually done any milling operations
on any energetic materials or mixtures and I am never going to start. Even solvent aided or melt systems I have limited to under 4 gram samples and
then using no glass or metal handling the sample.
Rolling the dice on manually formulating, mixing these compositions is not a gambit I am going to be making, not even with RDX that is "safer" still
in terms of the risk. In some kind of war environment being pressed to the ghetto of lower valuation of life and limb it would be a different
scenario, but as a risk taking not necessary for a peace time hobby, I'll pass on this manual mixer operation.
Oh and BTW I had already become familiar with dynamite and its inventor and dynmaite manufacture in my studies 60 years ago, along with noting the
loss of life in the mans immediate family of his next of kin killed in the family business by being blown to atoms.
[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Rosco Bodine] |
First, Nobel's brother died from a nitroglycerin accident, a bottle full of nitro fell on the floor beside him. He didn't die from a Dynamite
manufacture process.
You are entitled to have your fears and OPINIONS about things, that's perfectly fine. What I object to is your hostel and combative approach to
making your point. For the first few interactions with me on this subject, you didn't provide empirical evidence or make an OBJECTIVE argument. You
instead hurled incoherent rambling insults, and made UNSUBSTAINATED and INCORRECT assertions about OBJECTIVE FACTS! ETN is nowhere near as sensitive
to Nitroglycerin, yet you stated it as FACT! Then you used that incorrect fact to insult and demean.
I think you need to spend some time reflecting on why you are so angry and determined to demean others on a public board when instead you should be
sharing IDEAS and concerns in an objective and sincere way.
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wessonsmith | | Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk | Wessonsmith apperantly already went down from remote controlling melting his primary explosives to using blenders and then back up to using bread
mixing machines... My God, you use bread quantity amounts of primary explosives? In a mechanical machine?
Do you have neighbors? |
I think you guys need to get a grip on the reality of what I am doing. I am SLOWLY mixing a relatively safe to handle energetic(s) 1/5 at a time,
into an INERT binder, and when mixed into the said binder, a detonator with 400mg of pressed powdered ETN won't set off. The mixing blade doesn't
touch the side or bottom of the bowl. The bottom of the bowl has been pre-coated with the inert Lithium Grease binder futher reducing the possibility
of friction.
Please refrain from hyperbole and personal biases. The sensitivity issue you bring up is the reason why after spending months on this board I decided
to make NHN. An energetic that is 80x less sensitive to friction than Lead Azide. Yet on this very board, many members think that HMTD, TATP, Lead
Azide, etc are somehow acceptable primaries to make and use.
What I have found in the relatively short time I have spent on this board is that there a VERY few members who do their OWN research. Instead, there
seems to be a lot of regurgitation of misinformation at the best to flat out FALSE facts, at worst.
When I first came to this board I got a lot of grief for suggesting that people switch to NHN. I was meet with a lot of hostility because I factually
pointed out how dangerous and sensitive primaries like Lead Azide were, I guess I was bucking the status quo and it wasn't liked.
As I stated in my ealier post, I have no problem with being called out or CORRECTED as long as it is respectful and is based on FACT! Passing off
biases and personal beliefs as a basis for an attack isn't helpful to the discourse of the community. |
Discourse on this board ....riiiight ....a little depth could help that.
Yeah, Choice is the ultimate freedom. So you go ahead with your own RANT starting with INCORRECT and/or UNSUBSTANTIATED inventor's euphoria
"stability" arguments and proceeding with your own confirmation bias blindered brand of "objectivity" about the "safety" of what you are doing, or the
illusion of safety, and you go right ahead and do what you think is smart.
I never got down to the bean counting of joules or newtons on measurements in my generalization comparison of ETN and nitroglycerin which is still
valid.
And your imprecise and incorrect reference to a "blender" is a HUGE straw man for this expanded ARGUMENT to the commercial production that does use
remotely controlled and barricaded facilities .....FOR GOOD REASONS....peace of mind absolutely counting as a good reason, even if for alleviation of
unreasoning fears.
I should now descend into chanting mantras for banishment of all my death fears.  I'll get back to you when I'm all better. 
In U2U it was clear from you it was like you were asking, and who are you to know anything at all about ETN ....and so I told you, so far as I can
tell I am the "who" that dredged up the ETN obscurity from one post read in an old news group alt eng expl and first posted about ETN on another board
that was the E&W forum where I gave the patent and literature references and then Axt posted the first synthesis there at E&W and later here
on this board. So I personally have observed the stability under more years long storage than you have done, and I know something about that
stability to speak with authority in answer to your general SMART ASS "what do you know" kind of question....yet you blow right past that and "move
on" making misleading "safety" claims that are highly RELATIVE just like your dubious ETN stability claims.
Who needs a stabilizer for ETN ? What a bizarre idea !!!
And now you are going to school me in good manners and mental attitude and WARP this into some Freudian realm of psychoanalysis. Well go get a mirror
for self reflection and look for the sticky about an ETN misadventure at the top of this forum section for edification about "relative safety".
The generalization that ETN is generally like solid nitroglycerin is a fair generalization, and so is the generalization I made about stability.
The numbers can tell part of the story. And the numbers are modeling studies about an observed AND derivative theoretical and predicted reality
calculated to entirely govern that universe where ultimately theory may or may not hold true in practice, that is the bane of every bean counting
statistician, when SHIT happens not according to the "rules" that theory supplied. The anomaly lurks, and it is invisible in the statistics until it
has made a statistic of you.
[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Rosco Bodine] |
