Japanese Type 93 versus US Mark XIII torpedo.

The Nelrods did use oxygen rich torpedoes although gave up on them.

The Japanese exchange officer thought that was a good idea and he went on to help design the Type 93.

Check out the magnesium Formula one racing car from the 1960s.

Boy did that thing burn.

The F-16 uses hydrazine for its APU. It's SDS is here: https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/11040.htm
and some excerpts from it:

"Danger! Strong reducing agent. Fire and explosion risk in contact with oxidizing agents. May be fatal if absorbed through the skin. Causes eye and skin burns. Causes digestive and respiratory tract burns. Flammable liquid and vapor. Harmful if inhaled or swallowed."

"
Chemical Stability: Thermally unstable.
Conditions to Avoid: Light, ignition sources, moisture, temperatures above 150°C.
Incompatibilities with Other Materials: Substance is highly reactive reducing agent. Incompatible with oxidizing agents (including air), acids, and some metal oxides and metals. Substance may spontaneously ignite in air when in contact with porous materials. Ignites on contact with dinitrogen oxide and tetroxide, hydrogen peroxide, tetryl, and nitric acid. Explodes on contact with dicyanofurazan, n-halomides, potassium, silver compounds, sodium hydroxide, titanium compounds, and trioxygen difluoride. Explosive compounds may result from contact with air, chloromethylnitrobenzene, lithium perchlorate, metal salts, methanol, nitromethane, sodium, and sodium perchlorate. Also incompatible with barium oxide or calcium oxide, benzeneseleninic acid or anhydride, calcium, carbon dioxide + stainless steel, 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene, cotton waste + heavy metals, (difluoroamino)difluoroacetonitrile, iodine pentoxide, rust, ruthenium(III) oxide, thiocarbonyl azide thiocyanate,
Hazardous Decomposition Products: Oxides of nitrogen, ammonia and/or derivatives. "

NASA is looking for alternatives to hydrazine. Hydrogen peroxide is on the list.

The Basket said:

Check out the magnesium Formula one racing car from the 1960s.

Click to expand...

You do not want to fight a metal fire.

Thumpalumpacus said:

You do not want to fight a metal fire.

Click to expand...

In the right circumstances almost all (I'm not sure about gold or platinum )metals burn, not just magnesium. It's just that some are harder to get started. I know, from personal experience, that titanium is one of them....

swampyankee said:

In the right circumstances almost all (I'm not sure about gold or platinum )metals burn, not just magnesium. It's just that some are harder to get started. I know, from personal experience, that titanium is one of them....

Click to expand...

We once had a KC-135 come in and lock brakes on the port main bogey. We were scrambling to get the one truck we had with a Purple-K extinguisher out there. I believe those brake discs were a lithium-magnesium alloy that, once lit, will explosively spall if you put water on it -- sending shrapnel all over hell's half-acre.

And yes, all metals will burn given enough temperature, some (the lighter ones) more readily than others and at lower temps.

As a "cheap common parlor trick" around this point in the discussion someone would bet that that could set steel on fire; The bet loser would be shown a steel wool pad a match, after which the bet would be collected. While in the USAF reserves, 63-65, we were given fire training movies which included the magnesium wheels. When called, the base firefighters would spray something to enclose the entire wheel assembly from the atmosphere and let it burn out.

special ed said:

As a "cheap common parlor trick" around this point in the discussion someone would bet that that could set steel on fire; The bet loser would be shown a steel wool pad a match, after which the bet would be collected. While in the USAF reserves, 63-65, we were given fire training movies which included the magnesium wheels. When called, the base firefighters would spray something to enclose the entire wheel assembly from the atmosphere and let it burn out.

Click to expand...

When I was at AVCO-Stratford, the method used for magnesium fires was covering them with cast iron shavings. Of course, since some of these were magnesium-thorium alloys (used for their good high-temperature creep resistance), more excitement would ensue.

German torps had many problems as their primary torpedo development and test center was on the shallow Baltic Sea. Most testing was done there and the torps seemd to work OK . Then there was the deeper and colder North Sea and the far deeper/colder Alantic.
Their magnetic detonator did not work there due to differences in the natural magnetic fields. Other problems may have been caused by much lower water temps causing torps to run too deep.
So if the engineers are too dumb to look over the horizon (into the other big water area germany bordered on) those torps were prone to be problematic. Especially if France and Britain were supposed to be their (old) future enemy I can't understand the lack of proper testing in deep water.

Money. Torpedoes cost lots of money. And are very complex.

So on a tight peace budget then corners will have to be cut.

Also torpedoes have to be recovered after testing so you cannot do that in deep water.

Also in your own testing controlled environment is nice and safe and away from prying eyes.

Also problems would have arose as and when which were not foreseen so again understandable.

The Basket said:

Also torpedoes have to be recovered after testing so you cannot do that in deep water.

Click to expand...

British torpedoes had a practice warhead that automatically filled with compressed air after running for a set time. They would float with the tip of the torpedo above the water. Still not easy to spot at sea but better than rolling up your bell bottoms and paddling.

Gotta say that torpedoes are top secret squirrel stuff.

So u ain't gonna go firing a bunch off an enemy coast so they can wash ashore and give your enemy a free encyclopedia on torpedo design.

Which reminds me of pics I saw of Japanese (as the photo was labeled) torps washed up on a beach. I wonder if these torpedoes were examined and if they were, was the information passed along.

I guess in the confined waters at Guadalcanal.

Type 93 do be doing long distance.

Denniss said:

German torps had many problems as their primary torpedo development and test center was on the shallow Baltic Sea. Most testing was done there and the torps seemd to work OK . Then there was the deeper and colder North Sea and the far deeper/colder Alantic.
Their magnetic detonator did not work there due to differences in the natural magnetic fields. Other problems may have been caused by much lower water temps causing torps to run too deep.
So if the engineers are too dumb to look over the horizon (into the other big water area germany bordered on) those torps were prone to be problematic. Especially if France and Britain were supposed to be their (old) future enemy I can't understand the lack of proper testing in deep water.

Click to expand...

Hwat? Torpedoes were not supposed to run deeper than maybe 50 - 60 feet, so the depth of the ocean does not come into it at all; the Baltic was quite adequate for testing. Nor does water temperature; do you know how cold the Baltic can get in winter? Hint - it froze so solid in the winter of 1939/40 they had to use old battleships as icebreakers.

Most of the troubles the German torpedoes had early in the war stemmed from testing components for the G7a torpedo in an older model with lower performance - for budgetary reasons. The magnetic detonators, for instance, initially went off prematurely because the stronger vibrations of the more powerful engine shook the relay in the electric firing circuit hard enough to close the contact. The depth-keeping problems arose mainly because the pendulum mechanism that should have kept the torp running horizontally was so stiff it reacted only to large inputs i.e. large deviations which led to a condition similar to pilot-induced oscillations in aircraft. The contact detonator was compromised because of a modification to the safety mechanism that made the warhead live only after the torp had run off the safety distance; a propeller in the nose of the warhead turned a threaded rod that screwed the initiator charge into the main charge; if the initiator was not properly seated the main charge wouldn't go off. They had exchanged the originally four-bladed propeller for a two-bladed item that did not always generate enough torque to move the initiator - so dud.

Several of the problems had already come up early in 1939, but the commander of the torpedo development department developed what we now would call a burn-out condition early in 1939 (likely from overwork - the department suffered from understaffing right until 1945) that incapacitated him for half a year, and in his absence nothing much had been done which he was not aware of until the stuff hit the fan. That likely saved him before the court-martial. That said- the German authorities reacted much more energetically to the defects than the U.S Navy (or at least the NTF) did.

fastmongrel said:

British torpedoes had a practice warhead that automatically filled with compressed air after running for a set time. They would float with the tip of the torpedo above the water. Still not easy to spot at sea but better than rolling up your bell bottoms and paddling.

Click to expand...

Good idea. During the Great War when the Admiralty had put forward the use of torpedoplanes for sinking the High Seas Fleet, the torpedo evaluation was conducted in Scottish waters on the Firth of Forth, although the torpedo development facility was at Greenock. When practise drops were carried out during evaluation and training, navy divers had to go looking for them. Once the RAF was formed in April 1918, the navy relinquished control of aerial torpedo training being undertaken in Scotland and according to the official AP the RAF "volunteered" its torpedo mechanics into service as divers to recover the torpedoes! I can imagine the conversation when the mechanics were being told they had to forthwith go out into the sea and get their own torpedoes!

fastmongrel said:

British torpedoes had a practice warhead that automatically filled with compressed air after running for a set time. They would float with the tip of the torpedo above the water. Still not easy to spot at sea but better than rolling up your bell bottoms and paddling.

Click to expand...

German torpedoes also had exercise warheads that worked in the same way. They were painted in red and white for better visibility. They also contained a lamp that shone upwards so you could thrack them at night. The electric torpedoes were too heavy for that to work; the warhead did not have enough volume. So their EX warhead extended at the end of the run (no, I don't know how that worked, but obviously it must have).