Previous Message: Re: alchemists ballista bolt
Next Message: Re: alchemists ballista bolt
Month Index: March, 2004
From: "Steven \(Silverblade\)" <steven.james.1@??????????.??.uk> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:42:58 -0000 Subject: Re: alchemists ballista bolt
From: "Static" <eshum@????????.org> > >> Greek fire could burn ON water not IN water, you need thermite for > >> something that can burn underwater. Thermite...hmmmm theres an > >> idea. > > > >Phosphorous burns in water. > > You sure? I found a reference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus) > that says it's *stored* in water. So, if it ignites, water won't put it > out (which I kinda remember), but it won't *ignite* in water? Do you have > any references for this? One of the few things to burn UNDERWATER is *not* phosphorous, but *THERMITE*, either that or Sodium (and the similar series of elements). White phosporous burns on contact with air, water mostly removes it from direct oxygen and it doesn't burn. Thermite is an incendiary material which does not self ignite, but on burning, produces it sown oxygen source and burns at hellish temperatures (used not just in incendiary bombs, but in devices used to wreck heavy equipment like tanks, generators etc since it can melt sdteel) So this is weird, ancient Greek Fire had, allegedly, the SAME properties as late versiosn of *NAPALM*. To enhances napalm's characteristics, white phosporous and thermite were added, ensuring ignition in all environments and burning even underwater. Though most of it was still jsut an inflammable base with a coagulant (gasoline and soap). Napalm got its name form NAPTHA and PALMITATE (flamable substance and aluminmium based soap). So the question is: how the **** did the ancient folks refine and work with stuff like white phosporous? it's not impossible, but...hm... By the way, stuff I've read suggests "Greek Fire" was actually gunpowder (or similar) mixed with tar. The explosive properties of gunpowder weren't realized for a long time, but it's incendiary ones are quite obvious. Mixed with a sticky, flammable material it would be a mean weapon. Anyway...incendiaries in Space are a *BAD BAD BAD* idea. Poisoned atmospheres, being stuck in the middle of nowhere on a burning ship, the Phlogiston, accidents etc, would mean in gneral terms, you'd have to be insane, or desperate, to use incendiary weapons. Fire was rarely used in ship battles for centuries *except for fire ships* with damn good reason. It's simply far too dangerous, you lose any chance of capture, you can get fried yourself etc. Best ideas for such weapons, as folk have suggested, are things like acid, but NOT green slime unless yer a maniac..sunlight may kill green slime but the thought of that splattering, growing, eating away at a ship..which could infect your ship...ugh. Acid, poisons, gas spores, true expolsives (non-incendiary), and gasses are most likely to be used in such things, plus some other creative stuff, like Oil of Slipperiness. A short-lived hull eating susbtance would be good, or an AOE knock-out gas. Silverblades Suitcase www.silverblades-suitcase.com I'd rather be a Fool who believes in Dragons, Than a King who believes in Nothing
Previous Message: Re: alchemists ballista bolt
Next Message: Re: alchemists ballista bolt
Month Index: March, 2004
| Subject | From | Date (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| alchemists ballista bolt | Sam C. | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Static | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Sam C. | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Static | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Static | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Steven (Silverblade) | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Danton May | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Sam C. | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Danton May | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: alchemists ballista bolt | Danton May |