Past AZ major fire =shooting Tannerite

[HiBC]

I saw this news headline posted today.

It says a major fire in AZ was sourced to a shot fired at a Tannerite charge.

My point is not to sensationalize or smear,just saying if you use Tannerite (I don't) it obviously CAN start a fire. The person who started the fire was prosecuted,and will pay for it.likely the rest of his life.

Of course,its not good PR for shooting sports,and any opportunity to leverage anything into public land closures is a concern

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us...D=ansmsnnews11

[FrankenMauser]

Around here, blame is immediately placed on "target shooters" for all public land fires; and then rarely reported when the true cause comes out.
Of the 'major' human-caused fires initially blamed on "target shooters" last year, all but one of them was later determined to be caused by a vehicle, camp fire, sparking tool (grinding, torch, etc.), idiot with with fireworks, or a train ... or it wasn't human-caused, at all. And the one?... A moron shooting at propane tanks with steel-jacketed bullets.

Montana, from what I've seen over the last few years, has been facing the same thing. Everything gets blamed on shooters, but nearly all human-caused fires later come back to hipster idiots that walked away from a camp fire (or irresponsibly started one under stupid circumstances).

[Rachen]

Let's try to look at the physics behind a Tannerite detonation...I was always understanding that the potential for high explosives to START fires are very low to nonexistent. Of course I may be wrong, but...

A detonation produces a supersonic pressure wave expanding rapidly from the point of origin. The pressure wave moves so fast that it pushes surrounding air out of the way, and creates a cone of vacuum. This vacuum depletes the entire area of air and most importantly oxygen even if just for a split second. And then air rushes back in to fill this vacuum. All of this turbulence should not allow actual flames to take hold, unless the detonation was specifically engineered to scatter incendiaries (ie, white phosphorus) as a secondary effect.

In China during the Hulunbeier grassland wildfires of 1997, the military engineers placed dug-in pockets filled with RDX ahead of the forecasted path of the fire. When the fires reached the blast pits, the engineers shot em' all off at once with detcord. The blast pits were placed in a way that the generated supersonic cones overlapped each other. No oxygen, no fire. Most of the advancing flames were smothered by the detonation, allowing firefighters more safe room to advance into the burn zone and take care of the smaller pockets.

I am not saying that it is perfectly safe to fire off Tannerite in dry fields during windy season but what is the speed of detonation of this material? It detonates, not burn like black powder or smokeless so it's mechanisms should be similar to the plastic explosives right?

[TXAZ]

I’ve shot a fair amount of Tannerite and watched even more.
Unless it’s under a gas tank or next to 5 gallons of gas, there aren’t big flames shooting out, if any. There is often a yellowish cloud but that’s not flame.
Edit:
In looking at that video again, there is a small burst of flames that quickly catches the dry grass on fire. I’m wondering if maybe something combustible was added as a coloring agent?

[Rachen]

I’ve shot a fair amount of Tannerite and watched even more.
Unless it’s under a gas tank or next to 5 gallons of gas, there aren’t big flames shooting out, if any. There is often a yellowish cloud but that’s not flame.

I have done so many times. From using .223 bolt actions all the way up to .50 BMG boom tubes. When you purchase those DIY binary compound kits and the package warning reads to stay at least 100 yards away from the target, you better take that advice. That shock wave is pretty nasty. Even from 300-400 yards away your bones rattle. Absolutely fun for recoil junkies though. And do it on a flat as possible terrain and watching the supersonic bow wave expand from the target when the payload goes off is pretty amazing. It is just like watching a miniature version of the 1950's atomic bomb tests in the Southwestern desert.

And not just as mere targets for rifles to blast at. The binaries are really useful for doing all kinds of farm work. Back from 2007-2009 was what I call my Tannerite years. I have used them to tear up old fence posts and drain flooded depressions in horse pastures. Six to ten pound charges are exceptionally good at removing dead trees for firewood. You get your firewood and also get to pick up pre-shredded tinder. I ain't need to carry a darn saw when I can just grab a K-98 and a belt pouch of budget-priced PPU 7.92x57mm.

One thing I realized when I was playing around with that stuff that has so much to do with this thread topic is that when we go as groups to shoot with Tannerite, some of us, me included would ALWAYS inevitably try to replicate a fuel air burst using flour or sawdust as the payload behind a moderate 2-4lb charge of binary. Despite many "close ones", there was no way a true FAE could be simulated. Perhaps there needs to be an initiator charge to disperse the fuel, followed by a secondary light-off to ignite the mixture cloud, but the binary by itself could not get the proper conditions to ignite. Probably because it happens at such a high velocity that any actual burning that occurs during the explosion is immediately snuffed out by the pressure wave.

[Destructo6]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnvJLeYedgI

Video from the incident in question: Sawmill Fire.

The guy is paying something like $220,000, but I don't believe he was prosecuted.

I live within 20 miles of the Santa Rita mountains and saw the beginnings of this fire while returning from a range trip (went to an organized range because weather conditions were windy and very dry and I was shooting steel core ammo).

Funny thing is, after the following summer monsoons, you couldn't tell where it had burned, regarding brush and whatnot. Burned guardrail posts on highway 83 was about the only thing indicating that the fire went through that area. Burned up cattle are another story.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by HiBC

I saw this news headline posted today.

It says a major fire in AZ was sourced to a shot fired at a Tannerite charge.

My point is not to sensationalize or smear,just saying if you use Tannerite (I don't) it obviously CAN start a fire. The person who started the fire was prosecuted,and will pay for it.likely the rest of his life.

Of course,its not good PR for shooting sports,and any opportunity to leverage anything into public land closures is a concern

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us...D=ansmsnnews11

Off duty ICE officer. It was a new baby's 'sex announcement 'party"..5 years probation and ordered to pay the $8 MILLION the fire cost.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Rachen

I am not saying that it is perfectly safe to fire off Tannerite in dry fields during windy season but what is the speed of detonation of this material? It detonates, not burn like black powder or smokeless so it's mechanisms should be similar to the plastic explosives right?

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) classifies smokeless powder as a "propellant," but black powder is classified as an explosive. It blows up, it doesn't burn.

[reynolds357]

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) classifies smokeless powder as a "propellant," but black powder is classified as an explosive. It blows up, it doesn't burn.

Under no pressure, black burns. It has to have some pressure containment to explode.

[reynolds357]

Let's try to look at the physics behind a Tannerite detonation...I was always understanding that the potential for high explosives to START fires are very low to nonexistent. Of course I may be wrong, but...

I can't argue with the physics, but I used to help a licensed blaster out. He unintentionally set some stuff on fire quite a few times with both ampho and dynamite.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by reynolds357

Under no pressure, black burns. It has to have some pressure containment to explode.

I don't know enough about the chemistry to debate the issue. I do know that black powder is classified as an explosive, and I also know that black powder manufacturing facilities have a curious propensity to blow up.

[reynolds357]

don't know enough about the chemistry to debate the issue. I do know that black powder is classified as an explosive, and I also know that black powder manufacturing facilities have a curious propensity to blow up.

It deflagrates, not explodes. Under atmospheric pressure, that will be a flash burn. A true explosive, such as TNT, Ampho, C4, etc. will "detonate" at atmospheric pressure.

[Rachen]

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) classifies smokeless powder as a "propellant," but black powder is classified as an explosive. It blows up, it doesn't burn

The main difference between black powder and smokeless powder is that black powder, once it has been grained and corned, will possess a FIXED burn rate. That means whether the powder is confined to a cartridge casing, a bag as in an artillery charge, or spread out along the ground to form a fuse, it will burn at the same rate. That is why during the manufacture of a batch of black powder, the corning process is the most important. The percentage of nitrate in the powder determines the total energy yield of the powder. The corning/screening determines how fast this energy will be released. And that is what makes black powder especially dangerous. Because even if a very large vat of black powder is left in an open space, with no cover or obstruction on top of it, and it makes contact with an ignition source, it will still deflagrate violently, with the speed and intensity of an explosion. After all, to the flesh and blood human body, it does not matter whether we get hit with a 3000 feet/second blast wave or 10,000 feet/second blast wave. We are equally dead if we happen to be in such a situation. The deflagration of the powder inside the vat will be the same as if it is confined inside a cartridge, because once the powder is corned, it's rate of combustion has already been fixed. The finer the grains, the more rapid the rate of combustion. Much more explosive energy. That is why anything below FFF CANNOT be used in firearms except as a pan primer for flintlocks or a burn spreader at the very bottom of a cartridge case, only a few grains with even distribution. The bigger the grains, the more controlled the burn rate. Before the adoption of smokeless propellant, the main powder for large-caliber naval guns was called Hexagonal. It was developed in Germany and was a sulfur-free nitrate/willow mixture that was corned into pellets the size of large washers.

Smokeless powder, on the other hand, is a compression-controlled propellant. The more pressure is placed on a charge of powder, the faster it burns. Rifle powders inside a cartridge that can propel little .22 slugs up to 4000 feet/sec, when spread out on a cinderblock, will only burn like a paraffin firestarter. An open vat of smokeless catching fire will produce an energetic, rocket-like conflagration with a lot of foul-smelling smoke, but the effects would not be nearly as destructive as an open vat of black powder being ignited. And when smokeless powder has been compressed to a certain pressure, IT WILL detonate. Just like a plastic explosive.

Hope this clarifies the difference between black and smokeless powders.

I have made my own black powder in the past, in the form of 80/20 nitrate/charcoal concentration without sulfur so I have considerable experience with the subject. Sulfur-free black powder is virtually smokeless when fired and the 80/20 combination will drive a 220-grain lead conical out of a full-power .45 Long Colt casing at 1200 feet/second out of an 8-inch barreled revolver. This information is for educational purposes ONLY.