Posted on 10/26/2004 10:43:42 AM PDT by eagle11
HMX is a rocket propellant, and a highly toxic substance that the US Military is working to clean up using various methods. Did the Iraqis intend to use this chemical fuel to propel medium or long-range missles, delivering WMDs? This angle should be mentioned on Rush, Hannity, Shnidt, and on the networks. An additional source can be found at:
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/h/hm/hmx.html
Mohamed El Baradei's report to the UN security council
February 13, 2003:
"We have also continued to investigate the relocation and consumption of the high explosive HMX. As I reported earlier, Iraq has declared that 32 tonnes of the HMX previously under IAEA seal had been transferred for use in the production of industrial explosives, primarily to cement plants as a booster for explosives used in
quarrying."
"Iraq has provided us with additional information, including documentation on the movement and use of this material, and inspections have been conducted at locations where the material is said to have been used. However, given the nature of the use of high explosives, it may well be that the IAEA will be unable to reach a final conclusion on the end use of this material. While we have no indication that this material was used for any application other than that declared by Iraq, we have no technical method of verifying, quantitatively, the declared use of the material in explosions. We will continue to follow this issue through a review of civilian mining practices in Iraq and through interviews of key Iraqi personnel involved in former relevant research and development activities."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895890,00.html
HMX = Her Majesty's Explosive
Developed by the Brits. One form used as rocket fuel yes.
Oh yeah and RDX = Royal Demolition Explosive...also developed by the Brits
A rocket development facility? That's a connection, no coincidence...
Well, rocket propellants tend to be explosive. Now, what would Saddam have been doing with HMX in the first place when other explosives would do just fine in quarries?
Hunting geese?
HMX = high melting point explosive
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa.htm
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/al_qa_qaa.htm
But, rocket propellants are categorized as a "Medium explosive."
I also would like to point out that Dan Blather, made a new category of explosives he called it an"Ultra high explosive" he exclaimed on the air. Heehee...
There are 3 types categories explosives are in based on how fast it expands into gas:
There's only one "ultra high explosive"; a Lieberal DemonRAT's gas emissions (that's why there's no open flames within 300 yards of Blather).
LoL!
Maybe The Rutans stole it
Both HMX and RDX are used in various forms. They are what you will find in Plastic explosives.
> There are 3 types categories explosives are in based on how fast it expands into gas:
Not exactly true. Solid rocket propellants are separated based on their explosive abilities.
Some propellants are quite benign... composite propellants are typically composed of aluminum powder (fuel), ammoniam perchlorate (oxidizer) and a rubber-based binder to hodl it all together. Composite propellants are generally Class 1.3 explosives, which means for all intents and purposes they won;t explode, but they coudl tear themselves to bits and send chuncks flying if poorly handled or damaged.
Double-base propellants, however, are more dangerous... Class 1.1, generally, which means they can detonate if mistreated. These propellants are often made of things like nitrocellulose dissolved by nitroglycerin, with HMX or RDX added as an oxidezer and aluminum added for fuel. These are scary propellants, and are only used when a lot of energy is required in a small space, and where the rocket can be kept in a fairly consistent environment... things like sea launched ballistic missiles and ship-based booster rockets for anti-aircraft/missile missiles.
If the Iraqis were using HMX as a rocket propellant, they were idiots. There would be little advantage over a composite propellent, at much added expense and risk. Much more likely the HMX was for warheads.
Yes, no doubt you are correct no one likes mass detonating propellants. Ouch.
All the rocket motors that I remember handling in the AF were of 1.3 mass fire minor blast and fragmentation, that were color coded with a brown bands that indicted a medium explosive.
...things like sea launched ballistic missiles and ship-based booster rockets for anti-aircraft/missile missiles.
Thanks for the info...makes sense.
If the Iraqis were using HMX as a rocket propellant, they were idiots.
I agree...
One more thing, this jogs my memory of that Titan 2 ICBM rocket engine, which used a dangerous propellant that blew up in its Arkansas silo in 1980.
> Titan 2 ICBM rocket engine, which used a dangerous propellant
The Titan II was the last US *liquid* ICBM. It used a 50/50 mix of hydrazine and UDMH, both of which would kill you dead (or, failing that, give you cancer) for fuel, and nitrogen tetroxide for oxidizer (which would also kill you dead, then dissolve you). The reason these astonishingly nasty propellants were used was that they were liquids at room temperature and pressure (unlike the liquid oxygen used on the Titan I and Atlas ICBMs), and they were hypergolic (meaning they'd burst into flames on contact with each other, no need for an igniter).
One simple way to trash a silo is to, say, drop a wrench that pokes a hole in the tanks. The two mix, and BLAM. No more silo.
The Titan II is no longer in service, having been replaced with solid-propellant Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBMs. The Titan III and IV space launch vehicles also used those same propellants on the core, but solid propellant strap-on boosters. The Titan III is out of service, the Titan IV has either flown its last, or has one more flight. Then, no more Titans ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.