Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: johnson@amsaa-cleo.brl.mil (Don Johnson) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: using AFMs to exginguish oil fires Message-ID: <1991Mar13.002557.6971@cbnews.att.com> Date: 13 Mar 91 00:25:57 GMT References: <1991Mar1.052316.28686@cbnews.att.com> <1991Mar6.035440.21656@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker) Organization: AMSAA/GWD, APG, MD 21005 Lines: 27 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Don Johnson In article <1991Mar6.035440.21656@cbnews.att.com> PAISLEY%auvm.auvm.edu@VM1.gatech.edu writes: > > >From: >I saw an article in the NY Times about extinguishing oil fires, and I came >up with the same question. I think the problem is that FAM's, while maybe >putting the fire out, may not prevent a re-ignition of the fire, and would >not work at all if the fire had spread to the reserve of the well itself. >Plus is would be dangerous for the personnel hwo would have to be nearby >to cap the wells. I beleive that the FAM would certainly "suck up" enough oxygen to snuff out an oil well fire, if it were able to function as designed. But I don't think it can. Think about it. A FAM is designed to burst at some X feet/meters above ground level, dispersing the mixture in a cloud. After some delay to allow for 'optimum' dispersal an ignition source goes off and detonates the cloud. Now imagine dropping this thing on an oil well fire that is burning at thousands of degrees Fahrenheit. Will the fuel dissipate? Will an 'optimum' cloud be formed? I don't think so. My guess is the effect will be similar to pouring gasoline on a campfire.