Improvised explosives, And the things you attach them to... |
Improvised explosives, And the things you attach them to... |
Mar 2 2004, 08:38 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
What would happen if someone attached a tiny amount of c-12 to a fire extinguisher and then detonated the charge?
-Siege |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 08:46 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
I would have to say, teh case of the extinguisher make a resistence check, like any other barrier against explosives. 0 successes it explodes, 1 success it spews out entire contents and moves about 15 meters or so in a single combat round. 2 successes it gets a small whole, takes 3 full rounds to empty and tumbles and jumbles around 100 meters in distance (smaller hole, more focused applicationof the force), 3 or more success it get digned, bent and otherise useful.
|
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 08:50 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
You'd get extra shrapnel effects and put out any fires in the vicinity.
~J |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 08:56 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
And seriously complicate a mage's LOS for a round or two?
Provided he was in close proximity -- say, ground zero? -Siege Edited for circumstance |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 09:07 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
The main problem is, that outer shell of a fire extinguisher is not neccessarily the main housing of the compressed gas inside. If I remember correctly, and I likely am wrong here, there is an inner ccylinder that actually houses the gass, then there is some space or insulation then the thin outer shell, this is so you don't freeze yourself when using it nor do you risk it exploding should it fall.
How much explosive are we talking here? |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 09:15 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
That's a good question -- I'm not personally experienced in using C-4.
But based on demonstrations, I'd say it wouldn't take much to completely rupture a fire extinguisher. -Siege |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 09:22 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
I'd count it as heavy smoke in the area for 1d6 turns, light smoke for another 2d6.
|
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 09:24 PM
Post
#8
|
|||
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
Any damage for the people standing within one meter of the extinguisher when it detonated? -Siege |
||
|
|||
Mar 2 2004, 09:31 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Yes, probably. I, in my dice-happy ways, would probably roll 1d6, then use that number of dice against TN 4 to stage up damage from Light or Medium and use a Power of 2+1d6. This all to represent the random element of such an improvised explosive.
~J |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 09:31 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
The extinguisher here at work is 195 PSI in the green. It's a medium sized. I'd go with an 8S blast with a -1m radiating out. Double that if unarmored.
|
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 10:00 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
What type of extinguisher is it? Powder? Foam? CO2? Water?
I don't know how the rst of them work, but I saw them open the (big) water extinguisher in my flat a while back. The main section (containing water) wasn't pressurised at-all, I think the pressure came from a CO2 canister held inside. I'd imagine that when the handle was squeezed; it released CO2 in the central chamber which pushed the water out. If it is an extinguisher of that design, though, you could easily open it up and use the internal tank as a more potent & compact explosive. Unfortunately I can't check as they removed that extinguisher, replacing it with a powder one, and I have no idea how it works. |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 11:36 PM
Post
#12
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 675 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 2,034 |
How Stuff works, fire extinguishers
Seems like it would be very unlikely for the thing to explode. Most likely it would just crack open and dribble the retardant out, somewhat less likely the co2 canister might break open and violently force the retardant out of the outer cylinder in a second or two probably causing it to shoot off a bit. The pressure involved also isn't nearly as high as one of those compressed gas cylinders (ie a helium one for filling up balloons. The regular fire extinguisher is at 195psi, while a high pressure industrial cylinder is at 500+ psi. I think the ones I used to use in the lab arrived filled to 2000psi. I have heard anecdotes about those being dropped and having their valves snapped off then shooting through walls and down streets a few blocks. I think they are nearly impossible to actually break in half though. |
|
|
Mar 2 2004, 11:46 PM
Post
#13
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
I was thinking about that, but let's remember that RPG's are rarely about reality. It's about the cool cinematics that we grow up with making us go "Wow, that was soooo cool."
|
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 01:38 AM
Post
#14
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
Oh well, so much for that idea.
-Siege |
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 02:36 AM
Post
#15
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
Who's to say that Fire Extinguishers aren't different in the sixth world, though?
Besides, I think it's likely that some shrapnel from the outer blast could pierce the inner container (which is probably not made to be banged around at all). So I'd still have it blow up. |
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 03:03 AM
Post
#16
|
|||
Target Group: Members Posts: 84 Joined: 15-April 03 From: My own personal purgatory Member No.: 4,453 |
I've seen videos of what happens to a gas cylinder with a snapped-off valve. Scary stuff - anecdotes about going through concrete walls are no joke. Something to keep in mind next time someone starts swinging a Dikoted katana around in a laboratory environment... |
||
|
|||
Mar 3 2004, 04:42 AM
Post
#17
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 186 Joined: 30-January 03 From: Redlands, CA Member No.: 3,996 |
Well I know some stuff that would make perfect FAE devices then, small compressed air tanks, the type you use in paintball. These little fraggers are filled to 3,000psi and can go all the way up to 5,000psi, make a nice shrapnel blast. And to add to the fun, some like the fiberglass and carbon fiber wrapped models have a thinner steel cylinder then the all steel models. 9oz-20oz CO2 bottle also make a great weapon, they really don't explode, they can fly at high speeds<fast enough to kill some one> . Or you can make them spew liquid CO2 all over the place making the area kinda cloudy, not as effective as smoke grenade but does some what of a decent job in enclosed spaces. And if some one is stupid enough to pick said CO2 bottle up, they will give them selves a real nice cold burn.
[Edit] In paintball there are two main gases used in paintball, there is aid and nitrogen, so if you have the tank filled with N2 then you can have a FAE device. Just repalce the reg with a one way valve and provide an ignitor. [/Edit] [Edit] I was thinking of nitrous Oxide, well these little tanks are general putpose in what they can be filled with, so just put some very highly combustible gas in there and you have a nice explosive device. [/Edit] |
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 04:55 AM
Post
#18
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
They aren't FAEs, though.
~J |
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 06:30 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,047 Joined: 12-November 03 From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation. Member No.: 5,818 |
Tie the dynamite to a stick and put it on the mine cart, silly. |
||
|
|||
Mar 3 2004, 08:15 AM
Post
#20
|
|||
Target Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 257 |
You could go that way. But why would fire extinguishers in the future have been made much less safe than they are now? |
||
|
|||
Mar 3 2004, 08:20 AM
Post
#21
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
If they became phenomenally better at putting out fires, the tradeoff might be worth it.
A lame excuse to justify it? Yep! |
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 09:32 AM
Post
#22
|
|
Senior GM Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 |
They use dynamite to put out oil-well fires. Why not house fires? ;)
|
|
|
Mar 3 2004, 05:58 PM
Post
#23
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 675 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 2,034 |
Nitrogen isn't flammable. An oxygen or hydrogen canister could cause a really scary fire. |
||
|
|||
Mar 5 2004, 03:35 PM
Post
#24
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
a oxygen tank would not bring about fire on its own but pure oxygen makes it more likely that something else will burn. if i got things right the nevel of oxygen in the air is what controls how easy it is for something to catch fire.
hydrogen on the other hand would be scary as that would basicly react with the oxygen in the air! allso, nitrogen is one of the most stable gasses out there. i think there are allmost nothing it reacts to. |
|
|
Mar 5 2004, 03:40 PM
Post
#25
|
|||||
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Because it was more profitable that way. |
||||
|
|||||
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 06:13 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.