It's a safe mono-propellant so there has to be something unforeseen about it
under some unforeseen condition. :-) Here's a film about it from the Periscope
archive. One of my favorite video websites.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgi4ta5HZjk
Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
Ben Brockert
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 11:26 AM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: N2O avialability
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 4:59 AM Michael S. Kelly <mskellyrlv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I think a better monoprop, though, would be Otto fuel II, a much overlooked
substance. It’s used as a monopropellant for Navy torpedos, and if the Navy
accepts a liquid, it is quite benign. Its performance is nearly that of
hydrazine, but its density is much higher. Small amounts of oxygen or other
oxidizer bring its performance up to other storable propellant values, for
those who need it. Plus, it’s commercially available. One objection you
will often hear to Otto II is that it produces hydrogen cyanide as it
decomposes. That’s true, but the mole fraction is miniscule. You’d have to
fired a lot of it in a closed room to build up harmful amounts. If you’re
firing in open air, it makes no difference anyway, since the HCN is highly
flammable (and lighter than air).
