From: arno@antares.utu.fi (Arno Hahma)
Subject: Re: Does anyone make this propellant for us? was Re: Looking for 
	better ISP?
Date: 1998/02/17
Message-ID: <6cbkov$97l@antares.utu.fi>
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets

In article <6c01ar$q6g@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Mark Johnson <mark.s.johnson@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>1. Some weapons systems use RDX or HMX as a rocket propellant
>component...it makes for a bigger 'bang' against the target. Most

I doubt. HMX and RDX are used because they can be used to make less
sensitive propellants than perchlorates. They also create a much lower
signature and still have about as high an ISP as perchlorate
propellants have. Drawbacks are high cost, difficult processability and
difficulties in keeping the ballistic properties constant from batch to
batch. BTW, HMX and RDX propellants are frequently called LOVA, i.e.
LOw VulnerAbility propellants.

>commonly, these are NOT airlaunched systems as there's too much danger
>of explosion 'on the wing' of the carrying aircraft. You wouldn't want

I think that is not an issue here. It is just that the RDX/HMX
propellants offer no advantage as signature is not a problem anyway
(the plane usually has at least as large a signature as the missile it
launches).

>2. RDX and HMX are both classed as high explosives and are no way, no
>how, ever, going to be approved by DOT as consumer rocket propellants.

Yes, but the propellants made out of them can be non-detonable.
Provided, they are correctly made, of course.

ArNO
    2

From: arno@antares.utu.fi (Arno Hahma)
Subject: Re: Does anyone make this propellant for us? was Re: Looking for 
	better ISP?
Date: 1998/02/17
Message-ID: <6cblp6$de7@antares.utu.fi>
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets

In article <6c0r1l$jkh$2@ash.ridgecrest.ca.us>,
Dave/Kristin Hall <thehalls@ridgecrest.ca.us> wrote:

>: most power explosive anyone expects to find anytime soon (which no one
>: has yet fully synthesized, though I gather non-nitrated cubanes have
>: been made).

Hexa and heptanitrocubanes have already been made, on milligram scale,
though. Tetranitrocubane is relatively easy to make, but is slightly
less powerful than HMX or RDX.

>The latest, greatest out here is a formulation called CL-20.  I'm no
>chemist, but what I've gathered is that it's a stressed hydrocarbon that
>is based around some sort of carbon *cubic* molecule.

CL-20 or HNIW is a caged hexanitramine with 6 carbons and 6 nitrogens.
It is made by condensing benzylamine with glyoxal to get the skeleton
and then exchanging the N-benzyl groups into nitro groups.
Unfortunately, that is pretty difficult to do in high yield and in any
case, you will have to use more than 10 kg of chemicals for each 1 kg
of CL-20 made because of the large size of the benzyl protecting
groups.

CL-20 is very powerful, but only about 10..15 % more than HMX. Thus, it
offers quite little improvement over HMX, except in shaped charge
applications. ADN (ammonium dinitramide) is a better choice for
propellants.

>David Hall

ArNO
    2