Javelin wrote: Apologies to the court, I left out my intentional smilies to show that it was indeed a tongue-in-cheek floundering as opposed to any sort of fully vetted, researched, fact. (And on another note, is the skin/dope actually close to "rocket fuel" minus the oxidizer, or were the NASA/Discovery boffins making a good 1 hour TV show? I just thought it was cool that I got to see the skin piece in real life.)
Don't say NASA, it was a former employee (if the Pop Sci article is correct), not the agency. But they were just trying to make good TV.
From NASA: "The propellant mixture in each SRB motor consists of an ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 69.6 percent by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 percent), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 percent), a polymer (a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 percent), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 percent)."
I can't find the composition of the dope, but it's at most 18.36% similar (it would not contain the oxidizer or the polymer) to "rocket fuel." As previously mentioned, with oxygen present aluminium doesn't need an oxidizer to burn, but keep in mind that if you call the dope 18.36% similar to rocket fuel, the aluminum foil in your kitchen is 18.32% similar to rocket fuel and you'd then need to keep that E36 M3 away from your oven!
I did find hilarity while researching, though: Discovery is clearly playing the field.
No lie the coating can burn, but to compare it to rocket fuel is deceitful aggrandizing.
