Talk:Gelignite

message: Gelignite is not Blasting Gelatin. Blasting Gelatin is either Nitroglycerin or Nitroglycol (92-94%) that is saturated with Guncotton with a weight strength of 100% most of the time. Gelignite is mainly a 65% strength with added saw dust or other filler.
Msjayhawk 20:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you say semtex is much more powerful than gelignite??  Msjayhawk (talk) 20:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right.  Gelignite and blasting gelatin are two very different explosives.  Gelignite is plastic and contains other things besides NG and guncotton while blasting gelatin is just NG and guncotton and is rubbery.  It is very powerful but can't be tamped into a hole without leaving air spaces thus lessening its efficiency.  Gelignite does burn safely.  Some idiots use it to light safety fuse if they don't have a cheesa stick but don't drop it into water or it will explode.  Contrary to the article, it does sweat after a while.  It also gives you a rotten headache if you have to work with it for long, like making up primers.  The article needs to be rewritten. Egoli (talk) 23:03, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like you know the subject matter. Feel free to do the rewriting. If you don't do, it may not get done. David spector (talk) 03:44, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

text:  Can I add that guncotton is cellulose trinitrate and collodion cotton is cellulose dinitrate IIRC (http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561534584/collodion_cotton.html) and it's the latter that is used for blasting gelatin (and gelignite I think). This from a book I read on the subject many years ago (Pelican Books, Explosives, ISBN unknown). Captain Pedant (talk) 21:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Semtex

message: The article leaves some questions in my mind.
* There is no mention of Roaring Jelly, which I believe was a popular name in the late 1800s. Is RJ gelignite or blasting jelly?
* An understandable explanation of the differences between gelignite and blasting jelly is sorely needed. They sound the same. Besides their ingredients, how do they differ as explosives? How do they differ in physical consistency? How do they differ in ease of detonation? Do either of them "sweat" nitroglycerin?
* Are there any book citations for answers to these questions? Where are the explosives experts around here? David spector (talk) 04:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions 

message: I guess part of the problem with this is that gelignite is kind of a past explosive, not used much anymore. Mostly water gels and slurries now. I guess I have seen people using nitro mixes cleaning clinkers out of boilers, but that is about it..  Msjayhawk (talk) 01:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gelignite 

message: It's far too large, so as to be a violation of WP:UNDUE. I'm cutting it. ScottyBerg (talk) 22:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular culture section

message: You reverted 2 edits of mine
1. Allegedly Gelignite is being used to ignite the primary explosive. I deleted that.
The mechanism is: a. Primary explosive detonates. b Gelignite is being used as secondary charge or "booster charge" to amplify the detonation to the point where c. it is strong enough to detonate the very insensitive tertiary charge of a "blasting agent" like ANFO, which would have been too insensitive to be detonated by the primary charge, e. g. blasting cap.
This is called Explosive train. If you don't understand blasting technology and energetic materials, leave your hands off the article. The ref for the faulty statement was a newspaper article by some journalist apprentice, not a valid technical ref, so I deleted the nonsense.
These are highly technical matters, please refed to technical academic literature.
2. Ammonal - Is indeed a mixture of Ammonium nitrate, Aluminum AND TNT, see the body of the article. Somebody vandalized that by removing the TNT, and I reverted that. Again , hands off if you do not know what you are talking. Read the Ammonal#Proportions section in the body of the article there you are.
70.137.141.81 (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Your an insulting Prick, but I am happy to discuss the edits on the talk page. Tommy Pinball (talk) 08:20, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits on [[Gelignite]] and [[Ammonal]]

message: The current version of the Petlawad explosion article says later evidence showed that the gelignite explosion occurred first. This article may need updating. -- Dough34 (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petlawad explosion 

message: Note 3: should it read "Site safety"?  I'm not certain enough to change it.  Rags (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Site? 

message: Is this page about a type of explosive, or about *IRA exploits? Wegesrand (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Focus