> -----Original Message-----
From: paul kemble
Sent: 05 October 1998 14:46
To: tworld@bbc.co.uk; qed.programme@bbc.co.uk
Subject: New Heat Resistant Plastic

Dear Sir or Madam,

... in one programme (TW, I believe) a raw egg was coated with the substance and then subjected to a bunsen flame for the duration of the programme at the end of which the egg was broken and found to be still raw.

In the second programme (QED?) it was reported that reflection from the material destroyed a laser intended to cut it.

Please can you provide as much data as you possibly can.

Many thanks...

DATE: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:05
From: Tomorrows World
To: "'paul kemble'"

For further infromation on the substance...

"I finally got the jpeg JW was talking about. It's a scan of an article from "International Defense Review", April, 1993.

I have to say, this material is less than impressive. In testing they set a performance target for it to "contain and withstand 100 mW/cm^2 for one 15 ns (nanosecond) pulse". That comes to 1.5 nJ (nanoJoules) per square centemeter, or 1.5 Watt-seconds per 100 m x 100 m square! You wouldn't even feel this if it were to hit bare skin! I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, though, and assume they meant 100 MW/cm^2 (megaWatts, not milliWatts). This still only comes to 1.5 J/cm^2. I've got a pair of lasers that fire 150 mJ pulses 10 ns long in beams about 3 mm in diameter. That translates to 212 MW/cm^2, and that still won't go through a sheet of paper! (I've never stuck my hand in the beam, so I can't tell you if it hurts.)

They later said "a sheet of only 3 mm thickness sustained simulated nuclear flashes equivalent to 29,800 kcal/m^2 over 2.5 minutes while the substrate suffered temperatures of no more than 100 C". This translates to 83 Watts per sqare centimeter. I admit that's a pretty high power density (assuming a continuous beam), but it could easily be withstood by a piece of sheet steel with a little water cooling (which might explain their 100 C figure). But since they say simulated nuclear FLASHES, they probably hit the target with a bunch of pulses, so the total average power density was probably a hell of a lot lower.

I have to admit, Starlight is a hell of a lot less impressive than I've been lead to believe. Articles like this one probably sound pretty impressive to people who don't know what they're reading, though. If the blowtorch and egg trick that was shown on BBCs "Tomorrows World" years ago could be duplicated, I would be far more impressed.

Interesting mode of operation, though. Ablation and formation of an ionized layer that will reflect incident radiation. Does anybody know of any applications where this type of thermal barrier coating might be currently used?"

(Posted by [Ooops] Walter, Deja).

This American expert posted a number of very silly attempts at revealing my location (presumably through examining the codings in my postings) when all he had to do was either ask me directly, or even to look at the rest of my web-site!
Perhaps we can all e-mail Tomorrows World to ask them what theatre tricks they use?

06 Feb 2003 21:36


Your laser appears to be from the kinder garden,probably more akin to the title of the song Puppy Love.

Your interrpritation of energy dealt with do you really believe that the MOD/ RSRE have a laser that can only barely lick a postage stamp:|? Like to get your mind around just three results.

1. 100MW base line[ and you have nothing which can tollerate that type of energy]increased to 6600MW plasma produced, increased to 8000MW[ plasma reduced],described as self imunising, or self healing, increased to 25,000MW: CMsq/per second.surface under special microscope showed only minute pinprick.

2. 3.6GW CMSq/per second.had to turn laser off after about 2 minutes, it[the laser] could not take the heat.

3 CO2 laser continuos at 3750w CMSq/per second. The test requirement was to withstand 200 WCMSq/ per second for 2 seconds duration[use your imagination what that would be used for] however after SIX Minutes duration 1mm thick of Starlite was still giving protection to the substrate!

In the USA. they recognise a "Q" value for the capability of thermal protection. The tiles on the Shuttle have a "Q" value of ONE.At75mm thick. Starlite has a "Q" value of TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND SEVENTY!.at 1mm thick. Washington DC USA 1994 MW received an award for the Best Technology last 10 years Publicity was not helping us in our cause.So I cooled it. I have just started reading these pages and felt that I may as well send you this note. There is however much, much more.


Ps I forgot to mention your explanation of the AWE tests 29800Kcal/CMsq not Msq makes a big difference if you calculate Msq it works out at 1247MW/Msq.{ENRON POWER STATION at Wilton, the largest in Europe, USING; PLEASE CHECK I BELIEVE 12 MILLION CUBIC FEET OF GAS } PRODUCES 1700MW per hour. Based on results that one continous fluence of 400Cals/CMsq [1.5 seconds duration]can put a hole straight through a 1 inch thick steel plate,[ which it definitely can] That energy of continous fluence dealt with in 2mins29secs calculated as above would melt 100 inches thick steel! 1Mtr.sq. Starlite was 3mm thick giving protection to a kevlar substrate; which in fact did not raise in back face temperature to more than 70.c.


Thank you mw, know the feeling. Well, Walter?

Contact me
especially if you want additional content to this page
or if you find any links that don't work. Don't forget
to add the page title or URL. Take care!

Back to home