# London Bomb Plotters- How serious were they? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 29, 2006, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691 "2006-08-29T17:24:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2006, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/121 "2006-08-31T17:15:47Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] OK, the disclaimer was just funny. [/QUOTE] šŸ˜› Hopefully Orbifold will recognize the tongue in cheek manner there and accept my earlier apologies. [QUOTE=Magiver] Iā€™m not aware of any currently installed detection devices that would recognize HMDT or itā€™s individual components (note I said installed). This is different than nitrogen based explosives which detectors are designed around (again, pulling that from memory). [/QUOTE] I was under the impression that HMDT WAS detectable, but Iā€™m also going from memory there. If I have time this afternoon Iā€™ll see what I can dig up that is (IMO) safe to post on the board. If it is not detectable then it certainly should beā€¦but it would make sense then that this was the target explosive if thats the case. IIRC HMDT does not have a long shelf life for stability or uniform reaction, so it would also make sense that they wouldnā€™t create the explosive until they were ready to rollā€¦but they would have the components on hand. [QUOTE=Magiver] If the intended goal was to avoid detection by bringing individual components onboard then any danger involved would be meaningless. Iā€™m sure a suicide bomber is not hugely concerned about it exploding since this would be the desired goal. That goes back to the suicide video. [/QUOTE] Rightā€¦that was pretty much my point. Also, these guys may have been willing to accept a lower order of probable success (10% or 20% say) than most folks woudl find acceptable. If there were several teams then they might have counted on at least ONE of the explosions being energetic enough to at the very least cause major structural damage. As noted, punching a hole in a pressurized cabin at altitude can ruin your whole dayā€¦and its not all THAT hard to blow such a hole in the side (probably be a tad hard on the terrorist, but then thats what they are there for :)). -XT ---
**Author:** ![Caiata](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e56c9b/32.png) [@Caiata](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caiata)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2006, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/122 "2006-09-01T05:32:05Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > > [@magiver](#): > > > > Iā€™m not aware of any currently installed detection devices that would recognize HMDT or itā€™s individual components (note I said installed). This is different than nitrogen based explosives which detectors are designed around (again, pulling that from memory). > > I was under the impression that HMDT WAS detectable, but Iā€™m also going from memory there. If I have time this afternoon Iā€™ll see what I can dig up that is (IMO) safe to post on the board. > > If it is not detectable then it certainly should beā€¦ Forensic chemist checking in; although counterterrorism isnā€™t my area, I know a fair bit about instrumentation and detection of explosives. ā€œNitrogen-based explosiveā€ refers to compounds that create their explosive effects due to the involvement of nitrogen - typically compounds which contain nitrate or nitrite groups. I find it to be a distinctly useless term because many detection methods that are called ā€œnitrogen-basedā€ simply rely upon the presence of nitrogen, not whether the compound relies upon that nitrogen to explode. So HMTD, containing nitrogen, is ā€œnitrogen-basedā€ as far as detectors are concerned, but not ā€œnitrogen-basedā€ by the explosive definition. Nicely confusing! Ion mobility spectroscopy (IMS), which is the technique used in many airports for the detection of explosive materials (it is called the IonScan most of the time), were initially built in response to these nitrate- and nitrite-based explosives. However, the detection method itself is not exclusive to compounds that explode due to nitrogen involvement - IMS can also be used to detect nitrogen-containing drugs, oxygen-containing compounds, etc. There is nothing inherent to the structure of a nitrate/nitrite-based explosive that makes it possible to detect by IMS where other types of explosives are not. The technique is simply predicated on mass/charge ratios of the ionised form of the compound being analysed; compounds with greater mass/charge ratios move more slowly through the spectrometer. The time at which the ion encounters the detector is taken as the presumptive identity of the compound. With that in mind, any compound that can be volatilised by heat and subsequently ionised by a radioactive source can be analysed by the IMS. There are IMS programs available to detect peroxide-based explosives and these have been available since at least 2003 (See [this on-line reprint - PDF file](http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/twiki/pub/Terahertzx/WebHome/ExplosiveDetectionReviewcopy.pdf) of Moore, D.S. ā€œInstrumentation for trace detection of high explosivesā€, _Review of Scientific Instruments_ August 2004). This [Swedish (?) website](http://www.scanaconsecurity.se/trace/400b.html) selling IonScans seems to claim the machine can detect HMTD as well. However, I havenā€™t been able to scrounge up any on-line, academic sources about the detection limits of HMTD by this method, so I canā€™t provide to you any more proof than my own word that I have used the IMS owned by our local folks and it has the possibility to identify HMTD peaks in the resulting ion mobility spectrum. Another type of detection device, called the ā€œEGIS Defenderā€, can detect HMTD (see [product flyer - PDF](http://www.thermo.com/eThermo/CMA/PDFs/Various/File_26983.pdf#search=%22IMS%20detect%20HMTD%22) from Thermo Electron Corporation). This combines gas chromatography with micro-differential IMS detection. Testing two different types of chemical properties makes the results from this equipment more reliable. I havenā€™t been able to find out which type of detector is used in UK airports, but from the description in [this article in New Scientist Tech](http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn9715-analysis-explosive-detection-technologies.html) it sounds like they use IMS. Carry on! šŸ™‚ ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2006, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/123 "2006-09-01T16:01:33Z")
**Caiata** , thanks for your input. It was over my head and Iā€™m not quite sure of your conclusion. Is the possibility of identifying HMTD a functional aspect of an IMS machine or a marginal likelyhood? The only thing I found was a 2005 article in [Chemistry World](http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2005/July/26070501.asp) describing a $30 pen that could be used in the field. Such a device would be used to positively verify specific compounds if they were suspect but I donā€™t see it being used on every item that walks by. **xtisme** , Iā€™m not sure I agree with you that terrorist bombers would settle for a low success rate. This is just an observational WAG on my part but the continued fascination with aircraft (by terrorists) goes beyond the act of terrorism. 9/11 was a very specific event designed to attack the economic, military, and political symbols of US power. Large aircraft convey the transmission of this power. Failure to achieve a spectacular act reduces the symbolic projection of terrorism. The London bombings used both HMDT and TATP. Since the entire second wave bombs (which failed) were TATP it would appear that this was a working field test between the 2 (another WAG on my part). ---
**Author:** ![JacobSwan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@JacobSwan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JacobSwan)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2006, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/124 "2006-09-02T10:37:49Z")
Another 14 arrested in London last night. > **[BBC NEWS | UK | Terror police swoop on restaurant](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5307818.stm)** > > Police arrest 14 people as anti-terror raids take place at a London restaurant and an Islamic school in Sussex. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2006, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/125 "2006-09-02T11:05:45Z")
[QUOTE=JacobSwan] Another 14 arrested in London last night. > **[BBC NEWS | UK | Terror police swoop on restaurant](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5307818.stm)** > > Police arrest 14 people as anti-terror raids take place at a London restaurant and an Islamic school in Sussex. [/QUOTE] Not connected with the Aircraft Bomb Plot according to the BBC. These people are thought to be involved in helping people go to Iraq and fight or otherwise training people for terrorist activities. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2006, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/126 "2006-09-02T11:14:59Z")
[QUOTE=JacobSwan] Another 14 arrested in London last night. > **[BBC NEWS | UK | Terror police swoop on restaurant](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5307818.stm)** > > Police arrest 14 people as anti-terror raids take place at a London restaurant and an Islamic school in Sussex. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > The BBCā€™s Keith Doyle said the south London restaurant where the 12 arrests were made was a halal Chinese called Bridge to China Town. That is surreal - a Halal Chinese I heard nothing on the radio, and the newspaper only had something about 1,000ā€™s under surveillance. ---
**Author:** ![Malienation](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Malienation](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malienation)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/127 "2006-09-06T02:19:51Z")
Two words: Timothy McVeigh. Picture this: you have heard that there is a plot to blow up a Federal building and McVeigh is part of the plot. You gather all of the evidence and pick him up. He does not have an actual bomb built. He has some vague plans, maybe some partsā€¦mostly, though, he has a lot of crackpot theories and seething resentment against the government. In spite of the mentality of his rantings and the indications of some level of planning, you conclude that he is some sort of overheated hillbilly that doesnā€™t have the resources and brainpower to pull off such a stunt. Think you oughta just let him go? ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/128 "2006-09-06T03:18:09Z")
[http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail428.html#Carmack](http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail428.html#Carmack) > [@](#): > > 'm usually in the position of trying to use basic statistics and common sense to combat fear-mongering about the dangers of terrorism, but I have to tell you that you are just plain wrong about the impracticality of binary liquid explosives. > > I worked with concentrated peroxide for years at Armadillo Aerospace, and I can tell you with 100% certainty that you can reliably mix two clear liquids and get a high explosive that can be detonated by a sharp impact. > > TATP is an unstable molecule that can slowly form in acetone / peroxide mixtures, even fairly dilute ones. Synthesizing and purifying that is probably something better done in a lab, but a simple solution of concentrated peroxide and acetone (or any other soluble fuel like methanol or ethanol) is also an explosive that is just as powerful. Many explosive, like gunpowder or ANFO, are not compounds at all, but simply mixtures of oxidizers and fuels. > > You do need concentrated peroxide to do this, the common 3% peroxide from the drug store wonā€™t cut it. We have first hand data points at a couple of these concentration levels, but there are some papers available that map out the sensitivity / concentration / mixture ratio diagrams with a lot more tests. > > 50% peroxide / fuel mixtures wonā€™t detonate, even with a blasting cap. We used a very large amount of this safely as a rocket propellant, which does demonstrate that just mixing them is not hazardous. > > 60% peroxide / fuel mixtures can be detonated with a blasting cap. A blasting cap would probably be caught by explosive sniffing equipment, so it probably wouldnā€™t be useful for terrorists. > > 85% peroxide / fuel mixtures can be detonated by modest impacts. Shaking a plastic bottle of mixed solution with a few ball bearings in it would probably do it. > > 98% peroxide / fuel mixtures can be detonated by static electricity. > > 30% concentration peroxide is available in jug quantities from many places on the net. 50% peroxide is available in drums from many suppliers. We bought over ten tons of it while we were doing mixed-monoprop propellant work a couple years ago. 70% peroxide is what most manufacturers produce, but it only gets delivered by tank car to qualified receiving stations. The only remaining domestic supplier of 90 / 98% peroxide essentially only sells to government contractors. > > This does mean that you canā€™t just pick up the chemicals you need, but donā€™t overstate the difficulty of doing the concentration. We did decide that it wasnā€™t worth our while to do large scale (tens of tons) concentration ourselves, but here we are talking about just making enough to fill a couple water bottles. We concentrated a few gallons ourselves early on with vacuum distillation, and there are a couple people you can find on the net that will sell you a ready-to-use concentrator system for modest quantities. For the water bottle quantities, all you have to do is leave some 30% peroxide in an open crock pot under modest heat for a few days, and you are left with a much smaller quantity of 85% peroxide. A member of the Sacramento L5 society wrote a nice report on this process. > > There is no immediate reaction when mixing these fuels into even 98% peroxide. Left on a shelf for a long time, or in the presence of various chemicals that can catalyze the reaction, you will get some of the organic peroxide molecules that chemists usually think about when you mention peroxide explosives, but this isnā€™t at all important for just making a bomb. > > I can say this with certainty, because we have actually done it. When we began working with concentrated peroxide as a rocket propellant, we did many tests to sort out the mythical dangers from the real dangers. One of these tests was the explosiveness of peroxide / fuel mixtures. We used methanol with 98% peroxide, but not at an optimal mixture ratio. It would do just fine to blow a hole in the side of an aircraft. No doubt about it. > > I wouldnā€™t advocate any additional regulation or security measures based on this, but promulgating a new myth that binary explosives arenā€™t a valid danger isnā€™t helping anything. > > John Carmack Now, Mr. Carmack is most famous for writing video games, but heā€™s been trying to stuff rockets into outer space for a while. This qualifies as a man who knows what heā€™s talking about. The bombs could well have worked, he says. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/129 "2006-09-06T07:59:31Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] That is surreal - a Halal Chinese [/QUOTE] Why surreal? (a) China has 21 million Muslims, mostly in the Xinjiang province which borders Pakistan, and (b) it could easily be run by ethnic Chinese people from another country, e.g. Malaysia. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691/130 "2006-09-06T08:28:19Z")
[QUOTE=GorillaMan] Why surreal? (a) China has 21 million Muslims, mostly in the Xinjiang province which borders Pakistan, and (b) it could easily be run by ethnic Chinese people from another country, e.g. Malaysia. [/QUOTE] To be honest I have eaten with Moslems in Chinese run restaurants in Malaysia, quite interesting, some will not shake hands with an Infidel, but think nothing of diving their chopsticks into the same dishes. Just as the majority of ā€˜Indianā€™ restaurants in the UK serve dishes that are virtually unrecognizable to Indian Indians, UK Chinese food tends to have quite a lot of pork. Having said that Iā€™ve eaten pork spare ribs in a rib shack in a suburb of Tel Aviv, and I really found that surreal - maybe I have a warped sense of humour. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-bomb-plotters-how-serious-were-they/370691.md?page=6)