# Why would this Cessna 310 have magnesium flares? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 31, 2016, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985 "2016-12-31T19:25:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mixdenny](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mixdenny/32/2962_2.png) [@mixdenny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mixdenny)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/21 "2017-01-01T16:50:26Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > What are you talking about? I looked at all the pix and found nothing of the sort. Maybe your eyes are better than mine. The altimeter is probably a pressure gauge. Dennis ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2017, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/22 "2017-01-01T16:54:31Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Is that the correct term? … my apologies … in the one photo we can see a bit of the dash board … looks like steam gauges instead of advanced computer controlled multitaskable avionics … for the asking price I’m even wondering if the plane has radios … > > … and I guess **48Willys** is right about rebuilding costs … $325,000 for a [2012 Cessna 172](http://www.aircraftdealer.com/aircraft-for-sale-detail/Cessna-172/2012-Cessna-172SP-Skyhawk-G1000/61563.htm) … but here you can see the better instrumentation … and actual stenciled letters & numbers … woot … Gotcha. Yeah, that’s probably almost all original instruments. Plus at best 1970s radios (which we can’t see). Pretty much you’re buying a fuselage, wings, and landing gear as a pre-assembled “kit”. To which you’ll need to add the complete cockpit, interior, engine, and propeller package you need to gather on your own. For somebody with the skills, tools, facilities, and know-how this would be straightforward: 2000 man-hours, and maybe $150K. But that somebody sure ain’t me. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2017, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/23 "2017-01-01T16:56:54Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > … and I guess **48Willys** is right about rebuilding costs … $325,000 for a [2012 Cessna 172](http://www.aircraftdealer.com/aircraft-for-sale-detail/Cessna-172/2012-Cessna-172SP-Skyhawk-G1000/61563.htm) … but here you can see the better instrumentation … and actual stenciled letters & numbers … woot … The 310 ended production in 1980. The [newest one I find](http://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1418573/1979-cessna-310r) in a cursory search is a 1979 . The seller is asking $120K. I didn’t see a '56, but a [1955 Cessna 310](http://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1453301/1955-cessna-310) formerly owned by Jimmy Stewart, and apparently restored in 2004, has a price of $47,000. I don’t know how much engines or overhauls cost, but I’m guessing around $30,000 each for a rebuilt engine or for an overhaul (you’d have to buy rebuildable cores, possibly for around $5,000 each). And you need two of them. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/24 "2017-01-01T17:02:03Z")
Wow … maybe it wouldn’t be more expensive than an XJ-12 … ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2017, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/25 "2017-01-02T03:28:27Z")
Would those flares even fire after 60 years? ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2017, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/26 "2017-01-02T15:05:14Z")
Chemistry being what it is, once the magnesium got started they’d burn fine. A good question is whether the igniters would still work and whether the flares would jam in the launch tube and burn the aircraft to a cinder. I don’t know how those specific igniters work. But we can see they’re electrically initiated. It might be like a model rocket motor, with a nichrome heater wire coated with some compound with a low ignition temp and a high flame temp. That is/was also how USAF 2.75" FFARs worked in my era. Which were based on a similar WWII level of tech. After all those years and all that vibration there’s plenty of opportunity for the nichrome to have broken or the initiator compound to have dried up and flaked off the nichrome. I’d bet you’d get barely 10% of a lot to function today. The other plausible ignition system is something more like a firearm primer: the electrical signal actuates a solenoid firing pin that strikes a pressure/shock sensitive explosive. This seems pretty unlikely to me. Though more likely to fire provided the launcher solenoids still work. An interesting question is whether the whole system is more like a static line parachute connected to a grenade. IOW, the aircraft-mounted electrical initiator just powers something that ejects the flare on a lanyard. When the lanyard goes taught it pulls out a stop with releases a spring loaded firing pin which does the rest. That was/is how USAF aerial parachute flares worked. All in all the more I think about it the more the ejection mechanism is the key unknown here. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2017, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/27 "2017-01-03T05:18:14Z")
Any chance it is the Songbird? Might make it worth more. ---
**Author:** ![mixdenny](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mixdenny/32/2962_2.png) [@mixdenny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mixdenny)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2017, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/28 "2017-01-03T05:42:26Z")
I hope the flares required several steps to initiate. Pretty embarrassing to burn down the hangar because you thought you were turning on the radio. Dennis ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2017, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985/29 "2017-01-04T00:58:34Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > Any chance it is the Songbird? The 310 in the TV series (after the first season, in which it was a T-50) was scrapped in 1964. The registration was reused by another plane. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-would-this-cessna-310-have-magnesium-flares/775985.md?page=1)