Purdue Uni - these were the guys that lit a BBQ in .01 of a second using 10 gallons of LOX (liquid oxygen) and a smoldering tab end. ( Ok they vapourised 80% of the chracoal but what was left was ready to be cooked on).

They also provided video of this spectacular effort (I won't supply a link, just search for BBQ and liqiud oxygen on google)

Good old George Goble..

Paris ? - even she wouldn't try anything quite so stupid (tho entertaining)

But I would say that a thixotropic gel would be just the ticket.

OXO

(ex-rocket scientist)

With NASA it's always jam tomorrow.

But what will it tase like on my toast?

what genius thought of this.

"We need something between a liquid and solid. What on earth could we use?"

"A Gel, perhaps...."

"Brilliant"

It's not rocket science...oh hold on, it is!

They need experts on the process of squirting thick liquids through small nozzles.

Heck, I've been doing that since I was a teenager! HIRE ME DARPA !

Oh wait ......

Nice video. I love how they guys in the background go "Fire! Fire!" all Beavis & Butthead style.

The rockets will always land marmalade side down.

Dude, at the velocity and force it will arrive at on your toast, you're worried about the *taste*?

it will be a taste explosion

Surely this jam fuelled destruction concept is more in the realm of that bulging bonced bonkers boffin bureau - DARPA?

So what type of rocket fuel are we talking about here? If its a hydrocarbon fuel for use with an oxidiser whats wrong with good ole vaseline?

Just inject/extrude it into the combustion chamber feed in the NOx and away you go....

Vaselline !?! Oh, where is PH's phone number ?????

...has been hired to assist with the research are not as of yet confirmed!

Paris because she knows a thing or 2 about squirting thick liquids through a hole!

Oh yeah, they called it napalm. They could also just chill diesel to that point where it's not quite wax but I suppose the control scheme would be a bit extreme.

Black helicopter because I'm sure they're running it through their engines already.

Picture yourself on a boat on a river

With tangerene trees and marmelade skies.....

Maybe the Beatles COULD see in to the future.......

Youre Toast

The boffins at Mohave have been using a throttled solid propulsion system all along. I wonder if the MIL SPEC folks are just avoiding this concept because it would make them look bad - they didn't think of it first, eh?

It's all about the physics of ketchup or thixotropy if you want to be more technical . Stable when at rest behaving like a gel but becoming fluid when agitated. The thing is though, who is s going to want a rocket with the instructions

'Shake well before use' ?

Err, surely they didn't think of napalm did they? (Yes, yes, for those of you in the peanut gallery I know that napalm is not a fuel, it is a slow-burn substance). What happens if the container leaks or ruptures and sprays gel fuel everywhere? Will it be easy to put out and not stick to everything?

The problem with hybrid motors like the one SpaceDev provided for Space Ship One is that while their ISP compares favourably with conventional solids (250s v 270s for the Shuttle SRB), they don't really scale well for thrust. If you want to increase the thrust of a solid, you just make it longer (most solids burn along their entire length from inside out), while with liquid (or gel) propellants you increase the flow rate by using bigger pumps.

A hybrid requires you to increase the flow of oxidizer (which requires larger pumps) *and* increase the area of fuel (make it longer) - not to mention the difficulty of ensuring proper combustion along the entire length of the rocket.

... to point out that Bayern-Chemie have already demonstrated Gelled Fuel Propulsion motors on the ground, and have a test flight planned for 2009?

Or that they also have a Throttleable Ducted Rocket already in production which has all of the same listed advantages, but with solid fuel?

Icon: test firing of a rocket motor ;-)

I for one salute the efforts of the rocket scientists to boost the popularity of my favourite breakfast comestible but I can't agree with their preference for shredless from a point of personal preference, marmalade just isn't right unless there are chunks of peel in it acting like speed bumps for your knife.

Mind you, lumps of peel exiting a rocket motor nozzle in excess of mach 20 could put a serious dent in your toast so I expect they are probably right, being rocket scientists and all.

Paris, she's no rocket scientist but I'd share my marmalade with her at breakfast any day.

<German accent>That is all!</German accent>

Strangelovian mad scientist for obvious reasons

So, more like Lemon Curd, or runny honey, or swarfega :-)

I've been waiting for this for my rocket powered car. I predict it'll be marketed as Traffic Jam (TM)

Toast, Marmalade, You HAVE to have butter.

Speed bumps on my toast? That is just weird.

But I guess there is always the "smooth" and the "chunky" crowd (for you peanut butter lovers)

Now there is an idea... Use a "High Energy" Food. 'You know like peanut butter.

And not a word on "JUST How Volatile Orange Oil Is".

Try lighting orange zest oil with a lighter while squeezing an orange peel to make it squirt...

Maybe marmalade is not such a bad idea, BUT SPEED BUMPS?

I'm usually a chunky guy, but in this case I'll take SMOOTH.

PS: If you make a marmalade sandwich, it will ALWAYS fall bread side down.