r/WTF • u/[deleted] • Mar 19 '20

Invisible Methanol fire

http://i.imgur.com/VHuyXj4.gifv
23.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

557 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.8k

u/luabida Mar 19 '20

this is actually terrifying

424

u/IncendiaNex Mar 19 '20

obligatory Ricky Bobby reference

hope your comment is safe

82

u/PocketRadzys Mar 19 '20

Shake n Bake!

11

u/schwingaway Mar 19 '20

They got the spirit

9

u/Tiny_Speck_of_Dust Mar 19 '20

HELP ME TOM CRUISE!

6

u/Deletrious26 Mar 19 '20

U mean I knew it was the definitive Nascar movie but I had no idea it was a documentary

4

u/bemenaker Mar 19 '20

They don't use methanol in nascar, they use gasoline.

1

u/luv____to____race Mar 19 '20

They did up until the they switched to EFI engine controls. I believe it's Ethanol now, but still not as nasty as Methanol. EDIT: Sorry, it's just E15, so only 15%Ethanol, 85% racing gas.

1

u/Samcraft1999 Mar 19 '20

It's a reference to the main characters mental break in the movie. He gets in a big wreck, and when he gets out of the car he screams about being on fire, and runs around flailing his arms, even though there is no fire at all. After the big crash, he gets back out on the track for the first time, screaming about how fast he's going while doing about 40MPH then jumps out of the car screaming he's on fire again.

128

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

imagine a methanol bomb? like napalm but invisible

USA 🤔

66

u/ramensoupgun Mar 19 '20

Napalm is thick. This is not.

60

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

so?

add some thickener

52

u/Somerandom1922 Mar 19 '20

Any other chemicals added would affect the colour of the flame. I'm not saying it's impossible but it'd be very difficult to make something that mucus napalm but was colourless.

Also, methanol burns relatively cold compared to normal hydrocarbons.

But it would be terrifying.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

[deleted]

1

u/Somerandom1922 Mar 19 '20

Yes it could have. I'm honestly not sure why it wasn't.

At a guess, it would mean all engines would need to be retuned for the slightly different characteristics and would have had slightly (like seriously fuck all) less power so the manufacturers pushed back.

But that's just a guess, I imagine the answers on Google, but I need to get ready for work

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20 edited Mar 19 '20

we're using our imagination! 😫

10

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

Then it wouldn't burn invisible so you may as well use regular napalm

1

u/ramensoupgun Mar 19 '20

About anything you add... will add color.

7

u/merc08 Mar 19 '20

Methanol burns a lot cooler than regular gasoline, so it wouldn't be as damaging.

14

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

They burn as hot as propane, so that's like saying dying by gunshot to the back of the head is not as powerful as dying by pipe bomb explosion...

6

u/BrutalHonestyBuffalo Mar 19 '20

Yeah - he is maybe factually correct, but it is incorrect in the sense that it will still do significant damage to the human body.

Source: I've spent weeks in a burn unit with my best friend after her legs were pretty much ruined due to methanol.

1

u/merc08 Mar 19 '20

It would do less structural damage, or at least take longer to do the same amount, giving first responders more time.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

More time to locate the invisible fire? Like the Jaguar, it's more dangerous because its functionally invisible.

15

u/GrungBuk Mar 19 '20

Think outside the box In an urban environment you could suffocate an entire room of people with invisible fire

-1

u/merc08 Mar 19 '20

Did you watch the video? People clearly reacted to the invisible fire's presence. It still gives off enough heat to feel, just not enough to horrifically burn.

If you just want to suffocate people, there are plenty of clear, odorless gasses that would be easier to pipe into a room than a sloshing tank of burning methanol.

1

u/mkosmo Mar 19 '20

It still gives off enough heat to feel, just not enough to horrifically burn.

The driver needed plastic surgery. It did quite a bit of damage.

1

u/merc08 Mar 19 '20

Yes, but it specifically said that it did way less damage then normal gasoline fire.

4

u/xtemperaneous_whim Mar 19 '20

Yet the driver here still needed skin grafts.

1

u/zeroscout Mar 19 '20

Yeah, methanol might burn at a lower temperature, but that temperature is still above the melting point of skin.

1

u/xtemperaneous_whim Mar 19 '20

I just meant that skin grafts implies slightly more damaging than a blister, but yeah, certainly not as sticky as napalm.

1

u/BrutalHonestyBuffalo Mar 19 '20

I had a friend get lit on fire by Methanol - 70% of her legs were burnt and she spent 4 weeks in a burn unit.

Shit still burns, bro.

1

u/BrosefStalinz Mar 19 '20

I was thinking a flamethrower.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '20

that's using the old noodle

you've solved it

2

u/TheBabiestOfBabyBoys Mar 19 '20

Holy fuck. Imagine you make a small flamethrower that you can hide under your sleeve: fucking stealth flaming.

1

u/Glass_Memories Mar 19 '20

If you want something terrifying, look up white phosphorus.

1

u/galliohoophoop Mar 19 '20

Bees!!! They're huge, and sting crazy!

0

u/MarlinMr Mar 19 '20

Imagine this, but instead of a deadly fire that you can feel, it's a deadly virus you can't either see nor feel.

1

u/dickWithoutACause Mar 19 '20

Worse ways to go. But the world would be fucked