Guess What?

'No blister agent' in Iraq shells

Initial confusion

Field tests conducted by British and Danish inspectors indicated that the shells - found on 9 January - contained traces of blister gases - including mustard gas compounds.

But further tests by the Iraq Survey Group in South Iraq and the US Department of Energy's National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in Idaho proved these results were incorrect.

"The results show the shells from the Danish area did not contain chemical warfare agents," the Danish Army Operational Command confirmed on Sunday

Does degrading propellant/explosive give the same signature s blister agent?

8 days to find something big then :)
Maybe if you put that question to Fuchs66 he'll give you a serious answer as he works with the stuff all the time.
I've been resisting the temptation but you started it, I'm at the moment sat on me jack tod with about 1 litre of HD in the lab I'm even legally allowed to produce the stuff now (personal consumption only of course)
As for degrading HE/propellant giving the same signature it would depend on the detector used and the skill of operator (but it would be a new one on me if it did) and also you should always have a back up system using a different means of detection (eg CAM and RVD) to rule out as far as possible interference. My guess is (I dont know exactly what happened so it is pure guesswork) that they found munition (mortar rounds wern't they?) containing an unidentified liquid and someone jumped the gun identifying it. Seen it happen many a time.
Been thinking about it! If they used some form of neutron induced gamma spectroscopy (its a way of looking inside whole munitions and getting a read out of the elements present) and if the contents contained sulphur and chlorine (as some smoke munitions do) it could have been identified as sulphur mustard if the mix ratios were wrongly interpretated. From experience I've learned never say for sure until you have a lab analysis infront of you (and they can be wrong too) I've had allsorts brought to me by people who have sworn blind that it's S-mustard only to find out it's something completely different usually with the reaction "but the detector paper went red". Field detectors only give an indication of what it is (although the MM1 in the Fuchs aint bad if you know what you're doing)

Similar threads