Re:Turning Everyday Gadgets into Bombs Is a Bad Idea
by spwa4 on Friday September 20, 2024 @06:57AM
(#41600709)
> small circuit board embedded in it called the PCM or “protection circuit module”.
Which is, perhaps ironically, to prevent the battery from igniting from discharging rapidly (shorting) the battery. It also protects the battery from 100% discharge (which won't ignite it, but will kill the battery).
Makes you wonder if that's how it worked. If you wanted to use a lithium ion battery by just mixing PETN directly in the battery electrolyte ... (maybe it even dissolves, but you'd need an additive for that. Complicated. You could definitely put it directly in the battery in the same space as the electrolyte though) and then using the battery discharge as a "blasting cap", by sabotaging the protection circuit on command, that might work. That would maximize the effect of the PETN, might even use the, at that point superheated, battery electrolyte as shrapnel.
This setup would even auto-disarm itself. If it's not triggered for months to years it will, by itself, destroy the explosive slowly and safely. And yes, that will destroy the battery, but I imagine that's not a huge concern. Might be a problem if the battery then ends up in repair shops and people put it in battery testers.
This would also be completely impossible to detect at airports or the like. For directly checking chemical compounds they need to be able to touch them, so if you wash it and keep it clean it'll be invisible. And the battery is packaged in a metal! That's how all batteries work, so that's not suspicious at all. The metal will prevent other methods of scanning, and it'll be really hard to detect the nitrogen and oxygen of the explosive. I'm not sure if that would even be suspicious in a battery. It probably would.
I still think the fact that "plastic explosive" exists, the more modern variants is the bigger threat. Because you that way they can make an explosive that is a plastic. The very cover of a cell phone, or sunglasses, ... and the item itself can be the explosive. And of course, you could use something bigger. The danger of this is that people carry heavy pieces of plastic and it might be possible to take maybe even a few kilograms of explosive anywhere past almost any security check, because the explosive IS a suitcase, which would make a very scary amount of explosive not suspicious.
Which is, perhaps ironically, to prevent the battery from igniting from discharging rapidly (shorting) the battery. It also protects the battery from 100% discharge (which won't ignite it, but will kill the battery).
Makes you wonder if that's how it worked. If you wanted to use a lithium ion battery by just mixing PETN directly in the battery electrolyte ... (maybe it even dissolves, but you'd need an additive for that. Complicated. You could definitely put it directly in the battery in the same space as the electrolyte though) and then using the battery discharge as a "blasting cap", by sabotaging the protection circuit on command, that might work. That would maximize the effect of the PETN, might even use the, at that point superheated, battery electrolyte as shrapnel.
This setup would even auto-disarm itself. If it's not triggered for months to years it will, by itself, destroy the explosive slowly and safely. And yes, that will destroy the battery, but I imagine that's not a huge concern. Might be a problem if the battery then ends up in repair shops and people put it in battery testers.
This would also be completely impossible to detect at airports or the like. For directly checking chemical compounds they need to be able to touch them, so if you wash it and keep it clean it'll be invisible. And the battery is packaged in a metal! That's how all batteries work, so that's not suspicious at all. The metal will prevent other methods of scanning, and it'll be really hard to detect the nitrogen and oxygen of the explosive. I'm not sure if that would even be suspicious in a battery. It probably would.
I still think the fact that "plastic explosive" exists, the more modern variants is the bigger threat. Because you that way they can make an explosive that is a plastic. The very cover of a cell phone, or sunglasses, ... and the item itself can be the explosive. And of course, you could use something bigger. The danger of this is that people carry heavy pieces of plastic and it might be possible to take maybe even a few kilograms of explosive anywhere past almost any security check, because the explosive IS a suitcase, which would make a very scary amount of explosive not suspicious.