User talk:GGdown

Ahem

Depth Charge
Just wondering why you removed a referenced reaction velocity from this article?Thewellman (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I couldn't see any obvious reference for it, although to be fair, if it's in the reference at the end of the following paragraph, I didn't look that far ahead. Plus, from a chemistry point of view, I've never heard of reaction speeds being expressed in m/s - unless you're sure these numbers actually mean something, I don't necessarily think there's any benefit having them? m/s is an expression of distance covered over time, which doesn't equate to a chemical reaction in my mind. GGdown (talk) 08:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding so quickly. My original edit was in the form of a single paragraph from the United States Navy reference citation following the next paragraph.  I originally provided a reference citation following each sentence; but a subsequent editor simplified that to a single reference citation at the end of the paragraph, and another editor then split the paragraph.  Velocity is explained in the Explosive velocity article; and it's a fairly important part of the selection of appropriate explosives for depth charges, because high velocity explosives transmit a more efficient shock wave though incompressible fluids.  Increased sensitivity was considered an acceptable risk to obtain the higher velocities desired for depth charge explosives; and some accidents (like the Port Chicago explosion) were attributed to depth charges.  I propose to restore the velocity with one of the previously deleted redundant reference citations.Thewellman (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm sold - go for it! GGdown (talk) 16:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)