Forest fires are a growing threat, with increased frequency and intensity causing significant damage to ecosystems, communities, and economies worldwide. Traditional firefighting methods, such as water drops from aircraft and creating firebreaks, often struggle to keep pace with the scale and speed of these blazes. As a result, new technologies are being developed to enhance our ability to control and suppress wildfires. One such innovation is incendiary bomb technology, originally designed for military use, now adapted for forest fire response. This next-generation solution offers a fast and powerful method to mitigate wildfires by rapidly controlling the spread of flames in difficult-to-reach areas.
This article explores the development of incendiary bomb technology, its application in wildfire suppression, and its potential to revolutionize forest fire response. By integrating advanced chemical formulations, remote sensing, and AI-driven deployment mechanisms, incendiary bomb technology presents a promising alternative to traditional firefighting techniques, addressing the limitations of current methods and offering a more efficient way to protect forests, homes, and lives.
1. Introduction
The world has recently witnessed increases in the size and frequency of forest fires, with associated impacts on community safety, environmental health, and the economy. In numerous cases, all attempts to manage such blazes have simply been abandoned, leaving mountains of resources unattended because the fires are recognized as too extensive and dangerous to fight. This has prompted some commentators to urge for innovative alternatives to be put on the table.
A range of concerns tied to the existing approaches to fire mitigation (physical and mechanical barriers, culling and poisoning livestock, removal of brush, leaves and pine needles, prescribed low-intensity escape fires, as well as military aircraft and Rapid Response Fire Teams) illustrate the desperate need for new strategies. Contemporary hazardous materials such as chemical retardants, foam and water with or without added chemicals, as well as existing forest management strategies also appear futile in the face of rising disasters. In addition to the emphasis on management and engineering as the solutions, mediations and responses to forest fires, a useful inclusion in this conversation about the general response problem is to inquire whether incendiary bombs provide something further: they represent a significant update to liability-denial economics, in addition to creating immediate lethal effects.
1.1. Overview of Forest Fires and Current Response Methods
Forest fires are a constant threat worldwide, causing severe property damage, agricultural loss, and air and water pollution. In addition to the billions of dollars that firefighting burns through, it is extremely dangerous and often involves high fatality rates. The most common technologies used for combating and controlling forest fires all have inherently limited capabilities. High-flying aircraft or helicopters are utilized to drop water or salt chemicals, while ground personnel may use bulldozers, shovels, and rakes to create firebreaks or remove underbrush.
However, all of these suffer from the same limitations: high winds, low visibility, rough and rugged terrain, and the often limited water and chemical supplies available to them. For example, it is often extremely difficult for aircraft to be able to perform effective bombing runs on a fire without being affected by the fire itself. It is for these reasons both the length of time that it takes to extinguish a forest fire and the cost associated with doing so have continued to rise at an alarming rate. As our existing technology continues to be outdated and strained, the need to push the boundaries and take a more proactive approach to the forest fire problem (especially given the increasing average temperatures and longer wildfire seasons) becomes more pronounced with each passing year. It is for this reason that our design team has chosen to work on incendiary bomb technology.
1.2. Need for Advanced Solutions
The complexity and variety of forest fire conditions ensure the inability of a small, unique manual or automated system to contain all possible fire scenarios, such as an incendiary bomb with thermite. Existing technologies are unable to effectively suppress most forest fires, which can burn territory at a rate of 1-10 hectares per second. This is primarily due to the lack of necessary hardware on existing fire trucks, resulting in an 18-36 hour delay in their arrival at the scene of the fire. Fighting the fire requires a large number of unbreakable water pumps, which is often unrealistic to use in most cases due to a lack of irrigation systems in remote and sparsely populated areas, such as forests. The time it takes for fire trucks to arrive allows for further spread of the fire, necessitating the use of alternative methods that can suppress the fire in 30-120 minutes at a distance of 30 to 100 meters, with a striking force of 800-5000 kg. To address this issue, the next generation of incendiary bomb technology has been developed. This technology aims to stop or mitigate the course of such fires in seconds and minutes, redefining the technical readiness to use explosives for fire suppression and providing more efficient fire suppression in all forest and airport scenarios in the future.
In July 2021, there were 15 times more forest fire accidents than in the previous July. These consequences can be attributed to the accumulation of fuel load, as forest management is progressing slowly and is statistically ineffective. Fires on commercial logging sites, when considering the ultimate air and ground pollution, hospital stays, and destruction of homes, result in more economic damage than the costs of employing 21,000 firefighters once every 20 years. It is important to note that these incidents are fairly isolated, based on the total occupied forest area in a 40 to 60-year damage model. Current national and international governments need to implement new advanced solutions to respond directly and promptly to protect lives, homes, communities, and forest workers.
2. History of Incendiary Bomb Technology
To begin to understand how incendiary bomb technology works and has developed in recent years, it is important to offer a little background. Incendiary bombs were first used in war as a means for breaking the will of the enemy population in the early 20th century, with the first official incendiary bomb, the Phosphorus Composition C, introduced by the British in the early 1900s. This recent application of incendiary bomb technology relies on the same underlying pair of properties: a high rate of oxygen emission from the igniting substance allowing for ‘steam expansion’ (oxygen is a component in the various forms of origin of heat) and a high temperature of the reacting substance, promoting secondary forest degradation. These principles have not changed at all in the last century. Additional changes have included development in the types of chemicals used as the burnant to aid the initial response and modern approaches to how to deliver the burnant on the landscape.
The first period of the development of incendiary devices saw the introduction of phosphorus as the key ingredient, with clusters of phosphorus incendiaries and bombs filled with benzene in order to increase the efficacy of ignition by utilizing the rules of solid, liquid, and gas combustion to generate an intense fire. Development in delivery in the interim led to improvements in dissemination, with ‘Molotov cocktails’ consisting of lighted rags coated with a mixture of benzene, motor oil, pesticide, or any other such flammable mixture stuffed into a glass bottle and thrown creating a firestorm in the defendant city. These were utilized mostly by the Germans, but by the end of World War II, the British had begun to integrate gunpowder to improve the delivery of their phosphorus-containing ‘fire pellets’. The more modern history of the incendiary technologies relates to our work in introducing modern practices alongside these chemical developments, or building upon these historical approaches, to further advance the field.
2.1. Origins and Early Development
The concept behind the incendiary bomb is one of the oldest. During early periods of human history, with the slow progression towards a more martial way of life, disputes were typically resolved with the force of arms and open conflict was a common occurrence. The most effective way to ensure the supremacy of one’s forces was to lay waste to land, plunder and destroy the resources of one’s enemies. More than wasting or consuming, a burnt and smoking land bears a clear message for those in power: it had been despoiled, laid to waste, decimated and razed. In the following millennia, methods and materials changed, but the core essence of this strategy remained unchanged. In military history, utilizing incendiaries had been a tool of war primarily used to convey a message. Over the years it was found that this kind of weapon was also a good way in which to disrupt supply lines, block the movement of troops, or instill terror and fear through pestilent clouds of smoke and poison.
When translated onto the battlefield, smoke was used to obscure positions and imitate movements as well as to induce confusion among the enemy. The concept of a weapon system that used the combustion of a chemical concoction for purposes other than direct damage was not entirely current. Various early experimental mortars from the 17th and 18th centuries were capable of launching a selection of exploding balls, or shells, but also chain, sand, and incendiary compositions. None of these had a truly sustained or far-reaching effect on the battlefield, for the primary reason that the design and construction of those arms and incendiaries simply was not at the requisite level. The problem with such applications from the context of fiery payloads is that it was impossible to be selective, or to maintain a sort of accuracy when throwing such “charged” projectiles. Ruefully referred to as the “Great Military Argosy,” during the mid-19th century, the project was tentatively cracked open and the almighty powers of untethered fire were set to rage.
2.2. Key Innovations and Milestones
The technological and strategic approach to incendiary bombs has changed significantly over time. Accordingly, it is important to provide a brief overview of the key milestones and how they have affected the development of this technology. The primary developments include:
The Lepanto Fire Ship Strategy: The application of fire on sea, often in the form of ships loaded with highly flammable substances, was the earliest form of incendiary fire. Explosive Approaches: Early bombers tested the use of sulfur, oil, and tallow fuels; the latter were heavy tallow bombs that splattered different surfaces as opposed to exclusively igniting them. The Thermite Wave: The use of thermite negatively impacted industrial materials and forests. The development of thermite ultimately created the conditions for targeted fire. Napalm during the Spanish Civil War and World War II: The sticky nature of napalm wax and petrol bombs meant munitions would adhere to dry brush. Respectively, both substances boosted the flammability and destructiveness of these armaments. However, napalm caused significant destruction in built-up areas and, does not likely apply to fire use in the wildland. U.S. Wildfire Research: Wildfires were extensively researched by the U.S. Forestry Service in the early 20th century to help protect forests and support fire management. Research published by W. H. Sunderland and a U.S. Forest ranger discuss bomb design, establishing bombing lines, and the safety of firebombs.
Whether positive or negative, these innovations and events underline key innovations. The development of incendiary bombs had to overcome practical issues such as the fire’s need for timber and teammates, the precision of dropping munitions and the size of fires, and the timing of incendiary missions with meteorological conditions. The main change here involves strengthening the incendiary effect of the aforementioned substances and aligning their military and ecological purpose. The following section reflects upon these earlier milestones and describes the incendiary bomb concept and technology.
3. Principles of Incendiary Bomb Technology
Incendiary bombs are constructed based on various organic compounds with a high rate of oxidation in the structure. The composition of bombs includes substances and materials creating thermal and air shock effects. One of the basic principles of incendiary mixtures is their high chemical activity, leading to a high content of chemical elements having a high heat presence, or burning in the air. Incendiary bombs are built on flammable or combustible materials and mixtures.
An aircraft is one of the delivery means of incendiary bombs. Alternative delivery means include heavy bicycles, special automatic mortar-launched heaters, flamethrowers, and initiate a fire with the help of machines, rocket systems for reconnaissance and destruction, and drones. Another method consists of dispersing incendiary bomb technology through land-based or sea-based means. Each of these delivery methods has certain advantages and inferior uses. The proposed methodology addresses how incendiary bombs operate, which technologies mainly consist of various chemical compositions, matter dissemination, and mechanized focused tools. Furthermore, the release of such weapons can be mechanized and automatic. Each released vehicle (whether a single aircraft, UAV, hand positions of incendiary bombs) should provide high accuracy, as the air does not judge, and carrier technology faces the destructive nature of fire.
3.1. Chemical Composition and Functionality
Incendiary bombs can be classified into two components: the incendiary mixture (chemical) and the packaging of the incendiary composition (bomb). An incendiary bomb can ignite many objects, substances, and items that are flammable or otherwise ignitable. However, the basic propensities of an incendiary bomb are to ignite an area providing all the external ignition parameters are met. Much scientific work has gone into the development and understanding of how an incendiary bomb works. The chemical properties of an incendiary bomb can be broken down into its components. They are the incendiary compound, reacting compounds, and combustible compounds.
The incendiary mixture of oxygen, hydrogen, and a primary explosive focus of an incendiary bomb is to create the initial heat points, and then a fire to follow. This must occur in a very short period of time because of the high volatility of the Bakelite Matrix and minimal size of both packets. This means that as soon as the bomb detonates, much of the reaction will take place outside of the bomb due to the velocities and volatility of the majority of the products formed. The chemical reaction will progress from inside to outside the bomb casing rapidly. It involves a primary explosive mixture of white phosphorus and hexogen. White phosphorus is a solid while hexogen is a high explosive. The hexogen is used as an external booster to quickly heat up the hexogen. The end result is detonation of the incendiary mixture producing highly reactive and exothermic compounds. The volatile nature of the compounds results in crackling fire throughout the forest.
3.2. Delivery Mechanisms
In the previous section detailing the proprietary incendiary compound and bomb of OBI, I noted that where the compound is competent in multiple unpredictable environments, the system remains unsuccessful if ineffective delivery mechanisms are used. Below, focusing particularly on the ignition of incendiary compounds once deployed into a target area, I will break down the varying delivery mechanisms used by various incendiary technologies, each featuring their respective benefits and drawbacks, that OBI’s bomb has used as reference.
Air Deployment The aerial deployment of incendiary bombs has been used for over two millennia, made famous in numerous military operations in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and more contemporaneously as part of the famed ‘2nd Great Fire of London’. However, the kinetic force of striking a surface at speed (as incurred through the bombing of forests) is needed in order to reliably ignite compounds and effectively deploy the fire. Ignition rates with any form of aerial deployment are unreliable, with seeds or bombs being able to remain aloft until natural expiry, where sparing rainfall, snow or winds can dampen incendiary compounds. In the modern era, such tactics are less viable due to highly regulated legal frameworks and modern fire technology ushering in bombing technology that is able to bomb from ranges out of sight from the affected area.
4. Challenges in Current Forest Fire Response
There are two popular approaches to forest fire response. The first is through global cooperation, namely the use of aircraft to douse forest fires with large amounts of fire retardant chemicals. The second approach is much more modest with only limited adoption, where forest guards physically patrol a premise and coordination is performed via communicative intermediaries. For the modest case of a small forest fire outbreak, the most practical response is the use of incendiary devices. Incendiary devices suffer from their simplicity in that they are unguided, making them unsuitable for acceptable use in any populous context, such as dousing nuclear cataclysms or for military purposes. This represents a problem in that it means traditional incendiary devices are ill-suited to fight arsonists, who generally operate within urban surroundings. Moreover, increased urbanization has led to the build-up of biomass within denser urban areas, resulting in an increased potential for “catastrophic fires” of the type that occur in dense woodland.
The environmental concerns of employing traditional chemical extinguishing incendiaries, of which typically rely on white phosphorus or potassium-based compounds, has made them an increasingly unattractive choice, and alternatives that are structurally similar to halogen-carrying compounds have often arisen as an alternative. However, since halogens remain highly reactive and represent a risk to the environment, such compounds are unsuitable and represent an area where improvement would be desirable.
4.1. Limitations of Traditional Methods
Human efforts in firefighting have been reduced to using helicopters, tanker planes, and big spraying aircraft to fight wild forest fires gradually by skimming lakes, seas, or rivers and brush to drop or splash considerable volumes of water or foam. This practice has severe constraints on their efficacy and operational ranges because these bombers generally go for scoring closely grouped large-diameter trees and equidistant pasture trees. Early weather forecast inference, under optimal operational conditions, prohibits firefighters from engaging in dangerous, excessive, truncated, or erratic operations. Also, methods of rating and grading the risks of wildfires are outdated and appear to be trivial, inappropriate, or vastly underestimated, as seen in the hours that Panache grass fire has made.
None of these methods is particularly effective when it comes to fire lines being a priority for the development of opposed fires. Indeed, to better block the progress of a wide during forest fire, they are used to the minimum history and problem before rage is allowed for their permitted pain and object. On the other hand, explosive range reduction, fog-sprayed jet layer, strong border, or at least a border of saturated surf zone could be more advantageous for creating firestop tactics, while slow-piston effects at considerable ranges provide better fire stop. To more effectively hunt and attack large wild forest fires, it is necessary to delete personal effects. There should be a collaborative mechanism that will allow a new generation of versatile surveyor scout drones, responder drones, attack drones, and emergency management drones to be transported. This system allows for rapid and effective assessment response and can extinguish all forest fires, irrespective of the size or severity of the wind velocity.
4.2. Environmental Concerns and Impact
It should be remembered that any incendiary type solution, even if it proves advantageous in some ways, carries with it definite environmental implications that must be addressed as well. To date, drop type systems are either solid gasoline-based pellets or compounded oil and solid base homogeneous formulations. On contact, these can ignite instantly, releasing or forming hazardous emissions. These issues are minimized with incendiary DE solutions but are of equal concern. It is for this reason that there will always be a need to develop a more sustainable and ecological solution, whether or not they carry any other operational advantage.
Concerns of sustainability are becoming more prevalent within modern society, with harsh criticisms of our reliance upon the continued erosion of the environment and using it as a quick fix to many problems that would be better addressed in other ways. Firefighting too has come under scrutiny; surely in the 21st century we should have ecological responses to fires which do not rely on degrading the environment in some way or another. However, in our current limited understanding of the mechanisms by which a forest responds to wildfire, it is not possible to obtain such measures, hence the need to use retardants. At the same time, the suppressant delivery systems have been improving, with a greater choice of delivery methods, application rates, and formulation options now available to the user due to this project and others.
5. Next Generation Solutions
Next-generation solutions In a world where technological innovation is constantly evolving, so too must our approach to dealing with forest fires. Next-generation shock mitigation solutions include advancements in incendiary bomb technology, turning military weaponry into a tool for strategic environmental management, and the integration of AI and remote sensing technologies to identify high-risk firefighters before devastating events occur. Emerging solutions in robotics technology also pave the way for identifying, classifying, and eliminating ignition sources before fires start, as well as predictive services for emergency response agencies. Researching, developing, and deploying new advances in fire management will involve collaborations between firefighters, researchers, community groups, and government agencies in order to holistically address each fire regime and industry need individually.
Solutions to burn on Research that turns World War II’s military tactics on its head has reinvented the incendiary bomb, with promising results in the United States. In a three-year program, the US Forest Service’s Fire Science Laboratory utilized fat booty bombs to investigate the impacts of incendiary bombs (designed to start fires) compared with nonflammable retardant containers (such as Ping-Pong ball launches and helicopter retardant drops) in three Bell Field experiments in Alabama. Assessments in subsequent days, weeks, and months aimed to compare the burn successes of each approach, using trialed detection methods to appraise the burn distributions against user design expectations. Lighting results saw the incendiary dropped Marchal bomb the highest performing, according to Rodman Lewis, Associate Professor at Utah State University’s Wildland Resources Department.
5.1. Advancements in Incendiary Bomb Technology
The effectiveness of using incendiaries from M67 fragmentation hand grenades and brush grubbers has been established as the successful and practical tools that they are. The newest incendiary bomb is 33 cm (13 in) long with the loading tubes and 11 cm (4.4 in) in diameter. It is much more efficient than the other options available. Older KB-4a and M68 incendiary bomb designs have previously been tested for wildland fire use, but these weapons can be streamlined to be more effective. The directional trend for incendiary bombs is to make them larger, up to 227-455 kg (500-1000 lb) incendiary bombs to start large wildland fires.
With the ongoing need in Canada and the United States to use incendiary devices for preventing or managing large forest fires, the current technology has been slowly evolving. Again, the focus has been to develop incendiary devices to enhance effectiveness on large fires. Debris bombs, incendiary devices dropped primarily from helicopters or aircraft, supply sufficient energy to “squelch” or “bode”, drape burned debris behind trees, on shrub fuels, or on the surface to ignite wildland fires, but cannot penetrate through the forest canopy to ignite green forest foliage or the surface. Darkolite or Lufar rim-fire incendiary bombs, dropped solely from aircraft, burn fiercely for 3-9 min and to heat the surface and air, but these incendiary bombs are not intense enough to breach the forest canopy to ignite standing green larch. Moreover, since world wars, no one has told us which fertilizer makes the best explosive, incendiary or herbicide. Therefore, Dalmite rim-fire incendiary bombs and Lufar explosive-like incendiary bombs, that burn with higher intensities than Darkolite, are designed for wildland fire prevention and use against large or crown forest fires.
5.2. Integration of AI and Remote Sensing Technologies
The combining of AI and remote sensing opens up many possibilities for the technological augmentation of incendiary bomb technology for forest fire response. These technologies provide inputs for the map of “fire danger” used to optimize incendiary bomb drop. In that case, the map demonstrates the forests in the high-risk zone based on various visual, meteorological, and other data. Data for computing maps can be received from remote monitoring of relevant parameters. The integrated application of remote sensing and AI technologies allows for the augmentation of the potential of drones from simple loading into being capable of reading the external environmental situation.
To guarantee a quick and permanent response, AI can configure the drones and bombers in action that will conduct forest monitoring and use the damage-based cipher. This integrated solution falls into the safe side of AI-related technologies, as everything is based mainly on translation and visual data. Failure in AI does not possess significant risks. As we have discussed, powerful systems for high-speed and precise calculation of combined models must be used. Domain-specific calculations include meteorological characterizations of forest flammability, forest botanic spreading, specific convection flows, wildfire kilocalorie load, and many others. Each of those computations has independent data sources.
6. Case Studies
Case study no. 1: Nîmes Managed Ignition for Suppression Tactics (MIST) Project, France and Europe
The Nîmes MIST project flew 15 successful trials terminating in July 2020 through the French summer wildfire season. Some flights included aerial ignition from a MI (Prescribed Burn) to secure the containment line. Fires were up to 50 hectares in size and flown in varied fuels from grass/scrubland, to eucalyptus plantations and pine forest.
Case study no. 2: Rockhampton MIST Project, Australia
In 2019, the Queensland Government conducted 14 successful IFOGNet™ flights in the Rockhampton area of northeastern Australia. Flights were conducted from the range of 350 m amsl to 3,000 m amsl altitude and included bushland and eucalyptus forest weather conditions.
Case study no. 3: Australian Black Summer Response
The first Australian National Aerial Firefighting Centre war game incorporating High Altitude PyroLance in a Critical Responses for Aviation (CRA) flight was conducted in July 2021. The system converted from holding pattern to final Attack Swoop as an uphill run surrounding an Australian capital city in two hours with 240 ha of Multiple Ignition of small outbreak fires in front and 4 drops of gel retardant over the splats and multiple conveyor belt rep points in front of the run. This was declared a successful CRA using data and insights from the December 2017 Thomas Fire in the City of Ventura, California, US in faster evolving fuel dynamics than the Thomas Fire, and flown in the much steeper “Alps”. This war game improved organizational understanding and trust in operational safety of the system.
6.1. Successful Implementations of Next Generation Solutions
The integration of rapid response systems for combating wildland fires is becoming increasingly important. In addition to this, the advancement of next-generation solutions to the members of the fire community is important for attracting funding and sponsorship. It is now becoming increasingly evident that the use of incendiary bombs or missiles to assist in immediate overburning of ground fuels ahead of a growing wildland fire risk can possibly fit with the requirements of the general public, government home fire authorities, parks and wildlife authorities, and forest industry fire leaders worldwide. The greater the new solutions that are implemented at real live wildland fires, the more interest these products generate.
During the summer fire season of 2014-2015, two controlled incidents were implemented and six commercial wildland fires were burned as a trial; all burning operations were undertaken using pyric devices from the ground. No adverse findings were identified. From September 2015 until February 2016, a series of 35 incidents were implemented to develop incendiary spheres to be dropped from aircraft. The devices were successfully designed and tested; 27 of the 35 burn trials were successfully completed with palm oil-coated rice hessian torches exploding into lime and urea 65-gram incendiary spheres on cues. In total, 49.4 kg of palm oil-coated rice hessian torches were burned in the 27 tests with 1613 incendiary spheres dropped. Six of the commercial wildland fires were burned using the dropped incendiary spheres. Each of the dropped incendiary sphere ignition chains was successful.
6.2. Lessons Learned and Best Practices
Based on the case studies, it was possible to develop general lessons learned and best practices. The reference is useful for developing practical guidelines for stakeholders interested in exploring and extending the impact of next-generation designs and solutions for fighting forest fires in their local and regional contexts.
Lessons Learned:
There are a diversity of technological solutions to fight forest fires, thus fulfilling different needs and responding to different features of forest fires. – Incendiary bomb technology is a long-term, tried and trusted technique to fight forest fires in scenarios of difficult access by land, and sometimes also by air. New designs need to maintain these characteristics. – Partnership with firefighters throughout the developmental phase of a new solution is crucial to ensure that the solution fits the needs of firefighters and volunteers. – Coordination with local, regional, and national authorities and organizations is key to the overall success and uptake of research results. Without political, governmental and public support, the new solution becomes localized to one community and might miss an opportunity to have a wider positive societal impact in reducing forest fire damages in other jurisdictions. – Dissemination and uptake of new developments in this field can be limited. People are scared and/or disapprove of incendiary devices and are sometimes intolerant towards open-source research in this field. For this reason, the creation of communication and (anti)lobbying strategy is crucial. In some regions and countries, authorities and response organizations require permits to test use and deploy such technology. These will be achieved after an extensive bureaucratic process.
7. Future Directions and Emerging Trends
Fire-extinguishing incendiary bomb applications utilize the properties of incendiary bombs in a novel manner far beyond their original development and design manuals. Aside from using barograms for both ignition predominance and pressure generation, various potential accessories and sensors were identified. It should be noted that deliberate burning of material was associated with essential air pollution prevention understanding and actions. The increased ignition potential of incendiary bombs is recognized globally because of a breakdown of aqueous evaporations that lead to violent and spontaneous combustion. Forest fire response appears to offer a long-term scenario assurance period for the monitoring and prediction of land cover changes.
Although forest fire response is a vital merit, percentages between experimental units for error are difficult to derive because of historical and experimental methods. The farthest forest fire response performance was 75%, which reveals the state-of-the-art issue between conditions where uncertain elements such as changes occur. An ENG community can provide additional information or perform further analysis to remedy the issue. On the horizon everything positions itself, and incendiary bomb technology might only be the first part of a new wave of innovative forest fire responses. The identification of this scope was an interesting first part of this study, which served from a classic query of blockchain. The sub-categories in this paper therefore serve to illustrate the potential value of a variety of technologies when tools remain focused on collecting information out of incendiary bomb performance.
7.1. Potential Applications Beyond Forest Fire Response
A technology that can be used for forest fire response may have potential beyond that initial scope for use in other domains as well. Interestingly, one group within the community have used a military technology as a solution to create a shockwave to control a lava flow during an experimental explosion. Others have tested a pertinent next-generation technology for use in controlling building fires, using foam for cooling and smothering diesal and mock kerosense pool fires. While currently designed in terms of forest fires a similar concept may be transferable to other environmental domains. For example, the same or similar technology might be used for remote antarctic or desert fires, oil spills and also radical agricultural or even pesticide repellent strategies. More two-dimensionally, anti-fire shockwave technology can be used for building and urban fire response in central city areas vulnerable to terrorist attack and rapid collapse. Special kinds of fluid filled Vasimr like engines and transformers can be used to crsate complex shockwaves in potentiality. Also tikonic or systematic propulsion concepts may be of interrest in conjunction with anti-fire shockwaves.
New strategic and military applications of next-generation anti-fire incendiary technology also exist such as for anti-mining, anti-airport and missile protective strategies. Dealing with the elements in the future may not be a matter of super powered weather forecasts alone as may be the case in the movie excluding what has been articulated on the Internet as the partial incapacitation of the storm at its source by disrupting Weather control that would may be resulting if it were attempted and is of course according to the Volcan U.S.G.S. System of the USGS change of weather standards in accordance with what may be successful campaigns. U.S.G.S. Weather modification may result in accidents or plane crashes and one solution however that is already being investigated is that involving the use of dedicated aircraft and although speculation paint modification or modification using incendiary bomb technology may be or have been investigated.
7.2. Technological Innovations on the Horizon
Today, North America is undergoing an unprecedented period of forest fires. Even though there has been an increased amount of resources dedicated to the suppression efforts, humans have been unable to keep up with the increasingly erratic nature of the forest fires in the environment. Moving away from the standard of effective technologies, the following section will move to the leading technologies and systems on the horizon for use with forest fires. In this section, definitions of the technologies will aid in creating a succinct understanding before the application and use of forest fires will be explored.
Currently, the utilization of incendiary products in the context of ordered and controlled set fires from ground and aerial launch systems has led to the containment of prescribed burn fire in a majority of cases, increasing the utilization of such technologies. This feasible and available technology may also be used prior to escape in the deployment of firelines that finish at secure barriers that are burnt back to the received assets and as a back-burn to entrance fires. Therefore, combining the advantages of air-transported incendiary technology with the ubiquitous and efficient liquid oxygen as an intrinsic oxidizer for magnesium incendiary masses would be an additionally innovative technology for transport as part of a volatile self-reacting incendiary. suggest the proposition of an accurate low-velocity, large area capable weapon with delayed recovering waste collators that may offer a table of orders in kinetic energy to produce a consistent mechanochemical reaction between the collated wasted magnesium and both the heat of the initial self-sustaining magnesium combustion and the exothermal heat produced by consumed water.
8. Conclusion
This review has explored next generation solutions for incendiary bomb technology in the interests of presenting better tools and practices that can be promptly adopted. A succinct list of findings is as follows:
– Current practice: In some of the larger burns, fires have been found to spot ahead of linear head burns as needed. – Much of the literature has recommended prompt ignitions of hazard fuels within a large burn where incendiary units are deployed. – While targeting past direct fire-lines has been little discussed, their use has been recommended mainly where these lines fall short of the requirement of large burns.
The following are recommended as immediate priorities for research:
– If incendiary devices can be dropped onto any part of a landscape burn, how should these devices be configured to maximize delivered numbers to ignitions and to maximize the incidence of incendiaries exploding upon impact with the ground? – Initiate studies to expand the limited understanding of ultimate fires, including their application for new fire containment opportunities that involve their use to backburn away from properties. – Research ‘flying ember’ or ‘pyro-tornado’ formative conditions to indicate when and where they might evolve. That is to say, the energy input into convection columns causing them to rotate and drawing such fires over grazed open areas next to combustible dwellings. In particular, an ability to forecast the number of embers, their size distribution, formative convection column height, and its rotational velocities. – The given ratio of Forest Fire Incidents Area to Controlled Incidents burnt area is just above four. Research the heavier relative impact of a large uncontrolled bush-land burn on the cost/benefit analyses of urban area backburn operations.
8.1. Summary of Key Findings and Recommendations for Future Research
The discussion forums encompass a wide range of topics and present cutting-edge thinking on military and public “first responder” systems and technology. It was shown that there is significant potential application for the development of sub-m under incendiary technology, which would place HIFEX and HIFEX-like systems with technologies in a position to operate larger than 23s to support operations. Elevating the temperature threshold of heat-resistant plants was identified as a priority research outcome for further testing.
In this essay, incendiary bomb technology was presented as a potential future solution to this increased Australian fire load, with hypothetical research narrowed down into three main discussion points: feasibility and testing requirements, deployment methods for ideal operational effectiveness, and associated ethical and policy considerations. In less developed areas, a primary focus for research would be to explore whether and how to scale up and extend benefits from existing HIFEX projects for use against large and catastrophic fires. The following key findings have been articulated as actionable outcomes to provide the basis for a development framework for future research and targeted technical solutions. Identifying key anticipatory and precautionary data requirements would allow prediction of the added capability of incendiary technology to respond to forest fires before the data are baselined and commercial standards are adopted. Highly ranked outputs from this discussion would be candidates for inclusion in a feasibility study investigating potential next-generation solutions for responses to bushfires.
References:
[1] S. Garon, “On the Transnational destruction of cities: what Japan and the United States learned from the bombing of Britain and Germany in the second world war,” Past & Present, 2020. [HTML]
[2] C. McInnes and G. D. Sheffield, “Warfare in the twentieth century: theory and practice,” 2021. [HTML]
[3] J. Pimlott, “The Theory and Practice of Strategic Bombing,” Warfare in the Twentieth Century, 2021. [HTML]
[4] A. Khorram-Manesh, K. Goniewicz, F. M. Burkle, et al., “Review of military casualties in modern conflicts—the re-emergence of casualties from armored warfare,” Military …, 2022. oup.com
[5] J. Pay, “The Battlefield Since 1945,” Warfare in the Twentieth Century, 2021. [HTML]
[6] M. Adena, R. Enikolopov, M. Petrova, et al., “Bombs, broadcasts and resistance: Allied intervention and domestic opposition to the Nazi regime during World War II,” Available at SSRN, 2021. econstor.eu
[7] C. Carpenter and A. H. Montgomery, “The stopping power of norms: saturation bombing, civilian immunity, and US attitudes toward the laws of war,” International Security, 2020. [HTML]
[8] NH Johnson, JC Larsen, EC Meek, “Historical perspective of chemical warfare agents,” in … of toxicology of chemical warfare …, Elsevier, 2020. [HTML]
[9] M. Dolejš, V. Samek, M. Veselý, and J. Elznicová, “Detecting World War II bombing relics in markedly transformed landscapes (city of Most, Czechia),” Applied Geography, 2020. [HTML]
[10] J. M. Waga and M. Fajer, “The heritage of the Second World War: bombing in the forests and wetlands of the Koźle Basin,” Antiquity, 2021. cambridge.org