Gas Fog horn

[Elemental]

What is the difference between a gas fog horn with inflammable gas and one with non-flammable gas. Obviously I understand why you might want a non-flammable gas cannister on-board, but why would you prefer a inflammable gas powered horn.

Plastimo do one of each ...

 

[LadyInBed]

What is the difference between a gas fog horn with inflammable gas and one with non-flammable gas. ...

inflammable gas one doubles as a blow torch

 

[Jack @ Bosun's Locker]

Strange quirk of the mother tongue I'm afraid: non-flammable and inflammable have opposite meanings - whereas one might expect the in of inflammable to follow the same rules as the in of indestructible, ie: not flammable/destructible, however it actually stems from the the same in as inside.

Confused yet much?!

From Wikipedia:
The word "inflammable" came from Latin “'inflammāre”, meaning “to set fire to”

 

[saltwater_gypsy]

Excellent idea !!!!!
In the event of an emergency you can send a sound signal a visible signal (flames) simultaneously. That begs the question about what do you then do as the boat really begins to burn.

 

[nct1]

Aha, so we don't need flares any more.

 

[Jack @ Bosun's Locker]

Maybe we need another horn sounded by compressed Halon for when the boat really begins to burn!

 

[Elemental]

Strange quirk of the mother tongue I'm afraid: non-flammable and inflammable have opposite meanings - whereas one might expect the in of inflammable to follow the same rules as the in of indestructible, ie: not flammable/destructible, however it actually stems from the the same in as inside.

No, no, ... I know what the difference in the words is - what I wanted to know was why you would choose one over the other? Re-reading my post I can see it might have been misinterpreted.
What advantage does the flammable gas one have over the non-flammable one (or vice-versa)

 

[Ludd]

No, no, ... I know what the difference in the words is - what I wanted to know was why you would choose one over the other? Re-reading my post I can see it might have been misinterpreted.
What advantage does the flammable gas one have over the non-flammable one (or vice-versa)

Why have either when you can have an ECOBLAST with zero running costs?

 

[peterb]

No, no, ... I know what the difference in the words is - what I wanted to know was why you would choose one over the other? Re-reading my post I can see it might have been misinterpreted.
What advantage does the flammable gas one have over the non-flammable one (or vice-versa)

Most of the canisters using flammable gas actually store the gas (usually butane) as liquid under pressure. That lets you carry a far greater mass of the gas. The only readily available non-flammable gases that can be liquified under reasonable pressure are halons, now forbidden!

 

[lenseman]

That begs the question about what do you then do as the boat really begins to burn.

Stand on the poop deck, put your hands in the sky in a 'Y' configuration and wait for the yellow budgie!

 

[Ubergeekian]

Most of the canisters using flammable gas actually store the gas (usually butane) as liquid under pressure. That lets you carry a far greater mass of the gas. The only readily available non-flammable gases that can be liquified under reasonable pressure are halons, now forbidden!

Well, there's carbon dioxide, but something which changes to a solid when released isn't much good for a foghorn!

 

[peterb]

Well, there's carbon dioxide, but something which changes to a solid when released isn't much good for a foghorn!

And it needs too high a pressure. That's why you won't find CO2 in an aerosol can.