Slashdot Mirror
Disney Launches Fireworks With Compressed Air
rtphokie writes "When Disney debuted its new firework show at Disneyland recently, they also debuted some new technology which uses compressed air to lift fireworks. This virtually eliminates the need for smoke-producing black powder and other materials at launch, significantly reducing ground-level smoke, and apparently: 'Disney is in the process of donating all seven patents associated with the new air launch technology to a non-profit organization so these patents can be licensed to other pyrotechnic providers'. Something to think about for those of us attending fireworks shows this weekend in the U.S."
The release is very much lacking in details, but the concept is interesting. A friend of mine, a "licensed pyrotechnician," spent nearly three hours at our backyard launch (that rivaled any of the local shows) preparing powder and launch lines. The result was quite an investment in the firing equipment and materials; if the compressed air mechanism is really that efficient it will be reusable. Be clean and save money.
Start using the methods and devices commercially and you prevent them from being patented, everyone can use them freely.
Patent them and donate the patents to a non-profit, and you get a huge tax write off based on the assumed commercial value of the patents.
Disney isn't really doing anyone any favors here, they patent the common potato cannon and then donate the patents to a non-profit for the tax write off.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Disney does something environmentally sensitive, by developing this technology and then DONATING it, and it gets run into the ground. Sigh.
I imagine these are safer for the technicians as well, no? I don't know how many people are injured each year by misfired rockets, but if this technology helps at least with the launching (if not with fireworks that explode in dengerous ways _after_ launch) this is of course entirely a good thing.
because rockets are only used by terrorists... ... that's why compressed air launch is necessary.
I know this is meant to be funny, but I would think anyone making a rocket propelled weapon wouldn't really care whether the propellent was black-powder based or air-based as long as it gets its payload to target.
Actually, the U.S. military has a preference for non-flamable launch/propellent technologies because it's safer for the troops who're fireing the rockets. Basically a flamable propellant adds little or nothing to the damage to the target, but if the ammo store is hit, it adds quite a lot to the destruction of the ammo store.
TW
Lets face it. Fireworks are nothing more than mortars with a slightly mistimed fuse and a non-fragmentary casing.
Using any form of explosive to launch this is dangerous. The tubes must withstand the tremendous launch pressure. There is also the severe risk of burning ashes falling back into the cylinder complex and igniting a shell from the top down- at which point you have a buring bomb waiting for the heat to fry the launch charge.
Modern shows alleviate nearly all of these problems... but I've still witnessed a number of accidents- the most memorable (for me) was when an ash fell into a mortar array atop the Citibank tower in Indianapolis- the entire rooftop 'lit up'. Someone was severely burned, and (I believe) lived... burned over a good portion of his body.
Non-flammable launches won't eliminate (I'm going to miss the downwind smell, sigh) misfires in the tubes, but they should lower the risk during launch. It won't eliminate (or even affect) an ash falling into a shell, but at least you have less explosive contained in a small space waiting to go off.
Just my opinion, of course.
Thank you, Disney.
Unless, of course, the compressed air fizzles...
Remember the good 'ol days of aqua-net hairspray, a bag 'o potatoes, and a compressed air gun made out of PVC??? :)
I've never thought about putting fireworks in there... Thanks Disney!
spudtech
They're using compressed air just to launch the fireworks into the air. The actual fireworks themselves are still going to contain gun powder and such, so you'll still have the big bang when the firework explodes and still get some black snow. There just won't be that big cloud of smoke when it goes up.
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
I'd like to preface this by saying I really don't like the Disney Corporation. I really have to give them credit though. Developeing the technology to clean up the local air problem (seen here) caused by their nightly fireworks and then giving away the patents on the technology is amazing. Wow, I am actually impressed.
:)
All we need now if for Microsoft to give back the double click and I can die a happy man.
"Capital punishment makes the state into a murderer. Imprisonment makes the state into a gay dungeon-master"
When I set up a show, I bring mortar racks, shells and a firing system. The press release was kind of sketchy but I'm assuming I would need to bring a high pressure compressor (a Home Depot 175PSI compressor is not gonna launch a 5Lb shell 1500 feet with any reasonable mortar length). I would also need hundreds of feet of high pressure tubing (A finale rack is at least 100 feet from the main guns), and lots of fast (read expensive) air solenoids. It would take forever to set up a show like that.
Then there is the safety problems, thy don't say how they ignite the time fuze and verify it's burning before a tubeload of rapidly decompressing, cooling air hits the shell. I would like to see some dud data.
For a recurring display where you can leave the equiptment and just drop shells in the same tubes every night or week, this sounds like a dream though. I just can't see it coming to a municipal 4th of july show near you any time soon though.
One of the things I love about fireworks is the light that's reflected in the smoke.
The cloud that's created from launch turns into the color of the current firework going off. It just adds to the experience.
Personally, I've never seen a professional fireworks show where I could see any of the smoke from the *launch*... just the smoke from the explosion in the air.
Perhaps that's the smoke you're waxing rhapsodic about?
Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
I think the point of saying "I forget" rather than "I forgot" is to indicate that the subject is something that the speaker has forgotten repeatedly and is likely to forget again in the future, rather than something he/she has forgotten once. So it's more like "I keep forgetting."
You should donate what's left of your spinal column to medical science after your first test launch...
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
Note that this *doesn't* mean that anyone can use them for free. This means that for a "processing fee" you can get their permission to use the technology.
Nonprofit != public domain.
Just because they dontated them to a nonprofit organization doesn't mean that it'll be free.
Disney-fied fireworks sound like a really bad idea. I'm a huge fan of fireworks displays, and feel it would just not be the Fourth of July without smelling a little sulfur!
I've been to most every display on The Mall in Washington, DC for over 20 years. For July 4, 1986, I went to the Statue of Liberty centennial in NY, which was the most fantastic and outrageous display I've ever seen (they somehow removed ALL the cars in lower Manhattan to accommodate the crowds); it was surreal.
I highly recommend seeing a display close up. On The Mall in DC, I love to get as close as possible to the launch site near 17th Street. The experience of HEARING each launch, and the anticipation of seeing the shell rise above you before exploding in all its glory is FANTASTIC. You know when they're coming, and have some idea of how big they will be. It's much different than watching from far away, there's no delay between the flash and the bang--and you FEEL the big bangs. There's also all kinds of sizzling, screaming, and crackling that you don't here from far away. Most of the ground level smoke comes from personal sparklers, firecrackers, and such (I expect that these things are prohibited in the magic--and antiseptic--kingdom); smoke from the official display is not a problem.
The best place to see the fireworks on The Mall in DC would be from the Washington Monument grounds, but this area is mobbed with people from early in the day. Better to go just before Showtime to the much calmer and uncrowded Constitution Gardens (enter near 20th and Constitution Ave.). People think that the trees here will obstruct the view, but they don't, because most all of the fireworks will be STRAIT UP. They don't allow people to get TOO close, but you may see the rare bit of shell fragment or ash falling, don't be alarmed as they will burn out before getting to the ground. However, please do PAY ATTENTION to what's going on around you if you're out anywhere on the Fourth.
Fireworks would not be the same with some sissy air launcher. This cleaned-up fireworks technology might be appropriate in Disneyland, but I really hope that it stays there.
They're transferring the patents to a non-profit corporation so that they may be licensed (presumably on reasonable terms) to other pyrotechnic companies.
So why doesn't Disney transfer the copyright in Song of the South to a non-profit film preservation society?
personally, I'd rather see a company I invested in strive for a modicum of social responsibility rather than the relentless pursuit of the almighty dollar at the expense of the aforementioned trait. And yes, I do own Disney stock. this doesn't bother me one bit.
"split the clouds and divide the sea and show those evil guys how nasty the Tiki gods can be."
Usenet posting from 1997 http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8 &safe=off&th=9a08b22c38dabaa5&rnum=3
-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
They are profitting from it though.
No need to pay licensing costs that all the other pyrotechnic companies will have to pay.
Plus, whats the tax breaks on "donating" all that R&D and the subsiquent licensing fees?
Do you really think that Disney won't benefit from this?
This is a wonderfull development. Seeing as what a massive source of pollution Fireworks are. The blackpowder used to launch the shells will no longer release carcinogenic sulfur-coal compounds into the air directly ONTOP of our population centers.
Everytime you watch a fireworks display, you are watching tonnes of heavy-metal and radioactive materials being peppered on your community. Making the evening not as wonderfull as Id like.
But, tell me, how is a prudent environmentalist to come out against fireworks? What will the public think about the environmentalists who want to take something generally considered joyfull and request its abolition?
on a more practical note, people need to be aware... we are capable of putting *some* amount of 'pollution' into our environment, but a wise person would not want to see so much that it adversly affects our (and nature's) health. If everyone decided "yes, we will release x,y and z of quatities a,b and c for this display and instead will stop buying/making/behaving in manner T" The trouble is we are not near this level of organization/understanding in the will of the public. Like most environmental issues that the public is directly connected to (consumption) they dont A) care or B) recognize their very real contribution to our looming problems.
So, who wants to martyr themeselves on the Anti-Fireworks Brigade?