RFD

I think boric acid reacts with the magnesium,unless your mixing large qauntities, boric acid is liable to do more harm than good,ive always used de ionised water or even tap water at a push and coudnt realy tell of a difference,i have found overwetting a mixture can ruin a good glitter comp though and type/grade of ali/mag can alter the effect dramatically aswell.

I have seen on different pyro sites that a few people feel that the type of paper for the tubes is important,mainly how the paper burns may effect the colour of the bengal,to honest Ive tried all sorts from post it notes,cheap A4 copier paper,newspaper and everything in between and havnt been able to discern the difference,only thing i did notice is the type of glue used to roll the tubes can create a slight orange tint,but barium chlorate is such a good "traffic light green" i dont think its worth worrying about.

Bengal tubes are usually thin walled ie three or four turns of paper,ideally the paper should burn away at the same speed as the composition,otherwise the flame will be obscured by the tube,thus defeating the object of lighting up the area,incidentally i have replaced red gum for shellac with equally good results.

Phil,if my comments came across as being negative,this was not my intention and it certainly wasn't intended as a dig at the fine efforts of members and volunteers,if it caused offense then apologies all round.
I certainly haven't considered the project not to be worthwhile or i wouldn't have donated to the fund for removal the buildings in the first place,as for industrial heritage of the UK,if i was unconcerned about our firework past i wouldn't have bothered to try and keep the forum updated on the sad demise of Astra's at sandwich,as a small society trying to do something quite extraordinary on limited budget i think is outstanding,but judging by previous posts about Amberley it appears the museum likes to move the goalposts on occasions,if Amberley set out what they want/by when with some sort of guarantee i would put my "money where my mouth is" and be a sponsor

Is the UKPS obliged for the upkeep of the potential buildings,if i was given a business proposition whereby i was asked to spend a potential 30k plus time and effort and upkeep afterwards to build a display for a company that charges admission and i saw zero return,they would see the wrong side of the door pretty quick smart,surely a better way would be to have a small percentage of admission fee returnable to the UKPS,at least until costs are covered,i have to agree with Arthur trying raise a possible 30k in these cash strapped times could be a very long drawn out affair,to get people to sponser you need a bit more than buildings that a limited number of people are going to see,if publicity is what the UKPS wants 30k buys a lot of adverts in magazines and papers. I appreciate this sounds like victor mildrew and maybe it is, but sounds like Amberley want it all their way and basically giving us a bit of waste land to improve there finances for what appears to be little effort on there behalf,if the UKPS had a vast membership then its a realistic proposition but even with sterling efforts from the committee this has got financial meltdown written all over it,think on the lines of how difficult it was to find finances to remove the buildings in the first place,if it hadnt been for the hard work of volunteers it all would be rotting away still,i cant help thinking Amberley are asking far to much,ok rant over gonna start building the barricades now.