That sounds about right. I read about several catastrophic explosions in empty ships caused by crews not filling cargo tanks with inert gases.

Re: the type of fuel - I've read of WWII-era ships carrying both crude and refined products; the latter seem to have been more dangerous. AFAIK gasoline and aviation fuel were not popular cargoes...

Re: Boom!
 

Fuel FUMES are explosive. The flashpoint, you will recall, is the temperature at which the liquid emits enough fumes to cause a short explosion at its surface (Not enough to sustain a fire).

I've put out a match with diesel, as the outside temperature was below the diesel's flashpoint. Pain in the ass when you have to burn something. I'd do it with JP4 as well, but I believe it has a very, very, very, very low flashpoint. Colder than I'd want to get my hand in.

The environment in a cargo tank is such that you can throw a cigar in the tank, and it'll go out. The mixture's too rich - Remember, there's as little space as possible left in that tank, and the oxygen was mostly expelled when the cargo was pourred in. Finally, the north atlantic being the cold hearted biatch that it is, most cargoes (Except, say, avgas, JP, gasoline maybe) would be below their flashpoint.

To get an explosion, you'd have to pierce the cargo tank in such a way that the cargo would be opened to the atmosphere (IE, around the waterline) OR, and that'd be a stroke of luck, cause a list large enough that tanks would overflow on the deck. Cargo could also overflow if water starts infiltrating the tank and the vents are open (But tanker crews would, logically, close all the vents as soon as they expected to take on water)

So yeah, tanker might explode. But they also might not. I'm not saying that I'd stick around to grill marshmallows and watch it burn.

Saw "Mythbuster's" repeatedly shoot a barrel full of gasoline with multiple weapons. No explosion, only leaks.

They later revisited the fuel tank myth and shot at it with tracer rounds. They got flames after a few try (They were shooting from too close at first), and agreed that had the tank been more intact (It was swiss cheese at that point), it would have exploded.

But conventional bullets aren't dangerous.

People, for some reason, are convinced that flammable materials are dangerous.

Couple of comments:

1. Read about operation Pedestal, the convoy re-supply to Malta (I think that's it...). There was a USA tanker that made it to port with the sea level almost lapping over the main deck...I think it's name was 'Ohio'. Couldn't be bothered to check...being lazy :rotfl:

2. Tankers were notoriously difficult to sink. The most likely ways to make sinking a near certainty were (a) a massive explosion of the cargo (especially avgas), (b) breaking the back through a detonation beneath the keel or (c) hitting the engine spaces aft. As commented by others, it was quite possible to hit a tanker midships yet not sink it (you can read accounts by Edward L Beach from USS Trigger, Richard H O'Kane from USS Wahoo and Tang etc....).

3. I'd have a problem with tankers ALWAYS requiring the same number of hits irrespective of where they are struck.

Cheers