skip to content
BooksReddit

Book · 1972

Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants

by John D. Clark

A rocket chemist's irreverent account of the people who spent the Cold War blowing things up in pursuit of the perfect propellant.

4
Total mentions
4
Unique users
+0.45
Avg sentiment
−1 pan ↔ +1 praise
1
Subreddit
where it's mentioned

What does Reddit think of Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants?

John D. Clark's *Ignition!* lives almost entirely in r/askscience, which accounts for all 4 of its Reddit mentions across 7 years, spread across 4 unique commenters in 2019 and 2021. That's a small footprint, but every mention carries weight: the top comment (↑128) flags it as recognizable by writing style alone, which is a genuine compliment for a chemistry textbook from 1972. The pattern across r/askscience is consistent: commenters reach for *Ignition!* when a thread touches monopropellants, energetic materials, or the upper boundary of what organic chemistry can survive. One commenter (↑44) recommends it specifically for a "light-hearted treatment" of monopropellants. Another (↑51) cites it while lamenting forgotten organic chemistry knowledge. The sentiment across all 4 mentions reads as neutral, which is almost misleading — there's no ambivalence here, just engineers being precise. For years the book was out of print and circulated as a PDF; a 2021 comment (↑11) flags the reprint, which now makes it findable without the workaround.

Community feedback & reader fit

Themes

  • · rocket propellant chemistry and the search for specific impulse
  • · Cold War-era experimentation and institutional risk tolerance
  • · the gap between energetic materials and uncontrolled explosives
  • · out-of-print cult status and PDF distribution culture
  • · organic chemistry applied at the edge of human safety

Common praise

  • + The writing is distinctive enough that a commenter identified it by style from a single quoted passage.
  • + r/askscience pulls it out as the go-to for monopropellant questions, which says something about its accuracy.
  • + Treats genuinely dangerous chemistry with the kind of dry humor that makes the subject stick.
  • + The 2021 reprint solved the access problem that kept it as a PDF-only recommendation for years.

Common criticism

  • − Four mentions in 7 years is a thin Reddit presence for a book with this much word-of-mouth reputation elsewhere.
  • − The audience is narrow enough that a commenter has to clarify it's not hard to find — implying most readers still don't know it exists.
  • − Readers who've lost their organic chemistry will get the jokes but miss half the technical argument, as one commenter admits (↑51).

Who it's for

If you've ever wondered why rocket fuel development is a story about near-misses and institutional bravery rather than clean engineering progress, this is the book. Useful for anyone working in energetic materials who wants historical context, but r/askscience recommends it equally to people who just want to understand why monopropellants are complicated. Skip the PDF and buy the reprint — it's findable now.

Mentions over time

Q3 2019 peak: 2/qtr Q4 2021

Top subreddits

Which Reddit comments matter for Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants?

Top-upvoted quotes across the subreddits where this book is mentioned. Click through to read the full thread.

I thought I recognized this writing style, and looking at your link this passage is indeed a quote from John Clark’s book “Ignition!: An informal history of liquid rocket propellants”, currently out of print but available via PDF with an easy Google search. If you like the above, you’ll probably en…

r/askscience ↑ 128 positive

Why that order? I learned and remembered them alphabetically: ADEK, pronounced A-deck in my head. And I'll echo your loss of organic chem....just read "Ignition!" by Clark and it was all just a bunch of sounds to which I knew Iused to be able to ascribe meaning. Did a little review and brought so…

r/askscience ↑ 51 positive

TL;DR: Sure, you can do that. But the more energy you pack in, the more it starts looking like an explosive, with all the problems that entails. Look up monopropellants. For a light hearted treatement of monoprops in [John D. Clark's **Ignition**](

r/askscience ↑ 44 positive

It was reprinted recently. (not a big fan of Amazon, but showing that it is not hard to find)

r/askscience ↑ 11 positive

What else does r/askscience read?

Other books mentioned in the same sub, ranked. Shared-sub overlap with this title breaks ties.

Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants — frequently asked

What does Reddit actually say about Ignition! by John D. Clark?+

All 4 Reddit mentions land in r/askscience, and the tone is uniformly enthusiastic without being hyperbolic. The top comment (↑128) identifies the book by writing style alone. Others reach for it when threads hit monopropellants or the chemistry of energetic materials. Sentiment scores neutral across the board, but that reflects precision, not ambivalence.

Is Ignition! still worth reading if my organic chemistry is rusty?+

Probably yes, with caveats. One r/askscience commenter (↑51) says reading it reminded them how much organic chemistry they'd lost — but they still recommend it. The humor and narrative carry a lot. You'll follow the history even if the reaction mechanisms blur.

Is Ignition! hard to find now that it's been reprinted?+

No. A 2021 r/askscience comment (↑11) specifically flags the reprint on Amazon and notes it's not hard to find. For years it circulated as a PDF, but the Rutgers reprint resolved that. The commenter adds they're not a big Amazon fan but links it anyway to prove the point.

Who does r/askscience recommend Ignition! to?+

People asking about monopropellants, the upper limits of chemical energy density, and why rocket development was so dangerous. The ↑44 comment recommends it for a "light-hearted treatment" of monopropellants specifically. It's a niche recommendation that lands every time the right question comes up.