Book · 1972
Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants
by John D. Clark
John D. Clark spent a career trying to ignite rocket fuel that mostly wanted to explode, corrode, or both, and wrote the funniest history of failing at it.
What does Reddit think of Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants?
Ignition! shows up exactly where you'd expect a mid-century propellant chemistry memoir to show up: r/AskScience, seven times in seven years, cited by seven different accounts. The most upvoted comment (↑128) isn't even a recommendation. It's someone recognizing Clark's actual prose style quoted elsewhere and tracing it back to the source. That's a different kind of endorsement than a star rating: people know this book's sentences well enough to spot them out of context. The chemistry checks out too. One commenter (↑44) points to it specifically when explaining why packing more energy into a propellant starts looking like building an explosive, and another (↑14) cites Clark directly on chlorine pentafluoride's reputation for eating through concrete and lab technicians alike. Someone flags the reprint (↑11) since the original went out of print, and someone else notes Derek Lowe quotes from it as "the original source" (↑10). Nobody argues about whether it's good. The only friction is finding a copy.
Community feedback & reader fit
Themes
- · Mid-century rocket propellant chemistry told as memoir
- · Explosive-adjacent monopropellants and why they stay rare
- · Chlorine pentafluoride and other chemicals that eat through everything
- · A prose style distinctive enough to be recognized out of context
Common praise
- + One commenter recognized Clark's actual writing style quoted secondhand and traced it back to the source without being told.
- + Cited as the reference point for why high-energy monopropellants start resembling explosives.
- + Derek Lowe's chemistry blog treats it as "the original source" on propellant history, according to one commenter.
Common criticism
- − Seven mentions in seven years is a genuinely small sample, thin enough that broader claims about its reputation would be guesswork.
- − The book went out of print long enough that multiple comments exist just to point out where to find a copy.
- − Every displayed excerpt comes from a single subreddit, so there's no read on how it lands outside a science-question context.
Who it's for
You already know if this is for you: if "informal history of liquid rocket propellants" sounds like a fun way to spend an evening, it is, and if it doesn't, nothing here will change your mind. Chemistry people get the most direct payoff, since multiple commenters cite it for specific compounds rather than general vibes. It's out of print often enough that finding a copy takes more effort than reading it will, which one Reddit thread treats as a minor inconvenience rather than a dealbreaker.
Mentions over time
Top subreddits
Which Reddit comments matter for Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants?
The most relevant excerpts across the subreddits where this book is mentioned — opinionated, argued takes first, then top-upvoted mentions. 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…
“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…
“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**](
“Read the book called Ignition! by John D. Clark. Chlorine pentafloride is some pretty nasty and dangerous stuff.
“It was reprinted recently. (not a big fan of Amazon, but showing that it is not hard to find)
“Derek Lowe is quoting from John D Clark's Ignition!, which AFAICT is the original source.
“I can't really add anything to the other answers, obviously. But I can recommend the excellent book Ignition! (please consider buying it from your local bookstore instead), which is a comprehensive history of r…
Convinced? Pick up Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants
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
Is Ignition! by John D. Clark still worth tracking down?+
Yes, based on how specifically people cite it. One r/AskScience comment (↑44) points to it directly when explaining why high-energy monopropellants edge toward being explosives, and another (↑10) notes chemistry writer Derek Lowe treats it as "the original source" on propellant history. It's out of print, but a ↑11 comment confirms a reprint exists.
Where can I actually find a copy of Ignition!?+
A university-press reprint exists, per a ↑11 r/AskScience comment linking directly to it and noting it "is not hard to find" despite going out of print. An older comment (↑128) mentions a PDF circulating from before that reprint. Multiple commenters in this small sample treat sourcing a copy as the main obstacle, not the content itself.
Does Ignition! hold up as real chemistry, not just historical color?+
Yes, per the specificity of the citations. One commenter (↑14) cites Clark directly on chlorine pentafluoride's reputation for corroding almost anything it touches, and another (↑44) uses the book to explain why packing more energy into a propellant makes it start resembling an explosive. These are technical references, not just historical anecdotes.
Why do people recognize John D. Clark's writing in Ignition! out of context?+
Because the prose style is distinctive enough to be memorable on its own. The top comment (↑128) is someone spotting a quoted passage elsewhere, recognizing it as Clark's without being told, and tracing it back to Ignition! That's a stronger signal of a memorable voice than any direct recommendation in this small sample.