Aircraft being attacked by lasers

[G.T.Ace]

You don't need to shine straight in the eyes because of the illumination.
Again, read the comments from the pilot under the first video.

EDIT: Forget it, wrong link....

EDIT²: Looks like I copied the wrong video link, will search the right one with the comments, jeez.

EDIT³:

 

[Joel]

Bottom line is that laser pointers do pose a fairly significant risk to aircraft safety, but I can't imagine banning them will help very much.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

You obviously are in denial of the situation, so there is no point in going over this with you anymore.

Didn't pass Trigonometry 101?

Pythagoras is rolling over in his grave. I don't want 'what ifs', I want math.

 

[lbsf1]

Domestic lasers won't do any harm, they may distract but they won't cause problems.

You would need some serious piece of kit to disrupt planes, and if someone wants to do that then banning lasers won't stop them finding a way to get their hands on them.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Bottom line is that laser pointers do pose a fairly significant risk to aircraft safety, but I can't imagine banning them will help very much.

Why? Of course there would still be people who could get one if they really plan it etc. but at least you couldn't get them for a couple of bucks on ebay anymore and the "trend" of doing this would slowly die down.

EDIT:

Domestic lasers won't do any harm, they may distract but they won't cause problems.

Wrong, as already proven here.

 

[OG_Wretch]

If the kids just get some old surplus WWII barrage balloons and hang a basket underneath
to shine their laser pointers from they could have a better chance of blinding a pilot.

To nip this in the bud it would be wise to ban barrage ballons along with the laser pointers before someone trys it...
...baskets too just in case they figure another way of getting them up in the air.

 

[the Interceptor]

Didn't pass Trigonometry 101?

Pythagoras is rolling over in his grave. I don't want 'what ifs', I want math.

I've got to say it's an interesting strategy: deny the obvious and proven facts, demand a hand-crafted explanation, remain in denial when you don't get it. Seriously, don't you find that a bit weak?

What's the point of a discussion when the involved parties can not get on the same page because one of them disputes verifiable incidents? Sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LALALALA-I-can't-hear-you-LALALALA" is not discussion culture of any fertile nature.

 

[Touring Mars]

A quote I read in the paper this morning springs to mind...

"You can kill someone with a screwdriver, but that's not what it's for."

I reckon that infrared laser pointers are potentially much more dangerous. Although a potential attacker wouldn't be able to tell if they were hitting their target, they would be alot less likely to get caught and therefore able to make more attempts. The danger of an IR laser is that the victim can't see it, and will not react to it in the same way as a visible laser, meaning that direct exposure can result in blindness very easily.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

Wrong, as already proven here.

You haven't proven anything.

What's been shown via YouTube links are small aircraft being hit by laser pointers from the side. It may be a nuisance if you're a passenger but there is a grand total of ZERO planes being 'shot down' with a laser pointer and ZERO deaths from being distracted by a laser pointer.

The information provided in the document links you provided only show that 'if' a laser hit a pilot's eye, it can cause damage and distraction.

What I've been asking for is how would one shine a laser directly into a pilot's eye while flying a commercial aircraft. Where would they have to be on the ground, what altitude would the plane have to be at, what angle of attack, and how long is this window of opportunity?

This is a math question. Nothing more.

I do not know enough about flight patterns or cockpit seating to figure this out. But from my own 'eye test', it seems like the plane would have to be nose down and the laser would have to be quite a distance away...most likely on or near the runway.

If that's the case, which I bet it is, a laser pointer is the last of the worries.

I've got to say it's an interesting strategy: deny the obvious and proven facts, demand a hand-crafted explanation, remain in denial when you don't get it. Seriously, don't you find that a bit weak?

What's the point of a discussion when the involved parties can not get on the same page because one of them disputes verifiable incidents? Sticking your fingers in your ears and going "LALALALA-I-can't-hear-you-LALALALA" is not discussion culture of any fertile nature.

Perhaps 'facts' mean something different in Germany.

Do you know what a triangle looks like? It looks like this;

Point "A" is where a person would hold a laser. Point "B" is the pilot's eye. Side "a" is altitude. Do they not teach this stuff in schools anymore???

 

[the Interceptor]

The information provided in the document links you provided only show that 'if' a laser hit a pilot's eye, it can cause damage and distraction.

Not quite:

Two laser illumination incidents that seriously compromised aviation safety are summarized below:

• At approximately 6:30 pm PST on October 30, 1995, the first officer on Southwest Airlines flight 1367 sustained a debilitating eye injury after being irradiated by a laser beam on departure from McCarran International Airport, Las Vegas, NV. The airplane was enroute from Las Vegas to San Antonio, TX, climbing through 7,000 feet MSL, on a standard instrument departure route when the incident occurred. The pilot-in-command (first-officer) reported that the laser beam sweep through the cockpit, resulting in temporary blindness and pain in his right eye, in addition to after-image effects that impaired the vision in his left eye. The pilot could not focus or interpret any instrument indications and was disoriented for several minutes requiring the captain to assume control of the aircraft (13). Note: As a result of this incident, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) placed a moratorium on outdoor laser activities in the Las Vegas area.

• On November 29, 1996, a suspected laser beam illuminated a Skywest Airlines pilot during approach on flight 5410 into Los Angeles Airport (LAX). The Embraer EMB-120 was over a college campus on visual approach to LAX from Bakersfield, CA, when the incident occurred. The aircraft was on a right base leg, level at 6,000 feet MSL, when the captain was exposed to a bright light in his right eye while looking for downwind traffic through the right window. As the flight continued, the captain found it increasingly difficult to see because of the burning and tearing he was experiencing in that eye. On final approach, he relinquished control to the co-pilot who completed the landing. Examination revealed the pilot suffered multiple flash burns to his right cornea (14). Note: As a result of this incident, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended the FAA change the existing guidelines to protect pilots from temporary visual incapacitation and to conduct research to validate laser exposure limits.

EDIT: as long as you don't acknowledge this, we two are done.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Again, you don't have to "hit" the eye directly, the cockpit glass works like an extra lense, just as you can be dazzled by other reflections.

 

[lbsf1]

There are two cases of a pilot being blinded in ONE eye temporarily. Also please remember only 2 incidents out of how many attempts. The chances of the pilot even having the problems highlighted above are tiny and the chance that it is even worse in miniscule.

Edit: Try aiming at a moving object you won't get on target for more then a couple of tenths of a second, so the chance of permenant damage causiing danger is tiny.

 

[G.T.Ace]

"Who cares" about permanent damage? Temporary "damage" and the distraction alone are already enough.

 

[the Interceptor]

There are two cases of a pilot being blinded in ONE eye temporarily. Also please remember only 2 incidents out of how many attempts. The chances of the pilot even having the problems highlighted above are tiny and the chance that it is even worse in miniscule.

Edit: Try aiming at a moving object you won't get on target for more then a couple of tenths of a second, so the chance of permenant damage causiing danger is tiny.

While that is correct, the argumentation is that the laser beam hits the pilot during a critical phase, which can compromise the safety of that flight severely. The fact that this has not brought any airplane down yet doesn't mean that it never will.

 

[Touring Mars]

Edit: Try aiming at a moving object you won't get on target for more then a couple of tenths of a second, so the chance of permenant damage causiing danger is tiny.

Remember, though, that even a very weak laser is capable of doing serious damage to the eye very quickly. Looking at a 1 mW laser is around 100 times brighter than staring directly at the Sun. Many lasers pointers are much more powerful than that.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

Not quite:

EDIT: as long as you don't acknowledge this, we two are done.

The only thing I acknowledge is that people lie...math does not.

What is the window of opportunity for a 'laser attack'? What is the total area on the ground where someone can potentially blind a pilot?

If the window of opportunity is, say, 5 seconds and a person would have to be in a area roughly the size of a hockey rink in the middle of a runway...lasers are not an issue.

Conversely, if the window of opportunity is 10-15minutes during the landing sequence and a potential laser pointer threat is anywhere within 100 square miles...then lasers are an issue.

Statements from 2 pilots are not 'facts' - they're statements. Remove the human element and re-create the scenario on a piece of paper or on your calculator. This is how you'd approach such 'issues' scientifically. If you rely on 'statements', well...sasquatch would exist.

Let's go back an address the question again;

You stated something to the effect of "a laser pointer can crash an airplane". Feel free to correct me on that...

I stated something to the effect of it not being very likely and lasers are not an issue.

If you can provide math and not a statement from a pilot who may be seeking workman's compensation or disability payments, I'll stop asking for it.

This isn't an "I'm right and you're wrong" black:white discussion. We're discussing the dangers of laser pointers. In that, don't you think it would be nice to know how easy or difficult doing such would be? Math will tell us.

 

[MatskiMonk]

If you can provide math...

.. surely until you can provide mathematics to show that it is impossible then your argument can also not be believed. You have shown no math either?

Are we ignoring the obvious.. why would aviation authorities be trying to ban laser pointers if they were not dangerous?

 

[BrutherSuperior]

.. surely until you can provide mathematics to show that it is impossible then your argument can also not be believed. You have shown no math either?

Are we ignoring the obvious.. why would aviation authorities be trying to ban laser pointers if they were not dangerous?

You cannot 'prove' something doesn't exist...especially when it comes to risk.

Because of moronic thinking like that, people believe Sasquatch and Nessie exist b/c no one has 'proven' they don't exist.

And once again, I'm asking for simple things like the window of opportunity one would need to point a laser and kit a pilot's eye and where they'd have to be on the ground. Bigger the time & area - greater the risk. Smaller the area and time - smaller the risk. Real simple concept folks.

 

[RC45]

blank post

 

[MGS2 Snake]

Sorry, But I just had to say this...

“Laser Beams”

 

[the Interceptor]

The only thing I acknowledge is that people lie...math does not.

What is the window of opportunity for a 'laser attack'? What is the total area on the ground where someone can potentially blind a pilot?

If the window of opportunity is, say, 5 seconds and a person would have to be in a area roughly the size of a hockey rink in the middle of a runway...lasers are not an issue.

Conversely, if the window of opportunity is 10-15minutes during the landing sequence and a potential laser pointer threat is anywhere within 100 square miles...then lasers are an issue.

I understand where you're getting at, but math is not going to do reality justice. Theoretically it is possible, but there are way too many variables to account for to generate a waterproof case with simple trigonometry. Runway positions, lengths, heights; ways of access to the airport terrain from the outside; the position of areas outside of airport terrain; specific starting and landing conditions for planes; specific behaviour of pilots; and so on...

You can of course construct a simple position-plane-person case and calculate whether it is possible for the person on the ground to shine a laser into the eye of the pilot head-on. So what if it turns out that you can't? Does that mean that it is completely impossible to do so, or does that mean that it is not possible under these circumstances?

So does math lie? No, it doesn't. But does it always reveal the truth? Only if you incorporate every possible case. Which you can't.

Statements from 2 pilots are not 'facts' - they're statements. Remove the human element and re-create the scenario on a piece of paper or on your calculator. This is how you'd approach such 'issues' scientifically. If you rely on 'statements', well...sasquatch would exist.

So you're saying that these pilots lie, and so do all the pilots of the other reported cases? Must be a pretty rotten bunch of people.

Let's go back an address the question again;

You stated something to the effect of "a laser pointer can crash an airplane". Feel free to correct me on that...

correct

I stated something to the effect of it not being very likely and lasers are not an issue.

I didn't say it's very likely that a person with a laser pointer is going to bring down a plane any time soon. Also, I agree that laser pointers are not the biggest problems of aviation safety. Yet, the cases of people shining laser pointers on planes and helicopers are growing in number severely, which is connected to the facts that laser pointers are getting more powerful, are freely available to anyone and that the idea of doing nonsense with these devices is more popular than ever.

I acknowledge that a laser pointer has not brought a plane down yet, and I understand the resistance to having a bootload of tiny laws which tell people what to do and what not to do. I don't think that a law to ban laser pointers is a perfect solution to this issue either. But I think it could make a difference big enough to diminish the potential problem into absolute insignificance while not significantly hindering the life of anyone.

If you can provide math and not a statement from a pilot who may be seeking workman's compensation or disability payments, I'll stop asking for it.

This isn't an "I'm right and you're wrong" black:white discussion. We're discussing the dangers of laser pointers. In that, don't you think it would be nice to know how easy or difficult doing such would be? Math will tell us.

See above.

 

[OG_Wretch]

What about mirrors on bright sunny days?

A person or pilot could certainly be dazzled by that too.

Maybe a ban on all things shiney including chrome is in order because that stuff is way easier to get ahold of.

 

[blaaah]

What about mirrors on bright sunny days?

A person or pilot could certainly be dazzled by that too.

Maybe a ban on all things shiney including chrome is in order because that stuff is way easier to get ahold of.

It's far easier to order a laser device and take it in your back pocket to an airport. You would have to do research into mirror types, assemblies, before ordering something, then you would need to transport it to the airport then assemble it perhaps with a group of like minded volunteers, and perform trial runs to get the aiming and beam where you want it, while hoping for good weather, all the time telling the enquiring public and security it's a legitimate science project.
Or you could just point a laser at an aircraft with no planning.

 

[RC45]

blank post

 

[blaaah]

Why?
My point was that it's easier to shine an annoying beam of light from a pointer than it is a beam of light from a mirror. Whether either are effective to disrupt aircraft was not my reasoning.

 

[Dotini]

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/114228039.html
WASHINGTON (AP) - Twenty-six incidents occurred at Sea-Tac Airport last year in which the safety of planes was put at risk by people pointing at them with lasers, while more than 100 happened in Los Angeles federal officials said Wednesday.

Overall, the number of incidents nationally in which people pointed lasers at planes and helicopters nearly doubled last year, from 1,527 incidents in 2009 to 2,836 incidents in 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration said.

Many of the incidents involve airliners that were in the midst of takeoffs or landings, critical phases of flight when pilots need to be at their most alert. Pointing lasers at cockpits can temporarily blind pilots or even permanently damage their eyesight. In some instances, pilots have had to relinquish control of their aircraft to another pilot.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood called the laser incidents "an unacceptable risk to passenger safety."

FAA began keeping track of the incidents about five years ago, as Internet sales of new, more powerful handheld lasers began to increase. There were about 300 incidents reported in 2005.

The lasers are many times more powerful than the laser pointers typically used by lecturers. Stargazers use them at night to point to celestial objects. The introduction of green lasers, which are more powerful and more easily seen than red lasers, has also fueled sales.

FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt urged pilots to immediately report laser incidents to air traffic controllers, who can then report the incidents to police. It's a violation of federal law to shine a laser at an aircraft. Some cities and states also have laws making it illegal to shine lasers at aircraft.

In 2009, an Orange, Calif., man was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison for aiming a laser at two Boeing jets as the passenger planes were about to land at John Wayne Airport in Orange County, Calif. A Parsippany, N.J., man received two years' probation in 2006 after admitting to shining a laser at a plane approaching Teterboro Airport that temporarily blinded the two pilots.

There 108 incidents at the Los Angeles airport last year, more than any other airport, FAA said. O'Hare was next, with 98, followed by airports in Phoenix and San Jose, Calif., both with 80; Las Vegas, 72; Philadelphia, 66; Oakland, Calif., 55; Honolulu, 47; San Francisco, 39; Denver and Newark, N.J., both 38; Tucson, Ariz., 37; Miami and Salt Lake City, both 36; Portland, Ore., and Ontario, Calif., both 32; Burbank, Calif., Orange County, Calif., and Baltimore, each 31, and Seattle, 26.

And Seattle has already had at least one incident in 2011, with a charter plane carrying the Seattle Seahawks was tagged with a laser as it was approaching Sea-Tac Airport. No one was hurt.

 

[RC45]

blank post

 

[Touring Mars]

And how many where $1.99 LASER pointers?

What does it matter? The fact is, a 1 mW laser is capable of delivering a blinding flash of light that is more than 100 times brighter than direct sunlight. You can buy a 5 mW laser for less than $10.

 

[G.T.Ace]

I bet almost all of them. No one would use a show laser system for this on purpose, you need a power supply, these things are heavy and you cannot "aim".

 

[RC45]

blank post