Slashdot Mirror


FBI Investigating Laser Beams Pointed at Aircraft

sakshale writes "In an earlier discussion about Laser Pistols, many people argued about the concept of using them to target pilots of airliners. Apparently the FBI is investigating incidents in Cleveland and Colorado Springs. They issued a warning on December 14th."

91 of 500 comments (clear)

  1. Green with envy by SIGALRM · · Score: 5, Informative
    From LaserShoppe:
    Unfortunately, we have decided to STOP selling these lasers to the general public. Too many people have been doing stupid things with lasers recently, and this product is misunderstood. This laser DOES NOT pose a threat to airplanes or pilots
    Recent events have prompted LaserShoppe (and other outlets) to pull their products from the market, or at least from sale to the general public. The issue has at least raised laser safety consciousness, and the FBI is right to investigate the incidents, but there is always a tendency for the public and media to over-hype issues like this.

    Given some time, and--right or wrong--somebody will attempt to pile on the regulations and we can forget about buying green lasers from ThinkGeek or anyplace else.
    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Green with envy by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Funny

      damn, how am I supposed to burn holes in stuff now?

    2. Re:Green with envy by djtripp · · Score: 3, Funny

      Magnifying glass, or sulfuric acid.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    3. Re:Green with envy by BWJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunately, we have decided to STOP selling these lasers to the general public. Too many people have been doing stupid things with lasers recently, and this product is misunderstood. This laser DOES NOT pose a threat to airplanes or pilots

      And what do you want to bet they had a visit from their local FBI field office? Purchase records subpoenaed?

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    4. Re:Green with envy by kirun · · Score: 5, Funny

      The site says if you write an essay on laser safety, they'll sell you one. So write down the first 100 things you were going to try, with an introductory paragraph saying "The following actions are just the sort of irresponsible use of lasers that cause accidents. They should not be attempted".

      --
      I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
    5. Re:Green with envy by RapmasterT · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The utter ludicrousness of the claims in this article are astounding, mostly in how many people have bought it without any question.

      While it's entirely likely "something" occured, the dilution of the story through the press has resulted in something that even a child would find fault in.

      1. What constitutes a "laser" in the cockpit? A red dot? not likely at 1.5 miles altitude. Not to mention that the range would be a hypotenuse of the altitude and therefore MUCH farther.

      2. The accuracy required to "track" the cockpit of a jet aircraft is astounding. This is the kind of test that prototype military weaponry fails routinly.

      3. Assuming a laser was used, tracked accurately...what power output would be required for it to even be noticable? The thing would have to be semi-truck mounted.

      Anyone think that maybe, it might be likely that this story has been utterly and completely misrepresented by the press? Or that maybe a drunk pilot noticed a reflection off a stray CD in the cockpit and freaked out? I see stray lights on my walls all the time, never once did I think terrorists were trying to blind me.

    6. Re:Green with envy by Guppy06 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "This laser DOES NOT pose a threat to airplanes or pilots"

      Remember: lasers don't kill people, guided weapons that follow laser beams kill people.

    7. Re:Green with envy by myowntrueself · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think that the 'green dot' would have to be from a laser which was up there with the airliner.

      If there were much distance between the laser and the cockpit it wouldn't be much of a 'dot' and besides the tracking problem would be huge.

      No; this laser must be from another aircraft, probably military.

      The question is, what sort of lasers do the military use for painting targets? Green?

      Or maybe its just bullshit to start with.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    8. Re:Green with envy by RapmasterT · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think that the 'green dot' would have to be from a laser which was up there with the airliner.
      Exactly my thought. I'll bet the copilot was screwing with the pilot, and now is afraid to admit it cuz he'd be in it deep. As far as the military goes, I don't know much about weapons guidance systems, but I'll bet they're not VISIBLE lasers.
    9. Re:Green with envy by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hm,

      I have the impression you doint know what a 100 mW or a 300 mW laser is?

      Standard laser pointers are made to divergent, the outlet of the beam has usually a small drop of plastic or glass to achieve that.

      A 100mW laser easily blinds you. And if you have bad luck it does so permanently (usually only the parts imediatly hit, that is ~ a millimeters in diameter, but can be more).

      A 300mW laser easily cut plastics, paper, wood etc. The lasers sold here http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/28/185325 3&tid=159/ are only 180 mW to 200mW and allready cut plastic cups over a few meters distance.

      You probably have a key missconception: lasers usually do NOT divergent (or only a very little), thats exactly what makes a laser different from normal light.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    10. Re:Green with envy by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Funny
      Well lets see, the guy is selling high powered green lasers to responsible members of the public at $700 a time

      Exactly how does someone have $700 worth of fun with a laser in a responsible fashion? Its not like the thing is powerful enough to do really cool things like cut James bond in half or something.

      Incidentally, if Goldfinger had really known what he was up to he would have had Bond upside down on the slab of gold. This was the general practice in the middle ages when sawing a man in half was a means of execution. If the victim was upside down then the blood loss was less and they could be kept alive until the saw got down to the heart.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    11. Re:Green with envy by RapmasterT · · Score: 3, Insightful
      On Christmas night, two SkyWest pilots said they saw two laser-like rays of light in their cockpit as they attempted to land at the airport in Medford, Ore.

      On Monday, a laser beam was directed into the cockpit of a commercial jet flying about 15 miles from Cleveland Hopkins International Airport at an altitude of between 8,500 and 10,000 feet, the FBI said. It was determined the laser came from a residential area in suburban Warrensville Heights.

      Also on Monday in Colorado Springs, two pilots reported green pulsating laser lights beamed into their cockpits. Police sent patrol cars and a helicopter in a fruitless search.

      In New Jersey, the pilot of a corporate-owned Cessna Citation carrying 13 people said three green lasers were pointed into his cockpit while approaching the Teterboro airport on Wednesday night. Law enforcement officials said they were believed to have originated near a mall in Wayne.


      I'm sorry, but don't these anecdotes remind you just a little bit of the "mysterious odor sends dozens to hospital at local mall" stories on the news?

      One person says they smell a laser, someone else says "hey, I smell lasers in my cockpit too". Next thing you know, you're nobody unless terrorists are illuminating your cockpit with lasers. Lasers that smell mysterious.
    12. Re:Green with envy by returnoftheyeti · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Humm, I think we need to ban Tom Clancy novels Lets see 1) Crash airline into building, take out government. Check 2) Blind pilots on approach, crash plane Check Whats next? I am voting for Jack Ryan in the next election.

    13. Re:Green with envy by Phanatic1a · · Score: 2, Informative

      asers usually do NOT divergent (or only a very little), thats exactly what makes a laser different from normal light.

      What makes a laser different from normal light is that it is coherent and monochromatic.

      Uncollimated laser light obeys the inverse-square law. Even collimated laser light obeys it, it's just that you need to treat the initial range to the source as greater than it actually is - the 'source' of the beam isn't the exit lens, but is represented as a point behind that lens. The more collimated the beam, the further behind. Ferinstance, using numbers pulled right from my butt, if the beam divergence is 1 mrad, and the beam diameter at the exit lens is 1 mm, then the effective source of the light is a point one meter further away than the exit lens. If you then measure the beam intensity at 5 cm and 10 cm from the exit lens, it won't look like it's falling off as the inverse square, because the beam only widened by about 9%. But really, you didn't double the distance, you only increased it from 105 cm to 110 cm.

    14. Re:Green with envy by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 2, Funny

      Exactly how does someone have $700 worth of fun with a laser in a responsible fashion?

      Use it to "key" cars in public, without being noticed (in day time).

      Write your name in the snow.

      Light a chicks cigarette from across the room.

      Use it to heat your coffee.

      Modify billboards.

      Just don't hurt people with it. Unless they really, really need it. Could you toast a cell phone with it, I wonder?

    15. Re:Green with envy by roseblood · · Score: 2, Informative

      You:
      Snipers use a visible red dot, of course, since they have to see it (at least old school snipers).

      Me:
      Snipers in movies use a visible red dot.
      Real snipers use passive optical sights - that is they don't send a signal to the target, they passively collect data (light [visible or IR]) from the target. Old school snipers use iron sights with high quality Mk 1 Eyeballs.

      --
      There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    16. Re:Green with envy by Lectrik · · Score: 2, Funny
      If the victim was upside down then the blood loss was less and they could be kept alive until the saw got down to the heart.


      I think Goldfinger was expecting the laser to cauterize the wound as it went. Then again i don't have my Evil Master(mind)s degree in psychology.
      --
      --- As to make my comment seem, by comparison, more intelegent... doodie doodie doodie poop poop poop!
    17. Re:Green with envy by chaoaretasty · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's not gargoyles, it's friggin sharks with frickin lasers attatched to their heads.

    18. Re:Green with envy by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 2, Funny

      possible small glitch with your scenario.
      "even though the plane may be going at an very high speed, it will be virtually still since it's coming right at me."
      Personaly I wouldn't want a 747 with a blind pilot comming right at me.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    19. Re:Green with envy by arivanov · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The ridiculous aspect of the story is due to censorship.

      The only way to pick up a laser pointed in an aircraft from the ground is if the aircraft has a missile warning system installed. Most of these have a component which picks up illumination by laser distance/speed measurement equipment.

      Officially no US airline carries such thing (Israeli do, British Airways is considering it for some flights). Unofficially - the appearance of the article means that quite a few have it already or plan to do so and are testing equipment. They just do not want to shout about it.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    20. Re:Green with envy by MadMorf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The question is, what sort of lasers do the military use for painting targets? Green?

      Infrared.

      I know, I got to "fire" one from a USAF F-4D back in the 70's...

      Yep, I'm old...

    21. Re:Green with envy by mkettler · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree on 1 and 2. Clearly if it tracked the cockpit with any decent accuracy it wasn't done by hand or by unsophisticated highscool pranksters.

      Of course they never pointed out how accurately it was tracked. If it was just poping in and out of the cockpit on an intermittent basis, it could have been done by hand with a rifle scope or telescope to aid aiming.

      However, power output wise, I must disagree about the truck mounted size. A class IIIa green laser pointer is visible hitting a target 2 miles away.

      Sure you'd want something more powerful to be noticed clearly, a class IIIb device at least, but that at worst might make the laser itself the size of a pringles can instead of a laser pointer.

      Now to accurately track it, the tracking gear might add a lot of size, but even that would be feasible to fit in a car trunk.

      --
      -Matt
    22. Re:Green with envy by Dashing+Leech · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually, I know quite well about what 100 mW lasers can do. You've taken a lot of assumptions into account. Yes, a 100 mW laser can cut plastics and wood and permanently blind you (and even burn skin), but that all depends on (a) the wavelength, (b) the focus distance (or collimation), and (c) length of stationary time.

      Near IR lasers tend to be absorbed by the front of the eye and not make it to the retina. (That doesn't mean they can't do harm to the eye, but not in the same way.) But this isn't so important here since we're talking about red and green lasers which can certainly burn the retina.

      For focus disance or collimation, lasers are usually either collimated or focused near the lens (a few cm up to a few meters, though some long range lidar lasers might be focused much further). In either case, the beam divergence is usually quite huge (several milliradians at least. The only way to keep the beam divergence low is to start with a very wide beam. (The divergence equation is theta = lambda*f/w0 where f is the focus distance and w0 is the beam width out of the lens.)

      Laser pointers are low quality optics (as you say) and are only mean to operate at a few meters, with a spot size that is ~5 mm at a few meters. At several km where planes fly, the laser spot size would be huge. (A 1 mrad divergence at 1 km would be about a 2 m wide spot.) The power density of even 100 mW beam at that width would be pretty small and certainly could not cut through plastic or harm eyes.

      Then there's how stationary the beam is. The 100 mW beam requires a few seconds of stationary positioning to cut into the plastic. In the example video from your reference article the beam is mounted on a stationary holder. If even the person held it in their hands just the hand motion would probably keep it from burning through. At 1 km (or more), only a slight hand motion would move the beam around several meters, not to mention the plane itself is moving.

  2. nothing for you to see here by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Funny

    So fitting. I was blinded by the laser
    -nB

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  3. Coast Guard checks out lasers aimed at boats... by PornMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

    By sharks with frickin' laser beams on their heads...

    1. Re:Coast Guard checks out lasers aimed at boats... by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interestingly a Russian trawler (actually a spy ship) purportedly did aim a laser at a Canadian military helicopter in 1997. This incident was pretty much brushed under the carpet (just as the recent findings regarding Chinese spying in Canada will undoubtedly be).

    2. Re:Coast Guard checks out lasers aimed at boats... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 5, Interesting

      http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/newsletter/20 04/0104d.shtml

      he Pentagon inspector general has asked the Navy to consider awarding JW client Lt. Cmdr. Jack Daly (Ret.) a purple heart for injuries he suffered as a result of being shot with a laser by a Russian spy ship. Curiously, however, the Navy to this day maintains Jack's injuries never occurred. And evidence compiled by Judicial Watch suggests the Clinton Administration covered up the attack in order to avoid international conflict.

      "Jack Daly certainly deserves a medal for his injury from a hostile force," said JW President Tom Fitton. "For more than six years, the U.S. government has refused to acknowledge an attack of a U.S. serviceman in American waters."

      "Lt. Cmdr. Jack Daly (Ret.) was partially blinded by a laser attack. The laser was fired at Daly from the Russian spy ship Kapitan Man in April, 1997, while Daly was on an official reconnaissance mission, flying over the Straits of Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound, WA. During his surveillance, which took place aboard a Canadian military helicopter, Daly felt a flash of brilliant light strike his eyes, causing him to turn away. Later in the day he would experience stinging in his eyes and sharp pains in his head. The next morning he awoke with a small pool of blood in one of his eyes.

      Military doctors told Daly that he and his Canadian chopper pilot, Captain Pat Barnes (Ret.), had been shot at with a laser by the Russians. The damage would be permanent.

      Rather than standing by their injured military official, however, Clinton Administration officials treated the incident as an inconvenient stumbling block on the path to improved relations with the Russian government and covered it up.

      The Kapitan Man was not searched until several days later and only after at least 10 hours advanced warning given to the Russians. Though a thorough search should have taken 2-3 days, U.S. inspectors were aboard for less than 4 hours. Predictably, no evidence was found.

      Judicial Watch currently has an appeal pending for Jack Daly against the Far East Shipping Company, the owners of the Kapitan Man."

  4. Freakin laser beams by bfizzle · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well if people would put tops to their shark tanks we wouldn't be having this problem, now would we?

  5. More info by johnnyb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Some good links from FreeRepublic.

    Seems like Dr. Evil and his "laser beam" are finally starting to do their evil deeds!

  6. Complementary article by Stevyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    More information in this article that may be helpful. I think this is potentially a very serious problem.

    1. Re:Complementary article by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      no it is not.

      any laser that the general public can get their hands on will DO NO DAMAGE to a pilot or even distract them.

      first off even the high power green ones, at the 100 meters or MORE distance these people are at, they need to retrofit the laser with a tripod, fluid head and a high power scope just to hit the plane.

      Now let's addin the fac tt hat the angle if incidence of the beam to the cockpit window is at such an extreme angle that less than 20% of the beam will pass through the window, and THAT will get attenuated further by the cockpit glass.

      let's further add that the pilot is looking at the centerline of the runway and not directly at things that might be interesting, and if it's a clear sunny day a reflection glint off cars in the parking lot is 200 times brighter than any consumer laser.

      this is nothing but a bunch of people freaking out about isolated incidents.

      if I was able to get my hands on a targeting laser, Yes, that MIGHT be able to hit the cockpit window because of the gyro stablization of the optics and laser, but then it's infrared so NOBODY would know it was hitting it!

      can I get my hands on industrial lasers? yeah if I look hard enough, but you certianly will not run them off some portable battery for longer than a few seconds.

      it is NOT a serious problem. Quit being a scared soccer mom.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Complementary article by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2, Funny
      this is nothing but a bunch of people freaking out about isolated incidents

      Well, that's a relief. When a blinded pilot crashes on top of me, it will be quite comforting to know that it was an isolated incident, so I needn't worry about it happening too often.

    3. Re:Complementary article by LoRdTAW · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I once worked for a guy who bought and sold all types of electronic surplus. One neat toy he got one lot was a 20W water cooled laser. It consumed about 23KW I believe and needed a 3 phase 208v supply. I offerd to buy it but the three phase power needed would be too difficult to provide unless I bought a 3 phase generator. So yes the general public can obtain very powerful lasers if they look hard enough.

    4. Re:Complementary article by tiny69 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      any laser that the general public can get their hands on will DO NO DAMAGE to a pilot or even distract them.
      There's already one report of a pilot having his eyesight damaged because of a laser being shined into the cockpit of an airplane that he was flying.
      this is nothing but a bunch of people freaking out about isolated incidents.
      Tom Clancy used the idea of blinding pilots in his book "Debt of Honor". However, high powered strobe lights was used instead of lasers. A number of news reports picked up on this when it first become public in the beginning of December.

      While your average laser pointer couldn't do much, it's not hard to get higher powered lasers for educational or commercial purposes.

      if I was able to get my hands on a targeting laser, Yes, that MIGHT be able to hit the cockpit window because of the gyro stablization of the optics and laser, but then it's infrared so NOBODY would know it was hitting it!
      I guess you never tried to shine sunlight into someones eyes with a mirror as a kid. It's not as hard as you think, even with a moving target. No, it wouldn't be a steady beam shining into the cockpit. But with a stong enough laser, the beam wouldn't need to be steady.

      Do you really think that a terrorist organization that is determined and resourced enough to pull off 9/11 couldn't get ahold of a few high powered lasers?

      --
      Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
  7. Questioning this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can a laser beam travel round the nose of a plane overhead, and accurately reach the pilot's eyes from say, a few thousand feet away?

    The guy pointing it must have steady hands, and damn good vision.

    1. Re:Questioning this... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Informative

      They didn't shine it at a plane directly overhead, the pointed it at a plane a few miles away. At that distance, even at an altitude of a few thousand feet, the pilots still have a clear line of site to the ground. The could be hit much closer if the incoming beam was slighly angled to come in from the front side and not straight ahead over the center of the nose.

    2. Re:Questioning this... by Mistlefoot · · Score: 2, Informative

      A few thousand feet?

      8,500 feet straight up is more than a few thousand feet at enough of an angle that you could be in line of site of the pilot.

      I strongly doubt that this was a hand held laser. At about 10,000 feet - 2 miles - that would take a pretty steady hand and damn good eyes.....

    3. Re:Questioning this... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      ok I DARE you to hold a laser pointer beam on a pencil dot that is 200 feet away.

      now I dare you to hold that beam on a basketball that is 1500 feet away. you CAN NOT. it is impossible without special equipment. even a tripod and scope is inaccurate and will jiggle all over hell from ground vibrations. there is no way you can hit an airplane a "few miles away" with anything a consumer can touch.

      the only thing useable is gyroscope stabalized laser aiming systems. and those are not common, cheap or easy to get.

      There is one way I could nail a plane very brefily with a laser. a 12 inch dobsonian telescope with the laser perfectly aligned to correspond with the crosshairs of a guide eyepiece and at least 1 watt or more and perfeclty collimated for that distance.

      now tell me where I can get a very light 1 watt laser with military grade collimation...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Questioning this... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Informative
      I'm assuming the laser used was a large one, not some little pencil laser. A large one could easily be set up on a bipod or tripod mount (think of rifles or large caliber guns on mounts). Sharpshooters can hit things at extreme distance when their guns are properly braced. Snipers have taken out individual people with bullets at well over a miles distance. The cockpit is a lot larger target than a single human, plus at several miles the laser beam is going to spread a lot and be a LOT wider than a bullet.

      Ever look at a plane several miles away that is coming straight or almost straight in your direction? Sometimes it seems like they aren't moving at all. The number of arc seconds they will move in 10 seconds time relative to you is very small. I don't think a gyroscope/mechanical tracker would be necessary.

    5. Re:Questioning this... by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Like the Cleveland article said...
      Hawk said the laser had to have been fairly sophisticated to track a plane traveling at that altitude.

      Am I the only one that has used a green laser for a legitimate purpose? Interestingly enough, that legitimate purpose (which seems to be one of two *only* legitimate purposes) seems to be the only way to carry out such a damaging illegitimate use which is what must have happened here... Someone strapped the laser to the side of a telescope! I do it so that I can use the green light to point at a spot in the sky and then not have to fiddle about finding that spot through the scope. It's just a matter of getting a plane in your sight and turning a knob to keep it locked in (funny that the DMCA can prevent me from telling you how to get around a copyright protection mechanism but I can't be touched for describing how to blind a pilot flying at 8,500 feet).

      The other legitimate purpose I mentioned has to do with Pink Floyd and a fog machine... which once again can immediately lead to illegitimate activities.

      --
      Direct away from face when opening.
    6. Re:Questioning this... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Some folks have pretty steady hands and damn good eyes. Especially when braced or using a tripod/bipod. The world record sniper kill shot...

      http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/KillingShot_ 2430Metres.asp

      2,430 metres. Ok, so it's only been done once at that distance but think...

      The distance away these bad guys that had the laser were was probably 10x what the sniper was. But the sniper shot a man. The laser only had to hit the cockpit which probably has 10x the cross section of a man. No difference there. Even so far.

      The sniper had to worry about wind. Wind for over a miles distance, even if it's light at the near end, a breeze could be kicking up at the far end. Then there's the drop of the bullet from gravity over that distance. Lots of problems that all go away when you are talking about lasers, so the laser shot is a *LOT* easier.

      The sniper had to hit the target with a (relatively) tiny .50 caliber bullet. The laser beam was probably very wide after traveling several miles. I dont' know what kind of laser was used, but one poster mentioned ' my 2.5' long argon tube beam ends up 1' or more wide at a distance of only 1000 feet or so.' The beam of whatever kind of laser it was could have been extremely wide after several miles. Much easier to hit the target.

      The plane was moving, but at several miles away, if it was moving directly (or close to) at the laser, the number of arc seconds it would move relative to the bad guys would be very few in only 10 seconds or so. Somewhat harder to hit the target, but very doable.

    7. Re:Questioning this... by vadim_t · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Think of what you said for a little.

      A 747 flies at 565 mph or 909 km/h. This is 252 meters *per second*. And as you said, from the ground you barely see it move. You can't just point to it, since a second later your aim will be 252 meters off if you were right under it. Of course really it'd be slower for you due to the angle, but we can assume that the plane isn't at your altitude flying right at you, which is about the only thing that would make cheap aiming possible. The pilot will probably not even notice the laser even if you managed to shine it right into the eye for the tiny fraction of a second it'd be pointing at it.

      You need one heck of a system that can to two things. The first one is to aim precisely. That alone would be quite difficult, since it'll need to be capable of making really tiny and precise adjustments. The second one is that it needs some kind of very precise system that would keep it pointing to a moving target. The minimum would be some kind of very good motorized telescope mount, controlled by a computer.

      Now, the beam spreading. If your beam spreads noticeably, then it will lose a lot of power by the time it gets to the plane. First of all you have the atmosphere, with all the air and crap floating in it. Second, as the beam spreads it will become a lot less powerful. If the radius of the laser beam doubles, the area becomes 4 times larger. Either your laser has to be insanely powerful to overcome this, or you have to have an insanely good mount and tracking system. And neither of those things looks cheap, easy to get, or move around.

      Finally, if did somehow managed to do all of this, wouldn't it be a lot easier to pay some dumb islamic terrorist to shoot it with a rocket? Surely that would be a lot cheaper, less trouble, and less dangerous for you.

    8. Re:Questioning this... by theLOUDroom · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm assuming the laser used was a large one, not some little pencil laser. A large one could easily be set up on a bipod or tripod mount (think of rifles or large caliber guns on mounts). Sharpshooters can hit things at extreme distance when their guns are properly braced. Snipers have taken out individual people with bullets at well over a miles distance.

      Which makes the obvious point:
      Why the hell are you going to bother producing a one-of-a-kind "laser rifle" that *MIGHT* blind a pilot when you could just shoot them with an actual rifle?

      This article is just another bunch of paranoid "homeland security" bullshit.

      Ever look at a plane several miles away that is coming straight or almost straight in your direction? Sometimes it seems like they aren't moving at all. The number of arc seconds they will move in 10 seconds time relative to you is very small. I don't think a gyroscope/mechanical tracker would be necessary.

      It's not a question of "arc seconds" it's a question of precision.
      Ever try to actually do the math?

      Say you want to hit a 5mm target with a 10mm beam from 2km away, that means you need a precision of 2.5 × 10E-09 radians! That's fucking accurate. It's just not something that you're going to be able to build in your garage. There are probably some NASA guys and few spy satellite engineers who might be able to make it happen, but with that level of talent, you may as well just make your own stinger missile.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    9. Re:Questioning this... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why the hell are you going to bother producing a one-of-a-kind "laser rifle" that *MIGHT* blind a pilot when you could just shoot them with an actual rifle?

      I dont want to build a super fancy one-of-a-kind laser rifle. I'm saying they could just take an industrial laser, mount one end on a bipod/tripod and mount a high power sniper scope on it. Not exactly the type of engineering you need NASA for. A good 'ol boy could do it in an afternoon if he could get his hands on a high power industrial laser.

      Say you want to hit a 5mm target with a 10mm beam

      But you don't want such a tiny beam, and you aren't aiming at such a tiny target.

      You don't want a 10mm beam. You want a high power industrial laser that can put out a beam that will still temporarily blind somone when the beam is 5 feet wide. GE will be glad to sell you one powerful enough if you've got the bucks. And you won't be shining it at a 5mm target (the pupil of one eye of one pilot). You will be bathing the whole cockpit with that 5 foot wide beam so that you get both eyes of the pilot, and both eyes of the copilot. The cockpit is a lot bigger than 5 mm.

      Now do the math and compare that to a sniper hitting a 12 inch wide target with a .50 caliber bullet at a miles distance. Realise also that the laser won't have probems with windage, drop of the bullet due to gravity, or variations in speed of the bullet by how many grains of gunpower are packed into the cartridge. No NASA boys required. Just a good sharpshooter.

  8. tracking moving plane? by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 5, Interesting
    here is my question.

    it has been mentioned and it is obviously required that the laser track the cockpit. exactly how has the technology to track the COCKPIT of an airliner moving 200+mph. (pilots mention a constant laser light for 10+ seconds)

    tracking the plane is one thing, and even that is tough to do if you are talking laser accuracy, but the cockpit? also, this has to be done several miles out, since the cockpit windows don't have much downward view anyway.

    outside of military technology, are there any commercial systems that could even do this?

    1. Re:tracking moving plane? by CdBee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It does have the ring of "post-Sep-11th-paranoia" about it, doesn't it?

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    2. Re:tracking moving plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Although in that situation you might have a problem when you blind the pilot and he crashes on you.

    3. Re:tracking moving plane? by bombadillo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is exactly what I have been wondering. You would need some sort of computer assisted device. 20+ years of Star Wars research can't hit a target the size of a ballistic missle. I am pretty sceptical that any one could repeatedly hit inside a cockpit window of an airplane and at the right angle to hit the pilots eyes. Also, a good number of planes land on Auto pilot. this doesn't seem like a very exact way to terrorize people. It sounds more like some pranksters with a laser gun that get a few lucky shots at landing planes. Disturbingly enough Fox news said that one day terrorists could have laser technology that could pierce a planes hull. Unbelievable.....

    4. Re:tracking moving plane? by Michael+Spencer+Jr. · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure.

      I own a Sony Handycam (DCR-TRV260) with a 40x optical zoom (and a useless "990x digital zoom" which really just enlarges existing pixels and adds no new detail). I also own a Bogen tripod with a fluid head. (Professional tripods are usually sold with legs and head separate. I have these legs: http://www.bogenimaging.us/product/templates/templ ates.php3?sectionid=102&itemid=823 and this head: http://www.bogenimaging.us/product/templates/templ ates.php3?sectionid=9&itemid=287 )

      I would never do anything like this in real life, but it would be possible for me to somehow strap a laser pointer onto my camcorder. I would then need to stand my tripod up securely and calibrate it, so the laser points at the exact middle of the image. I could do this by just pointing the whole thing at a wall, zooming in, and then fine-tuning the laser aim until it shows in the middle of my viewfinder. I could then do the same thing for a distant object, like the wall of a house several blocks away, and fine-tune the laser aim even more until the point was in the middle of the viewfinder.

      Keep in mind the whole point of a fluid tripod head is to give the operator fine pressure-sensitive control of where the camera is pointing. There are no rubber pads pushed up against metal, seizing the metal and making fine movement impossible. Fluid heads use oil cartridges and tension knobs that let you tighten or loosen, but never completely lock, the horizontal or vertical movement. If you zoom a camera way in, tighten the tension knobs, and just lay one finger on the tripod pan handle, you can see the camera v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y tracking. To an outside observer you can't even tell the camera is moving, but the viewfinder shows the camera is not only moving, but it's moving smoothly at a constant rate.

      While someone with my rig could just barely track a fast-moving aircraft from far away, they *could* do it.

      --Michael Spencer

    5. Re:tracking moving plane? by Goldenhawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, please. Take off the tinfoil hat.

      >You would need some sort of computer assisted device. 20+
      >years of Star Wars research can't hit a target the size of a
      >ballistic missle.

      First of all, in 20 plus years of research, we HAVE demonstrated the ability to accurately target a missile. Enough to blow a few out of the sky. Second, we've done that from a 747 in flight at high altitude, not just a stable base placed on the ground. For crying out loud, we can repeatedly hit a precise spot on the MOON from the ground. Computer assist? Nah, just a good telescope with a bore-scoped laser.

      Bear in mind that most airports have a very repeatable approach path - the planes come in within a few hundred yards of the same point in the sky, one every couple minutes, all day long. It's not that hard to get things lined up and try again and again until you get just one good shot.

      After all, as Bush and Rumsfeld have said quite a few times, all the terrorists have to do is get it right once.

      --
      --Brandon / Split Infinity Music

  9. Accuracy? by Nine+Tenths+of+The+W · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What are the chances of someone being able to even hit the cockpit, let alone the pilot's eyes with a commercial laser pointer from 300m+(ballpark figure, but they'd have to stay hidden) against a moving plane?

    --
    Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
    1. Re:Accuracy? by Conspir8or · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not impossible. I used to target Womp Rats in my T-16 back home. They're not much bigger than two meters.

  10. Regulation by Thunderstruck · · Score: 4, Funny

    Perhaps public misperception can eventually make lasers easier to obtain and more widely produced rather than regulated to the point of inaccessability.

    1. People think the lasers are weapons.
    2. Other people start selling lasers as weapons.
    3. Weapons are constitutionally protected for civilian ownership in all civilized nations.
    4. Ergo - the Lasers can be purchased at your local sporting-goods store after a background check and some paperwork.

    (Author's note, Point #3 is intended to be a bit of a joke. But I expect at least one reader will not read all the way to this disclaimer, instead flaming me good and hard.)

    --
    Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
    1. Re:Regulation by JesseL · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just FYI for people that may respond to point #3:
      http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    2. Re:Regulation by 511pf · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can take my laser from my cold dead...blah blah blah...

      It's people. Soylent Green is made out of people.

      Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape.

  11. When green lasers are outlawed, only outlaws will& by jspoon · · Score: 5, Funny

    You'll take my green lasers when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers.

  12. Paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you by redwoodtree · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given the complexity of tracking a jet plane and the angles involved in getting a beam into a cockpit, one of the most likely conclusions is that this in fact is a malicious threat. It sounds pretty paranoid but heck, someone has obviously gone to some trouble to setup a mechanism that can track a rapidly moving object in flight. I'm glad the FBI is investigating because I fly almost every month and the last thing I want is to wind up in a plane with a blind cabin crew.

  13. What about... by ASayre8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One way mirrors on the cockpit windows? Let the Lasers just

  14. Yes there are some by GrAfFiT · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can easily find computer operated 60w lasers. And yes its beam is 5 inches wide.
    That would hurt.

    1. Re:Yes there are some by rewt66 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Great. Now all you need is to tie the computer controlling the laser into either a radar or optical system that's tracking the plane. I don't think you can get the integrated system off-the-shelf...

      And so suddenly this is bigger than just buying, borrowing, or stealing one piece of gear. It turns into a serious project, and therefore shows much more deliberate, long-term malice on the part of the perpetrator.

  15. FBI used to investigate UFO sightings as well by Nine+Tenths+of+The+W · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have no doubt this will prove about as fruitful as their investigation into Bonsai Kitten

    --
    Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
  16. Hmm. I dunno. by valkraider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This may or may not be a threat. Some interesting thoughts here

    But it seems to be that it would be awful hard for something from the ground to actually hit the inside of the cockpit unless it had some sort of tracking device to track the plane, and was high enough to hit the inside of the cockpit instead of the nose cone (perhaps on a tall building or mountain near an airport).

    I think this could be another tactic to strike fear into the populace.

  17. Re:When green lasers are outlawed, only outlaws wi by matth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unfortunately, that's the idea.

  18. is this any real threat? by v1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I question whether this is a real threat or not. All common laser pointers use laser diodes, which at best can bee columated to a beam a foot or so wide at a half a mile. This virtually eliminates any danger of retinal damage because of how much the beam's power is spread out. The only issue I see is a temporary "flash blindness" like that of getting your picture taken with a flash bulb in use. That's not too far off from getting glare off the hood while driving to work at dawn. If a pilot can't handle that, they have no business flying an airplane.

    That being said though, I still agree that giving a pilot a sudden vision obstacle while they are in the critical stages of landing their airplane is dangerous and should be unlawful.

    Also I agree with an earlier post here that there is zero risk of a sustained illumination of a cockpit window from someone holding a handheld pointer two miles away aiming at a target moving at upwards of 800mph.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  19. Real Homeland Security by Baldrson · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If the so-called "homeland security" policies were doing their job, rather than trying to take more and civil liberties from US citizens, they'd:
    1. Totally seal the borders
    2. Confiscate and auction off the properties of all employers of illegal aliens to pay the expenses of
      • sending illegals home
      • back taxes and
      • social service costs of supporting illegals to date
    3. provide huge prize incentives for commercial development of alternatives to the fragile air transportation infrastructure
    4. provide huge prize incentives for commercial development of small-capitalization self-sufficiency systems so that small communities if not individual households could provide their basic necessities without reliance on centralized structures
    5. tear down the prison system as unfit for human habitation and construct a new one in which none of
      • prisoner rape or other violence
      • hepatitis C or
      • AIDS
      was a substantial risk and
    6. make sure that when national guardsmen come home from Iraq, trained in urban warfare and all pissed off at having been abused by the government, they at least have a job.
    I know, I know... This is all way too sane for the scum who have occupied the positions of trust and authority within the de facto government of the US.
    1. Re:Real Homeland Security by myowntrueself · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Totally seal the borders"

      This is the part that I totally agree with; as a non-American I think that the USA *should* immediately seal all of its borders.

      Anyone currently in the USA should not be allowed to leave, and noone should be permitted to enter.

      Al internet connections, phone lines and satellite communications with the USA should be shut down.

      A wall should be built, as high as humanly possible.

      Best for everyone involved.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    2. Re:Real Homeland Security by stonecypher · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A wall should be built

      Well seig heil to you too, buddy.

      Yeah, it's all a joke until someone rubs your nose in who your jokes make you sound like. But Americans are the ignorant xenophobes, right?

      Then again, I just spent a half hour reading a bunch of people complaining about the size of the first-day tsunami donations, when by the second day they'd increased by an order of magnitude, and when the US is giving more per person than any populous unaffected nation, peppered with assorted whining about how our media spent less time covering a natural tragedy than a calculated attack to which the appropriate response divided a nation, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised in that these jokes are being made by seemingly the same people which decry them from us, and manage to stumble all over themselves looking for ways to damn us.

      Look, you guys are responsible for France, and all we've got is New Jersey. Now you tell me with a straight face who are the real criminals.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
  20. But what about the punks in the movie theatres? by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is serious, but not nearly as serious as what I'd like to do to the pointer-equipped, arrested development imbeciles that always seem to show up in the theater where I've just spent $9.50 to see a film. No doubt they think they're really onto something novel as they draw circles around Gollum's head, or perhaps improve Michael Moore's insufferable visage by doodling on it.

    These punks, with their cheesy dime-store pointers, are eroding our cinemaplex entertainment economy. As they taint our $40 movie dates, though, they're driving me closer and closer to actually buying a big screen at home. Which is good for China, or whoever makes it that week.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  21. No way... by Quixote · · Score: 2, Insightful
    There is no way that a hand-held laser can track a plane flying at 300mph at 8500 feet; find the cockpit and stay there for any period of time. If someone can pull that off, make that guy a surgeon. You can barely see a plane at 8500 feet!

    Have they explored onboard possibilities? Some emission coming from one of the onboard instruments?

  22. Re:Hmm. I dunno. by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...it would be awful hard for something from the ground to actually hit the inside of the cockpit...

    But I've been on many a looping approach where the plane is banked substantially to one side or the other for a good minute or so, during which I'm looking down, at a steep angle, right into business districts, neighborhoods, etc. If my eyes can see the ground, the ground can see my eyes.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  23. Re:Why green? by telemonster · · Score: 5, Informative

    Green appears the brightest on the human spectrum. Most of these small lasers are DPSS (Diode pumped solid state). If the beam is coherent it is *INDEED* a danger, and nothing scares me more than the thought of hoodlums running around with 600mw "laser pointers".

    Lasers for display are regulated by the Center for Disease and Radiological Health. Your not supposed to direct a laser above 5mw up into the sky.

    At a long distance, the beam definitly becomes incoherent. Gas lasers are considered better than solid state in regards to beam colimation, and without optics my 2.5' long argon tube beam ends up 1' or more wide at a distance of only 1000 feet or so.

    Targeting, no... Someone might manage to cross the planes path, but in order to track a plane I'd iamgine you would need to build a box filled with dirt sitting on innertubes to isolate vibration, then come up with a servo mechanism. I don't think 16 bit DACs would give enough accuracy with glavos.

    Weapons targeting systems do not use visible lasers AFAIK. It would be a giveaway if there was a bright green dot on the target and a green line tracing back to the source.

    Also, laser light is different then searchlights because the light is polarized. So you can see the beam better from one way versus the other.

    --
    Southeastern Virginia REPRESENT!
  24. Happened to me by HPNpilot · · Score: 4, Informative

    One night I was on a CAP SAR flight and we were targeted by such a laser. They can be very bright when your eyes are accustomed to the dark! When we tried to locate the source and got closer, it stopped. It was coming from a residential area. I had spots in my vision like someone took flash photos and I looked into the strobe.

    One note; there was mention in the news of a quote from an FBI agent who said it had to be a sophisticated laser to track a plane for severla seconds at 8500 feet. I disagree. I believe with a braced or tripod mounted unit in combination with the beam divergence holding on target for a few seconds is easy.

  25. Re:Friggin' ... by D'Sphitz · · Score: 2, Funny

    you're correct. the whole internet should be taken down and replaced with tsunami news and discussion and donation soliciting for the next month at least. i also find it really offensive that anyone has the gall to think about anything but tsunamis. the nerve of some people.

  26. WARNING: by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 3, Funny

    WARNING: Do not point laser into remaining good eye.

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    1. Re:WARNING: by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Informative

      it was also on Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  27. Laser Dazzler? by JhohannaVH · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it possible that someone with military experience or some such? Especially considering Colorado Springs. There's six huge and important military installations within about a 5 mile radius of the COS runways. Not to mention that it's easily accessible by the public, probably one of the worst security features (I used to work for Western Pacific Airlines! :O)!! Interestingly enough, many non-lethal weapons developers are headquartered in the area, to include Jaycor, Loral, and Raytheon. It may be possible that someone or someone's was able to gain access to a Laser Dazzler and is 'having some fun', or causing major trouble. Interesting thought... I saw these on a program on History Channel, and they were pretty amazing, and could possibly result in such things.

    --
    Sorry man... the Internet pooped on me.
  28. You forgot something.... by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 2, Funny

    5. Profit!

  29. Re:Why green? by temojen · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't think 16 bit DACs would give enough accuracy with glavos.
    You can get quite a lot of precision with 4 16 bit DACs micro-stepping a stepper motor, especially if you also use a reduction gear.
  30. IRTFA, My opinion by telemonster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Okay, it would be my guess that someone used a high powered YAG laser or maybe a large DPSS. I seriously doubt this was from a handheld unit.

    The beams could make it into the cockpit upon approach I believe.

    You have to be an idiot to do such a thing. The "pulsing" factor makes me think it might have been a pulsed YAG system, since many are triggered by flashlamps.

    Crazy stuff, and it will make it difficult for those of us into lasers for entertainment.

    For a good pic of a YAG on a clear night (this isn't mine):
    A flashlamp triggered yag

    Argon on foggy night

    I have some pics from playing around here:

    http://users.757.org/~ethan/pics/lasers/

    Don't forget to check out www.linux-laser.org, an opensource linux laser platform. The funny thing is the only major software to use the device so far is for Windows XP.

    --
    Southeastern Virginia REPRESENT!
  31. Re:Yeah sure, is it an imaginary laser pen too? by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why does everybody think this is just a case of some kid who bought a handheld laser pointer and is trying to point it at an airplane that flew overhead?

    Come on people, it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to figure out that a combination of a commercial/scientific laser along with a good quality sighting scope mounted on a high quality tripod wouldn't be too difficult or expensive to slap together. Hell, just get a good laser and mount it on top of a good pair of military observation binoculars and you'd probably be ready to rock & roll.

    It also doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to realize that from a mountain top or other high peak of land you could target aircraft flying directly towards your position from a few miles away. If it's flying in your direction then its horizontal and lateral positions won't change very much so you wouldn't need a sophisticated tracking system. You wouldn't even need a very high position if you intend on targeting aircraft that are landing - just an open area a mile or so from the end of the runway.

  32. Solution: Ban All Lasers from the private Citizen by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cant have something in the hands of the private citizen that MIGHT be used improperly can we?

    For get the multitude of legal uses, if there is ONE illegal use, we must take it off the market. And investigate anyone hat purchased the product before the ban..

    Must protect society...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  33. Anyone remember the pilot blinded by the Russians? by TheNarrator · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Anyone remember this story a year or two back? It was only covered by a few conservative news sites about a navy pilot being blinded by a laser from a suspected Russian spy vessel.

    WASHINGTON -- A San Diego-based Navy officer whose eyes were damaged by an apparent laser beam from a suspected Russian spy ship said yesterday he was injured by what was an act of war, terrorism or criminal conduct.

  34. Non-threat by crumley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As explained in the Ask the Pilot column, this threat is severely over-hyped. The probability of success is so low compared to the risk of detection, that its unlikely that terrorsits would try this tact.

    --
    Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
  35. Want to hit that cockpit with your LASER? Easy... by human+bean · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... Just keep the same old principle in mind that has been in use since WWI (Yes, that's right. The early nineteen hundreds).

    "Speed of motion" (as opposed to actual velocity) is apparent. When the aircraft is coming toward or away from you, it's speed of motion is less than if it was passing side to side. Just get in line with the sucker as it lines up on approach. Fire toward it.

    Rifle fire has brought down military jets with this technique. It's as old as the first biplanes, and still works.

    Chances are pretty good that you can do this with a proper rifle scope and a small hand LASER. As far as brightness goes, remember, the LASER (even at five milliwatts) is focused tightly. The beam is usually also parallel to a good extent. I can verify that at five miles on a bright day a five milliwatt LASER is the brightest thing on the horizon IF YOU GET LINED UP WITH IT.

    --

    *whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"

  36. Locate the laser with radar? by MoebiusStreet · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The low power, spreading beam, and difficulty of following the plane aren't the only fishy things. In a related article
    air traffic controllers used radar to determine the laser came from a residential area in suburban Warrensville Heights

    How in the world does one use radar to determine the source of a laser?

  37. Laser Dazzle Weapons by frank249 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As far back as 1981, the British Royal Navy tested a top secret weapon system called 'Laser Dazzle Sight,'(LDS). and they used it during the Falklands War where high speed, wave-skipping Argentinean pilots, met a dazzling array of laser beams designed to blind them.

    According to this Royal School of Artillery paper 'The most likely choice of lasers for a dazzle weapon would be
    Argon (458 - 515 nm, blue/green) or Ne YAG freq doubled(532 nm, green).'

    According to the Federation of American Scientists In the 1970's it was claimed that Chinese soldiers were blinded by Soviet-built laser systems during the China-Vietnam war. During the Iran-Iraq War, over 4,000 Iranian soldiers sustained injuries due to Iraqi laser systems. Throughout the 1980's, the Soviet Union were long suspected of directing lasers at US spyplanes. Today anti-personnel laser weapons are inexpensive, sold openly by the Third World, have line-of-sight aiming, and are capable of producing catastrophic results if used against aircrews and sensors in flight.

    In 1989 a US-USSR bilateral agreement imposed restrictions on the use of low-energy lasers. In 1989 the International Committee of the Red Cross called for multi-lateral controls.

    On 13 October 1995 the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV) was proposed. In 1998 it became international law but Human Rights Watch is concerned that the US is developing Dazzle weapons that do not cause permanent blindness and would circumvent the blinding weapons agreement.

    Now while the threat from laser weapons are real, I think the odds are greater that a real terrorist would use a man portable anti-aircraft missle.

    --

    Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.

  38. Easy Solution by sunderland56 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fact: pilots of commercial airliners do NOT look out the window.

    First, the windows are too bloody high to see the ground anyway. On the crucial part of the journey - the landing - you're nose up, so all you can see out the window is sky and clouds. You can't legally land any Boeing/Airbus/etc. on VFR except in a (very dire) emergency.

    So, simple solution? Paint the cockpit windows flat black. Over 90% of the crew wouldn't even notice. Unless the laser is strong enough to burn a hole in the 8" thick glass, it's no longer a problem.

  39. Re:Laser blinding weapons are made by China by DragonTHC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    laser weapons nothing. you can accomplish this with a $300 motorized telescope and a slightly powerful green laser pointer/module something about 8mW would easily go 10000 feet.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  40. hysteria by jeif1k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is no evidence that that is possible even if you look directly into fairly powerful laser pointers (many milliwatts). In order to harm someone's eyesight in the cockpit of a moving aircraft from miles away, you would need a fairly powerful laser and you would need to aim it accurately. I would guess that there are a lot simpler and cheaper ways to interfere with aircraft operations.

    However, even though there is no evidence of actual injury, people still report getting injured by laser pointers all the time. That suggests that there is a kind of fear and hysteria about these devices (maybe caused by too much SciFi) that now seems to be cross-breeding with the terrorism scares.

  41. A physicist's perspective by tbo · · Score: 5, Informative

    IAAP (I am a physicist). I do not work with lasers, but have taken a graduate level course in non-linear optics that primarily focused on lasers.

    It is quite possible to damage a pilot's eyes at a range of a few miles, using only commercial laser systems. If done by competent individuals, it would probably involve a pulsed infrared laser (harder to detect, and the eye is more susceptible to near IR than to visible). A Nd:YAG laser (1064 nm) would be ideal.

    Since a pulsed laser is used, there's no need for tracking the plane. A single 10-nanosecond pulse would be sufficient. At 10 - 20 pulses per second, you could just scan the sky in the area of the plane.

    After reading the story, I did some rough calculations. For the above-mentioned laser, the laser beam would do damage (although likely not sufficient to totally blind the pilot) at ranges of up to two miles, and the beam would have a spot size several meters in diameter at that range. Obviously, with additional optics, range and spot size could be changed.

    It seems to me that the laser could simply be mounted to a scope on a tripod (after some careful alignment), and that targetting by hand would work at least some of the time.

    All this aside, I don't think the recent cases are anything to be worried about. More likely it's just a nutbar with a relatively weak visible laser (I assume the laser was in the visible range because the pilots reported it, and I doubt commercial planes are equipped to detect IR lasers). If it was someone serious, they'd be using IR lasers, and we wouldn't know until pilots started getting eye damage.

    That said, the overall risk of plane crashes from this form of attack is low. If the airport and immediate area are kept secure (and they should be if only to guard against Stinger-style missile attacks), it's very unlikely someone with a commercial laser could get close enough to completely blind a pilot. Military or custom-built research lasers could blind from greater distances, but such systems are very finicky, and I can't see terrorists pulling that off.

    Finally, I'd like to address a few points other people have brought up. If the polarization and angle of the beam are chosen correctly, virtually none will be reflected off the plane's window, and all will be transmitted (see Brewster's Angle). For modest laser powers, the damage to the retina will be localized to where the laser beam is imaged, leaving much of the pilot's vision intact. Bad for the pilot, but he could probably still land. For more intense beams, other damage mechanisms come into play (apparently for severe cases there is an actual popping sound perceived by the victim as the laser pulse creates a small shock wave inside the eye), and more of the victim's vision could be damaged.

    Protective goggles aren't really an option, as they only protect against one wavelength. Attackers could then switch to a different type of laser (Ti:saph?). Combining goggles leads to virtually no light getting through.

    References
    Journal of Biomedical Optics 4(3), 337-344 (July 1999).
    Big Sky Laser CFR-800 spec sheet

  42. Charges against NJ man for lasering aircraft by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Informative

    A man in NJ has been charged with exactly what's been described here. Indications are that he hand-pointed the laser, occasionally caught the cockpit, and thus illuminated the pilots, who very much noticed.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.