Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Australia Shark Transportation Technology

Laser Incidents With Aircraft On the Rise 546

EqualSlash writes "High-power laser pointers available for cheap are increasingly finding abuse as the ultimate long-distance weapons of pranksters and vandals. The Federal Aviation Administration says laser events aimed on planes have nearly doubled in the last year, leaping from 1,527 in 2009 to 2,836 in 2010. The highest number of incidents was reported at Los Angeles International Airport, which recorded 102 in 2010. Lasers pointed at cockpits can temporarily blind pilots, forcing them to give up control of an aircraft to their co-pilot or abort a take-off/landing. In March of 2008, unidentified individuals wielding four green laser pointers launched a coordinated attack on six incoming planes at Sydney Airport, which resulted in a ban on all laser pointers in the state of New South Wales."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Laser Incidents With Aircraft On the Rise

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:20PM (#34969138)

    So, the biggest threat to airline travel is prankster laser pointer wielding yocals and not some loon putting explosives on a plane or hijacking it?!?

    Remember that when you're taking your shoes off, having your personal items picked through and groped by the TSA.

  • by warrigal ( 780670 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:28PM (#34969202)
    I doubt the problem is really pranksters.
    There has been a campaign for decades to close or at least move Sydney airport. It sits in an inner-city suburb that predates the airport.
    Every election sees both federal and state governments promising to do something about it.
    Spend some time in a suburb like Rockdale and you'll have to get used to large aircraft passing at chimney height all day and most of the night. At other airports with similar problems aircraft have been found with bullet holes in them. So I think the laser crew are being most restrained.
  • by dave562 ( 969951 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:30PM (#34969222) Journal

    I can only speak to the approach into LAX, because that is the only major international airport that I have seen on a regular basis (unless you count PDX, but that is more regional). There are plenty of 4-5 story parking garages along the 405 as the planes are nearly down on final approach. A person could probably get another 5 feet of elevation for standing on top of a vehicle, maybe 6-7 feet if you find a big lifted monster truck or cargo van. All in total that is about 55 feet of elevation.

    The flight paths on those planes is completely predictable. It would be fairly easy to get into the cockpit of some of those planes. A person would probably need a aim a few miles out. Once they were near the garage, the angle would be too extreme given the height of the cockpit.

    How much energy would be needed to create a distracting level of laser light into the cockpit of a jumbo jet that is 5-10 miles away?

  • by MavEtJu ( 241979 ) <[gro.ujtevam] [ta] [todhsals]> on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:35PM (#34969272) Homepage

    This issue doesn't need to be that it reaches the pilot's eye(s), when the beam reaches the window and it "scatters" the beam giving it a bright area through which you can't see.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:46PM (#34969336)

    Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that.

    Near my international airport (KSEA for those interested) is a public park on the north end of the airport, from there it is a ridiculously easy shoot into the cockpit with a laser at around 3 miles when aircraft are landing to the north (runways 34). At that range most green lasers beams are actually fairly wide, but still plenty bright, especially to eyes that have spent the last 6 hours acclimated to almost total darkness (pilots routinely turn the lights down at night) Since you bring up geometry, I submit to you that the angle from ground to cockpit at that distance is probably in the 10 degree range. And consider that these aircraft are landing from the south, facing north. The pilot is required to maintain contact with the runway lighting system at all times, including the lights leading up to the runway. If they can see lights 1/2 mile ahead of them, I think they can see the lights 3 miles ahead of them. If you'd like i'll get out my FAR/AIM (FAA rule bible) and quote you the regs.

    Now, lets talk the pussies argument. Would you want YOUR pilot to be even 1/4 blinded when operating at 175mph and 300 feet off the ground? Safety says you go around and let your eyes reacclimate. It's not that they could NEVER land the plane, but that given the other stressors already in place, why would you risk it? Remember we are in the plane with you, and we have just as much interest in going home to our families as you do.

    My credentials: Commerial rated, Multi-engine and Single-engine, with an unrestricted IFR rating.

    Posting AC due to lack of account, long time reader.

  • by shovas ( 1605685 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @09:57PM (#34969408) Homepage
    Many people, including myself, don't understand what you're seeing. The small size of lasers, the distance between the points, shakiness of human hands, etc., How is it even possible for more than a split second? Could you be confusing it with something else?
  • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) * on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:09PM (#34969482)

    No, I would rather live in a world where people behaved responsibly. Sadly that is impossible.

    I accept your argument, and I accept that night vision can be diminished by even a brief flash of light at night. I'm too lazy to calculate the energy density of a "wide", poorly collimated laser beam at 3 miles, however considering that these beams are usually powered by 5/1000ths of a watt or so, it's not a lot of energy to start with (the sun puts out around 24 times much energy per square centimeter). It's far less than 5 mW if you're not getting the whole "beam". I suspect that the impact on night vision is not much greater than looking at the instruments (which also emit light in a dark cockpit, and have to be checked quite often as you know).

    Rather than destroying vision I would claim that the biggest problem is surprise, and the chance of momentarily over-reacting or losing situational awareness because of that surprise. I agree that a pilot is quite busy during take off and landing, especially in weather and traffic, and anything unexpected is not good at all.

    What I hate, however, is an argument brought to the table for the wrong reasons. I hate to think of laser pointers being controlled or outlawed because of a handful of idiots since they do have their uses besides entertaining pets. The blurb said that there are well over 2000 incidents per year. I would point out that despite this, there has not been a single accident. So I do not condone taking people who point lasers at planes and burning them at the stake or, as is likely, charging them with PAX # counts of attempted murder, to be served consecutively.

      I still challenge that lost eyesight is the least of a pilot's worries, but this is the argument that is put forward. The pussies comment was a generalization based upon my opinion of a particular event in the news, because a flight crew came across as especially whiny and were threatening to sue the whole world because of this.

  • by bakamorgan ( 1854434 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:17PM (#34969536)
    There was a video on youtube from a news channel that showed what happend when a green laser hit the cockput of a plane/helio but I can't seem to find it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5r5-bMstX6g [youtube.com] This is about all I can find. Anyways its not so much the fact that it goes into the pilots eye, it's just that illuminates the cockpit like a disco which then doesn't allow the person to see out side the window.
  • Re:sad thing is ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AB3A ( 192265 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:23PM (#34969580) Homepage Journal

    A properly unloaded firearm in a locked case is permitted in an airport. The baggage is checked separately and tagged so that TSA knows it is there. Yes, this includes a handgun. It may seem counter-intuitive to those have never been in uninhabited areas, but a large caliber handgun is useful in case you are caught by surprise by wolves, boar, or bear. My cousin used to go on Salmon fishing trips in Alaska, and he always carried a .44 with him just in case he had to take down a bear. As far as I know, he never had to use it outside of the gun range, but better safe than sorry.

  • by definate ( 876684 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:24PM (#34969584)

    In Australia we ban just about anything at the drop of the hat. As such, their first reaction was to ban all laser pointers which could be used for this. It's now illegal to have them, similarly illegal as firearms, mase, battons, knives, etc.

    So that was their first line of dealing with it. Make it illegal to have them, then you just need to find it in their house/car/clothes, and you can arrest them for possession.

    This is just explaining how they make it easy to catch and prosecute these people. I don't agree with this, as this logic gets extrapolated quite easily. Eg, Want to get rid of bikies? Just ban motorcycle enthusiast groups [yahoo.com]. Want to stop people reading some book, playing some game [wikipedia.org], or watching some movie [wikipedia.org]? Just make ratings required, and refuse to classify anything you don't like.

  • Re:Accidental? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <phrosty@gmail.com> on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:24PM (#34969588) Homepage

    I own a 100mw green laser pointer -- the rare times I end up showing it to people, all of them aim it out into the distance to hit some target -- usually a tree or phone pole. I quickly noticed about 1/4th of them would aim it at a helicopter or airplane. It's not malice -- it's stupidity. Now after telling people the dangers of pointing it at living things or reflective objects, I have to tell them not to point it at flying shit too.

    The chances of someone having a steady enough hand to hit a plane are slim. Being able to keep it on the plane for any significant amount of time to blind someone is even slimmer. The beam is around 4-8mm wide at 3 miles distance on an expensive laser pointer. I don't know if it would have enough power at that distance to blind or even annoy. But hey -- there is plenty of shit on the ground to point at, so I don't really care to test it.

  • by Sam36 ( 1065410 ) on Saturday January 22, 2011 @10:33PM (#34969642)
    No it is really pretty easy. Just tape the laser pointer to a pair of binoculars. With a little bit of playing around with the aiming, you will be able to look into the binoculars and see the laser hitting objects way far away very easily. Holding the binoculars while placing your arms on a table will give you very good stability. Works really great!
  • Re:sad thing is ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by petermgreen ( 876956 ) <plugwash.p10link@net> on Saturday January 22, 2011 @11:21PM (#34969938) Homepage

    You can't make one yourself, as they use a special laser diode.
    If you just want a laser to cause mayhem with then afaict the ones out of DVD burners are far nastier than even the powerfull end of laser pointers.

  • by BetterSense ( 1398915 ) on Sunday January 23, 2011 @12:10AM (#34970212)
    Airline rules vary, but typically the gun has to be in a case 'designed for holding firearms' and it must be locked.

    Get that? It must be locked. NORMAL checked luggage not only doesn't have to be locked, it's not allowed to be locked (so TSA can rifle through it as they please and steal your shit).

    So if you want to be able to lock your checked baggage, just fly with a gun. Not only will you be able to lock your gun case, you will be REQUIRED to do so, and anything else you can fit in that gun case can be locked too. I used to know a guy who claimed to always fly with a starter pistol (legal in many jurisdictions) just so he could check a lockable case.

    IANAL YMMV
  • by R3d M3rcury ( 871886 ) on Sunday January 23, 2011 @01:12AM (#34970586) Journal

    I can't speak for Sidney airport, not knowing the situation. That said, it can be somewhat understandable.

    I live next to a railroad track. Usually twice a week, about 10:00AM, a train comes past carrying supplies to the local Home Depot and will make a lot of noise--like you can't hear someone close-by talking. It's twice a week--always on a weekday, lasts maybe 30 seconds, and it's not a huge deal.

    However, if the trains suddenly started coming by every hour between 6:00AM and midnight, I think I'd be more than a little upset.

    Again, I don't know the Sidney situation. But as airports expand outward, the house you bought 15 years ago that was far enough away from the airport that the noise level wasn't too bad is suddenly unsellable and unlivable because the airport became bigger or planes became noisier or some such thing.

  • by JWSmythe ( 446288 ) <jwsmythe@nospam.jwsmythe.com> on Sunday January 23, 2011 @03:10AM (#34971100) Homepage Journal

        I'd have to think, for stability a laser emitter and binoculars or low range telescope on a rifle stock would be better. photographers [google.com] using telescopic lenses have been doing this for a long time, especially for nature shooting, where a tripod isn't practical.

        For most folks who just picked up a cheap laser emitter, it doesn't exactly seem like they'd want to spend the money for binoculars nor a rifle stock. Unless of course they already have a binocular or telescope, and a BB rifle.

        I wonder how many of these incidents aren't malicious. There are plenty of laser devices for stage and outdoor performances too. In 2008, the FAA statistics say there were about 31.8 million flights. I assume the number of flights for 2010 is similar or greater than the 2008 number. If so, this involved 0.009% of the flights.

        Have you ever been to a shooting range, where someone was using a laser sight? It can be very scary. Most people can't point a gun steady enough to keep the point on the paper. That's only at a range of a few feet. Years back, I had a laser pointer, and lived in a 2nd floor apartment. At night when there was no traffic, I'd point it at street signs and tail lights of parked cars (they both reflect very well). Ok, I was young, and bored. I have steady hands, and can shoot firearms more accurately than most people. I could put the point on them very accurately at say 100 feet. At any significant distance (say 200'+), the beam divergence was pretty significant, so it had to hit something reflective to see it at all. As the range increased beyond that, the divergence would become greater (obviously), and even with a point the size of a truck, it was hard to put on target.

        At my local airport (a fairly busy international airport), the traffic pattern is at 1,500 feet (about 1,000 feet higher than any local structures). The FAA recommendation for the traffic pattern is 1,000 feet AGL, unless local conditions warrant otherwise (mountains, buildings, or noise abatement rules). So if it's hard to put a laser pointer dot accurately on something as big as a parked truck at around 200 feet or so, it would be damned near impossible to stay on a target at 1000+ feet traveling at 160mph.

        The other option would be that it's common to spot commercial entertainment lasers, from say outdoor concerts, theme parks, etc. They are not permitted to point any laser towards the eyes of the audience. Their only choice is to point them up. With that being true, a 0.009% chance of a pilot seeing a laser likely coincides with the chance of an aircraft intersecting the beam while in the pattern or on approach. Any higher than that, I'd say a pilot probably wouldn't even notice the dim light, or at best it would look like any other lights on the ground.

        I've only ever heard of two instances where someone was caught shining lasers at aircraft. One was a guy who had purchased a high power laser, and was caught when he was pointing it at a police helicopter (stable target, low altitude, ability to follow it to the offender). The other was the incident cited in the article, which would not be included in the FAA's statistics. With such little evidence of who the offenders are, it leaves plenty of opportunity for the evidence of pilots seeing lasers to be circumstantial at best in saying that the offenders were actually intentionally committing the acts.

        Sorry for rambling on there. :)

  • by h4rm0ny ( 722443 ) on Sunday January 23, 2011 @08:03AM (#34971926) Journal
    So why on Earth are planes designed so that pilots sit above the nose and can't see down, instead of below the nose and can't see up? Is it some psychological hang-up of the species that thinks you can only be in control of something if you're riding on top of it, or that being high-up has to mean you have the best view? Is it a prestige thing? Pilots should be under the nose so they can see what's below them. It doesn't matter how high up you go, you're not going to crash into anything (like what, the ISS?) but you do want to be able to see the ground below because the ground is hard.

    Anybody on here designing the next generation of passenger jets? The gate^H^H^H^H target is down, gentlemen.

"Money is the root of all money." -- the moving finger

Working...