Finland Announces an Anti-Laser Campaign For Air Traffic 114
jones_supa writes Trafi, the Finnish Pilots' Association, and STUK, the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, have launched a joint campaign against air traffic interference with the title "Lasers Are Not Toys." Ilkka Kaakinen from Trafi says that laser pointers interfering with air traffic is a real problem in Finland. "We receive reports of several cases of laser interference every month and every one of them is potentially dangerous," Kaakinen says. Last year, 60 cases of laser pointer interference were reported in Finland, and the figure for this year was at 58 in November. Despite the continuing interference, only one person has been caught misusing a laser pointer in this way in Finland. That single person was not convicted of a crime, as the court was not able to establish intent. Kaakinen says other countries hand down severe punishments for interfering with air traffic, even years-long stretches in prison. He also reminds that it is important for users of laser pointers to understand that the devices are not toys, and that children should be warned of the potential danger in using them irresponsibly – or ideally, not given one at all.
Do not give lasers as gifts to children (Score:5, Funny)
I have a great t-shirt from Meredith Instruments that reads "DANGER! LASER RADIATION! Do not expose beam to remaining eye."
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, most of the arrests have been people in the age of majority - perhaps they had the maturity of children, but they aren't children. Plus, given how expensive they are (several hundred bucks), it generally isn't a children's toy.
As for those claiming that it's not a problem because no one's lost
Re: (Score:2)
DANGER! LASER RADIATION! Do not expose beam to remaining eye
The beam might get damaged.
And in retaliation .. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Am I the only one who notices a strong correlation between lasers suddenly becoming Public Enemy Number 1 and the increased use of drone technology?
Re: (Score:2)
convex lens (Score:2)
Require lasers sold to the public to have a built-in, slightly-divergent lens. That would improve PowerPoint usage too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And DVD drives? CD drives?
Getting your hand on a powerful laser diode ain't so hard. Thought it would admittedly be easier to just replace that lens...
Re: (Score:2)
Hard to regulate when you can just order whatever you want from the other side of the world.
A solution does not have to be perfect to be useful. A divergent lens wouldn't eliminate 100% of the problem, but it would eliminate 90%. It would also make it easier to prosecute the remaining 10%, since a perp will have a harder time claiming that aiming it at an aircraft was unintentional, if they intentionally ordered a non-divergent laser pointer from another country rather than buying a divergent laser from a local shop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Right. They have a lens to focus the beam into as close to a parallel beam as feasible. jclaer is saying they should be required to have a considerably more divergent beam. How many people have a legitimate use for a laser that can maintain a pencil-sized beam at a couple of miles? There are applications for such a thing, but I doubt most people use the capability as anything other than a dangerous novelty, if at all.
Re: (Score:3)
How many people have a legitimate use for a laser that can maintain a pencil-sized beam at a couple of miles?
Fortunately, thanks to the laws of physics, such a laser would have to have an aperture of at least 10 to 20 cm, but probably much more, and thus would be very conspicuous.
Re: (Score:2)
My solution would be putting cameras
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever tried shining a hand-held laser at the moon? Even if you did, it wouldn't be visible. It spreads out too much.
But what if everyone pointed a laser at the moon, at the same time? [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
astronomers, astrophotographers, hunters, target shooters, etc.
Re: (Score:1)
You think a "lay-ser" beam is divergent? Have you ever considered
Re:convex lens (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Are you suggesting that we simply list the professions that are allowed to have a genuine focused laser? If so, what happens when a spargeborgler (some new profession that critically relies on focused lasers) comes along? These laws always take years to get updated, leave horrible loop holes, and leave some people with genuine need out on the cold. If you can't express a general way to separate the groups, and have to revert to listing specifics, you're probably doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
The gods themselves strive in vain to improve PowerPoint usage.
My Cat Disagrees (Score:2)
pew pew pew
Just use filters (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Just use filters (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is some Scandinavian country, not the US.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just use filters (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if you could protect pilots, what about the rest of the public? As with any dangerous product, the answer is not to make the general public armor themselves, but to simply demand responsibility from the product owners. Your idea is like requiring police to wear bullet-proof helmets so that children can have unfettered use of guns.
As with firearms and drones, people too stupid to use lasers responsibly should not be allowed to use them at all. But also as with guns and drones, the answer is not prohibition. It's education. You should be required to demonstrate safe lasing knowledge before buying, just as you must to buy a handgun most places.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My EYES!!!!! The goggles do NOTHING!!!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And too bad you don't know your Radioactive Man!!!
Re: (Score:3)
Googles won't work, and neither will a filtering windshield. They'll just obscure vision. The wavelengths are all over the spectrum. The only thing that would filter them all is a piece of steel. Tough to land that way.
What if you just used steel windshields, along with Googles Earth to find out where you're at? I don't see any problem with
Re: (Score:1)
>people too stupid to use lasers responsibly should not be allowed to use them at all.
I don't know anyone capable of using a 1000 miliwatt pocket laser safely, myself included. All it takes is one glance, or one reflection and blam your vision is damaged.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Practical lasers are in just a few frequencies. Not all over the spectrum. They are NOT light bulbs. Filtering works.
2. The rest of the public is not the problem. The problem is not damaging of eyes. It's seeing nothing because the whole freaking windshield lights up.
Having said that, education should indeed be part of the solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Filtering i
but they ARE toys (Score:2)
No government decree will convince people that a cheap laser pen is not a toy.
Are lasers not also dangerous to airline passengers? Of the 60 cases of 'laser interference' how many were blinded or otherwise injured? And why are Finnish pilots looking out the window?
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that airplane accidents are extremely rare and when happened, they usually are caused by an unique chain of events, where one event alone wouldn't caused the crash. The laser pointers alone may not be enough to cause a plane crash normally, but in a critical moment they may be.
Even a minor distraction or problem can be fatal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJnPH5ud2W0
Re: (Score:2)
It's not eye damage we're worried about. It's collision damage from the aircraft careening into a parking structure during final approach, killing everyone on board.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, like, when you're driving in a rainy night with the oncoming traffic's lights reflecting off the wet ground?
Re: (Score:3)
I hope you are not claiming that that situation does not lead to crashes.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but very obviously the situation is FAR more commonplace and so far crashes are small enough in numbers that even insurance companies didn't cause an outcry about it, so it can't be that bad.
And yes, I take insurance companies' revenue as an indicator of whether a situation is dangerous, not people dying. Simply because there is way more pressure on politics if the former starts to cause a problem...
A pilot checking in here (Score:5, Insightful)
So while punishing people who do this I certainly hope they take into consideration that most people doing this would not be criminal terrorists so much as criminally stupid. Thus the proper punishment most of the time should be to scare the crap out of them and then ban them from owning a laser pointer for a decade or two. Keep in mind that the goal will be to prevent the dimwits from doing it again; it is generally quite hard to prevent them from being dimwitted and thus identifying the occasional dimwit and training him will be far more effective than trying to somehow reach the dimwits and convince them from doing it trough draconian laws which will largely serve to make the dimwit's lives far worse than they already probably are.
For instance when flying the reports are that the lasers often are coming from trailer parks vs the nice end of town.
Re:A gun nut checking in here (Score:2)
But I recently got a Barrett M82A1 [barrett.net] and love to see just how far I can shoot the .50 cal rounds to hit things.
Does this version sound any better?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
and then there is this nincompoopery:
http://m.wpxi.com/videos/news/... [wpxi.com]
But my thing is that I like to shoot a laser across say a body of water at the storage building miles away which presuming some common sense results in zero harm. But few would debate the harm in shooting up at an airplane. The key being that a few would debate the harm; a few dimwits. But assuming
Re: (Score:2)
most people doing this would not be criminal terrorists so much as criminally stupid.
The crime is attempted second-degree murder. There's more to it than stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
And before you even spend one keystroke defending America, 70% of A
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly have no idea how stupid people can be. For research purposes I advise going to a beach party in summer.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's a moonless night and presumably the target you are aiming for is unlit (so you can see the beam reflecting off it) then you are firing blind. There could be someone stood there, or in the 5km (3 miles) or more to the target.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sick of this (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sick of this bullshit myth.
Lasers do not cause Aircraft to crash.
It's never happened, it never will happen. I can't even focus my pen laser on my cat that's 10 feet away from me for more than a split second. Hitting the windshield of an aircraft that's at least 1000 yards away and traveling at at least 200mph?!?! At worst, you have a 1 in a billion chance of nailing the pilot directly in the retina, so yes, you shouldn't do it because that might annoy him. But it's not going crash the plane even if that happened.
Now, for all of you that are going to tell me I'm dumb and don't know what I'm talking about... Please provide evidence. Has any plane ever had an accident as a result of a laser? Any? I've heard from some irritated pilots, and I can understand that... I'd be irritated to. But to claim there was any chance of an accident and we need to limit consumer freedom to harmless technology, just so we don't annoy pilots? That's a joke.
And, I'm willing to offer evidence myself:
2013 Egyptian protests. Snipers on buildings and in helicopters we targeting opposition leaders. As a result, protesters started buying cheap green laser pointers in the market and using them to highlight Sniper and helicopter positions. Eventually, so many lasers would be focused on passing helicopters they looked like this:
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/sta... [theatlantic.com]
and here's a video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
This went on every night for months. Dozens of aircraft, thousands of lasers focused on them continually... but not one single crash. None.
There's absolutely no way these laser pointers could cause a crash... and if they could, the NTSB should immediately require all aircraft to be retrofitted with polarized sheets on the inside of the pilots window. It'd cost a couple of dollars per aircraft and wouldn't infringe on the personal freedoms of the general population.
Re:I'm sick of this (Score:4, Informative)
When an airliner is landing, this is also a critical phase of flight. Blinding the pilot then will make it impossible to read instruments, possibly if not probably resulting in the aircraft departing from the glide slope and runway centerline and into a collision with airport surroundings.
You're right that no aircraft in the US has been shot down yet by a laser, although some pilots have suffered permanent eye damage. This is where the part about you being dumb comes in. See, intelligent people try to be pro-active about foreseeable disasters and take action before anyone, even a dumb person, dies. So we're just looking out for you. Pity you're too dumb to realize that.
Re: (Score:2)
Not just no aircraft in the US, no aircraft in the world has had anything more than a pissed off pilot at landing.
You seem to be arguing like I'm saying people should target aircraft at landing with lasers, its no big deal. Re-read what I said... I mentioned at least twice that you shouldn't do this. Stupid kids do this sort of thing. But this is heading in a very predictable direction. They are trying to ban consumer lasers with this lame excuse. Is there a possibility that the right laser, hits the right
Re: (Score:2)
Lasers do not cause Aircraft to crash.
People cause Aircraft to crash.
Re:I'm sick of this (Score:5, Informative)
http://abcnews.go.com/News/jet... [go.com]
Re: (Score:2)
An FAA preliminary incident report described the pilot's injury as minor but did not provide details.
Yea, sounds like it burned his eye right out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
No, the main complaint in the discussed article was eye injury (that cannot happen), not losing visibility for a minute.
> A couple watts at a spot size of ~ 1-2 m can reach the damage threshold in the visible range
No, they cannot. The limit for a fully dilated pupil is 9 mm which means 2000 mW / (1000 / 9) / (1000 / 9) = 0.162 mW of laser power enter the eye for a very short
Re: (Score:1)
Do it yourself - the comment I answered to was only about eye damage and the title of the referenced article is "Pilot Has Eye Injury From Green Laser".
> MPE is for visible region is 1 mW / cm^2, which can be reached with single digit watts into a meter diameter beam, assuming the beam is evenly distributed and has no potentially reflecting surfaces involved.
Wow,
Re: (Score:2)
All you've done is provide evidence of some pilot's eye getting damaged.
You have failed to provide any evidence about how you need eyes to fly a plane OR any evidence about crashes due to pilots being unable to see.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you understand the difference between 'has not happened' and 'can not happen'? There are many instances of accidents caused by things that you would think could not cause an accident.
Is a laser by itself likely to bring down a plane? No. Can a laser be the last straw that causes a crash when the pilots are already dealing with some other problem? Yes.
Look into the history of air crashes and educate yourself. Except for mechanical failures a whole bunch of crashes are caused by multiple small things
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Who cares if the chance of hitting the planes if incredibly small... using this argument it should be legal to stand in your garden with a blindfold, and shoot at your house with a BB gun. The chance of hitting a window would be small, the chance of hitting you even smaller, so if one did hit you it would be an "accident".
About the "jitter from your hand" argument... what if one has the laser pointer mounted on something that is easy to aim... like a riffle. Rifles are designed to be held steady, even a toy
What the problem? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why does there need to be a "problem", there is no "good reason" to point lasers at planes.
If you have a car, please post your licence plate number so that we can make an objective study of whether you will crash if people point lasers at your car.