Laser Injures Delta Pilot's Eye 772
stormfish writes "The Washington Times is reporting that laser light from an unknown source injured a pilot's eye as he was flying a Boeing 737 from Dallas to Salt Lake City. A 5 milliwatt laser pointer is strong enough to damage a person's eye, and stronger laser's are not that hard to come by. Unfortunately, having pilots wear colored laser safety glasses would be impractical as that would make it impossible to interpret the colored symbols on paper maps and cockpit displays."
Friggin' lasers attached to their heads! (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably going to only increase (Score:3, Interesting)
"Colored laser safety glasses" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:5, Interesting)
-nB
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:4, Interesting)
I dont think planes are dangerous anymore. You will have to kill/injure everyone on the plane. Nobody is going to let you fly it like they used to. Honstly all we really need is anti air missiles. The damage is no worse then a couple of public bussess or a subway station. We are spending far too many resources just trying to look like we are doing something when we are just spinning our tires. There are a million different ways to kill alot of people. Focusing on one is pretty damn political.
I for one am happy that "things are getting better" and "the country is safer". Cause I see a lot more reason for people to be pissed at us then they were 3 years ago. And if I didn't know any better... But this is not a political message, cause I dont vote.
Put on your tinfoil hats... (Score:3, Interesting)
Targeting the actual pilot? (Score:2, Interesting)
Are they sure it came from the outside? (Score:3, Interesting)
Could a first class prankster have used a pointer through a small hole or something similar? Maybe the door was open?
Grasping at straws here.
Lights and pilots (Score:2, Interesting)
They also "hid" entire squadrons using smoke and mirrors.
If I could remember the name of the magician and his special squad of effects dude, I'd google for some links. Cool stuff though. David Copperfield-style illusions to fool the Nazis into seeing forces where there were none, and seeing nothing where the forces are, mostly in the desert theatre.
I've seen this too -- it happened to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
On approach for landing in Seattle (I was just a passenger, not pilot) I was looking out the window into downtown Bellevue. From an area near the Bellevue main mall (hard to tell where exactly from 5000 feet, and 3 miles over) was some kind of laser light show, and the laser in describing its pattern for the show occasionally and momentarily came directly through the window, and directly in my eyes. Even this very brief exposure was painful, and my eyes had after-images for hours! The laser was green, so I assume an even higher energy than a red laser (don't know for sure).
Ever since that encounter I've always wondered if it was just an incredible fluke, or something that could happen easily again. Now I know.
IANAT, but... (Score:1, Interesting)
This does not sound like the modus operandi of terrorists. Don't terrorists like to leave lots of evidence. They want people to know it was a terrorist attack.
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:5, Interesting)
Read the article. This wasn't a quote from any leader; its from a retired Navy airman who was hit in the eye with a laser during a recon mission and is arguing with the Navy Appeals committee to try and get a purple heart for it.
In other words, he has a vested interest in making the incident sound as scary and threatening as possible.
Pilot Sight Destruction? (Score:5, Interesting)
Apparently the US was tracking a Russian "Laundry Ship" north of Canada because they somehow found it suspicious. A while later, the helicopter pilot that had been filming the ship came to the doctor having vision problems. Upon close examination, there was a grid of little damaged, scar-tissue-surrounded holes in his retina. Upon examination of the video, they found a brief flash that when freeze-framed proved to be a grid of bright little laser points that had flashed at the helicopter from the boat! So it's nothing new to use lasers to destroy the vision of expensive-to-train pilots. The question is, was this stray laser light or something intentional as was the case with the "laundry ship"?
~Ben
exactly what I was thinking (Score:2, Interesting)
I am thinking of a few scenarios, all of them suck if that is the case.
1- really lame practical joke gone really bad from a random person in another plane.
2- delibarate terrorist attack by joe "real" terrorist, a proof of concept effort maybe
3-agent provocateur attack by shadow government/rogue faction to induce a reaction to put pressure on reducing lasers in civilian hands, because of their potential self defense against a junta potential perhaps, or for some other reason, such as borking surveillence cameras, or any number of reasons
Of course it still could have come from the ground, but it seems just like an amazingly lucky shot with a pretty powerful laser.(anyone knowledgeable want to comment on probable laser used and how to aim it accurately in this scenario?) Not only to hit, but to see where the hit is to correct the aim. Try it with a simple handheld rifle scope with integral laser(maybe that's what was used, but a model not available readily for civilians), and you can see the wiggle you get and how hard to see it at a relatively close couple hundred yards against a stationary target, against something moving really fast and pretty far away indicates a pretty sophisticated and powerful setup. The news articles (I have read several before slashdot got it) don't really have much in the way of details yet.
Re:Friggin' lasers attached to their heads! (Score:3, Interesting)
The laser itself could be mounted on a tripod for stability and smooth control along with a rifle scope for aiming. Even allowing for movement of cockpit relative to the beam, you would have a reasonable chance of blinding a crew member given enough time and enough attempts. The jitter introduced might even up the odds a bit. With a little work, such a rig could be practically invisible - much like the Washington Sniper setup.
Finally, to fend off all those calculating the odds of a tiny beam hitting a tiny eyeball; if "terrorists" were responsible, they could have been trying this unsuccessfully for months. They would only claim credit after bringing a plane down.
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:3, Interesting)
Red is end of the runway. Green is the beginning of the runway. The pattern gives it away, not just the colour. You should be landing at the far end of the Christmas tree, which co-incides with the Green lights.
Secondly, the Blue lights... For a taxiway... By which time you have already landed... and it's obvious that the green lights in the centre are the centreline - you could do it colourblind.
White would be the hardest - although you only need to know that it's the airport rather than the highway, in which case you look for a flashing beacon, or even better, the two strobed lights at the threshold.
Or even better, just home in on RNAV at the airport, then dial up the ILS and do a glideslope/localiser approach. You don't actually need colour at all, apart from the maps when you are navigating, which when Mode S transponders become common place, can essentially be done without the viewscreen... You should know if you fly IFR that the viewscreen should only ben used for traffic lookouts - you must be able to fly through cloud etc.
I'm only actually a VFR pilot, and I've just bullshitted a lot, but to all intents and purposes, you don't need colour outside of the cockpit!
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, I get tired of this too.
What amazes me is that during FDR's time, it was "we have nothing to fear but fear itself".
During Clinton's time, there were several thwarted attempts against America that was not publized (does anybody here ever wonder why 400+ FBI agents were flown into Seattle for Y2K? It was not to have a party).
Now we have a leader that only wants to point out how scarey everything is and how he is protecting us. Forget about the fact that
Re:Laser pointers not a risk to aircraft (Score:4, Interesting)
I was watching a college bowl game a couple years back and noticed a light spot, about 5 ft diameter following one of the team coaches. It occured to me that some sh!t for brains in the stands was trying to blind the coach with a laser pointer. I wonder if they check for these when frisking people entering stadiums now.
In Clancy's Debt of Honor the crew of a 747 was blinded by agents with a high intensity light and it certainly occured to me that near an airport such a thing could post a considerable hazard.
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:5, Interesting)
I know you were semi-joking here, but this is exactly why many airlines require their first officers and captains to have different meals. It makes it that much harder for terrorists to take over a plane after slipping roofies into the food supply, because they would have to poison all the food, not just one particular dish.
p
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:3, Interesting)
Would it be practical to make the windows in the cockpit able to filter out laser light?
Pay attention here... (Score:5, Interesting)
The plane's two pilots reported that the Boeing 737 had been five miles from the airport when they saw a laser beam inside the cockpit
If I read this right it says there was a beam (a visible point of light) inside the cockpit. This may not be the case, but it is one possible interpretation.
If this is the case it's pretty serious. Think about it. What kind of tracking system is necessary to get a laser beam into a cockpit window of a flying plane from the ground and keep it there long enough to be seen by the pilots?
Happened while I was in the Army (Score:5, Interesting)
From my limited contact with the optics in an M1 (courtesy a tanker buddy), I appreciate the extreme difficulty of keeping cross-hairs on a fast-moving target, and I seriously doubt that anyone could have hit the windshield of an aircraft in flight with a handheld laser. They would have to have been using some sort of stabilized mount and telescopic rig. Were there any military units on exercises in the area? Bored soldiers will do the stupidest shit. Trust me; I know from personal experience.
Re:Sigh...another reference to terrorism (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Laser pointers not a risk to aircraft (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:US Army using laser against Helicopter (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's a quote from recent article [washingtontimes.com] that mentions the incident:
"In one case, Naval Lt. Cmdr. Jack Daly and Canadian helicopter pilot Capt. Pat Barnes suffered eye injuries hours after an aerial surveillance mission to photograph a Russian merchant ship that had been shadowing the ballistic-missile submarine USS Ohio in Washington state's Strait of Juan de Fuca."
You don't have any anti-American bias do you?
me too (Score:4, Interesting)
This was a few years ago, I believe the airlines complained and the clubs were banned from doing it any more.
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:5, Interesting)
possible? kind of exists now for cheap.. welding (Score:3, Interesting)
if you know nothing about welding, that is one issue when you are learning. knowing where the electrode is in relation to the work and getting it close enough to arc, but not to stick. normally you kinda peek then drop your helmet and go for it. the autoshade helmets let you see what you are about to weld and when it gets bright they tint fast enough to protect you..... the tinting is extreme, but under the plasma light youu can see your work.
it's possibly something like that can be used for lasers as well as any other type of super bright blinding light. maybe the lasers are too tricky to trip the sensors, but if they can make the helmets that cheap, and there is a market for it in planes... i bet someone can figure it out. it might help fighter/bomber pilots too. it has to throw their vision to see things explode in front of them... maybe?
Re:Class IIIa lasers don't cause permanent injury (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"Colored laser safety glasses" (Score:3, Interesting)
But why not just have the windshield of the plane turn one-way, or opaque, or red (or whatever the proper diffracting/diffusing element is for lasers), when they're doing the approach.
Clearly they wouldn't need the map at that point, so seeing red out the windshield during the landing portion, shouldn't affect them THAT much. It'd certainly be a lot safer than having pilots blinded by lasers.
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember back around 1986 when then-Soviet aircraft reportedly were "lasing" or "laser dazzling" interceptor pilots to make them back off. I then and now regularly think of applying Star Trek-like events to thwart would-be enemies. I could care less who's side I was on. I thought of the episode where Spock lost his vision in the solar & decompression chamber used to kill off those flying scrambled eggs , and the episode where Diana Muldaur's character lit up and blinded Spock. Somehow, I lept to the idea that lasers or concentrated light or energy projectors could be used for military purposes. I had not even known within the next few hours on my chow break that a message on that topic was printing on the Broadcast. My RMC was crossing the Messdecks at the very moment and barged up to me and berated the hell out of me, threatening my clearance and more.
Shit, I was only 21 at the time, an hard-core Trek fan, not into divulging secrets, but I was into conspiracy theories to a point, was imaginative, read many books, and particularly bought but never finished many of the inside the CIA/FBI/Spetznas/KGB/GRU type of books. I would just draw things or ships or blurt out ideas that were rooted in Sci-Fi, and sometimes either be berated by my chief, or praised by others who said, "Damn, Syes, we're glad you're on OUR side and not the RUSSians'", particularly since I was adept at reading US Naval Proceedings and noting the pictures of propellers, CIWS gun angles, comms equipment and more. Based on CIWS pictures, I told the Gunners Mates one way to defeat their gun would be to launch an ship-killer missile outside the CIWS range and arc it so that it strikes the ship at an angle the CIWS couldn't cope with.
Another time, thinking about Destroyer Escorts and their supposed role of intercepting torpedos to save the Carriers, I though it was stupid to sink a ship. All they had to do was trail noise makers in the water and vary frequencies to confuse or blow up the inbound torpedoes. I then (being a Libra, I guess) suggested the Russians could counter that by simply using torpedo sensors that could discriminate the size, duration, and other properties of the wake generated by an aircraft carrier to simply avoid or dodge the smaller decoys. It was common sense, to me. Hell, I watched LOTS of Star Trek (I guess thinking of the episode "Balance of Terror" (The Romulan's type 4 or something weapon they ejected from the disposal tubes, which gravitated or homed in on the Enterprise even though it was still and quiet until Styles hit the sensor sweep button, providing a fix for the Romulans...), maybe the "Tholian Web" (I forget how, but they enveloped the ship in a mesh meant to destroy or displace the ship), maybe "Arena" (the Gorn used Spock's tricorder signals to build up a feedback to destroy it) and others. To me, this shit is the result of imagination. I couldn't BUILD it, but I could IMAGINE it. I was not a weapons person, but I READ a lot. But, my chief ripped me in the ass for that, too.
Shit, I wasn't anything special, I just used my imagination. If militaries cannot handle imaginative people in the ranks, then maybe the business of weapons procurement should be forced out of existence. Since it can't be (except for apocalypse or self-annhilation), then, maybe fear of war or countermeasures should be the weapon to deter war-- even if imagined or proposed by low-level enlisteds.
David Syes
Re:Easy to get these lasers... (Score:2, Interesting)
And it doesn't accomplish all that much. Those planes can land by themselves.
Healing the retina with light (Score:4, Interesting)
This [slashdot.org] story appeared on Slashdot a while back. It mentions the use of near-infra red light to actually stimulate the healing of retinal cells. NASA has more [nasa.gov] information [nasa.gov] about it on their website as well. Here is a quote from the New Scientist article [newscientist.com] mentioned in the Slashdot story...
It seems to be very pertinent to the situations of the Delta pilot and Canadian Navy helicopter pilot in the current story. Some [quantumdev.com] companies [thorlaser.com] make devices using this technology for medical purposes.
Witnessed this happen (Score:5, Interesting)
At the time laser light shows were the rage at the newly built casinos. Several had them, and all used green lasers whose beams were panned around the sky by motorized mirrors. As these casinos were built surrounding an AirForce base, they were supposed to have safety shutoffs that, during operations, would disable the lasers upon request by the base. An investigation found that these safety devices had been bypassed by maintenance personnel, including a laser whose safety shutter had been defeated by wrapping wire around it.
Needless to say, the laser light shows were dismantled quickly and were never brought back.
Fortunately, in this case, the optics spread the beam out with distance, instead of keeping tight collumination, so the pilot did not suffer long term damage.
These lasers were in the range of 50W, not some little 5mW laser pointer. Their beams could be seen for miles orthogonally and would paint patterns on the underside of clouds over two miles up. Your 5mW laser does not have the collimation, nor the power after atmospheric absorbtion to do much after around 100 ft.
However, I must admit, lasers in the 50W range are available, would do grevious eye damage at distance, and could be used to down an airplane by blinding the pilots.
Re:Happened while I was in the Army (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Security concerns not overblown but misdirected (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, but come on. Who profits from which "level" of terrorism?
Body counts build sympathy among the liberal enemies, build morale among your allies, and draw attention from those not involved.
Threats of body counts builds fear that instability in your protector could give the enemy an opportunity. What else does it do? Empty threats don't draw recruits; don't draw attention from the world; and don't build sympathy among the liberal enemies.
One of the most jaw-dropping horrific parts of the "War on Terrorism" is the stupid rainbow colored FUD meter. It's LITERALLY fear, uncertainty, and doubt that it spreads. Not to be offensively callous, but the death count from 9/11 rivaled one month of our nation's automobile fatalities. 2001 had 13 months of fatal car accidents, not 12, and the death toll from 9/11 is entirely accounted for.
It was a horrible event, don't get me wrong, but the other 270 million Americans don't REALLY need a color-coded FUD meter greeting them every morning with the day's headlines. Al-Qaeda doesn't use empty threats of terrorism; the American government uses empty threats of terrorism. Why? Because the Bush administration are the people who have something to gain from empty threats of terrorism. It's a PR device. It's advertising. It's marketing FUD.
Well, that about wraps up my blithering partisanship for the day. Just to balance it out, I wish I were voting for John McCain for President, but I'll settle for John Kerry.
Lidar in Utah (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Light Guns? We don't need no stinking light gun (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not a pilot, but I've done a fair bit of sailing; my last trip was a ~1500 nautical mile blue-water passage from the Azores back home to the Isle of Man. That's 12 days at sea, and even with four crew you spend a couple of hours on nightwatch per day. You're bound to encounter various situations where coloured light recognition is *very* useful, nearing on essential. For instance: you see a very large tanker directly ahead; the very fact that she's already over the horizon means that she's going to have a hard time stopping within those 5km, and probably hasn't seen you. You may need to get out of her way, and fast. While you can try hailing someone on the VHF or SSB, even with DSC some ships don't pay attention, and a surprisingly large amount of don't have their radar on all the time (due to the limited life magnetrons, I guess?). So, can you tell if he's actually coming towards you, or going away? Can you tell the configuration of the lights? Is that red or green on their port side? (Yes, you should be able to see their white aft light, but bulbs die.)
Personally, I wouldn't be 100% sure. My general daytime vision is pretty good, and I can usually tell what colour an object is, but low-intensity lights at night? Not with confidence. (Even with bino's.) On a ship it's not too bad: you have time to play with, so you can take a bearing, wait a minute and take another one, then calculate if she's on a collision; you can check the radar if you have it (we do); or you can piss off one of your crewmates by waking them up
Personally, I wouldn't be confident enough to pilot a plane at night. I'd imagine that things happen much faster compared to sailing (we travel an average of 6 knots an hour, and most motor vessels do 30kts tops) and that extra dimension of movement must make a lot of difference! Sailing's got plenty of procedures, knowledge requirements & useful instrumentation; I'd imagine that piloting has many more, so I guess what I'm interested in is whether you feel these would cover absolutely any situation that happened? I know that if it came down to it, if I was stuck on a boat by myself I'd be able to manage in spite of being colour-blind; can you say the same of yourself as a pilot?
(This isn't meant in a confrontational manner, I'm genuinely interested.)