
Lasers should be classed as offensive weapons – British pilots' union - ascorbic
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35580261
======
omegant
As a commercial pilot that has been hit a number of times by lasers, I find
the report over the top. At the speed and distance the airplane is when hit
(180 kts, 2000' high when 6 miles from the airport), you see they are trying
to laser you, but is extremely difficult to fix the beam on you for more than
some ms. At that distance the laser is quite wide too, and the cristal
provides some protection. Also the beam comes from your side, and usually you
don't look directly that way, so it's hard yo get a direct retine hit. I don't
know what type of injury did the pilot suffer but all the cases that I know
the laser was just anoying and a distraction. It must be prosecuted, but
banning all lasers is stupid in my opinion.

~~~
Johnny555
So you're saying that the commercial pilot of Virgin Atlantic flight VS025
that called "pan pan pan" to request an urgent return to Heathrow was
overreacting and that his co-pilot suffered no serious vision loss? Note that
the laser strike was on takeoff and they didn't land until about 2 hours after
departure, so the pilot's vision was still affected an hour into the flight.

~~~
omegant
No, he maybe was hit badly, maybe was filling dizzy afterwards and they
thought the laser was the reason. I don't know all the possible effects of a
laser in a human eye, nor the power of this laser or the medical situation of
the pilot prior to the encounter.

Also if one of the pilots finds himself unable to continue the flight, the
other pilot has to declare pan pan, or even may day, as he is operating alone,
it seems a bit dramatic but it's mandated that way.

What I know is that common laser incidents are annoying to pilots but usually
harmless, and the pilot's association request to ban all lasers is over the
top.

You still got to prosecute the dumb people playing to blind pilots anyway, not
just for medical injuries, but because you are in a delicate parts of the
flight and every distraction has potential consequences during landing and
take-off.

------
p01926
Ludicrous authoritarianism masquerading as a solution to a problem.

Given that all laser pointers fall into a couple of very narrow bandwidths,
surely it would be more practicable to filter these at the cockpit window.
That way you solve the problem in every country where you fly your plane and
also deal with the billions of laser diodes already in circulation that are
essential most aspects of our modern existence. But that would cost air
carriers directly, not the public, so I guess it's unacceptable to them.

~~~
542458
With all due respect, what on earth are you talking about? The filtering idea
is much more complicated than you'd think, and almost certainly won't work.
Laser safety glasses are typically sold for specific wavelength sets. However,
the block isn't all that precise - typically you just filter out the entire
neighbourhood. Look at the Optical Density vs. Wavelength graphs on this page:
[https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=76...](https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=762)
. Now imagine trying to combine a whole bunch of those to cover all commonly
available laser diode wavelength groups. Your laser-proof glass would be
nearly opaque!

Even if we're extremely optimistic and have invented some new sort of very
precise optical filter, you're still looking at _dramatic_ reductions in
visible light transmission which I would have to believe would be a huge
safety implications.

~~~
p01926
[Airbus partners with Lamda Guard to evaluate an innovative laser strike
protection]([http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-
single/detail/a...](http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-
single/detail/airbus-partners-with-lamda-guard-to-evaluate-an-innovative-
laser-strike-protection/))

~~~
542458
Which is very cool, but still very experimental and appears to only block a
single frequency range (not what OP was proposing). I've also yet to see any
published specs at all for the stuff (i.e. what's the actual optical density
at those wavelengths?), so I'm a little skeptical still.

------
youngtaff
The thread from the Pilots equivalent of HN is worth a read -
[http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/574720-virgin-atlantic-
fl...](http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/574720-virgin-atlantic-flight-
london-ny-returns-after-pilot-hurt-laser-incident.html)

~~~
nvader
Thanks for the share, that was a very illuminating read (accidental pun).

As an aside, why do they all spell laser as "l@ser"? There's 3 instances of
"laser", two are from the title repeated, and one is in the body. This means
that that the common spelling is not banned or masked on that forum. Yet
everyone else spells it with the @ sign, about 79 times, which is egregious.

~~~
542458
[http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/349414-l-ser-attacks-
airc...](http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/349414-l-ser-attacks-
aircraft-14.html#post5092701)

It's to avoid all the contextual ads on the site being for high-powered
lasers, which some posters found irritating or offensive. I don't know why
some posts seem exempt from the policy though. Mod posts maybe?

------
hacker_9
What a knee jerk reaction. I agree that people shouldn't be shining lasers at
planes, but ban them outright? I think that really there just needs to more
education, and perhaps make people register if they want to buy the powerful
lasers, so there's some paper trail in an event like this.

~~~
brown9-2
Do you really think people who point lasers at a plane do so out of a lack of
education?

~~~
hacker_9
Well, of course. I imagine it's done to see if they can see it reflect off the
plane for amusement, not realizing that it could distract pilots and be
potentially fatal.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
It's mostly kids and not-so-smart young adults.

I built a laser show system about ten years ago, and managed to give myself
retinal burns with a fairly weak laser. So I'm aware of the dangers.

There are some incredibly powerful devices available now. IMO there's no
reason - beyond macho posturing - that anyone needs a handheld laser pointer
that puts out more than 50mW.

I wouldn't ban more powerful devices, but I'd certainly consider licensing
them. A 1W handheld is an insane thing to be selling to someone with no
training or oversight.

------
SeanDav
Not only are laser pointers potentially dangerous to pilots in aircraft, they
can, and do, cause retina damage - often between school kids playing around.
They should be licensed, with heavy fines for carrying an unlicensed laser
pointer and compulsory jail time for shining one at an aircraft.

Complete banning is somewhat ridiculous.

~~~
Ao7bei3s
So, do you want to ban wireless presenters or laser rangefinders?

Requiring a license for these would be akin to banning them. Except if
"holding a presentation" would be enough to get a license. In which case I
think the limit would be useless. Maybe limiting them to adults might help. On
the other hand, there are plenty of other ways for children to do stupid,
permanently harmful things; and exactly the children that shouldn't be let
near lasers would probably be able to find some anyway, so... I don't think
the licensing idea would work.

And shining lasers at aircraft already carries a jail term.

And maybe the power limits could be made somewhat (much, actually) stricter.

~~~
ascorbic
They can be restricted based on power or class. A Class 2 laser pointer used
for presentations or a laser rangefinder aren't going to be powerful enough to
bother aircraft, nor in most cases to damage eyesight. Currently there is a
voluntary code to not sell lasers over 1mW to the general public, but this
isn't a legal requirement.

------
dudifordMann
Sounds like a fun OpenCV type project to use a camera onboard in conjunction
with the airplane's gps position,altitude, and camera's orientation to locate
the source of the laser and prosecute accordingly.

~~~
fucking_tragedy
Prosecution based on such information has been done frequently in the past.
Basic geometry convicted a man near me about 6 years ago for shining a green
laser pointer at a pilot taking off at a local air force base.

Don't shine lasers at pilots from your backyard.

------
dozzie
So are bows, knives, clubs, and vehicles. Should they be banned, too?

~~~
dalore
Well knives are banned. And you need a license for vehicles. So a license for
lasers?

~~~
dozzie
> Well knives are banned.

I'm surprised. You can't own a kitchen knife? Or a hunting knife? Or pocket
knife?

~~~
qb45
This is what I found.

[https://www.gov.uk/buying-carrying-knives](https://www.gov.uk/buying-
carrying-knives)

It seems that you still can use one at home, but good luck trying to take a
knife to a forest.

Also, no sales of switchblades and samurai swords :)

~~~
gknoy
I find it really interesting that the blade lengths are given in inches ((3
inches or less") rather than 7 or 8 cm.

~~~
Symbiote
That law comes from the Criminal Justice Act 1988:
[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/139](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/139)

Some legislation has been updated with metric measurements (example [1]), but
not everything. This one is newer than metrication, but perhaps the length was
based on something that existed before, like a police or sentencing guideline.

[1]
[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/21/schedule/1](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/21/schedule/1)

------
nvader
Awesome but impractical idea: require every laser over a certain wattage to
encode in very short pulses its own serial number. On first purchase and every
resale, owners much register and transfer ownership.

Now, whenever such an incident happens, a bit of footage is all you'll need to
prosecute the owner.

Shortcomings: cost of implementation, real or alleged theft, aftermarket
modifications to mask the pulses, imported lasers, people who don't fear
repercussions.

------
astazangasta
How is it possible that there are enough people buying powerful lasers and
shining them at planes that they are hitting them often enough for this to be
a problem? There must be either a lot of dumb people or a few very smart,
vicious ones. Which is it? How did "Craig Ryan" do it?

~~~
ascorbic
Probably half a dozen people would be enough to cause all of the cases that
are currently being reported. The chart in the article says there's been
around 40 incidents at Heathrow in the first half of 2015. One person could
cause all of those in 20 minutes.

------
arikrak
I doubt that standard weak laser pointers could harm pilots much at such
distances. However it makes sense to ban/regulate stronger laser pointers,
since they don't have practical value for an ordinary consumer.

~~~
RIMR
I bought a 1W ultraviolet laser pointer and thought it was cool, but
disappointed with how dim it was. Then it destroyed the CCD in a digital
camera after a brief exposure, and I threw that shit away because it dawned on
me that it was 200x more powerful than my 5mw red laser, and 99%+ of the light
was invisible and that I was playing with something extremely dangerous.

It should have been obvious from how quickly the batteries drained, or how
much heat I could feel from the beam, or how bright that dot looked when I
pointed it at something UV-reactive.

------
Shivetya
So is there no way to treat the windshield to deflect the laser light? If not
then pushing towards fully autonomous landings and takeoffs is a better
solution to trying to ban something you could never realistically ban. Either
that or create detection systems if possible that can direct authorities

~~~
JulianMorrison
Treated windshields can block chosen wavelengths. But it's mutually exclusive,
what blocks blue and green doesn't block red, etc. Unless you replace the
glass with steel sheet and switch to camera optics.

------
MisterBastahrd
These people need to grow the hell up, or wear protective glasses in the
cockpit, whatever. Being able to target a plane, at all, and THEN also
targeting the cockpit window is well beyond the capability of the vast
majority of people. This is like asking that we ban spoons because somebody
managed to actually cut another person's heart out with one.

------
benbojangles
Nanny State UK

~~~
nailer
Your comment is accurate, but you need supporting messages for it to be an
actual argument.

The Times has an article about a nine year old boy, ___already blind in one
eye_ __, being given as laser pointer by his parents as a toy. The child
damaged his working eye, and the parents felt comfortable enough in their own
actions to speak to a national newspaper about it.

Edit: Times version is paywalled, but here's Daily Mail:

> Nine-year-old William Jackson was injured two years ago by one of three
> devices bought for him and his two brothers by their parents as a Christmas
> present.

> The schoolboy, who is now 12, already had a lazy right eye and wore an eye
> patch. The injury to his other eye left him unable to read.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3393159/Laser-
pens-b...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3393159/Laser-pens-blind-
children-causing-eye-experts-call-new-laws-deal-powerful-devices-brought-UK-
abroad.html)

Times paywall URL:
[http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/ar...](http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1654673.ece)

