Yahoos with Wicked Lasers - strike again...

[dsli_jon]

^^ +1, in-spite of my personal-loathing for 'Wackhead Lasers'...

Someone should 'write a letter to the Editor' / educate them a bit, so at least what Anti-wicked-et al-ammo, out-there, will be accurate-ammo...

.. Adam?
j

[norty303]

If its under MPE, is a crime actually being committed? Are you allowed to shine a bright torch or light at an aircraft? I'm personally not seeing the difference here.

[dzodzo]

But there's no way in hell that a 1 watt laser fired out of an apartment balcony at a rotorcraft hovering at 800 ft ...

do you know if police copters have some exception from the general minimum flight levels (1000ft over populated areas)? or they comply to the "routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA"?

[White-Light]

If its under MPE, is a crime actually being committed? Are you allowed to shine a bright torch or light at an aircraft? I'm personally not seeing the difference here.

I believe in the UK it's an Offence under the general title of Reckless Endangerment of an Aircraft.

I believe there were plans to make it a specific offence but these were withdrawn in 2010 pending a European Wide Regulation. Looks as if we might still be waiting as I can't find anything on it!

[Jem]

I had marked this post with the intention of coming back to it when I had time to pen a proper reply. However, Adam (Buffo), has written an incredibly articulate post above that pretty much covers everything I would have said, particularly about the damage caused to the white of the eye. I'd already done the math on this one* and have spoken to a couple of our Opticians here, all of whom concur that the damage would not have been caused by the laser directly. As has already been stated, it is more likely this injury was caused by a surface abrasion, perhaps from the hand or glove of the victim.

Stuff like that doesn't make the story as interesting though. The press are all about wanting sensationalism these days, even at the expense of the actual truth of the matter.

Finally, let me just state that I am in no way condoning the actions of the idiot with the pointer. I just wish that the press would check their stories and report accurately.





* Well, I have to confess that I actually I used the iPhone app ('Laser NOHD' from LVR Safety) to do an approximate calculation

[norty303]

Well, I have to confess that I actually I used the iPhone app ('Laser NOHD' from LVR Safety) to do an approximate calculation

It's ok Jem, we won't make you show the 'workings'

[Jem]

Haha... I could do them, but i've got lazy these days. Much easier to whip out the iPhone and let that do the work (thank you James )

[Stuka]

While the articles undoubtedly need a bit of clarification and perhaps a bit more research on the part of the editors, the point in posting is, yet another incident of a dumbass using the all-too-easy-to-acquire, stupidly high-powered handhelds against an aircraft has made the news, this time documented fairly in-depth in one of the rotorcraft industry's widest-read and most-respected publications.

While most of us will never know the details of the medical findings concerning the injury (the actual article detailing the incident DOES mention that an opthalmologist was part of the medical evaluation that this was a "laser-related" injury), the article kind of highlights something I have always said about lasers pointed at aircraft, especially "low & slow" aircraft like helicopters ~ the potential disruption and actions this could cause in the cockpit is potentially MORE dangerous than any lasting injury that might be caused by the exposure to the laser. The low-altitude urban environment is one of the most unforgiving environments helicopter pilots can operate in, and a sudden distraction or temporary blinding by laser (or even high-power "conventional" light), whether a pencil-thin beam or cockpit full of light, could have potentially fatal consequences. If the injury received WAS caused by the reaction of the crewmember responding to the sudden flash in his eye, that is EXACTLY the kind of reaction that could lead to some unexpected and severe aircraft movement in an environment that offers very little room for error or indecision.

To address a couple of points some others brought up in the thread ~

Yes, it is a crime to shine lasers, spotlights, etc. at flying aircraft.
It's considered intentionally interfering with the operation or flight of an aircraft, and could be considered a federal offense.

Concerning the altitude restrictions -

These weren't out in an aircraft just over-flying a populated area; they were law enforcement performing their mission.
There are definitely altitude exceptions for law enforcement, medevac, and in some cases, military aircraft performing missions over populated areas, but with that comes a potentially huge increase in the hazards the aircrews are exposed to - like towers (it's amazing how many have burned-out marker lights), trees, wires - and dumbasses with high-powered spotlights and laser pointers.

That's my story and stance, and me and my 5,000 hours of single-engine helicopter flight time are sticking to it...