Another laser flight incident

[Admin]

Another laser flight incident under investigation

 

Posted 1 hour 30 minutes ago

 

Updated 1 hour 26 minutes ago

 

Qantas Perth-Adelaide flight ... laser scare

 

• Audio: Peter Gibson of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority tells Matt Smith of the danger posed by lasers. (ABC News)
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

Police are investigating another case of a laser light being shone at an aircraft.

 

They say it involved a Qantas flight arriving in Adelaide from Perth at about 10:00pm ACST yesterday.

 

South Australian police say the light came from the area of Mount Crawford forest, just north-east of Adelaide.

 

Peter Gibson of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority says police have been using tougher laws in many states to deal with offenders who shine the lights toward the cockpits of aircraft.

 

"It's an incredibly irresponsible and silly thing to do - thankfully a number of people have now been caught around the country for doing this," he said.

 

"A number have been sent to jail and, if people keep doing it, more people will end up before the courts."

 

 

[Steve L]

Ian I think they need to make an even bigger example of them than they are doing at the moment. Maybe a front page mugshot along with the penalty on every newspaper possible. Just my thoughts I cant handle wankers.

 

steve

 

 

[Guest Peggy2]

Now as I see it, the only reason these fools shine lazers into the eyes of airline pilots it to try and bring the aircraft down and in my books thats attempted murder!!!

 

So why are these criminals only given a slap on the hand when caught?

 

 

[Downunder]

"Bringing down an aircraft"?

 

Must be some sort of terrorism law in there?

 

Hopefuly enough to put them away for a long time:thumb_up:

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

At least the CASA spokesman tells it like it is: "It's an incredibly irresponsible and silly thing to do".

 

Spare me the "attempted murder" and "terrorism" rubbish please, it's getting old and tired.

 

And of course the photo published with the article is a stock photo completely unrelated to this, or any, incident and unless the pilots involved say otherwise highly unlikely to be representative.

 

 

[Guest Peggy2]

Destroying the world trade centre was an incredibly irresponsible and silly thing to do also.....definately not cricket.

 

 

[Ben Longden]

Yes, Awfully ungentlemanly.

 

I think the poms of Elizabethan England had the right idea.. prisoners heads on sticks outside the tower of London.

 

While that may seem over the top, as you know I have been lazed while driving a car, and I really truly feel that jail time is warranted.

 

Its like the ferals who throw rocks onto cars from overpass bridges using the excuse ... "aawwww it was only a bit of fun".

 

Now the legislation has been changed for these 'fun seekers' and they face jail.

 

Ben

 

 

[Downunder]

Will it be

 

incredibly irresponsible and silly

after an airliner goes in?I think not.

Jump on the issue hard and fast NOW and the above may never happen.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Those we CASAs words, not mine. But obviously, the collective wisdom of recreationalflying.com is greater than that of CASA.

 

Seriously, you would compare shining a laser at an aircraft to hijacking one and flying it into a building? Really? Have you ever even seen a 5mw green laser at several kilometers away to base this opinion on?

 

Thousands of incidents like this worldwide every year, not a single accident or emergency ever. At several kilometers away, a little laser point has grown as big as a doorway, the momentary flash of which is no stronger than coming around a bend in the road and the car opposite leaving his high-beams on for a fraction too long. Those are the facts. Did you experience minutes of blindness and crash your car because of these things? Of course you didn't and nor should you assume laser pointers to have that effect an airline pilots.

 

If you intentionally speed, which often kills people, would you like to be sent to prison for years? Of course you don't, you just expect a fine and some points. So why should someone who thinks it is cool, without any intention to harm, to shine a laser at an aircraft get that kind of punishment?

 

And no, you can also not compare that to throwing rocks of bridges, something that regularly and consistently actually kills people.

 

In any case, the reality is that these things are NOT going to go away and the most useful and realistic thing that can be done to improve safety is for CASA, FAA, et al. to do proper research into the effects and dangers (which they seem to refuse to want to do) and then train pilots how to deal with them. "Making examples" out of a few misguided folks is not going to make the problem go away.

 

 

[Allan]

And letting idiots get away with it, will make it go away ?

 

?

 

?

 

thumb_down

 

 

[Guest Peggy2]

Those we CASAs words, not mine. But obviously, the collective wisdom of recreationalflying.com is greater than that of CASA..

I dont think many here would disagree with that;)

 

the most useful and realistic thing that can be done to improve safety is for CASA, FAA, et al. to do proper research into the effects and dangers (which they seem to refuse to want to do)

Why spend millions of dollars to find out what happens when an airline (or any) pilot is temorarily blinded or distracted at night especially when on an instrument approach in turbulant weather....its simple common sense.

And if it wasnt of any concern to the pilots, they wouldnt bother reporting it.

 

Whether its throwing rocks at passing cars for a bit of fun or speeding on public roads (without intending to kill other motorists of course:loopy:) or shining lazer beams at landing aircraft with hundreds of people onboard, the fact is its an act of criminal vandalism that can kill people and as other posters above agree, should be stopped at all cost even if it means making an example of someone.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

And letting idiots get away with it, will make it go away ?

Nope, but a punishment that fits the crime should do the trick. I have no problem with a grand or so in fines, community service, etc. And of course jail time if proven that there was intent to harm or for repeat offenders.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Why spend millions of dollars to find out what happens when an airline (or any) pilot is temorarily blinded or distracted at night especially when on an instrument approach in turbulant weather....its simple common sense.

It is simple common sense to do these tests and they will also not cost millions of dollars to perform. Just fly some IFR approaches with one pilot shielded under the hood and one looking out and describing what really happens.

If the powers that be do not do these tests, they do not understand the dangers and can not ask for strong penalties "just in case". Rules and punishments should not be based on gut feeling or "common sense", only cold, hard facts.

 

And if they don't do the tests, they can also not prepare pilots to deal with it.

 

I also disagree with "especially on instrument approach" - this is likely the safest time to be hit by a laser! First of all you are far less unlikely to be hit in the eyes as you will be looking at instruments rather than out the windscreen! Secondly, if you get a flash, it will likely be much quicker for your eyes to re-adjust to the light of the instruments than it would be doing a VFR approach on a dark night with less-than great approach/rwy lights.

 

The fact is its an act of criminal vandalism that can kill people and as other posters above agree, should be stopped at all cost even if it means making an example of someone.

Vandalism actually involves damaging or destroying something, hardly the case here. And why is it a fact that it can kill people? Please point me to the source of this fact.

As for "making an example", a fair justice system gives punishments that fit the crime, all the time, every time. Giving one person a harder penalty than another for the same offense to make an example? The thought alone disgusts me. How would you like to be made an example of for doing something potentially dangerous without you realising the danger and be put away for a couple of years - when nobody actually got hurt!

 

Is that the justice system you want for this country?

 

 

[newairly]

I agree that it is time that some rational discussion appeared to counter the hysteria about green lasers and aircraft.

 

This web page has a very understandable discussion about the real situation.

 

http://www.equipped.org/lasers_airliners.htm

 

There are many other authoritative sources that can be easily found by a Google search.

 

It is clear that 5mW class green laser pointers pose absolutely no threat to aircraft at any distance. Note that 5mW is 5 times the proposed maximum power to be allowed in Australia.

 

In addition note the discussion about the current use of lasers as distress beacons. The idea is that these can be shone at a search aircraft to take advantage of the superb visibility of these devices. No problems seen there it seems.

 

There is absolutely no need for action to be taken to ban these devices, or to charge people deliberately targeting aircraft because there is no risk to public safety. They should be charged with stupid behaviour perhaps! The only risk comes from the hysterical press reaction.

 

Phil

 

 

[Guest Peggy2]

An interesting review by a website that pushes the sale of guns, knives and you guessed it, lasers.

 

However Im more inclined to go with the research done by the US Department of Transport, Federal Aviation

 

Administration and the Office of Aerospace Medicine.

 

On November 29, 1996, a suspected laser beam illuminated a Skywest Airlines pilot during approach on flight 5410 into Los Angeles Airport (LAX). The Embraer EMB-120 was over a college campus on visual approach to LAX from Bakersfield, CA, when the incident occurred. The aircraft was on a right base leg, level at 6,000 feet MSL, when the captain was exposed to a bright light in his right eye while looking for downwind traffic through the right window. As the flight continued, the captain found it increasingly difficult to see because of the burning and tearing he was experiencing in that eye. On final approach, he relinquished control to the co-pilot who completed the landing. Examination revealed the pilot suffered multiple flash burns to his right cornea.

 

You can read the read the full PDF document at the link below.

 

www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/2000s/media/0409.pdf

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

the captain was exposed to a bright light in his right eye while looking for downwind traffic through the right window. As the flight continued, the captain found it increasingly difficult to see because of the burning and tearing he was experiencing in that eye. On final approach, he relinquished control to the co-pilot who completed the landing. Examination revealed the pilot suffered multiple flash burns to his right cornea.

There is not a chance at all that this was caused by your garden variety 5mw laser pointer. These take a 1 minute point-blank range exposure to do any damage at all and would do so on the retina, not the cornea; see this research on an actual human eye: http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2005-rst/2800.html

Laser pointers are specifically limited to 5mw by the US's FDA because they pose no danger to eyes even with short exposures at short distance.

 

More likely this was an accident with a military targeting laser or one being used for astronomical purposes, though the use of these is announced in NOTAMs.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

However Im more inclined to go with the research done by the US Department of Transport, Federal Aviation

 

Administration and the Office of Aerospace Medicine.

 

You can read the read the full PDF document at the link below.

 

www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/2000s/media/0409.pdf

That is a good document, it clearly shows that except for the most extreme of circumstances - 100 ft. AGL short-final and high power laser - there really is no issue.

Looking at a map, where this aircraft would have turning towards ADL and how far that is from Mount Crawford, the distance would have been between at least 5-10KM and at an angle where the pilots would have had to go out of their way to directly look into it. The FAA document you refer to suggests even at just 3KM, a 5 mw laser falls qualifies to be within the "Laser Free Zone" suggested for final approach. And in their testing, this was a sudden, direct hit to the eyes, all the time, every time lasting a full second - an extremely unlikely scenario in the real world where you would see a beam of light swerving, trying to find you and only possibly hitting you directly in the eye and for a much shorter period.

 

So for this type of laser to be a danger, you the "attacker" would pretty much have to be at the perimeter, have a very precise aim (like a gun scope) and aim at planes on short final. To me, that would clearly be malicious intent and the full force of the "interfering with the safe operation of an aircraft" law should apply.

 

But I don't think we need to invoke any terror laws or re-instate the death penalty for when little Johny tests out his new toy in Mount Crawford forrest...