SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the promoting-laser-beams-on-sharks dept.
A Virgin Atlantic flight from London's Heathrow Airport destined for New York was forced to return following a "laser beam incident":
A flight heading to New York turned back to London Heathrow Airport after a "laser beam incident", Virgin Atlantic has confirmed. A crew member is recorded saying to Irish air traffic control that they had a "medical issue with one of the pilots after a laser incident after take-off". It happened at 20:13 GMT, shortly after take-off, the company said, before flight VS025 returned as a precaution. There were 252 passengers and 15 crew on board. Metropolitan Police tweeted: "Aircraft forced to return to Heathrow after being hit by a laser strike... #laserstrike CAD4."
[...] A new law introduced in 2010 means people could be charged with "shining a light at an aircraft in flight so as to dazzle the pilot".
Janet Alexander, a commercial airline pilot, said shining a laser beam into a cockpit was a very dangerous thing to do. "It's unfortunately becoming an increasingly problematic occurrence. It's very like a lightning strike in that it's very instantaneous, very, very bright light, which is dazzling basically," she said. "And of course if it's targeted in exactly the wrong way you could permanently damage someone's sight."
A total of 414 "laser incidents" in the UK were reported to the Civil Aviation Authority between January and June 2015. The highest number of them was at London Heathrow Airport - 48 were reported during this period. In 2014, there were 1,440 incidents in the UK, with 168 at Heathrow, according to the CAA.
The British Airline Pilots Association (Balpa) has called for lasers to be classified as "offensive weapons" and banned in the UK, following the Virgin Atlantic flight VS025 laser incident. Members cite the frequency of laser incidents and say the 2010 legislation on lasers isn't tough enough.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 18 2016, @07:32PM
cockpit windows are designed to afford good view of the ground
When was the last time you were in a cockpit? This is not true at all, especially in a commercial airliner. While you can see the ground several miles away from an aircraft, you cannot see the ground immediately under the aircraft even if you stand up out of your seat. Also note the body of the aircraft is much wider (and beneath) the cockpit windows [authentic-airliners.de].
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Thursday February 18 2016, @11:14PM
While you can see the ground several miles away from an aircraft
That depends how high you are, don't it?
you cannot see the ground immediately under the aircraft even if you stand up out of your seat.
Good job lasers only work when pointed straight up then, isn't it? Oh, wait...
The forward view through a 747-400 cockpit window lets you look about 20 degrees downward. Side windows likely more.
And even if you can't actually get a direct bead on a pilot's eye, the kind of ridiculously bright lasers we're talking about can still screw with your night vision when they're shone into a darkened cockpit.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 18 2016, @11:50PM
The forward view through a 747-400 cockpit window lets you look about 20 degrees downward.
So calculate 20 degrees from this flight map [bbci.co.uk]. I'm guessing some ship in the middle of the N. Atlantic managed to hit a plane at its cruise altitude of 30,000+ft. How far was the ship from the plane, and how weak was the beam when it hit? Oh ok, let's take a different approach. Apparently the poor pilot received the "injury" about 6-7 miles after leaving LHR, and suffered his "blindness", brave soul, all the way past Ireland before deciding that he absolutely had to turn back because of his injury.
Fortunately we have the log [flightaware.com]. It seems he was cleared up to 11,000 feet initially, climbing at around a pretty standard 2-3000ft/min. He was doing 270 knots which is about 4.5nm per minute. Apparently he was "hit" about 7 miles from the airport, so after about 2 mins. At that point he was at 4,100 ft altitude. Let's ignore the 10 degree pitch due to the climb for a minute. Do you care to figure out how far away that laser had to have been, with your 20% field of view, for him to see it?
As for night vision - while yes it's true that pilots try to conserve their night vision, it's no longer critical. Commercial airlines fly under instrument flight rules (IFR) at night, and the instruments are quite bright enough to see even without night vision. It is absolutely not a critical factor. But either way, the pilot bravely persevered for well over an hour before deciding to turn back. It takes about 6 seconds for night vision to begin to return.
Don't get me wrong. I am much happier to know that some disgruntled pilot, for whatever reason, didn't feel like flying to New York that night and happened upon some excuse to turn his plane around than to read about a suicidal pilot who decided to plunge 400 people into the N. Atlantic. However that doesn't change the fact that he's a lying BASTARD and that the laser "threat" is being blown, once again, out of all proportion.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday February 19 2016, @12:06AM
I'm guessing some ship in the middle of the N. Atlantic managed to hit a plane at its cruise altitude of 30,000+ft.
That's not what happened.
Oh ok, let's take a different approach. Apparently the poor pilot received the "injury" about 6-7 miles after leaving LHR
So you do know what happened? Why were you talking about the plane getting hit over the Atlantic when you knew that wasn't the caes.
Let's ignore the 10 degree pitch due to the climb for a minute. Do you care to figure out how far away that laser had to have been, with your 20% field of view, for him to see it?
I said the forward view lets you see 20 degrees down. Planes have side windows as well. The view from them is likely wider - I couldn't find numbers, but it's a reasonble assumption - and not affected by climb angle.
Do you care to calculate how far you can shine a laser before it stops being an impediment to vision, bearing in mind that you have no idea how powerful the laser that was actually used was?
However that doesn't change the fact that he's a lying BASTARD and that the laser "threat" is being blown, once again, out of all proportion.
You have no more idea about what actually happened than I do, but you've settled on your conclusion and are assuming that all the other data, even that which you don't have, already fits your conclusion.
For all I know, the pilot could have caught a glancing "blow" from a laser which dazzled him briefly but was worrying enough to cause his blood pressure to increase and give him palpitations - reason enough for turning back a flight. Or his medical condition could ultimately turn out to be completely unrelated. He might have suffered a coincidental detached retina. Who knows? I don't, and nor do you.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 19 2016, @12:31AM
cause his blood pressure to increase and give him palpitations
In which case he should be grounded. Heart problems disqualify you from a private pilot's license, let alone a commercial pilot's license. My conclusion is that I've had laser pointers shined direcly at my eyes by aggressive university lecturers from less than 10 feet away and somehow my eyesight seems to have survived. I think the pilot is a liar.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 19 2016, @12:32AM
Detached retina?? Do you think ISIS hit him with a laser canon?
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday February 19 2016, @08:38AM
Learn to read. I said coincidental. Not that I think that's likely; I was merely pointing out that his "medical condition" (about which we have ZERO information) could turn out to be unrelated to the laser.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 19 2016, @04:16PM
So in other words, having NO EFFING IDEA what happened, you threw out a made up medical diagnosis based on NOTHING.
It adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday February 19 2016, @05:00PM
For god's sake...
I did that precisely to highlight the fact that no-one has any idea what happened.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday February 19 2016, @07:51AM
You have no more idea about what actually happened than I do, but you've settled on your conclusion and are assuming that all the other data, even that which you don't have, already fits your conclusion.
Well he is an Anonymous Coward, after all. What did you expect? Actual information, and reasoned argument?