If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
I'm going to "Laser" a pilot.
Hello FBI surveillance software?
Anyway, I am now in possession of one brand new "Jasper" DPSS 5mw laser from bigha.com. That's the same laser used in the recent media hyped incidents at KTEB. I'm going to test the claims that pilots can be visually impaired empirically. (Guess who the pilot is.) The weather is perfect for his. -20 and clear. I plan to try it at distance of about 3500' which is as close as anyone is likely to get to a landing plane. I happen to work near a perfect stretch of parking lot (one of the best places in a busy metropolis to land if you really have to) which is perfect for this. It's very runway-like. I'm going to do three things: 1. Measure the size of the beam at a measured distance. 2. Look into the beam for about 500ms after conditioning my eyes to usual night flying light levels. 3. Have a skilled pistol marksman (cop friend) try to accurately hold the beam steady at a measured distance both free hand and with support and see what the wiggle area is. If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? moo |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
You're crazier than a bedbug. Hope you have a good source of slightly used
retinas. Bob Gardner "Happy Dog" wrote in message . .. Hello FBI surveillance software? Anyway, I am now in possession of one brand new "Jasper" DPSS 5mw laser from bigha.com. That's the same laser used in the recent media hyped incidents at KTEB. I'm going to test the claims that pilots can be visually impaired empirically. (Guess who the pilot is.) The weather is perfect for his. -20 and clear. I plan to try it at distance of about 3500' which is as close as anyone is likely to get to a landing plane. I happen to work near a perfect stretch of parking lot (one of the best places in a busy metropolis to land if you really have to) which is perfect for this. It's very runway-like. I'm going to do three things: 1. Measure the size of the beam at a measured distance. 2. Look into the beam for about 500ms after conditioning my eyes to usual night flying light levels. 3. Have a skilled pistol marksman (cop friend) try to accurately hold the beam steady at a measured distance both free hand and with support and see what the wiggle area is. If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? moo |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Happy Dog" wrote in message
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:W92dnXX_ Hello FBI surveillance software? Anyway, I am now in possession of one brand new "Jasper" DPSS 5mw laser from bigha.com. That's the same laser used in the recent media hyped incidents at KTEB. I'm going to test the claims that pilots can be visually impaired empirically. (Guess who the pilot is.) The weather is perfect for his. -20 and clear. I plan to try it at distance of about 3500' which is as close as anyone is likely to get to a landing plane. I happen to work near a perfect stretch of parking lot (one of the best places in a busy metropolis to land if you really have to) which is perfect for this. It's very runway-like. I'm going to do three things: 1. Measure the size of the beam at a measured distance. 2. Look into the beam for about 500ms after conditioning my eyes to usual night flying light levels. 3. Have a skilled pistol marksman (cop friend) try to accurately hold the beam steady at a measured distance both free hand and with support and see what the wiggle area is. If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? You're crazier than a bedbug. Hope you have a good source of slightly used retinas. There's no risk. I'm calculating safety margins for exposure with the assumption that the unit produces double its rated power. It'll still be bright though. moo |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Have fun. You'll see a fairly bright green flash, or halo, depending on
the aiming accuracy. Even with a 100 mW output, at 3500 feet any diode laser output will have expanded to many feet in diameter. You do the math. Retinal input will be on the order of 1 microwatt, assuming a 2 foot diameter beam at the reception distance. This entire laser blinding scam is a load of hogwash. My HP35 calculator had my initials burned into it's case with a 5 WATT argon laser about 30 years ago. You could put your hand into the beam at the output of the 1 meter long tube for several seconds before feeling any heat. Would I look into the beam? Hell no. Would I look into the beam of a 100 mW diode laser 3500 feet away? Hell yes. For as long as you'd like. $10 a minute. Of course, if I was a United pilot, I'd be looking for any way to recoup my pension...help, help, I've been shot in the eye by a laser!!! Pay me, pay me! And if I was a media weasel, I wouldn't even need an excuse to make up a story like this one. Happy Dog wrote: "Happy Dog" wrote in message "Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:W92dnXX_ Hello FBI surveillance software? Anyway, I am now in possession of one brand new "Jasper" DPSS 5mw laser from bigha.com. That's the same laser used in the recent media hyped incidents at KTEB. I'm going to test the claims that pilots can be visually impaired empirically. (Guess who the pilot is.) The weather is perfect for his. -20 and clear. I plan to try it at distance of about 3500' which is as close as anyone is likely to get to a landing plane. I happen to work near a perfect stretch of parking lot (one of the best places in a busy metropolis to land if you really have to) which is perfect for this. It's very runway-like. I'm going to do three things: 1. Measure the size of the beam at a measured distance. 2. Look into the beam for about 500ms after conditioning my eyes to usual night flying light levels. 3. Have a skilled pistol marksman (cop friend) try to accurately hold the beam steady at a measured distance both free hand and with support and see what the wiggle area is. If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? You're crazier than a bedbug. Hope you have a good source of slightly used retinas. There's no risk. I'm calculating safety margins for exposure with the assumption that the unit produces double its rated power. It'll still be bright though. moo |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Happy Dog. Why don't you get a spot on "Myth Busters". I'll fly and
you aim the laser. Then we can swap positions and show the entire world what a load of crap this entire laser thing is. Happy Dog wrote: Hello FBI surveillance software? Anyway, I am now in possession of one brand new "Jasper" DPSS 5mw laser from bigha.com. That's the same laser used in the recent media hyped incidents at KTEB. I'm going to test the claims that pilots can be visually impaired empirically. (Guess who the pilot is.) The weather is perfect for his. -20 and clear. I plan to try it at distance of about 3500' which is as close as anyone is likely to get to a landing plane. I happen to work near a perfect stretch of parking lot (one of the best places in a busy metropolis to land if you really have to) which is perfect for this. It's very runway-like. I'm going to do three things: 1. Measure the size of the beam at a measured distance. 2. Look into the beam for about 500ms after conditioning my eyes to usual night flying light levels. 3. Have a skilled pistol marksman (cop friend) try to accurately hold the beam steady at a measured distance both free hand and with support and see what the wiggle area is. If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? moo |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
If anyone else can think of anything else they'd like to see tried (no, not in *my* plane) please post it here. This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? moo How about: 1. Acquire a standard optometrist eye chart. [A television resolution chart would be a good substitute] 2. Before each exposure, determine visual acuity. 3. After each exposure, repeat acuity test 4. Start at a lower exposure duration and work up. [This may require performing the test(s) on separate nights] 5. Do the whole thing during the day, facing away from the sun. 6. Chart your work Hmmm, before step 1, check your medical insurance and have an optometrist or opthomalogist do a retinal scan, before and after. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Happy Dog wrote:
... This isn't meant to be a scientific experiment or to become information used instead of any government research or guidelines. OK? I think you are missing the point Happy Dog... Frying eyeballs at 3500ft with a 5mw device is not the question. I suspect the terrorists want to verify their ability to point a higher powered, possibly useful weapon. As usual, the news media is doing whatever they can to provide helpful feedback. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Rip" wrote in message news:lG
Hey Happy Dog. Why don't you get a spot on "Myth Busters". I'll fly and you aim the laser. Then we can swap positions and show the entire world what a load of crap this entire laser thing is. I *hate* publicity. Knock yourslef out. moo |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote in
1. Acquire a standard optometrist eye chart. [A television resolution chart would be a good substitute] 2. Before each exposure, determine visual acuity. 3. After each exposure, repeat acuity test 4. Start at a lower exposure duration and work up. [This may require performing the test(s) on separate nights] 5. Do the whole thing during the day, facing away from the sun. 6. Chart your work Hmmm, before step 1, check your medical insurance and have an optometrist or opthomalogist do a retinal scan, before and after. Apart from the retinal scan, pointless. The claim is that tiny lasers can blind pilots. It's bull****. There isn't even a valid theory behind it. My work is just entertainment. moo |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Happy Dog wrote:
"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote in Apart from the retinal scan, pointless. The claim is that tiny lasers can blind pilots. It's bull****. There isn't even a valid theory behind it. My work is just entertainment. moo Although I agree that it is impossible to hold a laser on a sufficiently small area at the distances described (a 1 degree fluctuation causing a ca. 90 ft. movement at 1 mile if my math is correct), there is valid theory behind it. Maximum permissible exposure when looking into a laser beam is a function of exposure time. For wavelengths of 400 nm to 1.4 um: [1] t = 1 ns to 2x10^-5 s MPE = 0.0005 mJ cm^-2 t = 2x10^-5 s to 10 s MPE = 1.8xt^(3/4) mJ cm^-2 t 10 s MPE = 10 mJ cm^-2 Laser device in question has a rated power of 5 mW. 1 W = 1 J/s 5 mW = 5 mJ/s Assuming under the worst case the beam spread results in a beam no bigger than 1 square centimeter (and there are 2.54 centimeters in an inch), the exposure NEVER exceeds the MPE, even for very long exposure times. In reality the beam spread is much greater. A device I tested has a beam spread of over 2 inches at 50 feet. How accurately must one be to hold the 1 cm beam on target at the target distance? Assuming a distance of 1 km, a 1 cm movement is equivalent to an angular displacement of: tan a = 1 cm / 1 km = 1 x 10^-2 / 1 x 10^3 = 1 x 10^-5 a =~ .00001 radians =~ 20 arc seconds So, the whole thing doesn't wash. The power is insufficient, the beam spread is too great, and the required pointing accuracy is too high. [1] Jurgen R. Meyer-Arendt, M.D., "Introduction to Classical and Modern Optics", 2nd ed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Sport Pilot inconsistency | frustrated flier | Piloting | 19 | September 10th 04 04:53 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Piloting | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |