So... hear the latest about "lasers"? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Stompy · 12-10-2004, 06:47 PM

I can't believe no one's posted this.

It's pretty hilarious because they're being serious about it. I thought it was a joke: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/09/ter....ap/index.html

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Terrorists may seek to down aircraft by shining powerful lasers into cockpits to blind pilots during landing approaches, U.S. officials warned in a bulletin distributed nationwide.

The memo, sent by the FBI and the Homeland Security Department, says there is evidence that terrorists have explored using lasers as weapons.

There is no specific intelligence indicating al Qaeda or other groups might use lasers in the United States, they added.

"Although lasers are not proven methods of attack like improvised explosive devices and hijackings, terrorist groups overseas have expressed interest in using these devices against human sight," the memo said.

"In certain circumstances, if laser weapons adversely affect the eyesight of both pilot and co-pilot during a non-instrument approach, there is a risk of airliner crash," the agencies said.

In September a pilot for Delta Air Lines reported an eye injury from a laser beam shone into the cockpit during a landing approach in Salt Lake City, Utah. The incident occurred about 5 miles (9 kilometers) from the airport. The plane landed safely.

FBI and other federal officials are investigating. It is not clear if a crime was committed or if the laser was directed into the cockpit by accident.

Steve Luckey, a retired airline pilot who is chairman of the Air Line Pilots Association's national security committee, said pilots are concerned about a recent increase in laser incidents, but do not know what to make of them. He said he has learned of two or three cases in the past 90 days.

"The most recent incidents appear to be aimed at pilots in the vicinity of airports," Luckey said. "A few seem to be intentional, and we're wondering why and what's going on."

Lasers can cause temporary blindness and severely damage the eye by burning the retina. The bulletin notes they are "relatively inexpensive, portable, easy to conceal and readily available on the open market."

Lasers are commonly used in a number of industries and are featured in outdoor light shows. A variety of more powerful military-grade lasers are produced around the world, but there is no evidence that terrorist groups have managed to obtain one, according to federal officials.

The bulletin was sent late last month to law enforcement officials and key government agencies and industries. A copy was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.

Hahaha, seriously now... a terrorist is gonna fire a laser into a cockpit HOW exactly? Sittin over yonder on a hill trying to snipe a laser into something thousands of feet away? Oh gee, not suspicious at all

They might as well just come out with a report saying, "Evidence of black magic found on terrorist site, terrorists may try to summon satan to attack pilots"

Trust me, planes are far from their todo list at this point.. it's great how we pour all this money and focus all of our attention onto PLANES while we're leaving pretty much everything else wiiiiiide open.

The conservative media is getting a bit ridiculous with the fear mongering these days.

JJRousseau · 12-10-2004, 06:55 PM

While I agree with your last two lines, the use of lasers to blind a flight crew in the final moments of flight is possible and potentially dangerous, particualrly with older technology airplanes.

Irishsean · 12-10-2004, 07:45 PM

Old news... Similar stuff was posted months ago...

theusername · 12-10-2004, 08:06 PM

It's not a joke to me. No they're not going to "fire" a laser. but like JJ said, use lasers to blind a flight crew during the landing. The fact that they have made it public so now anyone who wants to bring down a plane can know how, eh not so smart.

To clarify, what I meant by that was, that a lot of these "warnings" also help provide suggestions for groups that may have not even thought of it until the american media announced it as a possibility.

Aborted · 12-10-2004, 08:29 PM

I'm not so sure that "everyone who wants to bring down a plane" would have access to the kind of laser required to pull something like this off (does such a laser even exist!?), and even "organised" terrorists would have a hard time of it. Add to this the logistical nightmare of setting it up and you're left with a completely inefficient and not-a-little-weird type of terrorist attack. I mean what are they supposed to do? Sprint down the runway brandishing laser pens obtained from christmas crackers?

Besides, terrorists want their work to be noticed, so I find it unlikely that they'd favour such a subtle method of bringing down a plane over firing a simple rocket for all to see.

CandleInTheDark · 12-10-2004, 09:15 PM

I wonder what works better, the flying saucer or star adapter?

fckm · 12-10-2004, 09:30 PM

I'm not sure that a portable laser powerful enough to do this exists outside of the US military.
EDIT:
In theory it certainly is possible, but very very complicated.

Lebell · 12-10-2004, 09:31 PM

Since pilots have been temporarily blinded by lasers in the past, I fail to see why this is a laughing matter.

When the Luxor hotel first opened, the pyramid panned the sky with lasers. Then they were forced to stop. Can anyone guess what forced them to stop?

Stompy · 12-10-2004, 10:44 PM

The thing is, it's highly improbable.

Anything can happen. I'm not saying it can't, there's just no need to make a news story about anything and everything a terrorist "could do".

sob · 12-10-2004, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

I can't believe no one's posted this.

It's pretty hilarious because they're being serious about it. I thought it was a joke: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/09/ter....ap/index.html

Hahaha, seriously now... a terrorist is gonna fire a laser into a cockpit HOW exactly? Sittin over yonder on a hill trying to snipe a laser into something thousands of feet away? Oh gee, not suspicious at all

They might as well just come out with a report saying, "Evidence of black magic found on terrorist site, terrorists may try to summon satan to attack pilots"

Trust me, planes are far from their todo list at this point.. it's great how we pour all this money and focus all of our attention onto PLANES while we're leaving pretty much everything else wiiiiiide open.

The conservative media is getting a bit ridiculous with the fear mongering these days.

I'm still not sure this isn't a troll, but I'll go ahead and post a couple of links relating an incident in 1997. I assume that will take out the usual "Neocon" rants.

Laser 1

Quote:

Russian ship's laser caused eye injury, Navy officer says

"WASHINGTON - A U.S. naval-intelligence officer says he may be losing sight in his right eye because of a laser beam that hit him as he flew over a Russian cargo ship in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

Lt. Jack Daly told a House Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday that he and the pilot of a Canadian surveillance helicopter suffered "irreparable eye damage."

Daly said he was photographing the Russian ship, which he suspected of spying on U.S. submarines, when the episode occurred.

The Pentagon investigated Daly's claims and concluded from medical examinations that the injuries to his eye were consistent with retinal damage from a low-power laser. But it said there was "no evidence" to prove it was a laser. No laser was found on the ship, and the Russian captain denied having any such equipment.

Daly said he remains convinced that the Russian vessel, the Kapitan Man, directed a laser beam at their helicopter on April 4, 1997, in the strait.

He also told lawmakers he is not surprised that a U.S. Coast Guard and naval-intelligence team could not find any laser when it boarded the ship three days later in Tacoma. He said the Russian captain was given 24 hours warning of the search.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the Armed Services procurement subcommittee, accused the Clinton administration of bureaucratic bungling in allowing the Russian captain to have so much advance notice.

Hunter called for banning all Russian ships from Puget Sound and other waters close to submarine bases.

Daly, wearing glasses, testified that he had perfect vision before the incident. Now, he has 24-hour pain in his right eye, cannot drive at night and cannot go to the movies or night ball games in stadiums with bright lights.

Laser 2

Quote:

Trial begins in Russian-laser case
Attorneys for U.S. Navy officer say 1997 attack was intentional
Posted: October 10, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jon Dougherty
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

Attorneys for a decorated U.S. Navy intelligence officer have told a federal court in Seattle that the crew of a Russian vessel believed on a spying mission intentionally fired a laser at a Canadian air force helicopter sent to photograph the ship, permanently injuring the officer and the pilot.

Larry Klayman, president and chief general counsel for the nonprofit legal group Judicial Watch, said Cmdr. Jack Daly, then a lieutenant, was injured when the crew of the Kapitan Man allegedly fired a laser at him as the ship laid off Puget Sound near Washington state five years ago.

Daly is suing the Far Eastern Shipping Company, known by the acronym FESCO, in U.S. district court. FESCO is a Russian company headquartered in Vladivostok and owned in part by the Russian government. Two other defendants – FESCO Agencies N.A. Inc. and FESCO Intermodal Inc. – are companies wholly owned by FESCO. The company is represented by attorney Marc Warner.

The April 4, 1997, incident occurred when Daly was a passenger in a Canadian military CH-124 "Sea King" helicopter piloted by Canadian Capt. Patrick Barnes.

Around noon, Klayman said, the Russian vessel was in U.S. territorial waters, five nautical miles north of Port Angeles, Wash., and was proceeding east in the inbound lane of the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the Port of Tacoma.

"Not coincidentally, the USS Ohio, a U.S. nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine, had left the Bangor, Wash., submarine base and was heading out to sea through the Strait of Juan de Fuca in the same vicinity as the Kapitan Man," Klayman told the jury of seven women and three men on Monday.

The Russian ship passed within 1,000 yards of the surfaced submarine, he said.

The Kapitan Man had a history of languishing in the narrow straits, usually when nuclear subs were traversing the area. The ship's actions raised suspicions and prompted the Navy to investigate. Daly's mission was to photograph the vessel for later inspection by intelligence teams.

Daly and Barnes made several passes at the ship. Within hours after the helicopter returned to its base near Victoria, British Columbia, both men exhibited signs that their eyes had been exposed to a laser. The next morning, both awoke with blood in the whites of their eyes.

The officers eventually were examined by Dr. David Scales, a now-retired Air Force ophthalmologist and retinologist, at the U.S. Army Medical Research Detachment, or USMRD, in San Antonio, Texas, the Pentagon's center of expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of laser injuries.

Scales is considered an expert in the field and one of only a few doctors in the world who have studied the effect of weapons-grade laser injuries. He found lesions in the right eye of Daly but none in Barnes', though he believes the beam of the laser may have been amplified as it entered the lens of Daly's camera.

While manuvering the helicopter, Barnes also looked directly at the ship, but because he was flying – and not taking photographs – the sun visor on his helmet was down, which may have blunted the laser beam. His injury was such that he said yesterday during testimony the Canadian government gave him a 15 percent increase in his pension.

Tests showed the men were most likely hit with a Neodymium YAG laser, according to a USMRD analysis.

In late 1998, Daly followed up with Dr. Howard Cohen, an ophthalmologist specializing in laser eye injuries. Cohen, who had previously helped found the USMRD's laser trauma center in the early 1990s in San Francisco, found six to seven threshold lesions on the retina of Daly's right eye and another two threshold lesions on the retina of his left eye. These lesions are permanent, Cohen believes, and are characteristic of laser scars.

Shortly after the incident, Coast Guard teams were given two hours to search the vessel but did not locate a laser. Teams were not given full access to the ship, however, and the Clinton administration had warned the Russian government in advance the ship would be searched.

And here's a little medical literature:

Laser 3

It's from the United States Naval Flight Surgeon Handbook: 2nd Edition 1998

I'm having a very hard time seeing the humor in eye damage of others. I've seen temporary bannings for less.

Konichiwaneko · 12-11-2004, 02:34 AM

when it comes to weaponry I tend not to say "Improbable"

I mean look at hellfire missles, ballistic armor, oxygen removal bombs and so forth. Things that are normally sci-fi become real when it comes to weapon

WillyPete · 12-11-2004, 02:45 AM

Soldiers are also provided with goggles to protect against lasers. A tank armed with a laser range finder could do it.

Tom Clancy had some of his characters bring down some aircraft in one of his books using a tightly focussed light that sent the crew into epileptic fits.
In the same book, a Japanese airline captain flies his fully fueled 747 into the Capitol building.

If an author can think of it and has researched it and found it to be plausible, why not a terrorist?

There so much a terrorist could do. It's most likely some bored kids just sitting on the hood of their cars under the approach path of the aircraft. Bored mormon kids. They can't drink so they may as well blind people.

trickyy · 12-11-2004, 05:53 AM

but really, why is this news? true, maybe some hero can stop an evil laser operator because they knew what to look for. but it just doesn't seem to do more than frighten regular people and help terrorists brainstorm.

is our food supply safe? what about all those containers coming into the country? are power facilities amply protected?
some may be valid concerns, but it starts to wear on you after a while.

WillyPete · 12-11-2004, 06:06 AM

Welcome to the real world.
Take our word for it, you get used to it in a while and the only real problem is the trip to work when another bomb stops traffic or trains.

It'll soon become old news.

Ilow · 12-11-2004, 08:45 AM

I would say say that the idea of a terrorist attempting to use a laser is plausible, but probably not at the top of their list. BTW, are all landings non-instrument? Frankly, I'm just living to hear Georgie W. talk about the issue in a Dr. Evil voice.

irateplatypus · 12-11-2004, 08:50 AM

if it actually happened i'm sure stompy would be one of the first to blame the grossly negligent Bush administration for ignoring the warnings.

Stompy · 12-11-2004, 12:43 PM

Warnings like "Osama Bin Laden is planning a major attack soon in the US" is vastly different from those of:

"Terrorists COULD put a flammable bar of soap in a gigantic slingshot the size of a house and aim it at the engine in an attempt to blow up the plane!!!"

It's highly improbable, not news worthy. Maybe for the onion, but not for CNN. There are many more realistic scenarios a terrorist COULD do other than firing a fuckin LASER at pilots!

It's funny that people actually take this seriously... "omg, but it COULD HAPPEN!" Looks like we can easily pick apart those who fall subject to these stories

Tarl Cabot · 12-11-2004, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

Warnings like "Osama Bin Laden is planning a major attack soon in the US" is vastly different from those of:

"Terrorists COULD put a flammable bar of soap in a gigantic slingshot the size of a house and aim it at the engine in an attempt to blow up the plane!!!"

It's highly improbable, not news worthy. Maybe for the onion, but not for CNN. There are many more realistic scenarios a terrorist COULD do other than firing a fuckin LASER at pilots!

It's funny that people actually take this seriously... "omg, but it COULD HAPPEN!" Looks like we can easily pick apart those who fall subject to these stories

You have yet to provide anything that establishes the improbability, or even difficulty, of using lasers in the manner suggested.

Can we expect any verification from you in this regard, or is your ridicule of the idea to be all we need?

trickyy · 12-11-2004, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyPete

Welcome to the real world.
Take our word for it, you get used to it in a while and the only real problem is the trip to work when another bomb stops traffic or trains.

It'll soon become old news.

i guess it's debatable whether these warnings are defining attributes of the real world. sure, certain real events make people pay attention, but so far the warnings themselves have served little purpose save overblown news items.

i can't avoid a peripheral knowledge of these things, but i certainly don't dwell events that have a 0.00...0001% chance of happening (and a negligible chance of affecting me directly). i'd argue that reality is not contained in hyped commercial teasers, despite their ubiquitous nature in our lives. although i attempt to ignore them, it is nearly impossible to do so without ignoring the news altogether.

Ustwo · 12-11-2004, 02:41 PM

I hear the terrorists are going to use sharks with lasers on their heads.

trickyy · 12-11-2004, 02:45 PM

ok, here is one way to look at this (from a post of mine a weeks back).
if terrorists completely destroyed a mall each month, the odds of your resulting death is still negligible.
now, we are assuming that one mall WILL be destroyed monthly.
if you agree that the event of a laser interfering with a pilot is less likely (again, we assume 100% chance of a mall destroyed monthly), you can see how important this laser scare actually is.

you die from laser + plane < hypothetical monthly mall destruction kills you
??? < 6 million to 1

http://www.anxietyandstress.com/sys...whataretheodds/

Quote:

Dealing rationally with the risks of terrorism is hard for several reasons. First, human beings are bad at assessing small risks of large catastrophes.
Second, the actual risk of being a terror victim is not merely small—it is unknown and unknowable.

...

What all this adds up to is a strong suspicion that we are not doing too little about terrorism: we are probably doing too much. Our initial instincts are overly risk averse; the danger probably looms larger than it should. A crazed terrorist's next move is going to be a surprise: the burdens we impose on ourselves out of hindsight from the last episode are unlikely to be the ones hindsight will recommend after the next one. We can be skeptical about the warnings of terrorism "experts." They have a psychological or even financial interest in erring on the side of panic.

...

What are the odds of dying on our next flight or next trip to a shopping mall? There are more than 40,000 malls in this country, and each is open about 75 hours per week. If a person shopped for two hours each week and terrorists were able to destroy one mall per week, the odds of being at the wrong place at the wrong time would be approximately 1.5 million to 1. If terrorists destroyed one mall each month, the odds would climb to one in 6 million. This assumes the total destruction of the entire mall; if that unlikely event didn't occur, the odds would become even more favorable.

...

Ustwo · 12-11-2004, 02:50 PM

If terrorists killed 2 million people in the US, you would still have less than a 1% chance of dying.

Does that mean we shouldn't be concerned?

jwoody · 12-11-2004, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarl Cabot

You have yet to provide anything that establishes the improbability, or even difficulty, of using lasers in the manner suggested.

Can we expect any verification from you in this regard, or is your ridicule of the idea to be all we need?

Seriously, I can't figure out how it would be possible to shine a laser into a pilot's eyes unless the laser was at a higher altitude than the cockpit of the aircraft.

I feel a diagram coming on...

Ustwo · 12-11-2004, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwoody

Seriously, I can't figure out how it would be possible to shine a laser into a pilot's eyes unless the laser was at a higher altitude than the cockpit of the aircraft.

I feel a diagram coming on...

Odds are the time you would do it would be when the plane was landing and the nose was pitched down. This would also be the most effective time as well.

jwoody · 12-11-2004, 03:25 PM

Exhibit A:

Manx · 12-11-2004, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

If terrorists killed 2 million people in the US, you would still have less than a 1% chance of dying.

Does that mean we shouldn't be concerned?

1% would be a lot. If I had a 1% chance of winning a $50 million lottery, I'd be playing it constantly. As is, I never play the lottery and my chances of winning are about the same as if I did.

Terrorism is nothing to be concerned about, to the degree that this country is concerned about it. But it damn sure makes a mighty fine Machiavellian method of controlling the populace. Be afraid! Be very afraid! I will protect you!

What about crazy drivers? Now they're dangerous, even with all the laws and regulations we have in place to reduce the killing they produce. Let's ban all cars.

And don't forget farmers' alamancs.

sob · 12-11-2004, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

Terrorism is nothing to be concerned about, to the degree that this country is concerned about it. But it damn sure makes a mighty fine Machiavellian method of controlling the populace. Be afraid! Be very afraid! I will protect you!

Why does that last sentence remind me of John Kerry?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

What about crazy drivers? Now they're dangerous, even with all the laws and regulations we have in place to reduce the killing they produce. Let's ban all cars.

And that one reminds me of gun control laws.

Guess it all comes down to who owns that ox.

Manx · 12-11-2004, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

Why does that last sentence remind me of John Kerry?

Probably because you're confusing Dick "Mushroom Cloud" Cheney or George "Imminent Threat" Bush or Tom "Terror Alert! Terror Alert!" Ridge with Kerry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

And that one reminds me of gun control laws.

Let's ban all Muslims.

blitz.fenix · 12-11-2004, 07:26 PM

Hold on here though..wouldn't they have a better chance shooting at the plane with FLAK than with a "laser" and how massive would this laser have to be. Would it look like a flak emplacement, because it wouldn't be conspicous by any means.

Ustwo · 12-11-2004, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blitz.fenix

Hold on here though..wouldn't they have a better chance shooting at the plane with FLAK than with a "laser" and how massive would this laser have to be. Would it look like a flak emplacement, because it wouldn't be conspicous by any means.

Trick with a laser is that it would be pretty hard to trace to the source. You try using a pom-pom gun and see how long before they find ya :P

Rekna · 12-11-2004, 08:51 PM

Ok I have seen professors unable to keep a laser correctly possitioned on a still projection from 20 feet away. So terrorists are going to be able to hit something the size of a nickel from large distances that is moving at 100+ miles an hour?

ObieX · 12-11-2004, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwoody

Exhibit A:

That is friggin hilarious

Such detail, the only thing missing is a turbin

trickyy · 12-12-2004, 12:07 AM

sure, if terrorism was happening regularly we would be concerned with more than just our own lives. but i really don't think those numbers are misleading.

1:6,000,000 is roughly 0.000 016 667 %. chance of being struck by lightning is between 2 and 20 times greater (depending who you ask). chance of dying in a car accident is about 1:250 (0.4%). regardless, if you don't worry about lightning, you shouldn't worry about le threat du jour. of course, it's not my place to make up your mind. this is just simple math, but perhaps even that is debatable here.

not that our leaders should be complacent. they should do their best given their resources to protect us from legit issues. the average person, however, could calm down a bit.

Stompy · 12-12-2004, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarl Cabot

You have yet to provide anything that establishes the improbability, or even difficulty, of using lasers in the manner suggested.

Can we expect any verification from you in this regard, or is your ridicule of the idea to be all we need?

That's like asking me to prove the improbability of the flammable bar of soap... I really don't think you need statistics, detailed diagrams, or a detailed report from scientists at MIT to understand how absurd and improbable it is.

Whatever happened to common sense and using your head?

The point of this thread is... why report on something ridiculous like LASERS? "Terrorists could use lasers to blind pilots! It was in a Tom Clancy novel, so it's GOTTA be realistic!" Come on now...

"Terrorists COULD be stealing your identity online, getting advanced plastic surgery to mimic someone you know, and infiltrating your family in an attempt to kill you"

"Terrorists COULD sprinkle anthrax into the Quaker Oatmeal factory, infecting millions of americans across the country"

Where does it end?

Do you not understand that this casues unnecessary paranoia? People are so obsessed with terrorists after 9/11, but they don't realize that they were INCREDIBLY lucky to even get away with THAT!

As open and unmonitored as most of our borders are, if the terrorists were even a fraction as smart or tactical as the media is leading us to believe, as if they were this underground cult of genius madmen, there would have been another attack somewhere by now.

They have nothing.

I'm not saying turn your back and ignore the problem all "ho hum", but damn, there's really no need for these kind of reports. They serve no purpose to the general public except fear and paranoia in the back of your mind of "Shit, next time I could get on a plane, terrorists could blind the pilot!!"

Why is that so hard to understand?

blitz.fenix · 12-12-2004, 01:02 PM

Also, my Bulgarian friend keeps mentioning an incident where Russia was attacked by the Chinese army and supposedly the army totally disapeared. He goes on to explain that the Russians used a "laser" and that is why there were no survivors. I don't believe him one bit but now that there is this topic I thought I should bring it up for discussion.

MSD · 12-12-2004, 09:53 PM

I'm still more concerned about a terrorist with a few syringes full of BSE-infected blood running around and sticking them in whole herds of beef cattle..

sob · 12-12-2004, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

That's like asking me to prove the improbability of the flammable bar of soap... I really don't think you need statistics, detailed diagrams, or a detailed report from scientists at MIT to understand how absurd and improbable it is.

Good thing, because you won't get them.

I don't plan to post the entire web pages, but here are two links: One from a Marine Major, and another from Boeing. They both disagree with you.

Boeing

Marine

Quote:

Whatever happened to common sense and using your head?

What ever happened to accuracy in posting?

Quote:

They have nothing.

Better tell that to Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. Oh, and you can tell the world that Article 1 of the Geneva Convention's Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons is unnecessary.

New Scientist

Quote:

Why is that so hard to understand?

I was thinking the exact same thing myself.

Stompy · 12-13-2004, 08:33 AM

sob, you're completely missing the point.

I'm sure there are tons of articles you can find with google that describe using lasers as potential weapons, just like I'm sure there are tons of articles on how terrorists can use plastic surgery in an attempt to steal an official's identity. Just because you link to something doesn't make it factual or any more realistic.

I said multiple times that sure, the possibility is there, but not very likely.

Regardless, it remains a very silly thing to report on.

[edit]
Perfect example: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5626850/

How bout another? http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/...3002/221502375

Wee, this is fun! http://www.bjhc.co.uk/news/1/2004/n41203.htm

http://www.interesting-people.org/ar.../msg00020.html

I really could go on and on... understand what I'm trying to say now?

Locobot · 12-13-2004, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwoody

Exhibit A:

LMFAO! Great diagram. I had a similiar thought myself, "wouldn't they have to be above the level of the cockpit?" Maybe it would be possible with a nearby building or mountain, but then the distance would be immense. Pilots are perfectly capable of landing the plane without looking out the cockpit as well; though once you detected an attack like this it would probably be too late.

Personally I'm much more worried about the mundane and unspectacular types of attacks that are more likely: food poisoning, anthrax, BSE in our cattle stocks (lets not give them any bright ideas now!), etc.

ObieX · 12-13-2004, 10:01 AM

BSE = mad cow disease? If so, all you'd need is one messed up cow and every country around will be boycotting your meat. Just ask Canada eh.

12-10-2004, 07:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
Irishsean edited for content Location: Austin, TX	Old news... Similar stuff was posted months ago... __________________ There are no absolute rules of conduct, either in peace or war. Everything depends on circumstances. Leon Trotsky

12-10-2004, 08:06 PM	#4 (permalink)
theusername Insane	It's not a joke to me. No they're not going to "fire" a laser. but like JJ said, use lasers to blind a flight crew during the landing. The fact that they have made it public so now anyone who wants to bring down a plane can know how, eh not so smart. To clarify, what I meant by that was, that a lot of these "warnings" also help provide suggestions for groups that may have not even thought of it until the american media announced it as a possibility. __________________ ? Last edited by theusername; 12-10-2004 at 09:10 PM..

12-10-2004, 09:15 PM	#6 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	I wonder what works better, the flying saucer or star adapter? __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

12-10-2004, 09:30 PM	#7 (permalink)
fckm Insane Location: Ithaca, New York	I'm not sure that a portable laser powerful enough to do this exists outside of the US military. EDIT: In theory it certainly is possible, but very very complicated. __________________ And if you say to me tomorrow, oh what fun it all would be. Then what's to stop us, pretty baby. But What Is And What Should Never Be.

12-10-2004, 09:31 PM	#8 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Since pilots have been temporarily blinded by lasers in the past, I fail to see why this is a laughing matter. When the Luxor hotel first opened, the pyramid panned the sky with lasers. Then they were forced to stop. Can anyone guess what forced them to stop? __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

12-10-2004, 06:55 PM	#2 (permalink)
JJRousseau Psycho Location: Vancouver, Canada	While I agree with your last two lines, the use of lasers to blind a flight crew in the final moments of flight is possible and potentially dangerous, particualrly with older technology airplanes.

12-10-2004, 08:29 PM	#5 (permalink)
Aborted Tilted Location: London	I'm not so sure that "everyone who wants to bring down a plane" would have access to the kind of laser required to pull something like this off (does such a laser even exist!?), and even "organised" terrorists would have a hard time of it. Add to this the logistical nightmare of setting it up and you're left with a completely inefficient and not-a-little-weird type of terrorist attack. I mean what are they supposed to do? Sprint down the runway brandishing laser pens obtained from christmas crackers? Besides, terrorists want their work to be noticed, so I find it unlikely that they'd favour such a subtle method of bringing down a plane over firing a simple rocket for all to see.

12-10-2004, 10:44 PM	#9 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	The thing is, it's highly improbable. Anything can happen. I'm not saying it can't, there's just no need to make a news story about anything and everything a terrorist "could do". __________________ I love lamp.

12-11-2004, 02:34 AM	#11 (permalink)
Konichiwaneko The Dreaded Pixel Nazi Location: Inside my camera	when it comes to weaponry I tend not to say "Improbable" I mean look at hellfire missles, ballistic armor, oxygen removal bombs and so forth. Things that are normally sci-fi become real when it comes to weapon __________________ Hesitate. Pull me in. Breath on breath. Skin on skin. Loving deep. Falling fast. All right here. Let this last. Here with our lips locked tight. Baby the time is right for us... to forget about us.

12-11-2004, 02:45 AM	#12 (permalink)
WillyPete Addict	Soldiers are also provided with goggles to protect against lasers. A tank armed with a laser range finder could do it. Tom Clancy had some of his characters bring down some aircraft in one of his books using a tightly focussed light that sent the crew into epileptic fits. In the same book, a Japanese airline captain flies his fully fueled 747 into the Capitol building. If an author can think of it and has researched it and found it to be plausible, why not a terrorist? There so much a terrorist could do. It's most likely some bored kids just sitting on the hood of their cars under the approach path of the aircraft. Bored mormon kids. They can't drink so they may as well blind people.

12-11-2004, 05:53 AM	#13 (permalink)
trickyy ►	but really, why is this news? true, maybe some hero can stop an evil laser operator because they knew what to look for. but it just doesn't seem to do more than frighten regular people and help terrorists brainstorm. is our food supply safe? what about all those containers coming into the country? are power facilities amply protected? some may be valid concerns, but it starts to wear on you after a while.

12-11-2004, 06:06 AM	#14 (permalink)
WillyPete Addict	Welcome to the real world. Take our word for it, you get used to it in a while and the only real problem is the trip to work when another bomb stops traffic or trains. It'll soon become old news.

12-11-2004, 08:45 AM	#15 (permalink)
Ilow Junkie Location: Pats country	I would say say that the idea of a terrorist attempting to use a laser is plausible, but probably not at the top of their list. BTW, are all landings non-instrument? Frankly, I'm just living to hear Georgie W. talk about the issue in a Dr. Evil voice. __________________ "Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about" --Sam Harris

12-11-2004, 08:50 AM	#16 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	if it actually happened i'm sure stompy would be one of the first to blame the grossly negligent Bush administration for ignoring the warnings. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

12-11-2004, 12:43 PM	#17 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	Warnings like "Osama Bin Laden is planning a major attack soon in the US" is vastly different from those of: "Terrorists COULD put a flammable bar of soap in a gigantic slingshot the size of a house and aim it at the engine in an attempt to blow up the plane!!!" It's highly improbable, not news worthy. Maybe for the onion, but not for CNN. There are many more realistic scenarios a terrorist COULD do other than firing a fuckin LASER at pilots! It's funny that people actually take this seriously... "omg, but it COULD HAPPEN!" Looks like we can easily pick apart those who fall subject to these stories __________________ I love lamp. Last edited by Stompy; 12-11-2004 at 12:46 PM..

12-11-2004, 02:41 PM	#20 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I hear the terrorists are going to use sharks with lasers on their heads. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

12-11-2004, 02:50 PM	#22 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	If terrorists killed 2 million people in the US, you would still have less than a 1% chance of dying. Does that mean we shouldn't be concerned? __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

12-11-2004, 03:25 PM	#25 (permalink)
jwoody Shackle Me Not Location: Newcastle - England.	Exhibit A:

12-11-2004, 07:26 PM	#29 (permalink)
blitz.fenix Insane Location: Toronto	Hold on here though..wouldn't they have a better chance shooting at the plane with FLAK than with a "laser" and how massive would this laser have to be. Would it look like a flak emplacement, because it wouldn't be conspicous by any means.

12-11-2004, 08:51 PM	#31 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	Ok I have seen professors unable to keep a laser correctly possitioned on a still projection from 20 feet away. So terrorists are going to be able to hit something the size of a nickel from large distances that is moving at 100+ miles an hour?

12-12-2004, 12:07 AM	#33 (permalink)
trickyy ►	sure, if terrorism was happening regularly we would be concerned with more than just our own lives. but i really don't think those numbers are misleading. 1:6,000,000 is roughly 0.000 016 667 %. chance of being struck by lightning is between 2 and 20 times greater (depending who you ask). chance of dying in a car accident is about 1:250 (0.4%). regardless, if you don't worry about lightning, you shouldn't worry about le threat du jour. of course, it's not my place to make up your mind. this is just simple math, but perhaps even that is debatable here. not that our leaders should be complacent. they should do their best given their resources to protect us from legit issues. the average person, however, could calm down a bit.

12-12-2004, 01:02 PM	#35 (permalink)
blitz.fenix Insane Location: Toronto	Also, my Bulgarian friend keeps mentioning an incident where Russia was attacked by the Chinese army and supposedly the army totally disapeared. He goes on to explain that the Russians used a "laser" and that is why there were no survivors. I don't believe him one bit but now that there is this topic I thought I should bring it up for discussion.

12-12-2004, 09:53 PM	#36 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	I'm still more concerned about a terrorist with a few syringes full of BSE-infected blood running around and sticking them in whole herds of beef cattle..

12-13-2004, 08:33 AM	#38 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	sob, you're completely missing the point. I'm sure there are tons of articles you can find with google that describe using lasers as potential weapons, just like I'm sure there are tons of articles on how terrorists can use plastic surgery in an attempt to steal an official's identity. Just because you link to something doesn't make it factual or any more realistic. I said multiple times that sure, the possibility is there, but not very likely. Regardless, it remains a very silly thing to report on. [edit] Perfect example: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5626850/ How bout another? http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/...3002/221502375 Wee, this is fun! http://www.bjhc.co.uk/news/1/2004/n41203.htm http://www.interesting-people.org/ar.../msg00020.html I really could go on and on... understand what I'm trying to say now? __________________ I love lamp. Last edited by Stompy; 12-13-2004 at 08:40 AM..

12-13-2004, 10:01 AM	#40 (permalink)
ObieX Pickles Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)	BSE = mad cow disease? If so, all you'd need is one messed up cow and every country around will be boycotting your meat. Just ask Canada eh. __________________ We Must Dissent.