There’s a number of stories on this but here’s one.
Any ideas on this? Sounds like the lasers are locking on and tracking planes. This is occuring in mulitple cities. How hard is it to get laser technology of this kind and shouldn’t the FBI be able to track this down pretty easily?
Sounds to me more like the press is distorting details of the incidents in order to make them more newsworthy. Locking a beam onto a window a mile or more away, and moving at ~300 mph would be pretty good trick. Unlike engines, windows don’t throw off a characteristic heat signature, so you’d probably have to rely on fancy optical recognition software.
I’ve had lasers shined at me from road bridges several times while driving. Should I worry that I’m an al-Qaeda target? And there’s far easier ways to take down planes. Plus, the cite is from Fox News, which in itself says plenty.
It sounds like what is freaking them out is that this seems to be a sophisticated, coordinated effort, ie. it’s not a kid with a $20 laser pointer.
Apparently not very hard at all.
I have a green laser pointer modified to about 15 mW of output, as opposed to the <5 mW of a Class IIIa. It’s bright enough to produce a visible beam in the dark. Not just a dot on the wall, but a beam in mid-air. Shooting into the night sky, the beam visibly travels for hundreds, if not thousands of feet. The total range you can apply a visible dot on something is on the order of 10,000 feet. So yeah, I could (but haven’t) pretty easily illuminate an airplane anywhere on its approach and landing. Although, at that range, the “dot” is as big as a Volkswagen. My point is that even I possess technology capable of doing what it says in the article.
Wht I find intersting is the supposed “tracking” that goes on. Putting a dot on any fast-moving object a few thousand feet away is awfully tricky. My guess, however, is that it’s still just kids (or stupid adults) having fun with common laser pointers—and apparently the more powerful green variety. All they’d need are somewhat steady hands or even a tripod mount. A visible mid-air beam from a green laser would certainly aid in aiming the thing if you were trying to illuminate a plane. For now, I think it’s more reasonable that the ability to “lock on” to the plane is being exaggerated by the media. I’d say it more of a case of some lucky shots, which are bound to happen from time to time. After all, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that an airplane descending into any metropolitan area has a couple of backyard laser pointers trained on it every time it lands.
Terrorists? Maybe…probably not.
Yokels with too much time on their hands? Far more likely.
Think Occams’s razor, folks.
The above reply contained much speculation and conjecture. That’s not the perfect GQ answer, but I’m simply exposing the possibilities. I left some anecdotal evidence that shows what commonly-available equipment is capable of, so the OP can draw his own conclusions. Also, don’t try this at home kids. 5 years in jail for messing with commercial aircraft!!!
The Pilot had some things to say about the Laser Terrorist Scare. (Registration required, you may have to watch a short ad.)
He (generously) estimates a 10% chance of success for such a scheme. What terrorist group would waste time and precious manpower on tactic with a 90% failure rate?
I wonder if a skilled person could modify one of those ‘goto’ auto-tracking telescopes
to point a laser at an airplane cockpit? 4º per second slew should be fast enough, but is the drive stable enough at high track rates, and is the autoguider software sufficiently kludgeable?
If the cost is close to zero, and the attempt can be repeated many times a day, then I would say any terrorist group wanting to bring down planes would be very interested in this, even if the success rate was only 1%.
I mean, how many planes land every day on a moderately large airport? If you could bring down one out of every hundred, that would be one crash every couple of days, if not more. Commercial air travel would be history in less than a week. And all that without having to find people who are a) willing to die for the cause and b) capable of getting on a plane without arousing suspicion. I suspect that even if (b) were not a problem, even Al Quaida does not have an infinite supply of (a) people, whereas a laser pointer and some batteries are easy enough to come by.
In short, we’d better hope that either the failure rate is MUCH higher than 90 or even 99%, or that there is a good defense against this.
We have talked about this before in GD, but it deserves repeating here. If a laser is even capable of blinding one pilot, it most also take out the other pilot or the plot is foiled. Also, if the pilot or co-pilot even has a few seconds warning from a missed shot, he/she could just direct the plane at an angle away from the laser for an approach at an alternate airport. Pilots are always prepared for such a scenario. It seems like a pretty crappy terrorist plan to me.
My point exactly.
The Laser Terrorists are a non-issue. Better to focus on real threats, such as Syrian Musicians who need to pee.
Not a chance. The software works by having you first align the scope, then calibrate it on a star or two After this, it will compensate for the earth’s rotation while viewing, or slew automatically to an object selected from the inventory. It doesn’t do any real “tracking”, as the movement of the celestial sphere is perfectly predictable. I imagine way larger telescopes (like, meter size or larger) might work this way, especially asteroid tracking systems would do this, but nothing non-custom that I can think of.
The considered opinion of this thread seems to indicate that it would not be terribly difficult to lase an aircraft on final approach, if the person doing the lasing can get in the right position. The closer one is to the landing point on a runway, the less relative motion one will see in an aircraft coming in to land. In fact, the aircraft will appear more or less stationary in one’s field of view, only getting larger and larger as it nears the ground.
However, we also agreed that it probably wouldn’t be terribly effective. The pilots on that thread agreed that we’d just execute a missed approach, and that it’d be pretty exceptional that such an attack would actually cause the plane to crash.
And yet, these scopes can be used to track such fast moving objects as the International space station, which do not follow the normal rotation of the celestial sphere. Plainly, an off the shelf got scope won’t do the job of tracking an airliner, but the devices are capable of more complex tasks than following a star as the earth turns under it.
Holy Crap!!! :eek: 
There’s more of a hobby there than I expected… all the links I could find there involved loading known orbital data on to PCs, which then drive a calibrated 'scope. I’m sure someone’s done something more then.
K - for the purposes of this thread though, you’d need to combine decent stepper motors (the 'scope tripod assembly would do nicely, but get rid of the controller) with some sort of image aquisition device (not very much magnification would be required, so ditch the actual telescope, say a decent digital camera or handicam), combine with a PC for control with some sort of homebrew image recognition software. (My friend made a lame face recognition program for a using an eigenface library he found somewhere, so we don’t have to start from scratch). And of course the high-power laser (available in 3-4 weeks, 2 days if you choose overnight air and it’s not grounded due to laser activity ;))
I still think it’s above your average n’eer do well. Decent terrorist ROI means they’re better off bulk mailing talcum powder. I think the only thing my list above is good for is adding digital telescope equipment to the same restricted list rocket motors are in the States.
There’s some pretty high-level software available off the shelf:
The above are pattern recognition tools, designed for manipulation of images rather than control of hardware, but it wouldn’t be real hard to translate a shift of “ten pixels up, three pixels right” into a control command for a motor system.
Maybe, but it’s not beyond the capabilities of the assholes who write computer viruses and spyware. Actually, given a fairly small amount of cash, you could probably employ a postgrad student to design and build the thing. They wouldn’t even have to know what it was going to be used for.