No, they’re not. Little matters of turbulence, and the fact that no two pilots are going to approach the runway in exactly the same fashion.
Let’s say you’ve decided that you know THAT PLACE where the plane is going to pass through on the way to the runway. But, whoopsie, there’s turbulence, or the pilot is slightly off the optimum flight path, or whatever. So the plane in fact passes a few feet above or below THAT PLACE. (Doesn’t have to be much…the cockpit window is not that tall.) So you have to adjust your aim, with very little time to do so.
And right there is the problem. A minute adjustment of the target point several miles away translates into an unbelievably minute adjustment of the laser. Unless the plane is exactly on your predicted flight path, you’re going to have to make a very minute adjustment of your aim on the fly. And, as I already said in the post I linked to, the precision of that adjustment needs to be enormous: a fraction of an inch of error at your end will translate into dozens of feet of error at the target end.
You keep going on about duck shooting, but I suspect that you don’t actually hunt ducks from a distance of several miles away. We’re talking about hunting ducks at La Guardia airport from a duck blind in Central Park, or duck at LAX from a blind somewhere near Santa Monica. A moving target at that distance, even a smoothly moving one, is not the same as a moving target at a closer distance, even a randomly moving one.
The fact that anyone is succeeding in this stunt at all suggests to me that the effect Finagle mentioned is coming into play: namely, that the beam is spreading out over that great distance, effectively increasing the diameter of the target (while at the same time decreasing the intensity of the laser dramatically).
First I should say that I also don’t agree that shinning a laser at an aircraft is a useful terrorist tactic, the only thing I’m arguing about is the idea that it is incredibly difficult to do it.
Turbulence. You choose a calm day. Turbulence isn’t some kind of random phenomena, it is generally caused–at the altitudes we are talking about–by wind being disturbed by ground objects or thermals. Do your deed on a cool calm day and there will be no turbulence.
Approach. You’d be surprised by just how accurate approaches are flown. Regardless, it doesn’t matter if the aircraft is slightly high or slightly low on the approach, you’ve been able to observe its approach path from the moment it turned finals, you can make minor adjustements before it gets to your spot. Or you have your laser on a tripod and just track the aircraft all the way down it’s approach. You have a telescopic sight on it calibrated to whatever distance you think is most useful. You have the whole thing disguised as survey equipment or even just a camera.
Well, if they really only do a manual landing “rarely” then I’ll make sure not to get a job with whatever airline it is they fly for.
This act doesn’t need to be done in the US though. It would be just as effective (or ineffective, see my first comment) if performed on a UAL 747 filled with 400 passengers landing at Sydney.
The point you make about the autoland is valid in one respect. Even if the pilots were landing manually at an autoland capable airport, they could conduct a missed approach and setup an autoland for the next approach with the assistance of anyone who doesn’t have spots floating around in front of their eyes.
Err . . . a rhetorical question perhaps aimed, since everyone here is discussing the technical feasibility of the event, at those actually committing the offense?
If you’ll notice in my post above, any question I might have had for an individual here was so directed, whereupon he then responded in kind.
NPR reports this morning that there has now been a momentous increase in the number of reported events involving lasers targeting cockpits, so take your pick.
If you think glueing a laser to a telescope and popping the telescope onto a tripod is “nigh on impossible” then you must have an extraordinarily mundane life. Cripes I’m surprised that you even believe that aircraft can get off the ground.
Fact: People have shined lasers into cockpits and it has at the least distracted the pilots, it has been done.
Opinion: This is not a particularly useful terrorist tactic.