Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Laser Pointer Store

laser prison

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
My last comment was directed at Thengine, not you Toaster. Read his post. He's the one talking about weed whacking with the tail rotor.. then claiming to be a safe pilot.

And yes. Picking 'fights', as you call it, is always amusing when your opponent is either calling other people out without offering any supporting evidence to back themselves up, or especially, giving multiple statements that conflict with each other... in the same post even.

It may make me an a$$, but people claiming to be stuff they aren't or knowingly spouting off wrong information as fact really gets on my nerves. I think that's a holdover from being a Delorean owner, since 99% of car guys seem to know absolutely nothing about the car, yet always end up spouting BS to their friends trying to sound all knowledgeable. They, like the online individuals who do it as well, don't particularly like me correcting them in front of their friends either.

On the subject of piloting. No i'm not a pilot yet. Yes I would like to be. And i've pretty much done everything in my power to begin that endeavor except actually putting hours in in a real plane. I'm even in the process of constructing a sim pit upstairs at work, (we own the whole building, but only use the upstairs for storage) and that project is down to just getting a matched set of three short throw projectors(two to go). Time and money are the only things stopping me from 'going for it' on the real thing, and mostly the former, since the nearest flight school is over an hour and a half away, and I work for a living already. The money I could find if I had the time, since I'd simply quit buying lasers and stuff for my other hobbies.

What it boils down to is I rarely jump into things like this unless i'm fairly confident my own knowledge on the subject is correct, and that other people are spewing BS.

And hey. Sometimes i'm the one that's wrong. I'm not infallible. I never claim to know everything and usually I don't mind being proven wrong. Since when it happens, it usually means I end up learning something about a subject i'm interested in. However on most forums it rarely happens because usually it's just one opinion countered with another and no facts are presented.

But on the above posts, I don't think it'd be too hard to find documentation to back up my 'debris in the tail rotor = bad' statement though.
 

Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
75
Likes
6
Points
8
Sometimes = twice in my 9 years of flying. Rotor blades and tail rotors can go through shrubbery and light branches without damage. Do you want to take the chance that they start eating large branches? no. Is it a large risk that your tail rotor will become damaged.. no.

I am below the curve when flying NOE, and an auto-rotation will most likely not be possible because I am 2 inches above the trees... Thanks for pointing that out. :rolleyes:

#1 I am a safe INSTRUCTOR pilot.

#2 Get some experience before calling other people liars..
What it boils down to is I rarely jump into things like this unless i'm fairly confident my own knowledge on the subject is correct, and that other people are spewing BS.
and
And you've shown no proof that you do either. At least i'm not claiming to be something i'm not, so until you prove you have experience flying yourself, then it's all opinions.

#3
I don't think it'd be too hard to find documentation to back up my 'debris in the tail rotor = bad' statement though.
Yep you got your facts straight on that one...
'debris in the tail rotor = bad'
You must be a capt. already.. Capt Obvious :rolleyes:

I am really surprised you wanted to "pick a fight" as Toaster put it.

#4
I'm honestly not sure why this topic is even being debated. Illuminating aircraft (as well as cars) is an exceedingly stupid thing to do. The technicalities about it don't really matter.
Yep you got your facts straight on that one...
"Illuminating aircraft (as well as cars) is an exceedingly stupid thing to do."
You must be a capt. already.. Capt Obvious :rolleyes:

Pointing lasers at machines with people inside them is stupid.. we have already said this, and thanks for re-affirming that. :rolleyes: People do stupid things all the time. That being said what is the proper punishment for the level of danger the pilots and drivers are exposed to?
If you don't want to debate this topic then feel free to leave. I enjoy the mathematics involved and wanted to point out that I don't feel that most lasers pose a credible safety risk to pilots except near the ground and on take-off and landing. It seems that the law and media take a knee-jerk reaction that ruins peoples lives. I would much rather they get probation and lots of community service then a new career as "soap picker-uppers" unless the risk is credible and/or the intent seriously malicious. You seem to be advocating all stupidity that MIGHT cause harm to people be rewarded with large amounts of time in prison. I can't agree with that as our prisons are already overcrowded and I don't need non-malicious lawbreakers taking my tax dollars.
 
Last edited:

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
#1 I am a safe INSTRUCTOR pilot.

#2 Get some experience before calling other people liars..
You do realize that, thus far.. You've show as much proof that your a pilot as I have that i'm a cup winning indy car driver.

Wanna prove it? I'll give you a shot. Come give me a lesson heh. I'll front the rental cost. :p

Pointing lasers at machines with people inside them is stupid.. we have already said this, and thanks for re-affirming that. :rolleyes: People do stupid things all the time. That being said what is the proper punishment for the level of danger the pilots and drivers are exposed to?
If you don't want to debate this topic then feel free to leave. I enjoy the mathematics involved and wanted to point out that I don't feel that most lasers pose a credible safety risk to pilots except near the ground and on take-off and landing. It seems that the law and media take a knee-jerk reaction that ruins peoples lives. I would much rather they get probation and lots of community service then a new career as "soap picker-uppers"
I won't argue this, and I haven't been arguing this. However I still feel like the more serious the repercussions, and the more they're flaunted in the media, the less the honest (but usually common sense lacking) citizens will be inclined to do it.

And i'd also rather be Captain Obvious than Captain BS.. That way people can't accuse you of making crap up to look important.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
75
Likes
6
Points
8
Griffin Helicopters | Video Player
Thats one guy that doesn't understand what NOE means.

I wouldn't give you a lesson. Not worth my time to fly with some pompous a$$ that thinks he can make accusations and demand proof of everyone he talks to on the internet.

I don't appreciate you making bold statements especially the 'debris in the tail rotor = bad' :rolleyes: Oversimplification with your paraphrasing = picking a fight.

Guess I got trolled but good.. my bad. :thanks:
 

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
So the pilot might lose sight but never damage and to pull a dangerous maneuver for a illuminated windshield make even less sense.
Its like say the sun was in your eye so you punched the gas to get out of its way, instead of just turning away from the source.
Heli are nice for the fact they can hover so if you lose sight you can stop moving and just wait, you dont have to worry about flying into anything as well as from the state of most windshield are scratched up it would be the same as putting leds around the window and then suddenly turning them on it might spook you but give your self a few second and your good.
Dont get me wrong that the guy did something dumb and needs to be punished but why put him in jail where i pay for him to be there?
Give him 100 hours of comunity service as well as some class to teach him what he did was wrong and end it.
Hes not a menace to society.
He can still work a job and pay taxes so we can keep the real menaces in jail.
Sometimes = twice in my 9 years of flying. Rotor blades and tail rotors can go through shrubbery and light branches without damage. Do you want to take the chance that they start eating large branches? no. Is it a large risk that your tail rotor will become damaged.. no.

I am below the curve when flying NOE, and an auto-rotation will most likely not be possible because I am 2 inches above the trees... Thanks for pointing that out. :rolleyes:

#1 I am a safe INSTRUCTOR pilot.

#2 Get some experience before calling other people liars..

and



#3
Yep you got your facts straight on that one...
'debris in the tail rotor = bad'
You must be a capt. already.. Capt Obvious :rolleyes:

I am really surprised you wanted to "pick a fight" as Toaster put it.

#4
Yep you got your facts straight on that one...
"Illuminating aircraft (as well as cars) is an exceedingly stupid thing to do."
You must be a capt. already.. Capt Obvious :rolleyes:

Pointing lasers at machines with people inside them is stupid.. we have already said this, and thanks for re-affirming that. :rolleyes: People do stupid things all the time. That being said what is the proper punishment for the level of danger the pilots and drivers are exposed to?
If you don't want to debate this topic then feel free to leave. I enjoy the mathematics involved and wanted to point out that I don't feel that most lasers pose a credible safety risk to pilots except near the ground and on take-off and landing. It seems that the law and media take a knee-jerk reaction that ruins peoples lives. I would much rather they get probation and lots of community service then a new career as "soap picker-uppers" unless the risk is credible and/or the intent seriously malicious. You seem to be advocating all stupidity that MIGHT cause harm to people be rewarded with large amounts of time in prison. I can't agree with that as our prisons are already overcrowded and I don't need non-malicious lawbreakers taking my tax dollars.
TheEngine, I wouldn't worry about it. Don't argue with idiots because they will beat you with experience.

Also I have been called a troll by other senior members so I am assuming that is what the community is like. They call everyone a troll that puts up a logical argument because they can't handle being wrong.
 

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
You weren't putting up a logical argument. You were taking laser safety as a joke. That WILL piss off most people here, as it did in that thread.

And please enlighten me as to what 'logical argument' Thengine gave? Everything i've said here has been backed up with what other KNOWN pilots have said, or other sources.. and some, from just plain common sense.

Typically the only people who refuse to prove they are who they say they are, are those that can't. And him proving it wouldn't involve any personal identification either. It could be done easily with a cellphone camera, a sheet of paper, and a trip to the airport he flys out of.. and since he claims to be an instructor.. he should be at the airport frequently enough that snapping some pics holding up an LPF sign while in the cockpit wouldn't take too much time out of his busy schedule now would it if he was flying anyway, which he should be doing regularly.. being an instructor and all.

It's not foolproof, but it'd be enough, since few airports will let just anyone show up and start wandering the tarmac and climb into aircraft.
 
Last edited:

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
It's not foolproof, but it'd be enough, since few airports will let just anyone show up and start wandering the tarmac and climb into aircraft.
Lol what a dumb ass thing to say, most public airports, anyone can drive in and look around. A few are locked with a code thing that is usually something simple like the frequency used for traffic.

No one can truly provide proof on the internet. You could maybe not even own a Delorean. Lol
 

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
Go try it sometime. Go try to climb in some random plane and I think you'll find yourself 'escorted off the property' pretty damn fast. I think you'll quickly discover that even local non controlled airports are watched better than you think. Aircraft aren't exactly cheap you know, and very few owners would leave something like that out with zero security.

And on the delorean comment, That's fairly easy for me to prove. I can go out in the shop right now and take any pic you requested of the car, with any kind of written sign requested.

Proof isn't that hard.. so long as your not lying through your teeth.

Kind of wonder how long before the mods close this thread though. This little 'debate' has absolutely nothing to do with the thread anymore after all.
 
Last edited:

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
Uh they aren't that expensive. A corvette or a new dodge charger costs more. My father in fact just bought a 152 for 15,000. So uh yeah.. And ok pierce county airport. KPLU if you will, No camera anywhere and there is no gate. and No one drives around. Many plane are on tie downs some are in hangers. So I don't know what to tell you.
 

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
I just know the two non-controlled airports in the vicinity both have someone there 24/7, as does the controlled one, but that's kind of a given, with the control tower and everything...

$15k for a 152 isn't bad if it's in decent shape. What's the year/hours/condition of it and what avionics does it have?

I looked at 172's a bit, but decided i'd really rather go the gyroplane/heli route, since then I could store it here and fly out of my back yard (or rather, the 60 acre field) and not have to deal with hangar fees, etc.
 

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
100 hours since total overhaul. 3000 since new.

I dont know what to tell you about the avionics. It has the standard 6. got a new Icom radio. Uh just got the annual done. oh a mount for my Garmin 496. Got two David clarks. what else, you wanna know what my physical was like? lol

Did you know that Helos don't actually fly? They are just so ugly that the earth repels them. (No offense Thengine:))

I fly piper Cherokee 235, hence the picture, <- eats gas, 15 gal/hour on climb lol. got that damn hershey bar wing
 
Last edited:

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
I cant take the credit :) It comes from my brother that flies a PC-12 in India. Here's a picture to prove:) He actually flew the Dalai Lama. (Not in this picture)

(Eh I removed the pic, wasn't my right to post it)

Oh here is one out the window over Nepal, I would like you to try to find this on Nat Geo :)

 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
75
Likes
6
Points
8
I was looking at the website Laser Pointer Safety - Tips on keeping laser pointers safe and legal and saw something I wanted to share:

Clint Jason Brenner, 36, was sentenced to two years in prison for hitting an Arizona police helicopter with a green laser pointer. On Dec. 9 2009, the helicopter was searching for a burglary suspect when “green laser light struck its windshield, causing glare that blinded the pilot for an instant.” Because “the light put the pilot and crew member in danger”, in April 2010 a jury found Brenner guilty of two counts of endangerment, which is a felony. On May 24, a judge sentenced Brenner to two years on each count, with the two 2-year terms to run concurrently. In addition, Brenner was ordered to pay $500 in court-related costs.

From the Prescott, Arizona Daily Courier


2 years, now thats some serious shit. I guess endangerment is the felony that the law can come after you with. :eek:

*EDIT*
Looks like they already did most of the work for us, this document details very nicely the risks involved for aviation and lasers:
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/LPSFiles/files/Lasers-and-aviation-safety_2pt2.pdf

It seems weird to me that 5mw poses an EYE HAZARD at 52 ft or less.. I think they may have been overestimating some of these numbers by a large factor. Also note that this is all "simulated", and not done as a real test.
That aside, the document is really well done.

*EDIT #2*
The Netherlands completed a very nice paper on high intensity light sources and included a 3.5 mw green. They said that the light sources posed no problem but the laser was worse then anticipated.. WOW! Only 3.5mw green at night and its WORSE then what they expected:
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/LPSFiles/files/TNO-DV 2009 C264.pdf

*EDIT #3*

 
Last edited:

qumefox

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
3,234
Likes
117
Points
0
Oh and I found a picture of Quemefox


You're just being insulting now. I've called people out several times in this thread, and requested some proof that they were what they were claiming, but show me ONE post of mine where i'm being insulting just for the sake of it?

This isn't a gamer forum or 4chan, so stop trolling, which is the only function that image serves.

btw. I only wish I had that much hair. :p
 
Last edited:

Toaster

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
1,249
Likes
38
Points
0
Dude I was just kidding, goodness. lol Damn now your trying to fight over a joke =P
 




Top