Wow, this explains it all! I currently live on the beach in Dakar Sénégal. About 2 weeks ago, I was up late on my balcony and saw these dazzling green lights coming from really far out in the ocean. For one I was wondering what it was, and two, I was surprised that the green lights seemed to be coming from so far out from the ocean, but yet they were lighting up the beach like someone was standing right there with a flash light. And I'm talking super far!
I had a hunch that it might be military related. It was fascinating to see how powerful the green lights were after they bounced off the water and hit the sand.
I'm so glad I caught this article here. I was going nuts for a while there lol
The youtube channel smarter every day is doing a series about live aboard a nuclear attack sub (different class than the one in the article, Los Angeles class IIRC) during an exercise where they navigate under ice, called ICEX. which might be of interest if you like this article. It's obviously propaganda but it is very interesting nonetheless.
I upvoted your child comment re: propaganda and I agree with it. I just also want to say to folks who might be turned off by that, his channel is super interesting!
Laminar flow, the physics of weed whackers and lawn mowers, rocket-powered golf clubs, eliminating poop splash, VR gloves and treadmills, touring a rocket factory and seeing a launch...he’s got a lot for geeks to like in there!
I’m not helping my case here, but he also has a good talk about being a science guy who is also a Christian in a field where that’s often dismissed reflexively as irrational. Probably only worth watching after you explore the channel and wonder about the Bible reference displayed briefly at the end of them.
Two side observations unrelated to the laser rifle:
1) It's surprising or kind of amusing that such a huge and complex submarine uses plain old Raytheon / Raymarine radar when operating in harbor, etc. as if were just a little sailboat. But whatever works and is effective! I wonder how it has to be dismantled and put up, taken down each time? Perhaps it's mostly for being visible to other ships/monitoring stations? I recalled hearing that a sub is never in such places without accompanying surface fleet/tugs/etc anyway.
2) Looking at the periscope mast, the amount of technological sophistication in that thing must be incredible. The amount of communications (radio, laser, metallurgy, stealth coatings, etc) gadgetry there I'm sure would boggle the mind. Yet it all goes to the theme -- here is a boat worth many billions of $ and the pinnacle of US military sophistication, being put into the hands and trust of mostly 20-something young sailors, and mostly without incident. Truly amazing that we're able to do that.
Using a cheapo radar gives a military target better "obvious" cover from electronical intelligence. As radars use active emmissions, they can be characterized and profiled. At range a civilian grade radar will not be fired upon in war without confirmation and in peace they can be used to hide your actual wartime radar capabilities and characteristics
> It's surprising or kind of amusing that such a huge and complex submarine uses plain old Raytheon / Raymarine radar when operating in harbor
Stealth ships and aircraft won't turn on the fancy toys when they are in predictable locations to avoid adversaries being able to collect and analyze signals intelligence.
>It's surprising or kind of amusing that such a huge and complex submarine uses plain old Raytheon / Raymarine radar when operating in harbor, etc. as if were just a little sailboat.
A warship has a lot more manpower (as well as highly refined policy/procedure) to get the most out of that cheapo radar.
The truly amazing thing it to consider that this boat is an iteration of an analog design which matured over 80 years ago.
When we consider the design characteristics of those older boats we can truly appreciate how much knowledge we had to build from scratch and glean from failure in order to get where we are today.
Unfortunately the US Navy has been beset by incident. Navigation of its ships is no longer a certain thing. Look for coverage on this matter which mentions the McCain and the Fitzgerald.
That Raymarine unit is a secondary piece of equipment, and is there primarily for its transponder capabilities, which the primary radar unit (the AN/BPS-16, which I believe is integrated into the masts) probably doesn't have. The last thing a submarine wants is an enhanced "here I am!" capability.
Submarines, in general, rely primarily on their passive sensors- passive sonar and EW receivers. A submarine's best offensive and defensive capability is stealth.
So the clarification (easily determined from the subtitle, as well as the article body), is that this is a dazzler meant to temporarily blind or distract.
It's not a sci fi laser rifle that cuts things. This is very different from star wars (the missile defense program), or star wars (the movie).
Makes sense. The 10/22 is indestructible and proven. I've had one since I was 10 and put at least 20000 rounds through it and cleaned it once. It almost never jams.
Laser pointers for Sphinx scale cats. Very informative article too. The quoted "it won't blind people, really" verbiage smells a lot like bullshit, doesn't it?
The bit about "unequivocal, cross-cultural warning" tho, that i buy. A more pointed way of saying "I see you" than launching a flare.
Seems very similar to the DC special flight rules area warning device, which was introduced to cut down the number of incidents of aircraft unintentionally erring into the DC SFRA resulting in expensive things like fighters being scrambled.
It's basically the same idea as a control tower's light gun sending the red/green "extreme caution" signal but it's laser-based to work at long range. They refuse to give much in the way of details, it's not even clear to me if it uses radar for targeting or the statements about it being radar-based just mean that the person operating it gets instructions from someone looking at ATC radar. It seems like it might just be a minor modification of this same device.
Actually I'll expand on this, because I think the article is a bit unclear but it seems like this is intended for the exact same use-case. it's not really a weapon but a signaling device. The problem with air traffic is that pilots occasionally err into restricted areas unintentionally. For various reasons (mostly bad ones, but still not too uncommon) they may not be monitoring any of the radio frequencies that a controller or the air force would try to use to communicate with them. So if the situation is severe enough, a military aircraft has to be scrambled to conduct an intercept and redirect. Even this has a failure rate because not all pilots seem to be familiar with the internationally agreed upon procedures for intercept and redirect by a military aircraft, although I'd argue it's pretty intuitive (if a fighter comes after you, act rational and follow them when they turn away).
So for the DC SFRA where this is a big ongoing problem they introduced this "visual warning system" that's just a laser that flashes red-green at the suspect aircraft. Ideally everyone who flies in that area knows about it, but they figure that even for people who don't, it's bright and conspicuous and alternating red/green means "use extreme caution" (every pilot should know that one, it's on the exam), so it ought to be enough to get people to figure out that there's something going on and they should start monitoring their radio. FAA provided a demo video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wAhreg9qpo
Seems like this is the exact same idea, it's bright and conspicuous and will make people realize that something is up even if they're not monitoring the radio, and so hopefully they'll either turn their radio on or head the opposite direction to avoid trouble.
I assume that the scope has a 532 nm bandstop filter to prevent that issue.
Also, the eyesafe feature probably triggers on retroreflection from a target's eyes, so a retroreflector would likely trigger the laser to reduce it's beam power.
This same technique is being used by the peaceful protesters in Portland, who have blinded half a dozen police officers in the last few days while peacefully burning down federal buildings.
FWIW: these have been reported to be in active use against the Portland protesters. It's so frustrating that HN chooses the gadget puff piece to push to the top of the front page instead of the actual deployed weapons.
Most especially because the much-lower-power pocket laser pointers have been cited by the white house directly as having "permanently blinded" federal agents. (Consumer red/green lasers are extraordinarily unlikely to cause permanent blindness, that's why they're available to consumers. You'd have to hold them on the same spot in your retina for minutes to kill cells thermally, the frequency won't do it alone.)
Edit: yes, folks, I'm talking about laser pointers. Obviously these things are poorly regulated and folks can get all kinds of crazy dangerous things online. There's zero evidence that any of them are in use by protesters in Portland. There's some shots of kids with clicky pointers.
You can easily buy class 3 and 4 lasers which can permanently damage your eyes. I have one for astrophotography alignment. So yes, the protestors are definitely using harmful lasers, as well as the police I’m sure.
You can buy or build a laser that can cause permanent blindness. There is ample evidence of protesters using lasers. Where is your evidence of federal agents using lasers?
If by "consumer" you mean the things sold for presentations, given away as advertising gifts (red ones), then yes. If you mean ones you can easily buy online, they can be quite scary power-wise. (And green ones are an infrared laser sent into a frequency-doubling crystal. A well-made one is well-aligned and has a filter stopping stray IR. A bad one might just pump out a bunch of IR too, without anyone knowing)
Fyi, lasers aren't safe/dangerous because of their power output but because they are so perfectly parallel. The human eye takes diverging light and turns in into a parallel beam to make images. The same lense takes a parallel beam and makes it focus onto a spot. Focusing to a near zero sized spot makes even very low powers blindingly bright...
The same is true for the sun (enormous distance means near parallel rays).
RTFA: It’s not the same, the Navy laser has a distance control that disables it if it’s close enough to damage someone’s eyesight. It’s only usable at long distances.
I couldn’t help but think Star Trek when they talked about the laser modulating it’s power based on range of target and shutting down if someone accidentally crosses it’s path. They are not allowed to intentionally permanently blind people. Set phasers to stun is what I thought of. It would be nice if we could have a world without lethal weapons.
Do note that blinding an enemy soldier is considered a really serious war crime by international law. You can kill them outright, not a crime. But you cannot blind them, including using a laser in this manner.
This seems to be accounted for, according to the article:
> The main idea behind the system is that it modulates its output based its range to the target via using an internal laser range-finder. Thus the maximum eye-safe setting can be used throughout the engagement. This is also important because international law prohibits the employment of any such system that is deliberately designed to cause permanent blindness.
A Navy fact sheet on what it calls 'non-lethal optical distractors' reads:
Non-lethal optical distracters are visible laser devices that have reversible optical effects on human targets. These types of non-blinding laser devices use highly directional optical energy to support several non-lethal capabilities, including:
These conventions don't matter unless they're actually enforced. For example, gas shells were banned 16 years before their use in WW1 by the very countries using them. Lots of victims lived horrible lives of suffering or killed themselves as a result of their use.
[+] [-] fode|5 years ago|reply
I had a hunch that it might be military related. It was fascinating to see how powerful the green lights were after they bounced off the water and hit the sand.
I'm so glad I caught this article here. I was going nuts for a while there lol
[+] [-] massaman|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] t-writescode|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] polytely|5 years ago|reply
actual submarine part: https://youtu.be/RXXMJAU6vY8
the leadup and context surrounding the exercise: https://youtu.be/5d6SEQQbwtU
[+] [-] filoeleven|5 years ago|reply
Laminar flow, the physics of weed whackers and lawn mowers, rocket-powered golf clubs, eliminating poop splash, VR gloves and treadmills, touring a rocket factory and seeing a launch...he’s got a lot for geeks to like in there!
I’m not helping my case here, but he also has a good talk about being a science guy who is also a Christian in a field where that’s often dismissed reflexively as irrational. Probably only worth watching after you explore the channel and wonder about the Bible reference displayed briefly at the end of them.
https://youtu.be/WDu2ldAxHyc
[+] [-] hylian|5 years ago|reply
Sorry, how is this video obviously propaganda?
[+] [-] supernova87a|5 years ago|reply
1) It's surprising or kind of amusing that such a huge and complex submarine uses plain old Raytheon / Raymarine radar when operating in harbor, etc. as if were just a little sailboat. But whatever works and is effective! I wonder how it has to be dismantled and put up, taken down each time? Perhaps it's mostly for being visible to other ships/monitoring stations? I recalled hearing that a sub is never in such places without accompanying surface fleet/tugs/etc anyway.
2) Looking at the periscope mast, the amount of technological sophistication in that thing must be incredible. The amount of communications (radio, laser, metallurgy, stealth coatings, etc) gadgetry there I'm sure would boggle the mind. Yet it all goes to the theme -- here is a boat worth many billions of $ and the pinnacle of US military sophistication, being put into the hands and trust of mostly 20-something young sailors, and mostly without incident. Truly amazing that we're able to do that.
[+] [-] Cocktail|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mike_d|5 years ago|reply
Stealth ships and aircraft won't turn on the fancy toys when they are in predictable locations to avoid adversaries being able to collect and analyze signals intelligence.
[+] [-] throwaway0a5e|5 years ago|reply
A warship has a lot more manpower (as well as highly refined policy/procedure) to get the most out of that cheapo radar.
[+] [-] zelon88|5 years ago|reply
When we consider the design characteristics of those older boats we can truly appreciate how much knowledge we had to build from scratch and glean from failure in order to get where we are today.
[+] [-] fennecfoxen|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nwallin|5 years ago|reply
Submarines, in general, rely primarily on their passive sensors- passive sonar and EW receivers. A submarine's best offensive and defensive capability is stealth.
[+] [-] dmoy|5 years ago|reply
It's not a sci fi laser rifle that cuts things. This is very different from star wars (the missile defense program), or star wars (the movie).
The US Navy does have things closer to that:
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a326766...
But they're huge, and still don't really do much.
[+] [-] robgibbons|5 years ago|reply
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1006745523
[+] [-] kyleblarson|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] h2odragon|5 years ago|reply
The bit about "unequivocal, cross-cultural warning" tho, that i buy. A more pointed way of saying "I see you" than launching a flare.
[+] [-] jcrawfordor|5 years ago|reply
It's basically the same idea as a control tower's light gun sending the red/green "extreme caution" signal but it's laser-based to work at long range. They refuse to give much in the way of details, it's not even clear to me if it uses radar for targeting or the statements about it being radar-based just mean that the person operating it gets instructions from someone looking at ATC radar. It seems like it might just be a minor modification of this same device.
Actually I'll expand on this, because I think the article is a bit unclear but it seems like this is intended for the exact same use-case. it's not really a weapon but a signaling device. The problem with air traffic is that pilots occasionally err into restricted areas unintentionally. For various reasons (mostly bad ones, but still not too uncommon) they may not be monitoring any of the radio frequencies that a controller or the air force would try to use to communicate with them. So if the situation is severe enough, a military aircraft has to be scrambled to conduct an intercept and redirect. Even this has a failure rate because not all pilots seem to be familiar with the internationally agreed upon procedures for intercept and redirect by a military aircraft, although I'd argue it's pretty intuitive (if a fighter comes after you, act rational and follow them when they turn away).
So for the DC SFRA where this is a big ongoing problem they introduced this "visual warning system" that's just a laser that flashes red-green at the suspect aircraft. Ideally everyone who flies in that area knows about it, but they figure that even for people who don't, it's bright and conspicuous and alternating red/green means "use extreme caution" (every pilot should know that one, it's on the exam), so it ought to be enough to get people to figure out that there's something going on and they should start monitoring their radio. FAA provided a demo video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wAhreg9qpo
Seems like this is the exact same idea, it's bright and conspicuous and will make people realize that something is up even if they're not monitoring the radio, and so hopefully they'll either turn their radio on or head the opposite direction to avoid trouble.
[+] [-] tantalor|5 years ago|reply
https://bemeyers.com/glare-mout-plus
I was sure this was a typo for "mount", but MOUT is military operations in urban terrain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_warfare
[+] [-] tgb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbay808|5 years ago|reply
Also, the eyesafe feature probably triggers on retroreflection from a target's eyes, so a retroreflector would likely trigger the laser to reduce it's beam power.
[+] [-] pjc50|5 years ago|reply
(Provided the claims about automatic power limit are true)
[+] [-] canada_dry|5 years ago|reply
Especially given that Federal enforcement agents are now being utilized, and likely have access to this equipment.
[+] [-] balsam|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_banner
[+] [-] tomcam|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] phjesusthatguy3|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jeffrallen|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] claydavisss|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] shitpostbot|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] newacct583|5 years ago|reply
Most especially because the much-lower-power pocket laser pointers have been cited by the white house directly as having "permanently blinded" federal agents. (Consumer red/green lasers are extraordinarily unlikely to cause permanent blindness, that's why they're available to consumers. You'd have to hold them on the same spot in your retina for minutes to kill cells thermally, the frequency won't do it alone.)
Edit: yes, folks, I'm talking about laser pointers. Obviously these things are poorly regulated and folks can get all kinds of crazy dangerous things online. There's zero evidence that any of them are in use by protesters in Portland. There's some shots of kids with clicky pointers.
[+] [-] refurb|5 years ago|reply
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1286914458032332800
[+] [-] tozeur|5 years ago|reply
https://www.laserpointerpro.com/attribute/class_class-iiib-l...
[+] [-] cwhiz|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] detaro|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LatteLazy|5 years ago|reply
The same is true for the sun (enormous distance means near parallel rays).
[+] [-] valuearb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xendo|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hprotagonist|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 14|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IgorPartola|5 years ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Blinding_Laser_W...
[+] [-] wyxuan|5 years ago|reply
article mentions it as well. the lasers used in this article follow int'l law
[+] [-] blackfawn|5 years ago|reply
> The main idea behind the system is that it modulates its output based its range to the target via using an internal laser range-finder. Thus the maximum eye-safe setting can be used throughout the engagement. This is also important because international law prohibits the employment of any such system that is deliberately designed to cause permanent blindness.
[+] [-] jngreenlee|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwhiz|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hajile|5 years ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Certain_Conven...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Blinding_Laser_W...
These conventions don't matter unless they're actually enforced. For example, gas shells were banned 16 years before their use in WW1 by the very countries using them. Lots of victims lived horrible lives of suffering or killed themselves as a result of their use.
[+] [-] tomashubelbauer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtnGoat|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tantalor|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzler_(weapon)#Legislation
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|5 years ago|reply
They should make killing against the rules and only allow blindness-based weapons.
[+] [-] dmh2000|5 years ago|reply