|
Post by ZEBRA on Nov 12, 2009 2:17:35 GMT -1
burst balloons! they light matches and burn through cd cases as well at close range ;D but i think with some things they really have to be seen photographs don't do them justice at all really but they give you an idea of what they are about i tryed to do some video as well but it really need to be done on a beach with a better video camera than i have. i think with the beams more visible they are better because they indicate where the beams are coming from better the green is a lot more visible than the red in the beam they do look a bit like a light saber Jim but one thats Miles high so its more visible .
the other thing Jim is that sar article in the link was written in 1999 they have advanced a lot since. i don't know but maybe back then the greatland was the only laser one available .
I think it’s important to realise that the pyrotechnic flares we use are not perfect there are many possible problems with them and a more reliable form of rescue signal has to be found lasers seam to be the alternative and modern way forward. It is also interesting to see on the coastguards website and many others that the use of a signal mirror is also recommended as a signaling device surly a laser of any type is much better than a mirror.
in my review it is my opinion that the megagreen ones I tested are superb. I never had the luxury of a marketed rescue laser flare to compare the difference. But what I would say is I would sooner have one of the mega green lasers With which I would have as much time as I needed for someone to see my signal and rescue me than to trust a pyrotechnic flare or mirror that may or may not fire and will only last a few seconds at best . I for one would not be without one now that I have had the chance to see and try them out personally and see how good they are . At the end of the day it’s really a question of if using a laser will help in a rescue situation and I for one believe it will
|
|
|
Post by megagreen on Nov 13, 2009 23:49:58 GMT -1
Hi Guys I am the owner of megagreen , terry phoned me up one day to talk about lasers and their potential use as a FLARE , i had my reservations , anything used as a safety tool really needs to go through some rigourous testing , also lasers have their own safety issues ! Anyways i offered terry the use of some different powered to allow him to test their suitabilty as clearly he has a lot more experience on the water than me :-) My first initial reaction is there is no way a laser can replicate the red flare distress signal , its so widely recognised as distress signal it would take many years and likely many millions of pounds in advertising to reducate the public to anything different. I am unsure also as a comparison to visabilty over distance for that initial GET HELP flare scenario... there no way without rigourous testing to effectively tell. My own gut reaction is a red flare or two is money wisely spent. One advantage of course is time in use , a laser will last for hours whereas a flare will last for minutes , a laser i feel would in this case have an advantage over a flare , when the RNLI is out looking for you having a permanant visable line as a reference point would save a lot of time , possibly life saving time ! I could never recommned a laser as a replacement for flares or a radio but if theres spare cash or you feel you can never be too safe , and want every possible safety tool available then i can see any disadvantage to having one available. As regards safety of the lasers , you can own and i can sell high power lasers there is no legislation as such to prevent this , their is however Health and Safety legislation that limits public use of lasers to <1mW ( for example in an office), but these would not be bright enough for use to attract attention , you would really need 50mW + etc , you can own and use in our garden , out at sea etc for starpointing but walk down the street pointing at cars , or planes etc and quite rightly you will be charged ..... I comapre lasers to owning a knife , fine to own but do something stupid with it and you will end up in court. Also bear in mind if a laser can burst balloon is can damage your retina , so careful handling is required , just like with a sharp knife , i also recommend when not in use keep the laser is locked away from temptations of children / teenagers . I consider my company a responsible retailer of lasers , not glamourising or targetting teenage market and including strong safety information . I am sure many people will buy and already have bought lasers for safety at sea , and it can be a useful tool and if you would enjoy pointing out stars and satellites to friends to kinda offset the cost as a personal gadget I have happy to answer any questions , feel free to call in to the number on the website Many thanks for the time taken and photographs terry its been a very useful excercise PAUL Anybody who has a general intrest in the facinating and addictive area of lasers may find these sites interesting to pass the time :-) www.laserpointers.co.ukwww.megagreen.co.ukwww.laserads.co.ukwww.photonlexicon.comand if you have a cat or dog , they LOVE chasing a laser dot ... www.noddingtoys.co.uk/shopexd.asp?id=515
|
|
|
Post by izzetafox on Nov 14, 2009 0:16:57 GMT -1
Paul do any of your products have the flare effect where the beam widens significantly at distance? I can see these possibly being of more practical use.
Thanks
Terry
|
|
|
Post by SEAJUNKY on Nov 14, 2009 6:02:41 GMT -1
Hi Paul
I think that you have a sensible attitude to what could easily be abused and sold to the youths. I too have reservations as to the lasers current value as a rescue tool. Used in addition to a flare to draw attention to your exact location does have a value. I think in time this may well be the way to go, but as you stated a huge advertising campaign would be required as a minimum. The option to buy a wide range of coloured lasers is going to complicate matters. Flashing red and green Lights (port and starboard) at sea are a common site now. So it wouldn't look much different to what is already out there.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by JIMBOB on Nov 14, 2009 10:58:33 GMT -1
Hi Paul, and thanks for taking the time to respond to this thread. Firstly may I just make it clear that none of my posts were, in any way, trying to discredit either the product you are selling or your integrity as a distributer. My main concern about the potential use of your particular lasers as distress flares is that they are not fit for that purpose. Although I do realise that this is the whole point of the review (to detirmine there suitability). The lasers produced by www.greatlandlaser.com/ appear to operate completely differently to those you offer for sale. The greatland, without going into too much detail, are by all accounts completely safe to point at, for example, a rescue aircraft. This is stated on their website if you click on the video on the home page. There is also information to clarify the difference between these lasers and the 'regular pointer' type lasers. The greatland laser seems to be virtually invisible to the naked eye unless it is targetted and moved in a particular manner, as per greatland's instructions. The issue of whether or not lasers will replace traditional pyrotechnic flares is another story altogether. I for one would sooner see EPIRBS as the way forward incorporating GPS technology. I can however see that laser flares, designed specifically for that purpose, do have a valid and worthwhile place along side our VHF radios and other safety equipment. I also think that, based on this review of your lasers, they look a fantastic item in their own right and I can see them being popular with stargazers and astronomers, as is highlighted on your website. As for their suitability as distress flares, well, I think my opinion will remain unchanged. Just to reiterate, I believe that you have a great product and I am, in no way, attempting to suggest otherwise. Likewise, it is not the intention of my posts to bring into disrepute your integrity or that of the forum's admin. I do think though, that in light of the fact that this review relates to a very important safety item, that all veiws on it's suitability or otherwise are given the opportunity to be heard. I would hate to think that somebody had their safety or potential rescue compromised because they bought a 'safety item' on a whim based on information they gained on a forum, however well intended. Jim
|
|
|
Post by megagreen on Nov 14, 2009 12:27:00 GMT -1
Jimbob no offence taken , this is why i am here for robust debate over safety issues.
In summary my own view is that these units should NOT be bought as a SOLE safety tool , if you have another interest in lasers it certainly would do no harm to have one with you.
As regards the WIDE angle effect Versus Single bright line laser I dont really have a view yet ...in my mind its a DRAW , i beleive having a single bright line would be more effective at drawing attention over distances as it would be brighter , more visable and travel further , the negative to this is the perceived or possible danger to rescue aircraft * , you would hop the person wanting resucued would be sensible enough not to point directly at aircraft once it becomes visable
We dont sell lasers with a very wide angle effect but its a simple lens attachment or inclusion which could be acheived , however I think it would be a bad idea to market these as a safety tool , if you are in a sticky position and have one GREAT , it will definately be useful , but without rigourous testing i dont beleive it would be responsible to market as a safety device at this stage.
PAUL
* i say perceived / potential as being involved in lasers I have seen this argument about danger to aircraft regulary and theres a strong case for there being little danger , in the main due to divergerance over distance ..however ditraction is a whole other debate , but thats unlikely to be an issue in the case of rescue ..distraction is what is actually required :-)
|
|
|
Post by SEAJUNKY on Nov 14, 2009 13:25:37 GMT -1
I think that I would like to expand on this topic a little bit. The lasers that I think you refer to Jim are the purpose designed safety lasers. The greatlands lasers have a cone type beam when waved from side to side would catch the eye of the rescuers, and that of course is what they are designed for, and nobody could argue with that. What I think about the other lasers made by megagreen is that they to could perform a safety function as well, but only in a different way. I think that what happened to Terry is very relevant. He was running the lasers at some unearthly hour, something like stupid o’clock when a policeman turned up to see what was going on not only this but another 2 police officers turned up as well to be nosy. Now when you take into account that Terry lives in Skelmersdale, and the light pollution in that area is very high. Through conversation with the police it transpired that the police had seen the lasers from over 2 miles away in a city environment. These lasers were just pointing skyward. According to what the police said they looked like coloured rods going up into the sky. Would this not serve as a big pointer to identify your exact location? Not having actually seen the lasers myself, I am assured by Terry that the lasers he has are powerful enough to bee seen on a sunny day.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by JIMBOB on Nov 14, 2009 13:48:06 GMT -1
Steve, I have researched the difference of the two lasers before continuing to post, afterall I need to know I am not spouting rubbish There is no denying that megagreens lasers can be seen for miles. It is well documented on their website. It is illegal to deliberately point a laser, or even a torch for that matter, at aircraft. The police turning up to Terry is proof of just how serious the law is regarding the use of lasers and is the only relevance I can see. My point is this: the lasers in this review are powerfull enough to point at star constellations, presumably the sky would have to be clear in order to see the stars anyway. With this in mind, how can anybody be sure that they are not unwittingly shining the laser at an aircraft flying over head above cloud cover, in the event of using it as a safety devise at sea and possibly at night? I still can't see how these particular lasers could be used safely and 100% within the law as it stands. I can however understand the reasoning behind thinking they could guide the safety services to you in the event of an emergency due to their visibility, but I would consider a Personal Location Beacon to be a far safer and acurate method. I beleive these are valid points in adding to this review.
|
|
|
Post by SEAJUNKY on Nov 14, 2009 13:55:51 GMT -1
Its nice to discuss these issues. Afterall thats what forums are about. Thats how we all learn.
|
|
|
Post by megagreen on Nov 14, 2009 15:13:38 GMT -1
Jim
I take your point about pointing a laser at aircraft , it a serious one , and people in the Uk have been imprisoned for maliciously doing such things. However they have not been imprisoned under a LAW that states its illegal , they have been imprisoned using other laws that have been used to show malicous intent.
In a life saving scenario my view is its unlikely that any prosecution would take place , please bear in mind these are not james bond lasers , the debate over the years has proven to me that eye damage, retinal damage , is virtually impossible over the typical distances involved with aircraft . However there is a DISTRACTION hazard which some pilots will deem serious other not so serious a lot would depend on flight path etc
Australia for example has completelybanned sale of lasers over 1mW to the general public , many view this as too much , its likely you would debate this is highly suitable , but that overall debate is for another place , at another time . I beleive the basis of this was not so much the possiblity of actaul eye damage but more for a concern for distraction, in the scenario we are discussing here distraction is a postive effect rather than negative.
I would make you aware of divergence , this is the key , a typical laser with 3mR divergence such as the once reviewed here , over a mile for example the circumferance of the dot maybe typically 40ft wide , the light spreads out , diverges , vastly , vastly reducing possible , indeed by many described as impossible eye damage.
Its it possible you are confusing your general dislike/fear of lasers , and negative publicity surrounding lasers casued by misuse by chavs with a real safety positive in this scenario.
PAUL
|
|
|
Post by JIMBOB on Nov 14, 2009 18:01:09 GMT -1
Paul, I should imagine the prosecutions you refer to would have been made under the Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2005 that refers to endangering the safety of an aircraft, or under Article 135 of the same Order that refers to dangerous lights. This quite clearly demonstrates it is in fact illegal to point lasers at aircraft, intentionally or otherwise, regardless of whether there is a specific law relating their use. I agree that in an emergency situation the possibility of prosecution is fairly unlikely, if it can be proved no malicious intent was meant. The same could be applied to using a VHF radio with no license or training. I am certainly not confusing a dislike of lasers or indeed a fear of them, far from it. Lasers and their technology have proven to be an invaluable tool within the medical industry, laser guided missiles, right down to teasing next doors cat or removing dodgy tattoos after a night on the ale. I certainly wouldn't advocate a complete ban on their sale or use as in Australia, and I am surprised you suggest otherwise. To bring the thread back on track, I just don't think that these particular lasers are suitable for use as a distress flares. They are not designed for that purpose. They would cause problems to aircraft. I don't believe either the argument for using them to guide a rescue craft to you at sea, PLB's would be better and potentially safer. To this end, I would love to have one of your lasers as a xmas pressie, they look like great fun... bring on the balloons! ;D ;D Some interesting info here: www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP736.PDF
|
|
|
Post by izzetafox on Nov 14, 2009 18:58:55 GMT -1
On the subject of prosecutions...here is one where a guy got 4 months imprisonment. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3081096/Man-who-shone-laser-pen-at-police-helicopter-pilot-is-jailed-for-four-months.htmlNotable from this Paul was that the charge was ' Recklessly endangering an aircraft'. Now if my memory of the law is correct to prove 'recklessly' you do NOT have to prove 'malicious intent' you merely have to show that the person was reckless, i.e. had not given enough thought or consideration to the consequences of his actions. However this is an aside. The main point is they are very visible and also it COULD be deemed reckless to use them. I think this debate has a long way to run and it's is good it is happening but it is really down to the Search and Rescue services to decide whether they feel it is acceptable and if so in which format, cone or beam?
|
|