Wicked Lasers 445nm <1W Spyder III Pro Arctic Series

Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

I found myself wondering how powerful the lasers are that are used for lunar ranging. Answer: 2.3 W. They are very careful with the laser: http://www.physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html

Is it safe?

It's all fun and games until someone shoots an eye out! Working with a powerful laser demands some attention to safety. We follow strict safety guidelines when working around the laser, wearing protective glasses that only admit one ten-millionth of any laser light hitting them to pass through. But once we have expanded the beam to fill the 3.5 meter telescope aperture, it is far less dangerous—almost eye-safe, in fact (far too weak to cause damage to anything but eyes or sensitive detectors). Nonetheless, we are diligent about not hitting aircraft, which, more than creating an eye-hazard would potentially startle pilots. Some have reacted in horror when we tell them that we are shooting a laser at the moon. "Why would you want to destroy the moon?" Rest assured that 2.3 watts of laser power spread over a 2 kilometer patch on the moon is nothing compared to the sun's 1380 watts per square meter. Not even enough to tickle.
So 2.5 W spread over the area of a 3.5 m telescope is "almost eye-safe".

Hm...
Let's assume the atmosphere has no effect on the beam.
A rough figure for sunlight at Earth's surface is 1 kW/m^2, so the atmosphere attenuates light by a factor of ~0.72. You could include that in your calculations, AAS.
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

A rough figure for sunlight at Earth's surface is 1 kW/m^2, so the atmosphere attenuates light by a factor of ~0.72. You could include that in your calculations, AAS.

It's good to put a number on this but careful, atmospheric attenuation is very frequency dependent and relates closely to the absorption spectra of atmospheric gases. The averaged 0.72 for sunlight (many frequencies) is not necessarily true for monochromatic light @ the SpyderIII's ~67THz. Could be similar or a lot differetn...

Certainly someone could dig up this figure , I couldn't find it right away. :drunk:😗
 
News Flash (for Newbies)

Power over Distance - a primer on "burning things at miles away".

Now read this.

You cannot burn objects at miles away, or even hundreds of meters away, with any hand-held laser module; including any laser pointer from Wicked Lasers.

Here's why.

Specifications:

Beam Diameter: 1.5mm @ aperture
Beam Divergence: <1.5mRad

These are pretty typical values for any hand held laser module or pointer. Some may claim as low as 1.2 or 0.9 mRad, but this is typically a lie.

mRad? you ask.

Your beam starts off as 1.5 millimeters "thick" (diameter) when it exits the business end. However, as soon as you start walking even a short distance away from the laser, your target will notice that the beam gets much much wider and subsequently much less powerful. If you're the one holding the laser, you really can't tell the beam (dot) is growing in size.

After each meter, your beam at 1.5 mRad will expand another 1.5 mm in diameter. So after 1 meter distance, your beam is now 3mm thick... after 2 meters, 4.5mm thick... after 100 meters, 151.5mm thick (that is 1/2 foot)... after 200 meters it will become a full 12 inches. Airplanes fly at a cruising altitude of 30,000 ft, or about 9000 meters. By the time your beam reaches an airplane, it is 44 feet or 13.5 meters in diameter.

Naturally, the strength of the beam is much weaker when it's spread out over such a great area.

After 1 meter beam density is only 1/2 as powerful. after 2 meters the beam density is 1/3 as powerful... after 99 meters it's 1/100th as powerful... after 9000 meters, it's 1/9001th as powerful.

1 Watt of energy over 1.5 mm might burn the skin at a close distance, but after 100 meters that same 1.5 mm area is only as strong as a 10 mW laser. After 1000 meters, it's barely 1 mW, and after 9000 it's about 1/10th as powerful as a dollar store laser.

The only thing you're going to burn from 100 meters away is your popularity.

BTW. compared to the visibility of a 532nm green laser for a Dark Adapt eye, a 445nm blue laser is almost exactly 1/3 apparent brightness.

People are asking if this 1W blue laser will be good for pointing at stars. It is about as bright as a 333 mW green laser.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

The specs on Wicked Lasers for this laser says:

Output Power: <1W

That reads, "Output power: less than one watt." That's a useless spec. Every portable laser currently made is less than 1W. Considering Wicked Lasers has a history of exaggerating the output power of their products, I'm very interested to see exactly what one of these 445nm lasers measures on an accurate power meter.

If these 445nm diodes can currently be sourced for ~$33 per by cannibalizing a projector, then I suspect they will be available direct from China for less than half that price before the end of the year, and complete "1W" 445nm lasers will be on the market for under $50. At that point, everybody who wants one will have one (or five). This could mean bad things for laser hobbyists, if the power output is anywhere near what people are claiming. Time will tell.
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

Can you kindly send me a link to where I could right now purchase a live grenade without a special permit?

That was my point, the weapons you mentioned aren't illegal in most US states, they're just usually subject to an additional tax stamp. Switchblades aren't in my state. I can legally own a switchblade without any special tax or permit as long as I avoid the ridiculous interstate commerce restrictions. That makes sense because there's nothing about a switchblade that makes it any more dangerous than any other knife and they are ponderously slow compared to any fixed blade knife and a few folding knife designs.

An arc welder cannot blind someone from 200m away.

Sure, and the laser can't burn through steel like a hot knife through butter. We may as well be scared of 5 gallon buckets. Do you have any idea how many children drown in buckets each year? 200m? Ha! Buckets are everywhere and anyone can buy them, even in huge quantities, with no government oversight at all. No permits required for filling them with water either.

Can you state the danger of this "wild hype"? Where is the danger? What right do you risk loosing? Again, I'll restate my belief that no one has a legitimate use for a laser of this power without also being able to apply for a special needs permit.

These hyped up articles are playing to fears of this product being misused. If they would have left it alone it would have been a much smaller group of mostly enthusiasts who were even aware the product exists. Now they're giving it free global advertising and emphasizing its potential to be misused. That is just an example of poor judgment on the journalists' part if they were really concerned about the public safety angle but what's worse is the hype is wildly inaccurate and they attribute things to the laser that it just can't do. Of coursing getting the facts all wrong is nothing new and it's bad enough that at this point you can't honestly consider the mainstream media to be a credible source of information.

The other thing you said, about what right we risk losing, well that shows me you have a misunderstanding of how freedom works in the US. Our heritage of freedom flows from, among other things, our Constitution that acts as a white list on government powers. By default its our birthright as Americans to do what we please as long as it doesn't harm others unless for some exceptional reason legal restrictions have been put in place through specific due process. Yes, we do have a right to own powerful lasers and it would fall under not only this general principle but also the Tenth Amendment which reads,

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The federal government hasn't been given any legitimate special powers to control access to lasers and wisely so. An argument could be made that a given state or community could examine the issue and choose to restrict access to lasers. A total ban would go right out the window as soon as we're talking about a weapons grade laser which would be protected under the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The military and law enforcement community have shown interest in lasers as weapons which according to supreme court case law strengthens the claim of lasers as protected arms and if this particular laser is actually as capable of blinding as the hype suggests than it would seem that it could indeed fall into the category of arms. Not exactly my top pick in personal armament but the more powerful and portable the laser gets the more likely possession is a protected right under our highest law.

It is your right under the First Amendment to loudly and publicly object to the availability of these lasers. While I disagree with your position I do believe it is important for you to exercise your right if for no other reason than all angles on any subject should be considered if we're going to have our society operate on any principle resembling reason. It's even your right to pursue a change in the law to prohibit the laser but it will have to be done in good faith through due process to be legitimate as the United States of America is a Republic and therefore our law is not subject to mob rule. That's also a good thing as it protects the little guys from the whims of the big guys.

Personally I don't think things should have come to the point we need to discuss stuff like this. The laser is neat but not for everybody, just like my lathe which could easily take your arm off if you made just one mistake. Or a five gallon bucket. The debate itself was inevitable though. Firearms, which have been well established as a legally protected class of weapon here in the US, are at heart an ancient technology dating back about 7 centuries. Some would and could argue much older. It was inevitable that just as guns eventually replaced the bow and arrow that directed energy weapons or other exotic technologies would eventually replace the firearm. That replacement is a good thing because eventually it will give rise to the proverbial phaser set on stun which I believe most of us would prefer to use for self defense once they are available, affordable and reliable. I don't know that this product will spur the debate on energy weapons in any significant way but it is a harbinger of things to come.
 
Re: News Flash (for Newbies)

after 100 meters, 151.5mm thick (that is 1.5 meters)... after 200 meters it will become 3 full meters around.

No, 151.5mm is 15.15 centimeters. That is probably still enough power to cause eye damage, but it won't set fire to anything. Also, at 9000 meters the beam will be 13.5 meters wide and no longer able to damage eyes (although it could still startle pilots).

Edit: maybe it would be a good idea to change that part of your post, in case someone reads it and think they can start pointing their 1W laser at aircraft without startling the pilots 😱
 
Last edited:
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

Indeed. Someone else just pointed out the decimal error to me, so I corrected that statement.

My biggest point of the airplane rant is how these accounts of pilots being "struck in the eye by a laser beam" are inconsistent, and how several are fascinatingly science-fiction in nature.

"green dot in the cockpit that almost hit me in the eye"
"pilot hit in the left eye, co-pilot had to take over"
"seeing an eye doctor"

Seriously now. A 44 foot diameter "beam" isn't going to hit someone in the left eye, or miss the co-pilot.

Cockpits are not dark. Pilots cannot see outside below the horizon. Planes practically fly themselves (as if pilots are searching for dangerous obstacles to avoid?).

There have been some 300 documented incidences claims the FAA. And I'm not buying it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

I think most of those incidents happened during landing/takeoff. During that time they are manually flying the airplane and I think they turn off the light in the cockpit to see the landing strip better (at night).
Anyway, I just think pointing lasers at aircraft is a really bad idea (even if the danger should turn out to be blown way out of proportion).
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

Considering that I've been using green lasers to point out stars since 2003, and have bought several for our campus astronomy club, I vehemently despise any exaggerated report that demonizes personal laser use.

Interestingly, nobody has ever bothered us, and I know at least a few students have nailed a plane now and then ("i think that's a satellite!").

It would really suck if false reports about sizzling eyeballs would cause judges to start convicting good natured back-yard astronomers with felonious acts of terrorism.

Seen the CSI episode from 2004/2005? The pilot's corneas were melted from a pointer! The public believes this poop!
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

There are some posts in this thread that are a bit worrisome, including talk of pointing lasers at planes not being dangerous. Yes, we can quibble over the details about how intense the light is when a plane is however far away, but careless use of lasers can have permanent consequences - in the case of this blue laser, even from diffuse light reflected from objects with no specular reflection. Also, there's an ad on CPF that points out that aiming a laser at a plane is a felony.
 
Re: News Flash (for Newbies)

People are asking if this 1W blue laser will be good for pointing at stars. It is about as bright as a 333 mW green laser.

And Wicked's cheapest 300mW green unit is $1,300; to edge that out for only $200 could be one of the greatest bang-for-the-buck deals of all time..
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

I think most of those incidents happened during landing/takeoff. During that time they are manually flying the airplane and I think they turn off the light in the cockpit to see the landing strip better (at night).
Anyway, I just think pointing lasers at aircraft is a really bad idea (even if the danger should turn out to be blown way out of proportion).

Commercial airliners are not the only thing to worry about. Around were I live "it's very rural, and there is a small airport near by". Small planes are constantly flying around, none going much more then 2,000 feet up "I know I've been in them before". At this height I could potentially strike them with some of my more high power flashlights, let alone lasers, I have to be very careful at night. Though to be fair, I don't exactly think there is exactly a lot of laser collectors out here😗….
 
Last edited:
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

Wicked Lasers' website has been updated with new warnings and requirements for purchase. I wouldn't be surprised if they are worried about the fallout.




Wicked Lasers Supplementary Class 4 Buyer Requirements
  • Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to digitally sign a Laser Hazard Acknowledgment form stating they understand the proper handling, use and risks associated with such products
  • Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to provide government-issued photo ID for age verification purposes
  • Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to completely read and electronically acknowledge nine disclaimer passages
  • Customers of Class 4 lasers are required to be shipped at least one pair of certified laser safety goggles that meets minimum O.D. required for safe operation

What kind of ID card do they want? I was thinking about giving them my FID, I figure they would understand someone who can handle a firearm can hopefully handle a Laser.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

That was my point, the weapons you mentioned aren't illegal in most US states, they're just usually subject to an additional tax stamp.
That's about as accurate as saying any Joe Blow off the street can shoot fireworks in excess of 500G simply by paying extra taxes. If you actually do your research, you'd see that both examples require special permission from the ATF. This is pretty much what I said about needing permits. Permits nor licenses are automatically awarded. You apply for them and you may or may not get it. After an individual goes to the effort to be granted one, they're not likely to do something stupid to get it revoked, which cannot be said about the public at large.
Switchblades aren't in my state. I can legally own a switchblade without any special tax or permit as long as I avoid the ridiculous interstate commerce restrictions. That makes sense because there's nothing about a switchblade that makes it any more dangerous than any other knife and they are ponderously slow compared to any fixed blade knife and a few folding knife designs.
While I may have used a poor example as you are somewhat correct and I was mistaken that there are no complete bans on then, they are still heavily regulated as a whole with outright bans in many states. If they are such a poor choice for a weapon, than why were they historically a popular choice for street criminals?
Sure, and the laser can't burn through steel like a hot knife through butter. We may as well be scared of 5 gallon buckets. Do you have any idea how many children drown in buckets each year? 200m? Ha! Buckets are everywhere and anyone can buy them, even in huge quantities, with no government oversight at all. No permits required for filling them with water either.
Wat does this have anything to do with my statement, which is confirmed directly from Wicked Lasers' technical specification on this device, that the laser can cause eye damage from 200 meters away?
These hyped up articles are playing to fears of this product being misused. If they would have left it alone it would have been a much smaller group of mostly enthusiasts who were even aware the product exists.
If you read the news you can easily find daily occurrences of people misusing lasers and directing them at airplanes and helicopters.
That is just an example of poor judgment on the journalists' part if they were really concerned about the public safety angle but what's worse is the hype is wildly inaccurate and they attribute things to the laser that it just can't do.
Very interesting you say that since much of what the journalists in question were quoting was from this very thread.
The other thing you said, about what right we risk losing, well that shows me you have a misunderstanding of how freedom works in the US. Our heritage of freedom flows from, among other things, our Constitution that acts as a white list on government powers. By default its our birthright as Americans to do what we please as long as it doesn't harm others unless for some exceptional reason legal restrictions have been put in place through specific due process. Yes, we do have a right to own powerful lasers and it would fall under not only this general principle but also the Tenth Amendment which reads,
No disrespect, but I have actually studied Constitutional law as well as Supreme Court case law and it is you who are mistaken about "how freedom works in the US". Our "rights" are those and only those which are enumerated in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other Amendments. Your quote of the 10th Amendment, without getting into a history lesson, comes from two concepts: establishing the limited power of the federal government, and second, specifying in no uncertain terms that for something to be criminal it must be spelled out (this was obviosuly a problem with British rule which they were trying to correct). There is nothing which say states cannot nor should not create new laws when applicable to meet the evolving needs of society.
The federal government hasn't been given any legitimate special powers to control access to lasers and wisely so.
When did I ever say lasers should be controlled by the Federal Government?
An argument could be made that a given state or community could examine the issue and choose to restrict access to lasers. A total ban would go right out the window as soon as we're talking about a weapons grade laser which would be protected under the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights.
Ahh, so by that rationale weapons grade plutonium is covered under Second Amendment protection (I think not).
The military and law enforcement community have shown interest in lasers as weapons which according to supreme court case law strengthens the claim of lasers as protected arms and if this particular laser is actually as capable of blinding as the hype suggests than it would seem that it could indeed fall into the category of arms. Not exactly my top pick in personal armament but the more powerful and portable the laser gets the more likely possession is a protected right under our highest law.
Sorry you are just flat out wrong. You can read literally dozens of US Supreme Court cases (which I actually have done) which clearly limit the power of the Second Amendment to personal firearms, here's one example:
'We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons." '

Nowhere will you find the discussion of lasers because they quite simply are not protected by the 2nd Amendment. Arms = Firearms.
It is your right under the First Amendment to loudly and publicly object to the availability of these lasers. While I disagree with your position I do believe it is important for you to exercise your right if for no other reason than all angles on any subject should be considered if we're going to have our society operate on any principle resembling reason. It's even your right to pursue a change in the law to prohibit the laser but it will have to be done in good faith through due process to be legitimate as the United States of America is a Republic and therefore our law is not subject to mob rule. That's also a good thing as it protects the little guys from the whims of the big guys.
I completely agree with you; never did I assert that I thought these were illegal at the current time. Quite to the contrary, my concern is rooted in the fact that they are legal.
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

While I may have used a poor example as you are somewhat correct and I was mistaken that there are no complete bans on then, they are still heavily regulated as a whole with outright bans in many states. If they are such a poor choice for a weapon, than why were they historically a popular choice for street criminals?

Switchblades have never been a popular choice for street criminals. Although some have used them. The anti switchblade laws came into effect as a result of idiot elected officials watching West Side Story and assuming that they were a common choice. Much like the freak out over martial arts weapons in the 70's when the Kung Fu movies were popular. I have never heard of a crime being committed by a shuriken wielding punk.
 
Re: Wicked Lasers 445nm 1W(!) portable deathray

Is there a course that English majors take that teaches them why it's O.K. to cite out of context if its for the sake of sensationalism? It seems that most articles that I read now are just a jumbled pile of quotes from disparate sources arranged in such a way to insinuate some kind of sensational idea. Every where else this kind of thing is considered a non sequitur, but in journalism, it's brilliant!

"Sum guy on teh interenetz sez dis will shoot down teh space station" "Therefore it must be true!" "The world must know!"
 
Back
Top