Whelen Parmetheus 3

[NotarPilot]

So, last week I called Whelen to ask about their successor product to the Parmetheus Plus.  I spoke with a gentleman, who’s name escapes me, and told him I was considering upgrading from my Parmetheus Plus to the Aeroleds Sunspot as it’s a lot brighter, but I had heard Whelen was coming out with a brighter landing light in the near future.  He admitted they do have a new light in development called the Parmetheus 3 that will be about 60% brighter.  When I mentioned I really liked the Aeroleds Sunspot he immediately said how he is not familiar with “other products.”  (I’m sure David Clark had the same attitude in the early 90s when the Bose headsets started to hit the market even at $1000}.

I told him I upgraded from the Parmetheus to the Parmetheus Plus expecting a big improvement but I was rather disappointed by the lack of increased brightness.  He countered with some of his reasons on why the Parmetheus is superior proclaiming they are approved on over 2000 aircraft, they’re less expensive and that brighter LED landing lights suffer from a problem where the brightness degrades over time.  I countered that we switched from the Parmetheus to Sunspot landing lights on our fleet of three helicopters, where I work, and all of the pilots remarked how much brighter the Sunspot was and how much better it illuminated the runway on final.  I added that we had not noticed any degradation in luminosity in the time that we’ve had our landing lights.

In the end I told him I would hold off on buying a new landing light until they release their light, which he mentioned should be around January 2019.  That being said, I have a feeling I’m going to be disappointed with the light compared to the Sunspot but that’s just based on my experience of upgrading to the Plus.  Let’s see what happens.  I hope Whelen doesn’t get too comfortable with their market share like David’s Clark and Bendix King did and take their eyes off the ball.  But if you’re in the market for a new LED landing light like I am, this will be my third, then you might want to wait until January.  

[carusoam]

Great pirep, Notar!

 

Fear not, for Whelen...

Their real business is the safety business of police cars, fire engines, and ambulances...

They have made it a sport to hide the most powerful LEDs in fixtures that you can’t see in your rear view mirror...

DC has also tapped that same alternative market...... http://www.davidclarkcompany.com/fire-rescue/

Narco had difficulties getting into and staying in the digital era...

 

How are we going to know when to replace an LED landing light...?

Best regards,

-a-

[Hank]

15 minutes ago, carusoam said:

How are we going to know when to replace an LED landing light...?

Same way we knew with the old ones:  come in for a night landing, can't see the runway . . . . .. 

[NotarPilot]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

Same way we knew with the old ones:  come in for a night landing, can't see the runway . . . . .. 

I don’t think that’ll be an issue.  Most of these LED landing lights have something like 10,000 MTBF.  I think the way we know when to replace an LED landing light is when we decide we want to see more of the runway or we want to see it farther out.

[Raptor05121]

I've got the product sheet already on them. Whelen is WELL aware of Aeroleds. I had a long discussion with their head salesman at SnF.  tl;dr- The Sunspot is still MUCH brighter. Don't bother waiting.

AeroLeds Sunspot 46LX: 7,700 lumens @ 155,000 candlepower with 10* beam, 5.0 amps, 70W
Rigid Industries Hyperspot: 4,200lumens @ 200,000 candlepower with 6* beam, 4.0 amps, 55W
Whelen Parmetheus G3: ??????? lumens @ 155,000 candlepower with 8* beam, 1.8 amps, 25W

Having played with their lights, I doubt this thing is over 3,000lumens which means Whelen is seriously overestimating their 150,000 candlepower. Time will tell.

page 24:

http://www.whelen.com/pb/Aviation/Catalog Price Lists and Manuals/General_Aviation_Catalog.pdf
 

[NotarPilot]

Thanks for the info Alex.  That’s great information. On a side note I did read your post about that truck landing light you installed in your plane.  It looks extremely bright.  My only apprehension is that it’s not PMA’d.  However, I wonder if FAR 23.1383 allows it’s installation even if it’s not PMA’d.  Nothing in the section says it has to be approved.  I would almost consider filing a request for legal interpretation from the FAA but don’t necessarily want to close the door for guys using this section as authority to install non-PMA’d landing lights should the FAA determine landing lights we do need some sort of approval in the form of a PMA, STC or field approval.  Is this pretty much what you did or did you get a field approval?

§ 23.1383 Taxi and landing lights.
Each taxi and landing light must be designed and installed so that:
(a) No dangerous glare is visible to the pilots.
(b) The pilot is not seriously affected by halation.
(c) It provides enough light for night operations.
(d) It does not cause a fire hazard in any configuration.

 

[Raptor05121]

My IA was comfortable signing it off as a minor alteration IAW 23.1383 as you've posted. If you wanted to be doubly-legal, I assume you could file a 337 and send the relevant data to the FAA.

[NotarPilot]

28 minutes ago, Raptor05121 said:

My IA was comfortable signing it off as a minor alteration IAW 23.1383 as you've posted. If you wanted to be doubly-legal, I assume you could file a 337 and send the relevant data to the FAA.

Having gone through the field approval process with my local FSDO to install my TSO’d Whelen Orion 600 wingtip lights in 2013, I think there’s a little more to it than just filling out a 337 and sending it in.  I had to have an FAA airworthiness safety inspector come to my hangar (two ended up coming) to inspect my plane and explain to them what I wanted to do.  Totally asinine if you ask me but just goes to show the thinking of some FAA people and that was with a TSO’d product.  In the end I was granted a field approval to put TSO’d LED lights in my plane.  (Major eye roll here)

[Hank]

Before sending off to the FAA to approve an LED landing light, is your existing incandescent light "approved"? TSO, PMA, anything? The GE bulb I used (and all previous owners of my plane since it left the factory in 1970) is not, and has no paperwork other than whatever Aircraft Spruce supplies with it, at an affordable aviation price of only four times Home Depot . . . .

It is best to know the answer to your question before opening a can of Federal Worms, and avoid Form 337s for things that the FARs do not call Major Modifications. After all, what is the title of Form 337? It isn't for minor modifications, and shouldn't be used to cover your A&P and IA's backsides.

[StevenL757]

3 hours ago, Raptor05121 said:

I've got the product sheet already on them. Whelen is WELL aware of Aeroleds. I had a long discussion with their head salesman at SnF.  tl;dr- The Sunspot is still MUCH brighter. Don't bother waiting.

AeroLeds Sunspot 46LX: 7,700 lumens @ 155,000 candlepower with 10* beam, 5.0 amps, 70W
Rigid Industries Hyperspot: 4,200lumens @ 200,000 candlepower with 6* beam, 4.0 amps, 55W
Whelen Parmetheus G3: ??????? lumens @ 155,000 candlepower with 8* beam, 1.8 amps, 25W

Having played with their lights, I doubt this thing is over 3,000lumens which means Whelen is seriously overestimating their 150,000 candlepower. Time will tell.

page 24:

http://www.whelen.com/pb/Aviation/Catalog Price Lists and Manuals/General_Aviation_Catalog.pdf
 

This is an old catalog entry.  Whelen was ready to release these lights, and went back to the drawing board earlier this year to rework this design.  The new design (technically, a “Gen4”, although they won’t be called that) is what is expected to be released on or about January 2019.

So the specs you’re seeing for the lights above are not accurate.

I’ll be looking forward to “seeing” how they perform over my Gen1 Parmetheus (couldn’t resist).

Steve

[StevenL757]

9 hours ago, NotarPilot said:

Having gone through the field approval process with my local FSDO to install my TSO’d Whelen Orion 600 wingtip lights in 2013, I think there’s a little more to it than just filling out a 337 and sending it in.  I had to have an FAA airworthiness safety inspector come to my hangar (two ended up coming) to inspect my plane and explain to them what I wanted to do.  Totally asinine if you ask me but just goes to show the thinking of some FAA people and that was with a TSO’d product.  In the end I was granted a field approval to put TSO’d LED lights in my plane.  (Major eye roll here)

To all...Once again...you DO NOT need a field approval and/or a 337 to install a light that has a TSO listed for it, or one that has an STC listed for your specific type, on your aircraft.  A logbook entry will suffice.  Only a light that is part of an aircraft’s approved ACL system NOT possessing any STC or TSO approvals (hence, approved data) would need to go through the FAA.

As @Raptor05121 put it, there is no such thing as being “doubly legal”...you either are, or you aren’t.  With respect to the FAA, there’s no need to involve them with something like this unless absolutely necessary.  

I’ve installed several types of lights on several aircraft, and all instances were inspected signed off with logbook entries by authorized mechanics and IAs as being approved, legal installations.  Keep it simple guys...you’ll be much happier with less drama and frustration.

Steve

[bob865]

1 hour ago, StevenL757 said:

you DO NOT need a field approval and/or a 337 to install a light that has a TSO listed for it, or one that has an STC listed for your specific type, on your aircraft

So you may be able to answer this question.  I was under the impression that once a device had a TSO it was able to be installed on any aircraft and an STC was not required.  The A&P decided if the installation itself was a major/minor change and what paperword was required, i.e. if they have to make major changes to install the TSO harware.  But I also understood that to get a TSO, it had to be pretty much a bolt on install that wouldn't require a Major Change.  An STC was required for non-TSO equipment to be installed and your aircraft and your plane model has to be explicitly listed as approved if the STC using an AML or the specific airframe (by serial number) listed if not using an AML.  And in this case the A&P decides if it is major vs minor at install.

In your case above, changing a light fixture with a different but still TSO light, in the eyes of the FAA, is no different than chaning it like for like.

I know this is changing topics some, but I'm asking because I bought a SkyBeacon which recieved its TSO in September, but they are not shipping becuase they are waiting on an STC?  I thought with the TSO an STC was not needed?

[Raptor05121]

16 hours ago, StevenL757 said:

This is an old catalog entry.  Whelen was ready to release these lights, and went back to the drawing board earlier this year to rework this design.  The new design (technically, a “Gen4”, although they won’t be called that) is what is expected to be released on or about January 2019.

So the specs you’re seeing for the lights above are not accurate.

I’ll be looking forward to “seeing” how they perform over my Gen1 Parmetheus (couldn’t resist).

Steve

Interesting. That's taken straight from their 2018 catalog they are peddling out.

[StevenL757]

6 hours ago, Raptor05121 said:

Interesting. That's taken straight from their 2018 catalog they are peddling out.

Yea, unfortunately they haven’t removed that entry.  I expect they’ll revise it closer to release time.

Steve

[EricJ]

On 10/16/2018 at 6:21 AM, bob865 said:

So you may be able to answer this question.  I was under the impression that once a device had a TSO it was able to be installed on any aircraft and an STC was not required.  The A&P decided if the installation itself was a major/minor change and what paperword was required, i.e. if they have to make major changes to install the TSO harware.  But I also understood that to get a TSO, it had to be pretty much a bolt on install that wouldn't require a Major Change.  An STC was required for non-TSO equipment to be installed and your aircraft and your plane model has to be explicitly listed as approved if the STC using an AML or the specific airframe (by serial number) listed if not using an AML.  And in this case the A&P decides if it is major vs minor at install.

In your case above, changing a light fixture with a different but still TSO light, in the eyes of the FAA, is no different than chaning it like for like.

I know this is changing topics some, but I'm asking because I bought a SkyBeacon which recieved its TSO in September, but they are not shipping becuase they are waiting on an STC?  I thought with the TSO an STC was not needed?

An A&P doesn't get to decide what is or isn't a Major Alteration, but they can certainly use their judgement as to whether something falls under the definitions of Major Alterations in the regs.   Yeah, that can come down to splitting hairs, and that's definitely what people do for this stuff, and way too often IMHO.

Major Alterations are defined two places in the regs, the first is 14 CFR Subchapter A Part 1, Definitions and Abbreviations, 1.1, General Definitions, which gives the basic umbrella, catch-all definition of what a "Major Alteration" is.   Changing lamp technologies doesn't seem to me to fall anywhere near it.

"Major Alteration" means an alteration not listed in the aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller specifications--
(1) That might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other qualities affecting airworthiness; or
(2) That is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.

The other is Part 43 Appendix A, Major Alterations, Major Repairs, and Preventive Maintenance, which all aircraft owners would do well to be familiar with, if for no other reason than to know what "Preventive Maintenance" is per the regs, since we can do all those things without the need for an A&P or an IA.

Anything that is not listed in 43 App. A as a Major Alteration or Major Repair is, by definition, a Minor Alteration or Minor Repair unless it is Preventive Maintenance or falls under the umbrella of the Major Alteration definition in Part 1.1.   

I think it is very difficult to point to either of those places and make even a weak case that changing a lamp technology is a Major Alteration or Major Repair.   However, in Preventive Maintenance, an owner is specifically allowed to not only replace landing and position bulbs, but reflectors and lenses and troubleshoot and repair the wiring for landing lights.

So, no mention of changing lighting technologies that would, IMHO, remotely suggest that a 337 needs to be involved, but specific mention that an owner can futz around with bulbs and reflectors and lenses, and, in the case of landing lights, even hack at the wiring as much as they'd like.    To me that suggests that the folks who wrote the regs didn't think that exterior lighting was nearly as big a deal as some make it out to be.

Some IAs are totally fine with owners changing to LED position and/or landing lights without a 337 or even A&P/IA involvement for socketed lamp changes.   Others have different opinions.   I think it comes down to you and your IA.   YMMV.

 

Edited October 17, 2018 by EricJ

[NotarPilot]

I just saw this on the Spruce website just now.  Does anything know the specs on this new Parmetheus light?  I can't find any mention of it on the Whelen website.  For $599 if better be f***ing bright.  But is it brighter than the AeroLEDS Sunspot?

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lopresti-11-16621.php

[Steve W]

2 minutes ago, NotarPilot said:

I just saw this on the Spruce website just now.  Does anything know the specs on this new Parmetheus light?  I can't find any mention of it on the Whelen website.  For $599 if better be f***ing bright.  But is it brighter than the AeroLEDS Sunspot?

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/lopresti-11-16621.php

It's part of the line that Whelen got when they purchased LoPresti. It looks to be this one(with a little more specs):

https://flywat.com/collections/led-landing-taxi-recognition-lights/products/parmetheus-plus-46-series-led-landing-and-taxi-light

Although as usual there are no lumens or beam pattern specs listed.

[NotarPilot]

The SunSpot says 150k candela vs the 157,557 candela listed on the link above for the Parmetheus PRO.  The SunSpot also claims 7,700 lumens but I don't know how all that translates or relates to each other beyond the higher the number the brighter the light.  

[Steve W]

Just now, NotarPilot said:

The SunSpot says 150k candela vs the 157,557 candela listed on the link above for the Parmetheus PRO.  The SunSpot also claims 7,700 lumens but I don't know how all that translates or relates to each other beyond the higher the number the brighter the light.  

Candela is the brightness of the beam, you can get nearly infinite candela with a narrow enough beam thus my comment about a beam pattern,. Lumens is the total light put out, same lumens for a narrower beam is higher candela this is why you see taxi lights with much lower candela for the same lumens.

As far as I'm aware the best in-the-lab LEDs today get 200 lumens per watt. Assuming that Whelen is using those(hint: they aren't) with the about 45 watts that light draws they could hit 9,000 lumens. In reality those 2 lights seem to be fairly close on specs. I'd guess the Whelen has the edge on reflector design, but until a third party does a shoot-out there's not really a good way to see which one would 'win'. 

[NotarPilot]

Maybe there will be a side by side comparison at Airventure that someone can check out.

Thanks for the explanation.

[MikeOH]

Here's my story:

1) GE bulb burned out.

2) I ordered an AeroLites Sunsetter;  $150

3) I removed the GE bulb and put in the Sunsetter...15 minutes, tops.

4) If my A&P has a cow at annual and won't sign off, I'll tell him to put the GE bulb back in

5) I'll let you guess what the hangar fairies will do when I get the plane back....

The regs allow me to change the damn landing light bulb...that's what I did.

 

There is only so much government BS I'll put up with.

[PT20J]

Every thread about LED landing/taxi lights seems to devolve into a discussion about what is "legal" to install in type-certificated aircraft.

Here's a way to think about it: When the airplane left the factory, it was issued an airworthiness certificate. Every component in it was "legal." Now, a year later, if something breaks and you buy a replacement part from Mooney, it  can be installed with a logbook entry and it's still legal. Suppose you leave your recognition lights on and melt a wingtip lens. You decide to buy a lens from LASAR rather than Mooney. The LASAR lens is manufactured under a PMA. This means that it has been approved as an acceptable replacement for the Mooney part and so it can be installed with only a logbook entry. Want to replace the Mooney sunvisors with Rosens? Well the Rosen visors are a different design than the originals so a PMA wouldn't apply. But, Rosen has an STC so they can be installed with a 337 and a logbook entry. Suppose you want to install an ADS-B out transponder. The transponder will be TSO'd which means that it meets a specification approved by the FAA for use in aircraft and so it can be installed with a 337 and a logbook entry.  OK, so far?

The FAA allows certain parts that meet established industry standards to be used on type certificated aircraft without a PMA or STC or TSO. Commonly cited examples are nuts and bolts and safety wire. Incandescent landing lights fall into this category. A 4522 lamp is made by several manufacturers to an industry standard, and they are interchangeable. Replacing one with another requires a simple logbook entry. There is no such industry standard for the LED replacements. This is why Whelen has an STC for the Prometheus lights. To be "legal",  replacement of the incandescent lights specified by Mooney with an "equivalent" LED requires an STC'd part and a 337 and a logbook entry. 

You may or may not think this is reasonable. Your IA may or may not care. But that's the way it works.

Skip

Edited July 21, 2019 by PT20J

[carusoam]

Way to go, Skip!

Wish I could memorize that..!

Best regards,

-a-

[EricJ]

53 minutes ago, PT20J said:

The FAA allows certain parts that meet established industry standards to be used on type certificated aircraft without a PMA or STC or TSO Commonly cited examples are nuts and bolts and safety wire. Incandescent landing lights fall into this category. A 4522 is made by several manufacturers to an industry standard, and they are interchangeable. Replacing one with another requires a simple logbook entry. There is no such industry standard for the LED replacements. This is why Whelen has an STC for the Prometheus lights. To be "legal",  replacement of the incandescent lights specified by Mooney with an "equivalent" LED requires an STC'd part and a 337 and a logbook entry. 

Actually there probably are specs, e.g., TSO-C30c applies to position lights.    Many of the LED replacements for incandescent lamps include a statement that they meet TSO-C30c.   I don't think there's a requirement anywhere that a lamp has to be incandescent, just that it meets the minimum specs in the TSO.   The IPC for my M20J doesn't even show a position light bulb as a component with a part number, just the socket assembly.   I replaced a part that doesn't even appear in the IPC with a part that meets the TSO commonly cited for that component.   I think that's pretty defensible.

Edit:   Ahg...I don't recall which model doesn't show the lamp, but my IPC actually does show an A7512-12 bulb. 

Edited July 21, 2019 by EricJ

[PT20J]

29 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Actually there probably are specs, e.g., TSO-C30c applies to position lights.    Many of the LED replacements for incandescent lamps include a statement that they meet TSO-C30c.   I don't think there's a requirement anywhere that a lamp has to be incandescent, just that it meets the minimum specs in the TSO.   The IPC for my M20J doesn't even show a position light bulb as a component with a part number, just the socket assembly.   I replaced a part that doesn't even appear in the IPC with a part that meets the TSO commonly cited for that component.   I think that's pretty defensible.

Edit:   Ahg...I don't recall which model doesn't show the lamp, but my IPC actually does show an A7512-12 bulb. 

Well, as you pointed out, TSO-C30c is for position lights. I don't believe there is a TSO for landing/taxi lights. Without at TSO, you need traceability to an industry standard (such as the incandescents) or an STC (such as Whelen).