LED Landing/Taxi Lights

[Nukemzzz]

To be clear, I’m not knocking the Aero-Lite.  Perhaps it’s a good value, especially if you can avoid the additional price that comes with “airplane part”.  I’m a sucker for overpaying for top of the line stuff though. Possible character flaw. lol 

I mean I bought Bose headsets and I don’t have my PPL yet or a functioning airplane and I’m now at risk of paying a whole lot of money for a landing light and have yet to land a night myself with my currently installed incandescent GE bulb. But the cowl is laying there in the hanger and calling my name “Put a really fancy LED in me, you know you want to...”. I reason it out as: I’ve spent a metric ton of money and time on this plane this year and if I put a good LED in it now it’s one thing I’ll never have to mess with again. I laughed at these new $600 Apple headphones, but found myself watching YouTube reviews on them today. I might need counseling. LMAO 

[Nukemzzz]

58 minutes ago, OSUAV8TER said:

That's fine to be a CB Mooney owner, I get it, and I respect it. But that PAR-46 Parmetheus Pro will outperform that AeroLite all day. It's not even comparable in brightness. 

Here is some interesting lab data Whelen just published. Granted, it's not a full on scientific study but they sent Whelen and AeroLED lights to the lab to get tested.

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0080/5598/0128/files/PARMETHEUS-PLUS-46-Lab-Comparisons.pdf?v=1606333315

The thing about Candella measurement is it picks up intensity at a point. If focused tightly enough you could probably match that level with a pocket sized mag light. 

I suspect that the new WAT is a great light, might be the best, but there is more to the story.  Picking a light based on just Candella readings is like picking a wife based solely on cup size. Lol. 

My X3 has the BMW “Laser” lights. They are super bright, but they had to make them steer into corners and deflect to the sides when turning at stoplights because you can’t see squat outside of the bright zone in the beams. They market the steering headlights as a selling point but honestly they are needed for safety. 

I keep looking on the web for practical tests of these lights and there isn’t much other than marketing hype or one dimensional lab tests. Some guys shinning their lights on a hangar...but just one model. AVWeb has one video that’s so so. Perhaps that WAT Pro is good for distance, general area lighting, and taxi, but I can’t find good comparative evidence of it. Just to give you an idea for what some potential customers are looking for. 

[ZuluZulu]

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

A few comments:

1) So what?  A landing light isn't even required for Part 91; even at night!  (Sorry if my pragmatism is abhorrent)

2) The incandescent build it's replacing isn't TSO certified either!  It is just listed on the TCDS.

3) What's the worst that could happen?  It shorts out and blows the CB?  I can live with that.

4) CYA, like I did, and get your friendly A&P to file a 337 (charged me $50).

Frankly, I should have skipped 4 as I really did it so some future anal retentive buyer wouldn't have a cow if I should ever sell.  It would have been cheaper to just toss back in a POC GE bulb if someone like that should stumble into my life

I didn't take a position.  All I did was try to explain the lower price.  I have Aero-Lites LEDs in my plane (albeit interior lights only).  My landing lights are a pair of Parmetheus Pros and I've been very happy with them.  Then again, probably a solid 40% of my recent flying has been at night.

[testwest]

OK, I got that video posted. There are three separate and distinct products being discussed here, all with similar sounding names. Here are the numbers on all of these, from their datasheets:

Aeroleds - Boise, ID - Sunspot 46LX - 70 watts - 7700 Lumens - 150000 candela - Certified $650. 110 lumens/watt and calculated beam angle 14 to 15 degrees to get these results. Landing/taxi light combo.

Aero-Lites - Thomaston, GA - Fusion 46LR - 51 watts - 5200 lumens - for 10 deg beam angle it's about 170000 candela using 14 of the 18 emitters for the narrow beam. Non certified $159. About 101 lumens/watt. Landing/taxi light combo.

Whelen Aviation Technologies - Parmetheus Pro PAR 46 series - 40 watts - calculated 14690 lumens using 240240 candela on a 16 degree beam width. Certified $599. Landing light (with taxi capability, not specified but their max candela graphic depicts wider beam width light out of the main beam, like the others) About 367 lumens/watt....? Aircraft Spruce lists this as 175000 candela on 16 degrees, or 10700 lumens and 267 lumens/watt.

The Aero-Lites bulb is clearly a good value assuming one wants to go through any potential certification hassle. My AMT had no issue with it. The WAT bulb is very late technology and very bright, but AFAIK LEDs are still at 100-120 lumens/watt efficacy at present. Perhaps Whelen has made a breakthrough on LED efficacy which would explain the numbers....or I have made some other calculation error. Whelen's data sheet on the 45 minute run indicates these late bulbs do better on thermal management, meaning more consistent output as they are operated and then heat up.

Would be fun to run these three side by side.

[OSUAV8TER]

7 hours ago, testwest said:

OK, I got that video posted. There are three separate and distinct products being discussed here, all with similar sounding names. Here are the numbers on all of these, from their datasheets:

Aeroleds - Boise, ID - Sunspot 46LX - 70 watts - 7700 Lumens - 150000 candela - Certified $650. 110 lumens/watt and calculated beam angle 14 to 15 degrees to get these results. Landing/taxi light combo.

Aero-Lites - Thomaston, GA - Fusion 46LR - 51 watts - 5200 lumens - for 10 deg beam angle it's about 170000 candela using 14 of the 18 emitters for the narrow beam. Non certified $159. About 101 lumens/watt. Landing/taxi light combo.

Whelen Aviation Technologies - Parmetheus Pro PAR 46 series - 40 watts - calculated 14690 lumens using 240240 candela on a 16 degree beam width. Certified $599. Landing light (with taxi capability, not specified but their max candela graphic depicts wider beam width light out of the main beam, like the others) About 367 lumens/watt....? Aircraft Spruce lists this as 175000 candela on 16 degrees, or 10700 lumens and 267 lumens/watt.

The Aero-Lites bulb is clearly a good value assuming one wants to go through any potential certification hassle. My AMT had no issue with it. The WAT bulb is very late technology and very bright, but AFAIK LEDs are still at 100-120 lumens/watt efficacy at present. Perhaps Whelen has made a breakthrough on LED efficacy which would explain the numbers....or I have made some other calculation error. Whelen's data sheet on the 45 minute run indicates these late bulbs do better on thermal management, meaning more consistent output as they are operated and then heat up.

Would be fun to run these three side by side.

 

Yes, lab results show that AeroLED overdrives their diodes so they have trouble dissipating heat so they do not maintain advertised output for very long.  

[testwest]

That is kind of what I expected....thermal management of LEDs is a big issue. I wonder what Aero-Lites uses for an emitter. The latest Cree XHP 35.2 is about 500lm per emitter using about one amp max drive (12 watts), 18 of those would be about 9000lm.

Obviously there is a lot of technical information behind these devices, again a 30 minute burn-in test on a taxi way range with the three above mentioned lights side by side would be most....illuminating.

*

*

*

Sorry about that, I simply could not resist.

And sorry about that, I am not sure watt's wrong with me.

[Seth]

In my K cowling on my M20J Missile, I have two PAR 36 spots. Thus I used two Aero LED's. One landing light, and one three position taxi light. So the landing light is on or off solid, and the taxi light I have set to be on, off, or blink. Usually during almost all operations the landing light is on. During taxi the tax light is on. During takeoff/landing/climb decnet, and cruise during the day I pulse the taxi light. During night ops I have it solid.

I would go with the Aero LED version that has the pulse feature (three way switch) so that while in the air you can pulse your light - much easier to pick up. 

Of course, for 1/4 the price to go with a good LED bulb - that's not bad either if you are fine with not certified parts - which may of us are.

-Seth

[OSUAV8TER]

14 hours ago, Nukemzzz said:

To be clear, I’m not knocking the Aero-Lite.  Perhaps it’s a good value, especially if you can avoid the additional price that comes with “airplane part”.  I’m a sucker for overpaying for top of the line stuff though. Possible character flaw. lol 

I mean I bought Bose headsets and I don’t have my PPL yet or a functioning airplane and I’m now at risk of paying a whole lot of money for a landing light and have yet to land a night myself with my currently installed incandescent GE bulb. But the cowl is laying there in the hanger and calling my name “Put a really fancy LED in me, you know you want to...”. I reason it out as: I’ve spent a metric ton of money and time on this plane this year and if I put a good LED in it now it’s one thing I’ll never have to mess with again. I laughed at these new $600 Apple headphones, but found myself watching YouTube reviews on them today. I might need counseling. LMAO 

I can help you with really expensive LED landing lights :). I have two PAR-46 Parmetheus Pro lights in the wings of my Bonanza and they are phenomenal lights. I pulse them with a Precise Flight PulseLite 1210 module. It's a pretty slick setup! 

 

You can email me at gallagheraviationllc@gmail.com for a quote or visit my website www.gallagheraviationllc.com

[Steve W]

3 hours ago, OSUAV8TER said:

Yes, lab results show that AeroLED overdrives their diodes so they have trouble dissipating heat so they do not maintain advertised output for very long.  

This was noticeably visible and measurable when I was testing the PAR 36 in my hangar bound Mooney at the time. I emailed them and they said they'd be fine with airflow. But with the wing mounted late M20J lights I'm not sure how much airflow there would be. I never got to check with them actually in motion before it was sold.

[OSUAV8TER]

7 hours ago, Steve W said:

This was noticeably visible and measurable when I was testing the PAR 36 in my hangar bound Mooney at the time. I emailed them and they said they'd be fine with airflow. But with the wing mounted late M20J lights I'm not sure how much airflow there would be. I never got to check with them actually in motion before it was sold.

Yes I have heard that same claim that they are fine with airflow but there are many aircraft models that have lights behind lenses. My V tail Bonanza has them behind lenses. Cessnas with wing lights have them behind lenses... You SEE the picture! Pun intended :)! 

[gsxrpilot]

I got my LED landing and taxi lights from @LANCECASPER. No paperwork, PMA, STC, or otherwise. But they're just light bulbs. If I remember back then they were $60 each. Five years later, still working great!

[amillet]

Both landing and taxi lights are from @LANCECASPER

All four are on for this approach 

[LANCECASPER]

8 hours ago, amillet said:

Both landing and taxi lights are from @LANCECASPER

All four are on for this approach 

Looks like a 747 coming in  

[flyer338]

I am doing my annual. I intend to replace the landing and taxi lights with LED bulbs. My 1983 201 has two taxi-lights in the right wing (I do not know how that happened; the Mooney parts manual does not show a wing mounted light for my serial number) and a landing light in the cowl. I would appreciate it if @LANCECASPER would contact me privately to consult.

The lights to be replaced are GE Q4509 (x2) and GE4522.

[ZuluZulu]

10 minutes ago, flyer338 said:

I am doing my annual. I intend to replace the landing and taxi lights with LED bulbs. My 1983 201 has two taxi-lights in the right wing (I do not know how that happened; the Mooney parts manual does not show a wing mounted light for my serial number) and a landing light in the cowl. I would appreciate it if @LANCECASPER would contact me privately to consult.

The lights to be replaced are GE Q4509 (x2) and GE4522.

There's at least one other '80s J with the same configuration...

 

[OSUAV8TER]

Aerolite vs WAT Parmetheus Pro. If you fly at night, I don't recommend the Aerolite. If you're a daytime VFR flyer that just wants to reduce the amperage on your electrical system then that is about all it is good for. You should just stick with you incandescent light bulb versus the Aerolite IMO if you're considering it for night flying. You get what you pay for. These are PAR-36 size.

[OSUAV8TER]

I wanted to get the drone up into the air but it was gusting to 25 with temps in the mid thirties and raining so I elected not to fly it :). Also, the ambient light around the airport didn't help. I need to find a less bright spot to do this test again. With darker places comes its own challenges. I edited the photos in photoshop to balance the color a little bit because both lights have different color temperature, which threw off my DSLR sitting on a tripod while taking the photos. As you can see, the camera never moved for perspective. 

[carusoam]

Looks like you used an official test bench for the experiment.... 

-a-

[OSUAV8TER]

8 hours ago, carusoam said:

Looks like you used an official test bench for the experiment.... 

-a-

I think it is a Coleman brand test bench  

[PJClark]

Aero Lites PAR 36 landing and taxi.