Ditching the huge beacon

[James331]

Hey guys,

Got a question about the huge beacon on my 78' 185s tail, I hate the thing.

So I found this

Tail fin with no beacon
http://www.steneaviation.com/products/sa-0742025-1

LED position lights with strobes
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pages/el/ledlighting_zaeroleds/aeroledspulsar1.php

Wingtips for said lights.
http://www.steneaviation.com/products/sa-0723200-56led



This would remove the beacon from my tail, said wiring and switch, the old school strobes and incandescent bulbs from my wingtips and the huge power boxes for said old school strobes, more aero dynamic, better light quality, less weight and less complex.


So the question is, if I install this stuff can I legally ditch the flashing red beacon and said wiring from the top of my tail?

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

Ugh, I read "Huge bacon". I was going to offer to take it.
NM

 

[Tom-D]

LED position lights with strobes
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pages/el/ledlighting_zaeroleds/aeroledspulsar1.php


So the question is, if I install this stuff can I legally ditch the flashing red beacon and said wiring from the top of my tail?

the short answer is no. ---- unless the STC says it complies with FAR 23 for lighting requirements.

 

[James331]

the short answer is no. ---- unless the STC says it complies with FAR 23 for lighting requirements.

If it's TSOed as a nav/strobe wouldn't it meet 23?

 

[unsafervguy]

the TSO version does meet the requirements of part 23, the question is does the new wingtips meet the light pattern of part 91 for anti-collision lights. It may still require a tail mounted strobe to meet the light pattern required by part 91. if thats the case, they make the suntail for that function.

bob

 

[James331]

the TSO version does meet the requirements of part 23, the question is does the new wingtips meet the light pattern of part 91 for anti-collision lights. It may still require a tail mounted strobe to meet the light pattern required by part 91. if thats the case, they make the suntail for that function.

bob

Ok...

So if I'm reading this correctly, the NS180s are 180 degrees a piece, one on each wing tip gives me full coverage as I'm reading it.

So I could get away with ether a plane jane stock tail position light, or toss a LED bulb in, presuming I could buy a single one that would fit and wouldnt cause the FAA to have a fit.

 

[GlennAB1]

"Ditching the huge beacon" is that anything like "The ditching balls" on an old Boeing?

 

[Tom-D]

the short answer is no. ---- unless the STC says it complies with FAR 23 for lighting requirements.

change that to FAR 91,205
(c) Visual flight rules (night). For VFR flight at night, the following instruments and equipment are required:
(1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Approved position lights.
(3) An approved aviation red or aviation white anticollision light system on all U.S.-registered civil aircraft. Anticollision light systems initially installed after August 11, 1971, on aircraft for which a type certificate was issued or applied for before August 11, 1971, must at least meet the anticollision light standards of part 23, 25, 27, or 29 of this chapter, as applicable, that were in effect on August 10, 1971, except that the color may be either aviation red or aviation white. In the event of failure of any light of the anticollision light system, operations with the aircraft may be continued to a stop where repairs or replacement can be made.

If it's TSOed as a nav/strobe wouldn't it meet 23?

Not necessarily, it may be TSOed for manufacturing, but does the STC say it will meet the requirements of 91.205?

 

[Timbeck2]

"Ditching the huge beacon" is that anything like "The ditching balls" on an old Boeing?

Oh I did that after the twins were born....oh wait...you meant something else. As you were.

 

[Timbeck2]

Did ya here it?

 

[n9144p]

My plane is in the before 1971 group. I was able to get rid of the top and bottom beacons with Whelen Orion 650 and 500 LED lights/beacons. Coupled with LED landing lights I now fly with everything on. Before LED's I had to turn my landing lights off to lower the gear so the breaker wouldn't trip and the strobes whined in the background over the headsets. LED's are great (but expensive).

 

[bnt83]

If it's TSOed as a nav/strobe wouldn't it meet 23?

Per their website its only TSO C30c which basically
approves the color and intensity of the position lights only
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...7fce7626e61bbe86256da5006e1936/$FILE/C30c.pdf
e. Color and Intensity specifications. The chromaticity coordinates contained in AS 8037, paragraph 3.3.1 for aviation red, green, and white provide an equivalent level of safety to those specified in Section .1397 of FAR Parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. For national and international standardization these coordinates have been made identical to the existing International Civil Aviation Organization requirements. This also applies to specifying intensity in terms of “candles” in AS 8037 as opposed to “candles” in Sections .1391 and .1395 of FAR Parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. In practical application all existing aircraft position light installations meet both the TSO and FAR requirements.

Start reading the SYSTEM installation requirements in part 23...

§23.1385 Position light system installation.

(a) General. Each part of each position light system must meet the applicable requirements of this section and each system as a whole must meet the requirements of §§23.1387 through 23.1397.
(b) Left and right position lights. Left and right position lights must consist of a red and a green light spaced laterally as far apart as practicable and installed on the airplane such that, with the airplane in the normal flying position, the red light is on the left side and the green light is on the right side.
(c) Rear position light. The rear position light must be a white light mounted as far aft as practicable on the tail or on each wing tip.
(d) Light covers and color filters. Each light cover or color filter must be at least flame resistant and may not change color or shape or lose any appreciable light transmission during normal use.

§23.1387 Position light system dihedral angles.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, each position light must, as installed, show unbroken light within the dihedral angles described in this section.
(b) Dihedral angle L (left) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the left of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(c) Dihedral angle R (right) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the right of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(d) Dihedral angle A (aft) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes making angles of 70 degrees to the right and to the left, respectively, to a vertical plane passing through the longitudinal axis, as viewed when looking aft along the longitudinal axis.
(e) If the rear position light, when mounted as far aft as practicable in accordance with §23.1385(c), cannot show unbroken light within dihedral angle A (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section), a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.04 steradians is allowable within that dihedral angle, if such solid angle is within a cone whose apex is at the rear position light and whose elements make an angle of 30° with a vertical line passing through the rear position light.

§23.1389 Position light distribution and intensities.

(a) General. The intensities prescribed in this section must be provided by new equipment with each light cover and color filter in place. Intensities must be determined with the light source operating at a steady value equal to the average luminous output of the source at the normal operating voltage of the airplane. The light distribution and intensity of each position light must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Position lights. The light distribution and intensities of position lights must be expressed in terms of minimum intensities in the horizontal plane, minimum intensities in any vertical plane, and maximum intensities in overlapping beams, within dihedral angles L, R, and A, and must meet the following requirements:
(1) Intensities in the horizontal plane. Each intensity in the horizontal plane (the plane containing the longitudinal axis of the airplane and perpendicular to the plane of symmetry of the airplane) must equal or exceed the values in §23.1391.
(2) Intensities in any vertical plane. Each intensity in any vertical plane (the plane perpendicular to the horizontal plane) must equal or exceed the appropriate value in §23.1393, where I is the minimum intensity prescribed in §23.1391 for the corresponding angles in the horizontal plane.
(3) Intensities in overlaps between adjacent signals. No intensity in any overlap between adjacent signals may exceed the values in §23.1395, except that higher intensities in overlaps may be used with main beam intensities substantially greater than the minima specified in §§23.1391 and 23.1393, if the overlap intensities in relation to the main beam intensities do not adversely affect signal clarity. When the peak intensity of the left and right position lights is more than 100 candles, the maximum overlap intensities between them may exceed the values in §23.1395 if the overlap intensity in Area A is not more than 10 percent of peak position light intensity and the overlap intensity in Area B is not more than 2.5 percent of peak position light intensity.
(c) Rear position light installation. A single rear position light may be installed in a position displaced laterally from the plane of symmetry of an airplane if—
(1) The axis of the maximum cone of illumination is parallel to the flight path in level flight; and
(2) There is no obstruction aft of the light and between planes 70 degrees to the right and left of the axis of maximum illumination.

§23.1391 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of position lights.

Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Dihedral angle (light included)Angle from right or left of longitudinal axis, measured from dead aheadIntensity (candles)

L and R (red and green)0° to 10°
10° to 20°
20° to 110°​

40
30
5​

A (rear white)110° to 180°​

20​

The approvals it has doesn't cover any strobe aspects either.

23.1393 Minimum intensities in any vertical plane of position lights.

Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Angle above or below the horizontal planeIntensity, l

0°​

1.00​

0° to 5°​

0.90​

5° to 10°​

0.80​

10° to 15°​

0.70​

15° to 20°​

0.50​

20° to 30°​

0.30​

30° to 40°​

0.10​

40° to 90°​

0.05​

§23.1395 Maximum intensities in overlapping beams of position lights.

No position light intensity may exceed the applicable values in the following equal or exceed the applicable values in §23.1389(b)(3):
OverlapsMaximum intensity
Area A (candles)Area B (candles)

Green in dihedral angle L​

101​

Red in dihedral angle R​

101​

Green in dihedral angle A​

51​

Red in dihedral angle A​

51​

Rear white in dihedral angle L​

51​

Rear white in dihedral angle R​

51​

Where—
(a) Area A includes all directions in the adjacent dihedral angle that pass through the light source and intersect the common boundary plane at more than 10 degrees but less than 20 degrees; and
(b) Area B includes all directions in the adjacent dihedral angle that pass through the light source and intersect the common boundary plane at more than 20 degrees.

 

[bnt83]

That's pretty much why I canned the idea of dinking with mine.

 

[Tom-D]

Per their website its only TSO C30c which basically
approves the color and intensity of the position lights only
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...7fce7626e61bbe86256da5006e1936/$FILE/C30c.pdf
e. Color and Intensity specifications. The chromaticity coordinates contained in AS 8037, paragraph 3.3.1 for aviation red, green, and white provide an equivalent level of safety to those specified in Section .1397 of FAR Parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. For national and international standardization these coordinates have been made identical to the existing International Civil Aviation Organization requirements. This also applies to specifying intensity in terms of “candles” in AS 8037 as opposed to “candles” in Sections .1391 and .1395 of FAR Parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. In practical application all existing aircraft position light installations meet both the TSO and FAR requirements.

Start reading the SYSTEM installation requirements in part 23...

§23.1385 Position light system installation.

(a) General. Each part of each position light system must meet the applicable requirements of this section and each system as a whole must meet the requirements of §§23.1387 through 23.1397.
(b) Left and right position lights. Left and right position lights must consist of a red and a green light spaced laterally as far apart as practicable and installed on the airplane such that, with the airplane in the normal flying position, the red light is on the left side and the green light is on the right side.
(c) Rear position light. The rear position light must be a white light mounted as far aft as practicable on the tail or on each wing tip.
(d) Light covers and color filters. Each light cover or color filter must be at least flame resistant and may not change color or shape or lose any appreciable light transmission during normal use.

§23.1387 Position light system dihedral angles.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, each position light must, as installed, show unbroken light within the dihedral angles described in this section.
(b) Dihedral angle L (left) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the left of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(c) Dihedral angle R (right) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the right of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(d) Dihedral angle A (aft) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes making angles of 70 degrees to the right and to the left, respectively, to a vertical plane passing through the longitudinal axis, as viewed when looking aft along the longitudinal axis.
(e) If the rear position light, when mounted as far aft as practicable in accordance with §23.1385(c), cannot show unbroken light within dihedral angle A (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section), a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.04 steradians is allowable within that dihedral angle, if such solid angle is within a cone whose apex is at the rear position light and whose elements make an angle of 30° with a vertical line passing through the rear position light.

§23.1389 Position light distribution and intensities.

(a) General. The intensities prescribed in this section must be provided by new equipment with each light cover and color filter in place. Intensities must be determined with the light source operating at a steady value equal to the average luminous output of the source at the normal operating voltage of the airplane. The light distribution and intensity of each position light must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Position lights. The light distribution and intensities of position lights must be expressed in terms of minimum intensities in the horizontal plane, minimum intensities in any vertical plane, and maximum intensities in overlapping beams, within dihedral angles L, R, and A, and must meet the following requirements:
(1) Intensities in the horizontal plane. Each intensity in the horizontal plane (the plane containing the longitudinal axis of the airplane and perpendicular to the plane of symmetry of the airplane) must equal or exceed the values in §23.1391.
(2) Intensities in any vertical plane. Each intensity in any vertical plane (the plane perpendicular to the horizontal plane) must equal or exceed the appropriate value in §23.1393, where I is the minimum intensity prescribed in §23.1391 for the corresponding angles in the horizontal plane.
(3) Intensities in overlaps between adjacent signals. No intensity in any overlap between adjacent signals may exceed the values in §23.1395, except that higher intensities in overlaps may be used with main beam intensities substantially greater than the minima specified in §§23.1391 and 23.1393, if the overlap intensities in relation to the main beam intensities do not adversely affect signal clarity. When the peak intensity of the left and right position lights is more than 100 candles, the maximum overlap intensities between them may exceed the values in §23.1395 if the overlap intensity in Area A is not more than 10 percent of peak position light intensity and the overlap intensity in Area B is not more than 2.5 percent of peak position light intensity.
(c) Rear position light installation. A single rear position light may be installed in a position displaced laterally from the plane of symmetry of an airplane if—
(1) The axis of the maximum cone of illumination is parallel to the flight path in level flight; and
(2) There is no obstruction aft of the light and between planes 70 degrees to the right and left of the axis of maximum illumination.

§23.1391 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of position lights.

Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Dihedral angle (light included)Angle from right or left of longitudinal axis, measured from dead aheadIntensity (candles)

L and R (red and green)0° to 10°
10° to 20°
20° to 110°​

40​

30
5​

A (rear white)110° to 180°​

20​

The approvals it has doesn't cover any strobe aspects either.

23.1393 Minimum intensities in any vertical plane of position lights.

Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Angle above or below the horizontal planeIntensity, l

0°​

1.00​

0° to 5°​

0.90​

5° to 10°​

0.80​

10° to 15°​

0.70​

15° to 20°​

0.50​

20° to 30°​

0.30​

30° to 40°​

0.10​

40° to 90°​

0.05​

§23.1395 Maximum intensities in overlapping beams of position lights.

No position light intensity may exceed the applicable values in the following equal or exceed the applicable values in §23.1389(b)(3):
OverlapsMaximum intensity
Area A (candles)Area B (candles)

Green in dihedral angle L​

101​

Red in dihedral angle R​

101​

Green in dihedral angle A​

51​

Red in dihedral angle A​

51​

Rear white in dihedral angle L​

51​

Rear white in dihedral angle R​

51​

Where—
(a) Area A includes all directions in the adjacent dihedral angle that pass through the light source and intersect the common boundary plane at more than 10 degrees but less than 20 degrees; and
(b) Area B includes all directions in the adjacent dihedral angle that pass through the light source and intersect the common boundary plane at more than 20 degrees.

IF ..... it is STCed, you can throw all that paper work away, Specially if the local FSDO considers it a direct replacement.

 

[bnt83]

IF ..... it is STCed, you can throw all that paper work away, Specially if the local FSDO considers it a direct replacement.

they aren't....

 

[Ted]

I put Whelen Orion LED nav/strobes on the 310 last year and ditched the beacon on the tail (as well as the belly strobe). Based on the Whelen install manual, this is approved provided you meet certain light view requirements (basically, for 360 degrees around the plane from 1000 ft away you need to be able to see at least one light). The 310 required Orion 650E lights (tips) and Orion 500 (tail stringer). Orion 650s would be sufficient if the tips allowed 180 degrees of view. On the 310, the lights in the tips don't shine backwards.

I noticed a 5 kt speed improvement at 11k ft. I think this was a worthwhile change and I'm going to look into doing it on the 414.

 

[denverpilot]

I put Whelen Orion LED nav/strobes on the 310 last year and ditched the beacon on the tail (as well as the belly strobe). Based on the Whelen install manual, this is approved provided you meet certain light view requirements (basically, for 360 degrees around the plane from 1000 ft away you need to be able to see at least one light). The 310 required Orion 650E lights (tips) and Orion 500 (tail stringer). Orion 650s would be sufficient if the tips allowed 180 degrees of view. On the 310, the lights in the tips don't shine backwards.

I noticed a 5 kt speed improvement at 11k ft. I think this was a worthwhile change and I'm going to look into doing it on the 414.

The only downside to this, if one considers it a downside, is with both the AIM change and the Chief Counsel letter about use of anti-collision lights, you have no choice (unless you can prove they're causing a safety hazard) but to have them all on on the ground at all times nowadays.

Of course, technically that also goes for all of us with separate beacon and strobe systems also. The strobes must be on when the aircraft is "in operation" unless someone can prove they're a safety hazard.

Personally I don't care. My strobes are so wimpy they'll never bother anyone in daytime and I can prove they're a safety problem for the other airplane at night when taxiing. But the new LED stuff is often brighter, and may be bright enough to be a safety hazard or distraction to someone else during the day.

The AIM change and the letter sure tossed "Lights, Camera, Action" out the window though. I just flip them all on anymore (except Nav during the day and if they were LED I'd leave them on, too) and call it good unless I'm blinding someone.

Since my taxi light is LED, it's always on also. I've seen what our landing light (also LED) looks like from afar on the ground and it stays off unless needed.

Silly lawyer letters. Changing how we did stuff for decades. Leaving my strobes on on the ground isn't really going to accomplish much for safety. But who wants some ninny who's decided to read the letter calling "official" people complaining that someone isn't doing it right, to have you as a target? Other than the landing light, it's rare that anything is turned off on my airplane anymore, lighting wise.

So I guess I just argued myself away your "problem". LOL. Light em up! Haha.

 

[Tom-D]

they aren't....

Then the user will be required to do the field approval, showing they are in compliance with 91.205 and part 23 requirements.

 

[James331]

The only downside to this, if one considers it a downside, is with both the AIM change and the Chief Counsel letter about use of anti-collision lights, you have no choice (unless you can prove they're causing a safety hazard) but to have them all on on the ground at all times nowadays.

Of course, technically that also goes for all of us with separate beacon and strobe systems also. The strobes must be on when the aircraft is "in operation" unless someone can prove they're a safety hazard.

Personally I don't care. My strobes are so wimpy they'll never bother anyone in daytime and I can prove they're a safety problem for the other airplane at night when taxiing. But the new LED stuff is often brighter, and may be bright enough to be a safety hazard or distraction to someone else during the day.

The AIM change and the letter sure tossed "Lights, Camera, Action" out the window though. I just flip them all on anymore (except Nav during the day and if they were LED I'd leave them on, too) and call it good unless I'm blinding someone.

Since my taxi light is LED, it's always on also. I've seen what our landing light (also LED) looks like from afar on the ground and it stays off unless needed.

Silly lawyer letters. Changing how we did stuff for decades. Leaving my strobes on on the ground isn't really going to accomplish much for safety. But who wants some ninny who's decided to read the letter calling "official" people complaining that someone isn't doing it right, to have you as a target? Other than the landing light, it's rare that anything is turned off on my airplane anymore, lighting wise.

So I guess I just argued myself away your "problem". LOL. Light em up! Haha.

I'll still keep by bright flashing stuff off for ground ops, it is a saftey hazard in my opinion as PIC, when I enter a runway strobes and xpdr, once clear vise versa, I don't expect to see any ASI running after my plane on the ground yelling "strobes"!

 

[James331]

they aren't....

How so?

Why wouldn't a TSOed light be a direct replacment?

 

[Ted]

I don't view that as a downside, Nate. Personally I turn them on first thing anyway, I want to be seen.

I'm more concerned with drag reduction anyway.

 

[bnt83]

How so?

Why wouldn't a TSOed light be a direct replacment?

Not trying to be argumentative just looking at from an inspector position, the TSO is not installation eligibility. The TSO is pretty clear about what it does approve, which is very little.

 

[Tom-D]

How so?

Why wouldn't a TSOed light be a direct replacment?

TSO's are a standard, not eligibility. IOWs, this lighting system may change the type design of the aircraft. even tho the light system meets the TSO standard for strobes.

 

[James331]

I'll look into it further, but something tells me if someone went through the time and expense to make those skywagon wing tips and beaconless tip for those LED lights, they probably are good to go on a sky-wagon

 

[denverpilot]

I don't view that as a downside, Nate. Personally I turn them on first thing anyway, I want to be seen.

I'm more concerned with drag reduction anyway.

Yeah, halfway through my post I had talked myself out of it being a problem, anyway. LOL... But I was too committed to not hit Post Reply.

 

[Ted]

Yeah, halfway through my post I had talked myself out of it being a problem, anyway. LOL... But I was too committed to not hit Post Reply.

Improvement: Lights are brighter
Problem: Lights are too bright

 

[iflyvfr]

I wondered if someone was going to bring up that issue of the letter that says if you got 'em (strobes), you have to turn 'em on. I took the position that it was the polite thing to turn them off when exiting the runway, but now I wonder if tower is going to give me a number to call one of these days.

Part of me wonders if a low profile tail strobe was installed STCd, TSOd or not would anyone ever notice, care, or do anything about it?

 

[James331]

I wondered if someone was going to bring up that issue of the letter that says if you got 'em (strobes), you have to turn 'em on. I took the position that it was the polite thing to turn them off when exiting the runway, but now I wonder if tower is going to give me a number to call one of these days.

Part of me wonders if a low profile tail strobe was installed STCd, TSOd or not would anyone ever notice, care, or do anything about it?

I have never run strobes on the ramp or taxi ways, most of the big boys don't do it ether, I HIGHLY doubt anyone is going to give you any flack over it.

Thinking about it I've landed a few times with my strobes OFF, if I am going to be going in and out of IMC I kill the stoves to get ride of the flicker, I'm not messing with my strobes during a IAP just so I can be flashing for the 300' worth of VMC before touch down.

 

[kayoh190]

I'll look into it further, but something tells me if someone went through the time and expense to make those skywagon wing tips and beaconless tip for those LED lights, they probably are good to go on a sky-wagon

Wow - those things look great. Just say screw it and install 'em. There aren't any rules in Alaska anyway, right?

 

[Ron Lewark]

My son's and I installed the fin caps from Stene on their 57 straight tail 182 with the huge coffee can beacon and on my 185 with the smaller beacon more than ten years ago. We installed wingtip strobes and the tail light/strobe kit in the tail cone. We both gained around 20 knots. . Well, maybe a little less. The 180/185 club claims the large coffee can beacon on the 180/185 aircraft when removed could see an increase of up to 4-5 mph, the smaller one may produce 1-2 mph, or a little more. Tough to tell for sure, one would have to fly in the identical conditions to see if there was an increase in speed after a mod. The two aircraft look better with out those big beacons.

 

[unsafervguy]

Not trying to be argumentative just looking at from an inspector position, the TSO is not installation eligibility. The TSO is pretty clear about what it does approve, which is very little.


View attachment 45073

Bnt83 is right in that if they are tso'ed under c30 then they don't meet the requirements for anti collision which is tso c96a. Then there is the question of installation on the aircraft. The solution is the new tips with the whelean light which are tso'ed under c30 and c96a and have an stc for installation on the airframe.

 

[ircphoenix]

Apparently I missed something regarding strobes.

If I'm taxiing around at night, the strobes are off. If I'm entering/on/exiting a runway, they're on.

What changed?

 

[bnt83]

Bnt83 is right in that if they are tso'ed under c30 then they don't meet the requirements for anti collision which is tso c96a. Then there is the question of installation on the aircraft. The solution is the new tips with the whelean light which are tso'ed under c30 and c96a and have an stc for installation on the airframe.

I researched a Whelen STC for position lights with strobes and was a little shocked to find the STC only listed strobe regulations on it. Since that assembly includes position lights I expected the STC to list compliance with those installation regulations too. Their installation approval documents seem piecemeal together and there is no clear paper trail covering all strobe & position light regulations.

I think this falls into "don't poke the bear and use what they provide with the parts" category.

 

[Ted]

I researched a Whelen STC for position lights with strobes and was a little shocked to find the STC only listed strobe regulations on it. Since that assembly includes position lights I expected the STC to list compliance with those installation regulations too. Their installation approval documents seem piecemeal together and there is no clear paper trail covering all strobe & position light regulations.

I think this falls into "don't poke the bear and use what they provide with the parts" category.

That's interesting. Main thing I can say (having done the conversion on the 310, and planning to do it on the 414 as well) is that they work great, and the FAA approved the 337.

Not poking the bear is a wise move.

 

[denverpilot]

Apparently I missed something regarding strobes.

If I'm taxiing around at night, the strobes are off. If I'm entering/on/exiting a runway, they're on.

What changed?

In the real world, nothing.

In the Chief Counsel's world? A few more innocent brain cells have been killed reading their letter about it.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...2011/murphy - (2011) legal interpretation.pdf

 

[iflyvfr]

It certainly seems to contain wiggle room: Section 91.203(b) does give the PIC the discretion to turn off the. . .beacon and/or strobes. . .if the PIC determines its in the best interest of safety to turn off either one or both of the components of the lighting system (paraphrased). So, if I don't want to distract tower and other pilots as they taxi to/from or monitor taxiing A/C, I'm free to turn off my tip strobes.

 

[Atypicalguy]

I put Whelen Orion LED nav/strobes on the 310 last year and ditched the beacon on the tail (as well as the belly strobe). Based on the Whelen install manual, this is approved provided you meet certain light view requirements (basically, for 360 degrees around the plane from 1000 ft away you need to be able to see at least one light). The 310 required Orion 650E lights (tips) and Orion 500 (tail stringer). Orion 650s would be sufficient if the tips allowed 180 degrees of view. On the 310, the lights in the tips don't shine backwards.

I noticed a 5 kt speed improvement at 11k ft. I think this was a worthwhile change and I'm going to look into doing it on the 414.

Maybe there are newer threads on this, but 5kt is a huge speed increase for eliminating a single beacon. Or more fuel efficiency at the same speed. I guess the wingtip lights may have saved some also, but wow. I fly in LA and visibility is pretty important, so simply downsizing to the LED beacon is tempting. But for anyone flying long distances frequently, I can see the temptation to eliminate the beacon altogether. I am sort of surprised they didn't come out with a streamlined beacon and tail tip like they did for the wings.

 

[Wagondriver]

I removed one of those mason jar beacons from the back of my 180, put on a sun beacon 2. Super bright light, do not look at it even in bright sunlight. I saw zero increase in speed. Sun beacon 2 is about 1.75" in diameter and sticks up about 1.25", weighs a bunch less too.