Cherokee 140 LED NAV lights?

All this over a damn light bulb.

Your-face-When-it39s-time-to-be-petty-meme-46222.jpg
 
unsafervguy said:
no, because i have not seen anything that can be submitted to the FAA to show that they comply with the fars to get a field approval. until you have that documentation they are illegal to install on an aircraft. last time i checked, the FAA does not accept, "it said so on their web site" as acceptable data.
by the way, i sent an email to the manufacture asking if the test data was available to obtain a field approval, so far crickets from them.
bob
Click to expand...

So what if the guy does send you the test data? Then what will you say?
 
unsafervguy said:
thats all good that you don't care if you are compliant with the FAA. but the IA that puts his signature in your log books every year had better. their certificates are on the line.

bob
Click to expand...

I'm going to guess that 98% of IA's don't check lightbulb part numbers. If I thought my IA would actually have an issue with them, I'd simply put incandescent bulbs in for the annual to make everyone happy then swap them back out. Easy peasy.
 
bradg33 said:
I'm going to guess that 98% of IA's don't check lightbulb part numbers. If I thought my IA would actually have an issue with them, I'd simply put incandescent bulbs in for the annual to make everyone happy then swap them back out. Easy peasy.
Click to expand...

WOW you are a rebel!
 
CC268 said:
So what if the guy does send you the test data? Then what will you say?[/QUOTE
Click to expand...

I just now saw the document that you posted from last night.that is what I needed to see, it shows that it has met SAE/AS 8037 REV b which spells out what the FAR requires. that is acceptable data.

bob
 
unsafervguy said:
I just now saw the document that you posted from last night.that is what I needed to see, it shows that it has met SAE/AS 8037 REV b which spells out what the FAR requires. that is acceptable data.

bob
Click to expand...

Good to hear
 
in not trying to be a hard...s about little things like this, but all it takes is a FAA inspector walking around the airport to see something on an airplane that does not look right to him, IE a lightbulb that does not look like they have since grimes invented the thing, to find a red tag on your airplane. then you are spending a lot of time and money defending your certificate for flying an un-airworthy aircraft. The FAA really only cares about 1 thing, paperwork, if its in order everything is good, if not somebodies certificates are on the line.

bob
 
mtuomi said:
So - making a red LED that looks as bright as a green LED costs more, because it has to be brighter.
Click to expand...

No, you just run more current through it (unless you are at the current limit spec of the device) to equalize the apparent brightness.
 
unsafervguy said:
I just now saw the document that you posted from last night.that is what I needed to see, it shows that it has met SAE/AS 8037 REV b which spells out what the FAR requires. that is acceptable data.

bob
Click to expand...
Bob ... I'm just curious. The document that was posted is a repeat of what is on the website, but I don't see the manufacturer's name on the tag. I sure hope it is in that black circle to the left that you can only see a small fraction of. Would you accept what was posted as sufficient to accept the lamp? Just curious.

Jim
 
unsafervguy said:
in not trying to be a hard...s about little things like this, but all it takes is a FAA inspector walking around the airport to see something on an airplane that does not look right to him, IE a lightbulb that does not look like they have since grimes invented the thing, to find a red tag on your airplane. then you are spending a lot of time and money defending your certificate for flying an un-airworthy aircraft. The FAA really only cares about 1 thing, paperwork, if its in order everything is good, if not somebodies certificates are on the line.

bob
Click to expand...


Fortunately for the mechanic, regarding unapproved light mods, "wasn't that way when I annualed it" should cover them reasonably.
 
weirdjim said:
Bob ... I'm just curious. The document that was posted is a repeat of what is on the website, but I don't see the manufacturer's name on the tag. I sure hope it is in that black circle to the left that you can only see a small fraction of. Would you accept what was posted as sufficient to accept the lamp? Just curious.

Jim
Click to expand...
the company responded to my email today with the same information plus a bit technical data of how the tests are performed along with the standards that they meet. he also gave me his phone number to call and discuss any questions I might have. you are correct that the full name does not seem to appear on the form sent with the units. I think that with the form and the email that he sent I would be inclined to sign it off, but I might consider a visit with the fsdo to discuss it. I would suggest to them that the full name of the company, address, and phone be put on the form.
 
CC268 said:
You know I've said it to you before and I will say it again - not surprised to see a jerk such as yourself make a worthless comment. Your a borderline troll in my book. Thanks for calling my Cherokee an antique.

Honest question - why do you reply to threads when you have nothing useful to say?
Click to expand...
Our cherokees are not Antiques - according to EAA, they are Vintage aircraft.
 
Kind of crappy photos, but here you go. Love them. Very bright.

IMG_1473[1].JPG IMG_1476[1].JPG IMG_1481[1].JPG IMG_1496[1].JPG IMG_1497[1].JPG IMG_1498[1].JPG
 
CC268 said:
It was technically GRG55 that posted the link to them :p
Click to expand...
Yes I posted no link. I did point out that they existed a fact of which you appeared to be unaware. So you are still welcome.
 
Clark1961 said:
Yes I posted no link. I did point out that they existed a fact of which you appeared to be unaware. So you are still welcome.
Click to expand...

Let's just all sit back and look at the LEDs and enjoy them now
 
As an aside on this whole silly thread and @weirdjim losing his crap on the "more expensive to make" comment...

I believe the thing not carefully noted was the manufacturer may have said the entire bulb assembly as a whole might be more expensive to build for the bright red ones than the other style.

Jim focused in on (pun intended!) the LEDs themselves, but without looking at the entire assembly may have completely missed that a change in current draw may have dictated a different physical layout to the internals of the bulb layout which meant a heatsink had to be placed behind the LEDs on the board or all sorts of possible other design changes that made some factory in China triple their assembly price on the silly things.

I've seen stupid crap in a board layout triple the cost of even hobbyist level PCBs because some size limit for panelization of the board or a limitation of the pick and place machine was missed by a fraction of an inch. Or a drilled hole wasn't a standard size for their drilling machine with the bits they usually run the production line with.

Let alone assembly costs when someone has to physically put the board inside a lens and glue it in or whatever, and the fab doesn't like the oddball angles required or a tight spec on how far off that angle can be... etc etc etc.

Any little manual intervention of their mostly highly automated processes to get the insanely low prices one can have a Chinese fab make something like a lightbulb, is an easy way to triple the cost. Or more.

They like stuff that's within specific parameters. And many have god-awful documentation on what those parameters are. You just send the quote and the board layout files and then if you're lucky, pick through cryptic notes in semi-Chinese semi-English or send emails back and forth hoping they can go find a translator who can explain why a 35* angle cut on a PCB costs five times as much as a 45* angle.

So yeah. I can see how making one type of "bulb assembly" can be a LOT more expensive than another.

Even in the hobby electronics "market" you can tweak your board layout and re-submit the files and watch the price fall from "must be manually run through our fab line" to "it'll be there overnight shipping for such an incredibly low price you'll wonder how it even covers the cost to put it on a cargo aircraft in tiny quantity".

The fab and assembly houses these days are "quirky" at worst, "trying to make you design a certain way so humans don't have to touch the thing ever" at best.

It may not be about the LED specs at all. The LEDs themselves are dirt dirt cheap and have been forever.

I suspect the "paddle" assembly triggers something at the fab house that the "Christmas tree" assembly doesn't. Probably can stuff the Christmas tree into the bulb assembly with a machine and need a human to line up the paddle. But that's speculation.

The owner saying the paddle style costs more to make can be either BS, marketing (brighter means more $!), or a real assembly line cost. Probably nowadays, a little of all three.
 
denverpilot said:
The owner saying the paddle style costs more to make can be either BS, marketing (brighter means more $!), or a real assembly line cost. Probably nowadays, a little of all three.
Click to expand...

The thing is - the owner of said company told me to buy two cheap ones and one expensive one, instead of 3 expensive ones. Bob is a good guy.
 
mtuomi said:
The thing is - the owner of said company told me to buy two cheap ones and one expensive one, instead of 3 expensive ones. Bob is a good guy.
Click to expand...

Sounds like most small business people.

The silly LEDs in quantity are literally pennies. It's putting them into a product that works the way it's intended, that costs real money.

I don't know why Jim would assume other small business owners in aviation are out to get everyone, when he's also in that category. Or that the guy was talking about the LEDs themselves ONLY and not the entire product, when discussing product manufacturing costs.

I can buy a bag full of LEDs of all colors available in the visible spectrum for a few bucks per POUND these days*. It ain't about the LEDs.

* I wouldn't vouch for their quality or consistency though. But the "real deal" ones with a name brand and specifications one can count on, aren't much more per unit. They're "jellybean" components.

Heck, companies make a PROFIT on stupid little LED lights of all sorts at the Dollar Store, even.

$10 and an order at AliExpress or BangGood and you'll be awash in the things on your workbench today.

Now if we could just get designers to stop using the obnoxious bright blue ones on every piece of consumer electronics gear for the home, while the unit is in standby at night, lighting up the whole room... that was cool when blue LEDs were rare and expensive... not so much anymore... then maybe we're getting somewhere!

I also question Jim's statement that "cool white" is equivalent to "aviation white". 3000 Kelvin and higher nasty blue-white LEDs don't come anywhere close to matching the orange/yellow spectrum coming out of the crappy incandescent FAA approved light on the tail of my 182. That real bulb isn't anywhere near what LED makers call "cool white".

I couldn't even stand to put "cool white" LED bulb replacements in my house. Made the kitchen look like a hospital with overhead fluorescents. Bought off white almost "yellow" LEDs to mimic the incandescent bulbs that the fixtures originally came with and were designed for.

Still have a case or so of incandescents I bought when the powers that be were pushing CFLs (horrid light, horrid lifespan) and LEDs were still expensive as hell. Probably never use them, but if I ever need a space heater, or to warm up a barn or shed, they'll do nicely. LOL!
 
WannFly said:
they look really cooooool. quick question, do you have strobes along with the position lights? i have and wondering how i can get some cool lights like this and still keep the strobes... wheelan have the whole unit in LED but they are like 1500 a pop
Click to expand...

I have a strobe on the belly of my plane
 
CC268 said:
I have a strobe on the belly of my plane
Click to expand...
I replaced the tail beacon on the cherokee last year with the LED beacon. At some point, I may remove the strobe on the belly and possibly replace it with another LED strobe. Would love the wingtip LED/strobes but at $1500 + installation for the Whelen Orions, I'd rather spend the money on a Garmin G5.
 
murphey said:
I replaced the tail beacon on the cherokee last year with the LED beacon. At some point, I may remove the strobe on the belly and possibly replace it with another LED strobe. Would love the wingtip LED/strobes but at $1500 + installation for the Whelen Orions, I'd rather spend the money on a Garmin G5.
Click to expand...
+1
 
murphey said:
I replaced the tail beacon on the cherokee last year with the LED beacon. At some point, I may remove the strobe on the belly and possibly replace it with another LED strobe. Would love the wingtip LED/strobes but at $1500 + installation for the Whelen Orions, I'd rather spend the money on a Garmin G5.
Click to expand...

Yea I would love to go all LED...the Beacon and Strobe will be next I suppose...although I probably won't replace them unless they go out.
 
Hey Nate ...

You and I have been in this game long enough to see the Bede-s and the other snake oil merchants who have ripped off the general aviation market so that we've come to be just a bit suspicious of wild claims without hard data. My bs detector went off when I saw that these devices would meet specification up to 50k-ft. You and I both know that an environmental chamber that goes up to 50k isn't in the average lab, not even the ABOVE average lab. Same for a chromaticity spectrum analyzer. The feds are really specific as to what "red" and "green" really mean, and lab equipment that can do that measurement are as rare as a big-hearted FAA inspector. So, yes, my bs detector went off and continued to clang when all we got was website claims and vague references to "field approvals" that I still haven't seen. (Please, a 337 all by itself is NOT a field approval without an FAA stamp/signature in block 3.)

Yes, I like the light. It is nice and bright, and relatively (as airplane parts go) inexpensive. It is just that I've been fighting the "FAA approved" fight since 1973 and probably have a few more rounds to go before I pack it in. Roger on your observation that what seems to be a slight design change can move the product in China from a popcorn part to one that they give individual names to when they come down the assembly line.

I will stick by my guns to the necessity of having the red light be more expensive than the green. THere are half a dozen different ways of making this problem go away.

Have a great weekend.

Jim
 
Just got back from the airport, and talked to the A&P. He says there's no statement in the FARs regarding light bulbs. After all, Piper put off the shelf GE53 bulbs in the panel as original equipment.
 
murphey said:
Just got back from the airport, and talked to the A&P. He says there's no statement in the FARs regarding light bulbs. After all, Piper put off the shelf GE53 bulbs in the panel as original equipment.
Click to expand...

please suggest to your A&P that he read FAR23.1387 through FAR23.1401

bob
 
unsafervguy said:
please suggest to your A&P that he read FAR23.1387 through FAR23.1401

bob
Click to expand...
Those are "what" specifications, not "how to meet" the specifications. If something satisfies the specifications, obviously it's legal. Otherwise owner-fabricated parts that meet the specification and are fabricated using procedures and materials that meet AC 43.whatever, would not be allowed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top