Landing Light Performance

[VickersPilot]

I am not prepared to upgrade to the 50w. I’ll wait for an entirely redesigned solution to come to market. This whole landing-taxi light is a complete design error and should never have been certified. The first condition of any landing light is that one should be able to see outside, especially on a $2m aircraft.

[ememic99]

The first condition of any landing light is that one should be able to see outside, especially on a $2m aircraft.

Absolutely. With current level of LED lights development, it’s hard to believe nothing appropriate has been offered.

[mfdutra]

Yeah, any modern car has spectacular headlights. It’s a solved problem. Still new GA airplanes have pathetic lights.

Just had a night flight on a 737 MAX. Those LED headlights are really impressive.

[XeVision]

The first condition of any landing light is that one should be able to see outside, especially on a $2m aircraft.

Absolutely. With current level of LED lights development, it’s hard to believe nothing appropriate has been offered.

Well, all other things being equal, you can expect a significant increase in power requirements to offer comparable distance performance to 50 watt HID from LED. given the current space dimensional constraints.
"Everyone" thinks LED is always the panacea. in the available space (tunnels) there is no currently available LED made by anyone to perform as well as the 50 WATT HID
We are working on an potential (Diamond) LED solution that if successful will not be ready for production for a year or 2.

ALL of the existing manufacturers products besides our XeVision XeTREME LED have relatively pathetic performance distance (range or throw) for landing, they are well suited for taxiing.
They all use many small TIR optics the size of a dime or nickel at best, we use optics the size of the old large size silver dollar (1-3/8 diameter or 35 mm) we get 1/3 mile very useful illumination with 7 X 15 WATT rated LED's driven at 13 watts, they typically use 3-6 watt rated LED's (8 to 16 and even 30 LED's depending on manufacturer) We use active cooling and very efficient patented heat sink PCB technology, keeping the LED's very "Happy".
All of the others products have inadequate heat-sinking and thus cooling, so they must dramatically pull the power back, usually to about 1/2 power within 5-10 minutes of on time. The only way for them to improve this would be blast tube cooling air on the units heat-sink or out in the air stream, on the gear, etc.
Even the automotive industry is using active cooling in all of the better performing LED headlight systems, obviously there is a reason for this.
Check out this link below for more details regarding our current 4.5 inch (Par-36) round replacement using ~100 watts.

https://www.xevision.com/led_aircraft.html

[Boatguy]

What’s the DAN policy on commercial postings?

[ememic99]

I still haven’t got the answers on EASA approval and European purchase availability.

[chili4way]

I still haven’t got the answers on EASA approval and European purchase availability.

Earlier in this thread, the higher power ballast was installed using a 337 approval (single airplane, FSDO field approval). I didn't see any reference to an STC. That suggests that there isn't an EASA approval unless there is the possibility of the equivalent to a 337 approval process (and a reasonable "FSDO-equivalent.")

[XeVision]

I still haven’t got the answers on EASA approval and European purchase availability.

We have no representation in Europe. We only have a USA STC for this conversion on DA40's. Some detail info directly above, and in prior posts, the 2 ballasts are physically identical 35 vs 50, except for the taller heat sink fins. It's a simple direct swap. The 24/28 VDC input PCB (circuit board inside) is also identical just the output power settings are different.
They are tested for EMC (EMI & RFI) to RTCA DO160 (FAA standards) by a certified testing lab.

[chili4way]

What’s the DAN policy on commercial postings?

The stated policy is "Any recruiting, selling, or otherwise promoting services, products or businesses is strictly forbidden. Therefore, it is not ok to ask for offers, directly or indirectly." see Forum Guidelines, point #2. The question is, when does information cross the line into promotion or solicitation? ("Whenever you draw a line, you extend an invitation to a border skirmish."). It's tricky when a member asks for a solution to a problem, and posting a solution is considered a promotion or solicitation.

Also applicable is point #3, which limits all forums except the Public Forum to Diamond Aircraft staff and [current] owners of Diamond Aircraft. If strictly applied, it would eliminate former owners (and third parties, including some DASCs) who might have helpful information to share with owners. This provision also limits access to non-owner pilots and prospective owners of Diamond Aircraft. Strictly and consistently managing this would be a monumental task.

Managing this is the responsibility of the administrator and the moderators of the specific forum involved.

[XeVision]

What’s the DAN policy on commercial postings?

Managing this is the responsibility of the administrator and the moderators of the specific forum involved.

They moderate every post from me BEFORE it becomes visible to the membership here. Sometimes it takes a couple or even a few days before it becomes visible to everyone, usually within 24 hours though. Prior to approval, only I and the moderators can see it. They don't approve every post I've done and sometimes I have to modify it first. All of this is to be expected.