 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
XeVision
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Ogden, Utah
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:55 pm Post subject: Lopresti HID claims |
 |
|
I order to avoid taking anything out of context I have posted the entire add from Lopresti personnel on the COPA (Cirrus) forums at the end of this post. Here is a link as well:
http://www.cirruspilots.org/forums/p/116256/479507.aspx#479507
They have made this same ridiculously exaggerated claim a few times in other adds and on their website in the last couple of years, even from their employees who claim to be "technical" and not "sales oriented."
"more light than a 747 and more than 1 million Lumens."
Facts are, a 35 watt HID including the ballast requires about 40 watts (input) to operate. It produces about 3200 lumens = Net result 91.4 lumens per watt from the bulb (35w) but including the ballast power losses, 80 lumens per watt, power going into the ballast. Now for a 50 watt HID (output to the bulb) the ballast will pull about 56 watts. This system produces about 5300 lumens. That makes 106 lumens per watt from the bulb and 95 lumens per watt again including the ballast losses.
Using these numbers plugged into the Lopresti claim of 1 million Lumens seen below. Here is the actual math: with 5300 lumens from a 50 watt HID you would need 188 HID systems to produce 1 million lumens.
Using instead 35 watt HID systems as they typically do, producing 3200 lumens each, it would require 312 HID systems. Obviously impossible. They are confusing Lumens with candlepower which are totally different. measurements with much different meanings. To produce 1,000,000 lumens using HID would require 800-1000 amps in a 12/14 VDC system or 10,500 to 12,500 watts (10.5 KW or 12.5 KW) To accomplish this you would need some VERY BIG capacity alternators or a ~20 HP generator just to run the lights. I won't waste any more time to show how ridiculous this claim is.
I can also assure you that a 747 has MUCH more landing light lumens output than the 3 HID lights Lopresti is selling in this package offering.
The argument could be made that this (747 statement) is meant as a "tongue in cheek" statement but the 1,000,000 lumens claim cannot.
I wish someone would "call them on the carpet" for these unchallenged claims. If anyone here is a COPA member or knows someone who is, please do so.
My point is they claim to be the experts on HID but then this kind of false information comes much (ALL) too frequently from them. When marketing their HID products.
Here is another link advertising this "hype": http://media.sbwire.com/files/Cirrus_AD.pdf
Just do a google search on "lopresti 1 million lumens" and you will find many pages of this stuff over the last 2-3 years. Anywhere from 750,000 lumens combined output from 2 lights to over 1,000,000 lumens from 3 of their HID lights of combined output. We even told AeroNews about the problem (wrote Jim a letter, which he did get) a couple of years ago when they did a "news" article including those claims and debunking it from a technical viewpoint as I just did here.
Dan Blumel - XeVision
| Lopresti wrote: | av8her Posted: 4 Dec 2009 12:32
rated by 0 users "But what if I want ALL your lights?
You asked, so we're answering...
LoPresti is pleased to offer a COPA-exclusive package deal for our SR22 G1/G2 TriTips™, bundled with our X2 BoomBeam™ cowling light for $5995.00 (Retail $7443.00)
This is the most comprehensive lighting offer we have ever extended to COPA members. With this package, your light output be over 1 million Lumens!! Just to give you an idea of the scale of that measurement… that's more light than a Boeing 747.
Aircraft lighting is not only important for safety of flight at night, but it is also imperative for daytime flight recognition. New automotive and motorcycle manufacturers clearly understand the safety benefits "Lights on" 24/7.
Details: The X2 technology, developed by LoPresti Aviation, is a powerful High Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting system designed specifically for aviation that consumes less power while increasing light output 300%-500% (tunable)!! The TriTips are modified wing tips that have HID BoomBeam lights in each side. To install the light pocket in your existing tips, we will bond the lighting system behind a custom designed lens assembly. (Your decals will be stripped off and your tips repainted Cirrus white).
* This offer is limited to one group of 10 COPA members by January 31, 2010.
* In order to be included on the list, you must sign up on the COPA thread for this discount.
List price: TriTips™ $6495, X2 BoomBeam™ $948 = $7,443 (+ S&H)
COPA offer - lighting package: TriTips and X2 BoomBeam = $5995 (+ S&H)
Shipping for this mod is $250-$500.
This offer applies to SR22 serial numbers 0002 thru 2437.
Allison Bergan
allison(at)loprestaviation.com |
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance).
Last edited by XeVision on Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:09 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:45 pm Post subject: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
| Quote: | <snip>
"more light than a 747 and more than 1 million Lumens."
|
<snip>
| Quote: | Using these numbers plugged into the Lopresti claim of 1 million
Lumens seen below. Here is the actual math: with 5300 lumens from a
50 watt HID you would need 188 HID systems to produce 1 million lumens.
|
I'm wondering if they're not confusing LUMENS of total
light output with a luminance of 1,000,000 Beam Center
Candle Power.
| Quote: | My point is they claim to be the experts on HID but then this kind
of false information comes much (ALL) too frequently from them. When
marketing their HID products.
|
Yeah . . . that 747 thing seems a bit of a stretch.
Raytheon did some light measurements on a Lopresti
system we installed on a Bonanza about 10 years ago.
I'll see if I can dig up the report. BTW, the system
they were offering then was not selected for production . . .
but then I don't know who was driving the program either.
It may have been a simple, inquisitive look-see.
But I do recall that some folks from the metrics
lab took some pattern data on the fixture.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XeVision
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Ogden, Utah
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:06 pm Post subject: Re: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
Yes, I agree but they used to talk candle power for at least 5 years prior then recently (2-3 years ago) started frequently using Lumens numbers instead.
Just added this to the first post.
Here is another link advertising this "hype": http://media.sbwire.com/files/Cirrus_AD.pdf
Just do a google search on "lopresti 1 million lumens" and you will find many pages of this stuff over the last 2-3 years. Anywhere from 750,000 lumens combined output from 2 lights to over 1,000,000 lumens from 3 of their HID lights of combined output. We even told AeroNews about the problem (wrote Jim a letter, which he did get) a couple of years ago when they did a "news" article (adds credibility) including those claims and debunking it from a technical viewpoint as I just did here. Jim never responded except to getting it, I guess he never passed it on to them for comment ???
Dan
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance).
Last edited by XeVision on Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:27 am Post subject: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
At 07:06 PM 12/5/2009, you wrote:
| Quote: |
Yes, I agree but they used to talk candle power for at least 5 years
prior then recently (2-3 years ago) switched to using Lumens instead.
Just added this to the first post.
Here is another link advertising this "hype":
http://media.sbwire.com/files/Cirrus_AD.pdf
Just do a google search on "lopresti 1 million lumens" and you will
find many pages of this stuff over the last 2-3 years. Anywhere from
750,000 lumens combined output from 2 lights to over 1,000,000
lumens from 3 of their HID lights of combined output. We even told
AeroNews about the problem (wrote Jim a letter, which he did get) a
couple of years ago when they did a "news" article (adds
credibility) including those claims and debunking it from a
technical viewpoint as I just did here. Jim never responded except
to getting it, I guess he never passed it on to them for comment ???
|
Interesting . . . and somewhat disappointing. I did
some work for Roy while he was at Mooney. I think
we (Electro-Mech and Mooney) was the first team to
use a microprocessor based trim position manager
that would automatically adjust magnitude and sign
of a servo-antiservo tab in response to pitch trim
position. The idea was to provide a constant stick-force
per G of vertical acceleration over the full range of
operating speeds. We flew it on the M-30. The processes
and science for that endeavor could not be fudged.
I would hope that the Lopresti quest for doing good
engineering was still present and strong.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eric M. Jones
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:20 pm Post subject: Re: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
Thanks,
We are fortunate that electrical units started out metric and haven't changed a bit. (Okay, there were Mhos, CPS and a few stragglers). Photometric units contain plenty of traps for the unwary.
BTW: "Cree Achieves 186 Lumens per Watt from a High-Power LED
High-performance chip and R&D package combine for record-setting efficacy"
Amazing.
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XeVision
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Ogden, Utah
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:20 pm Post subject: Re: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
| Eric M. Jones wrote: | Thanks,
Photometric units contain plenty of traps for the unwary.
BTW: "Cree Achieves 186 Lumens per Watt from a High-Power LED
High-performance chip and R&D package combine for record-setting efficacy"
Amazing. |
Yes, I agree with your first comment.
The 2nd is likely at lower drive levels, they (LED's) "droop" typically at higher drive levels.
We are watching the LED technology very closely. We work with Cree high powered LED's in our flashlight offerings. LED can make a very good taxi light now, but to collimate it for a landing light is still a big hurdle.
It still has a way to go to compete with HID for landing lights. Especially 50 watt or 75 watt HID as we now have, 5300 and 8300 Lumens output each respectively. 35 watt HID produces about 3200 lumens compared to ~1600 lumens from a 100 watt incandescent such as the well known GE4509, very common in light single and twins. Also the 24/28 volt version of the same 100 watt lamp, the same 1600 lumens.
The 250 watt sealed beam incandescent aircraft lamps produce almost the same lumens as a 35 watt HID.
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bicyclop(at)pacbell.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:41 am Post subject: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
HIDs and LEDs are obviously better in lumens/watt than halogen. How about lumens/$ ?
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
XeVision wrote: [quote] | Quote: | --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "XeVision" <dblumel(at)XeVision.com> (dblumel(at)XeVision.com)
Eric M. Jones wrote:
| Quote: | Thanks,
Photometric units contain plenty of traps for the unwary.
BTW: "Cree Achieves 186 Lumens per Watt from a High-Power LED
High-performance chip and R&D package combine for record-setting efficacy"
Amazing.
|
Yes, I agree with your first comment.
The 2nd is likely at lower drive levels, they (LED's) "droop" typically at higher drive levels.
We are watching the LED technology very closely. We work with Cree high powered LED's in our flashlight offerings. LED can make a very good taxi light now, but to collimate it for a landing light is still a big hurdle.
It still has a way to go to compete with HID for landing lights. Especially 50 watt or 75 watt HID as we now have, 5300 and 8300 Lumens output each respectively. 35 watt HID produces about 3200 lumens compared to ~1600 lumens from a 100 watt incandescent such as the well known GE4509, very common in light single and twins. Also the 24/28 volt version of the same 100 watt lamp, the same 1600 lumens.
The 250 watt sealed beam incandescent aircraft lamps produce almost the same lumens as a 35 watt HID.
--------
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance).
Read this topic online here:
[url=http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 76789#276789]http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 76789#276789[/url]
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eric M. Jones
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:42 pm Post subject: Re: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
| Quote: | HIDs and LEDs are obviously better in lumens/watt than halogen. How about lumens/$ ?
Pax,
Ed Holyoke |
Ed,
Lumens per dollar is probably not an interesting number. The battery cost and power supply cost and replacement costs are more important. A magnesium flare excels in lumens per dollar.
Light bulbs are usually classed in lumen-hours per dollar. For the pilot this is less important than factors such as lumens per pound (all other things being equal) lifetime, etc.
What is best, is a matter of accounting.
One more issue...the matter of "Throw". This is not a contemporary photometric unit, and is expressed in "Peak Beam Candlepower". It is the brightest spot on a far-field light beam. It is a function of the optics, not the lamp (or whatever you want to call the thing that makes light in an LED.
To achieve the highest "throw" for given lumens, you need the tiniest source and the biggest reflector (or short-focus huge lens). It is also true that the lumens put out decrease on the sides if you send them to the middle, since lumens are what the lamp puts out, regardless of how they are steered.
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XeVision
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Ogden, Utah
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: Lopresti HID claims |
|
|
Ed,
Great question and glad you asked it.
A better way to compare them (than cost per lumen) is cost per hour (actual usage). In the cost per lumen approach as you suggest, the INSTALLED cost for Halogen is about $0.05 per lumen, for HID INSTALLED cost it is about $0.15 per lumen so about triple the cost per lumen compared to the Incandescent option. Using $850 installed on HID (50 watt) ~5500 lumens and $80 installed on a 4509 with 1600 ~lumens.
The incandescent lamps are good for 20-100 hours. Being liberal (optimistic) we will use 50 hours for this calculation as a safe avg. For a very common usage 100 watt GE4509 delivered (shipping) you can expect to pay at least $20 / 50 hours = $0.40 per hour. This does not consider down time costs or labor costs to install the GE4509 replacement, which likely raises this cost by a very significant factor. It might cost $60 for a mechanic to install the replacement 4509. This would now push the cost per usage hour to $1.60
For a 35 watt HID installed $500 HID + $300 (High estimated install cost) = $800 / 3000 (3000 hr warranty) = $0.27 per hour. (27 cents per hour).
In all fairness, since the max warranty is 5 years, if you only fly 100 hours per year X 5 = 500 hours. $800/500 hrs = $1.60 per hour. That is assuming it fails at 5 years and 500 hours which is NOT very likely.
The 100 watt unit only produces about 1600 lumens of light while the HID about 3200 lumens, about double plus it is a much whiter more useful light. Better contrast etc. It also reaches much farther out.
Since LED in our opinion is not yet suitable as a landing light except for possibly VERY SLOW landing aircraft, I will not bother to compare them. They can only be a very good taxi light at this time.
When comparing these 2 technologies (HID & Incandescent) on a cost per hour basis, HID is a clear winner by a very large margin. And the performance comparison ?? There is "NO comparison". The 100 watt GE4509 is a "candle" compared to even a 35w HID.
Dan
[quote="bicyclop(at)pacbell.net"]HIDs and LEDs are obviously better in lumens/watt than halogen. How about lumens/$ ?
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
XeVision wrote: | Quote: | | Quote: | --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "XeVision" <dblumel> (dblumel(at)XeVision.com)
Eric M. Jones wrote:
| Quote: | Thanks,
Photometric units contain plenty of traps for the unwary.
BTW: "Cree Achieves 186 Lumens per Watt from a High-Power LED
High-performance chip and R&D package combine for record-setting efficacy"
Amazing.
|
Yes, I agree with your first comment.
The 2nd is likely at lower drive levels, they (LED's) "droop" typically at higher drive levels.
We are watching the LED technology very closely. We work with Cree high powered LED's in our flashlight offerings. LED can make a very good taxi light now, but to collimate it for a landing light is still a big hurdle.
It still has a way to go to compete with HID for landing lights. Especially 50 watt or 75 watt HID as we now have, 5300 and 8300 Lumens output each respectively. 35 watt HID produces about 3200 lumens compared to ~1600 lumens from a 100 watt incandescent such as the well known GE4509, very common in light single and twins. Also the 24/28 volt version of the same 100 watt lamp, the same 1600 lumens.
The 250 watt sealed beam incandescent aircraft lamps produce almost the same lumens as a 35 watt HID.
--------
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance).
Read this topic online here:
[url=http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 76789#276789]http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 76789#276789[/url]
|
[b] |
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
LED still has a long way to go to compete with HID as a landing light. This is true in terms of total lumens and reach (distance). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
