Disclaimer
I’ve been an Aeroleds fan since they first launched and install all their stuff on pretty much every airplane I work on with great success. I think their performance is top notch, but to me, their biggest value proposition are the Aeroleds people and their stand up customer service.

I should also say that while I’ve flown a bunch with the older Parmetheus lamps, I have limited experience with the latest generation of WAT lamps (only a ferry flight here and there.) Aeroleds is also a sponsor of BCP so I am biased due to their support of this forum. I was not asked to write this nor am being compensated… I just dig these guys and love to help them out.

Last month the dealers got a note about a new light, which they announced on Monday. The lamp is called the Sunspot 36LXi and competes against the Whelen G3.

As opinionated as I am, I like to think I have an open mind, always looking for the “best” stuff… but I have to say that the lamp industry is pretty confusing with all the terms that are bandied about… Lumens, candela, lux, watts…. yikes. It seems like different manufacturers tend to use whatever unit that falls in their favor to qualify and quantify why their lamp is the best.

So, the 36LXi… I’m always interested with innovation and new products, but when I saw that their new lamp was going from a candela of 65k to 140k (more than double) I was keen to learn more... sounded better right???

With respect to Aeroleds and landing/taxi lights, I have always used and installed their premium lamp, which in their latest 14v iteration (as I understand it) is the Sunspot 36-4313,4314 (landing/taxi) with integrated pulse. This is a 95w lamp with an internal solid state pulse feature (no separate dongle needed.) Aeroleds states a candela of 150k with a 20x20 beam profile. By all standards, this is an expensive lamp compared to the lower end LEDs as well as being more expensive than what I assume is the WAT competitor to the 4313, the Parmetheus Pro. $499 vs $650 respectively.

But what to pick and how to compare apples to apples?

In their literature, WAT says that their Parmetheus Pro landing light has a candela of 101k. They don't disclose the watts, but at 14v with a draw of 1.7amps, we presume that this is a 23w bulb. The Pro literature doesn't disclose a beam pattern, but their other lamp, the “Plus” states 10 degrees, so we might presume that the “Pro” is similar? If this is the case, the Pro at 10 degrees vs the Aeroleds at 20 is interesting. Apples to apples, it appears that the Aeroleds has higher candela with a wider pattern, which is done, in some part (I presume) with more wattage. 95w (for 14v) vs 23w, thus we assume more overall lumens?

As I understand it, WAT doesn't currently make a Pro taxi lamp, for that you presumably run the Plus lamp, which has a candela of 15k with a 40 degree pattern. Again, they don't market the wattage, but at 14v and 1.36amps the math says it's a 19w lamp. One could also run the new Parmethues G3 Taxi, which is considerably brighter than the Plus, but more on that below. Incidentally, Aeroleds does make a premium taxi light, which in contrast, like the landing light, is a 95w (for 14v) lamp with a 40 degree horizontal pattern. Even though this lamp has the same wattage as their landing light, the candela is less, 50k vs/ 150k. This is because of the wide beam... Wider beam with same wattage means less candela.

Let’s be clear, by no means am I an expert, maybe even a Holiday Inn patron, but the more I try to learn, the more I find myself getting confused with how to understand what the right light is for me and my mission. I’m also not implying that more wattage equals a better lamp, as this is just one component. Reflector geometry and lamp design have a lot do do with quantification of “brightness,” but thats beyond what I will go into here.

I should also take a second to say that when we talk about lumens, we are talking about the raw potential of the light, or total amount of light produced by a source. Lux is the total amount of light landing on a surface at a given distance, and a candela (or candle power) is the intensity of the light in a certain direction. [KC HiLites, (2021), Lumens vs Lux vs Candela, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQsfuYSAQBI] But I digress…

When I saw the new figures on the new Aeroleds Sunspot 36 LXi (01-1030-L-A) boasting an increase from a candela of 65k to 140k I was intrigued, but confused. With the 36 LXi around $300 cheaper than their premium 4313,4314 with almost the same candela (140k vs 150k) I found myself asking more questions.

As I mentioned at the onset, the thing I love about Aeroleds is their accessibility and customer service, so I gave Susan Calvin a call to get a better understanding.

I asked her to help me understand the difference in the lights… "if your LXi has almost the same candela, but is $300 cheaper, what is the need for 4313??"

This is when she started to go into how lights were quantified and the difference between candela, lux, lumens, and watts. She explained that the currency of the realm is watts… that it all starts with power. Once a manufacturer decides on the wattage they will use in a lamp, the next step is “how” they will “use” that power. She said that it was just simple math, and that manufacturers could choose different ways to manipulate that power. In the context of the same wattage, narrow beam pattern meant higher candela. Wider pattern meant lower candela… If you wanted to increase the candela AND have a wide pattern, you must increase the power (watts) which meant an overall greater lumen. The downside of course was price point, as the higher the wattage, the more expensive the light was going to be to produce.

They (Aeroleds) had a 45w bulb, and a 95w (for 14v) bulb, but quickly realized that they were missing a product for in between, and that the new LXi was created to fill this niche. (FWIW... Aeroleds has now discontinued the LX (45w bulb) in favor of the new and improved 75w LXi)

Here was the difference… At 75 watts, the LXi used a narrower pattern (14 degrees) to get close to the 95w (for 14v) 4313 with the wider pattern (20 degrees). Yes the two were close in candela, but the 4313 had greater overall lumens along with a wider pattern. This was the reason for the MSRP delta.

For some, a high candela was important. The LXi would now give customers the ability to run a punchy bright beam without breaking the bank. For those that wanted to have maximum lumens AND a wider beam, the 4313 was the choice. According to Susan, The LXi should be considered more of a “spot” beam; narrower concentration of light, where as the 4313 is overall brighter with double the spread. Great for punching way down the runway, but maybe not so good for catching the deer on the sides?

So what about the Parmetheus G3 compared to the new LXi?

As far as I can tell, WAT doesn’t list official numbers on the lamp, only a graph… But on their graph, it looks like the G3 has a candela of around 135k-ish. No published wattage, but at 14v and 3.6 amps, it looks like a 53w lamp. There isn't mention of the beam pattern, but with less wattage and less candela, I'm assuming like the LXi, has a tight beam pattern in order to keep the candela up.

Confused yet?? It's hard to know what statistic to use when comparing, but the interesting thing WAT does bring into the mix is “time."

On their marketing chart, WAT says that their G3 stays brighter over time. This seems to be the value prop and indeed seems like a compelling angle to investigate.

In their brochure, WAT’s G3 goes from the 135k-ish candela to 65k-ish after 45 min. In contrast, WAT says the Aeroleds 4313 after the 45min goes from a candela of 150k to 45k-ish (huge drop for sure). The LXi is not included in the WAT chart as it is brand new. As I understand their marketing materials, WAT’s lights have less candela when you turn them on initially, but end up suffering less from a drop-off over time.

If this time issue is true, this could be pretty important… however, I found myself asking; who is actually in the landing environment for 45 min? Does this test matter?

Ok… yes, with LEDs that wont burn out, we are now encouraged to run with the lamps on all the time for recognition. One could find themselves taking off in the afternoon, flying a 4 hour leg and landing in the dark. If the lamps have been burning that whole time, I surely don't want to be landing with a bulb that is a third less bright than the moment I turned it on!

Interesting yes… but more and more folks are using a pulsed lamp, so does this change the test? Does the bulb diminish if its pulsing?

This idea of “time” with respect to lamp intensity (however quantified) is indeed compelling, and the more I looked the WAT chart, the more I began to question the Aeroleds numbers.

To understand, I again called Susan. “What’s the deal with time? Is this important for Aeroleds, and do your lights really get dimmer over time?”

For this, Susan had me talk to Ryan Edmak, the Aeroleds director of sales. Ryan explained that the important thing to keep in mind is what they call an “isotropic” vs “non-isotropic” testing environment, meaning “with” vs “without” wind.

According to Ryan, if you tested their lights in a shop, on a bench, with no cooling (unlike on an airplane in flight) that their candela would indeed drop… it wasn’t theoretical, it was expected; but that this style of test didn’t mean much as it had no applicability to the real world. He said that when they conduct their tests, they take into account the cooling of the lamp; how the light is actually used in flight; with airflow. When the test is done in this matter, Aeroleds found no appreciable drop.

I personally have not seen this data, but if this is true, this is indeed interesting.

Anyway, I’m not sure I have the big picture yet, and what little I have learned so far makes me want to learn/understand more. Since this is a forum, I’d love to hear what other folks think, or hear of their experiences.

As I mentioned, Aeroleds is a current BCP sponsor, which is one of the reasons I was interested in taking the time to dig into this… Most of us really value this forum, so if a manufacturer makes a good product and stands behind their stuff, we might consider supporting them in return?

I would also encourage Aeroleds to take a moment to chime in. I’d love to hear what they have to say? Anything I’m misunderstanding or got wrong?

There are also members here who have had great experiences with the WAT lights and it would be great to hear those experiences.

FWIW, I did not reach out to WAT for this post and only read their available material on their website, so it's possible I have misinterpreted their material or testing methodology. If the Whelen team is reading and I have something wrong, please set me straight as it would be helpful for all that are interested.

I think if we all could understand how to qualify and quantify some of these products better, we might be able to make more informed decisions.

I would just add this one caveat; although the anecdotal “I’ve been running this for 10 years and have been happy” comments are fun, they really don't mean much when we are contrasting and comparing. Please contribute with substantive info. Perhaps you’ve done side by side testing, or maybe swapped one for another kind of thing… perhaps even experiences with each company or customer service stories?

At any rate, I hope this helps and or sparks a nice discussion.

Greg-


///////////

///////////


FWIW… I did some quick poking around the web as I was writing this and found some good info in the following article by Sigma Safety Corp.

Lumens and Lux and Candela, OH MY

There are really 3 main ways to judge the brightness of a light;
1) Lumens – this is the total light that a lighting fixture emits in all directions
2) Candela - this is the light that a fixture emits in a certain direction.
3) Lux – this is the measurement of how much light hits a surface to illuminate it.

LUMENS
Let’s start with Lumens because that is what most people (and companies) use when comparing various scene lights.

As you can see (hopefully) from the diagram above, Lumens show the total amount of light put out from a light source. With LEDs, this gets a bit tricky because most manufacturers use what they call “Raw Lumens“.

I would suggest that this is the most misunderstood term in the scene/work lighting world. What this means is that they haven’t actually measured the light coming out of a fixture. Rather, they are going by the LED manufacturer’s specifications for the LEDs themselves. If Cree (or whatever LED manufacturer) says that each LED emits 100 lumens, and the light manufacturer puts 10 of these LEDs in a fixture, then the manufacturer somewhat erroneously claims a 1000 Lumen output.

The difficulty with this measurement is that there are many factors to the brightness of an LED. For example, even a clear lens can suck up over 10% of the light output. If there are any optics to ‘bend’ the light in any direction, those can consume over 30% of the light. As the LEDs warm up, they can grow dimmer if the heat is not properly removed. So, in an extreme case, a 5000 lumen light can only really put out 2500 lumens. Why do manufacturers do this? First of all, because it’s easy – the manufacturer of the LED gives them the specifications for each LED so the manufacturer of the light simply adds them up and declares a “raw Lumens” number. Second, most manufacturers use this “raw” method so to have an actual Lumen measurement would mean your light is “dimmer” (on paper) than the competitors’. So, everyone tends to use the “raw Lumens” method.

We have had customers buy a 5000 lumen light that is twice the price, thicker, heavier, with a worse warranty, than a 4700 lumen light, just because of that extra 300 lumens. Of course, whether they can tell the difference in intensity of the light on the ground is unknown.

Very few, if any, manufacturers use Candelas for scene/work lights. They are quite common with warning (flashing) lights as that’s what SAE uses to measure a light. In the case of scene lights, however, pretty much no-one uses Candelas. So, let’s skip right over to Lux…


LUX
Lux is the measurement of light on a surface. Lux is the metric version of an older term you’ve probably heard of; foot-candles. Lux is a much more accurate and desirable measurement than Lumens.

You’ve probably seen a photographer with a handheld light meter, putting it beside a model’s face and triggering the flash to see how much light is being splashed on the subject? That photographer is measuring in Lux (they use a different scale, but essentially they are measuring Lux). You’ll note the photographer is not measuring right at the light itself, but rather where the light is hitting.

A Lux is 1 lumen covering 1 square meter. How does that equate to real life? Roughly speaking, 1 lux is about the equivalent of twilight. Your office is probably around 400-500 lux. A dark overcast day would be about 100 lux. Full daylight is 10,000-25,000 lux, and direct sunlight can get up to 100,000 lux.


LUX VS. LUMENS
Clearly, the end goal of scene/work lighting is to light up a working surface. Really, do we care how bright the light on the side of the truck is, as long as it emits the proper amount of working light on the ground?

Here’s an example; Manufacturer “A” has a scene light that uses 10 x 100 Lumen LEDs (according to the LED manufacturer). They put these in a light fixture but put them behind a thick, aggressive lens to “bend” the light down to the ground. Also, they don’t have a great heatsink on the back so the lights dim 25% after they warm up. The manufacturer claims 1000 lumens but at 10′ from the vehicle, the measured light on the ground is 100 lux.

Manufacturer “B” uses 8 of the same LEDs in their light. However, they use a much more efficient optic and power/heat-sink system so that the lights emit 95% of their rated Lumens. When measured at 10′ from the truck, Manufacturer “B’s” light emits 150 lux., yet the manufacturer can only claim 800 Lumens.

Which light is brighter? The one that emits more Lux at the same distance from the light. The Lumens, in this (and many cases) are irrelevant. Generally speaking, a 5000 lumen light will be brighter than, say, a 1000 lumen light. However, a 5000 lumen light may or may not be brighter than a 4700 lumen light, for example. The 4700 lumen light may be more efficient and have better optics so that it’s actually brighter, or at least the same as the 5000 lumen light.

Watts deserves a mention here as well. Can you judge the brightness of a light based on watts? Not at all, especially if you’re talking about LEDs. Watts is simply a matter of how much power a device draws. You could have an efficiently-designed light that draws 60 watts at puts out 400 lux @ 10 meters, or you could have a poorly engineered light that draws 90 watts yet puts out only 200 lux. It’s like trying to estimate the horsepower of a car strictly from its gas consumption numbers.

Another trick some manufacturers will do is to create a ‘hot spot’ in their light pattern to allow them to increase their rated numbers. They measure their light intensity (candelas or Lux) at this bright spot and say “peak intensity = xxxxx”. The keyword there is “peak”.

sigma safety hot spot.jpegIt tells you how bright the brightest part of the beam is, but doesn’t tell you how bright the rest of the light is. Ideally, you want a nice even light pattern with no ‘hot’ spots. Most manufacturers have “polar plots” or other light-pattern drawings that show these kinds of hotspots.

The polar plot here shows a popular LED “flood” light. You’ll note the extreme hotspot in the middle of the light pattern, that is only roughly 30 degrees either side of center, and only about 10 degrees high. It’s certainly not an ideal flood light pattern, but hey – it’s rated at 16,000 lumens and has a draw of 166 watts, so it must be bright, right? Your impression, when you stand in front of it at night, is that it’s a really bright light – and it is…right in the middle.

[Sigma Safety Corp, (2020), Lumens and Lux and Candela, OH MY! https://sigmasafety.ca/news/lumens-lux- ... inate%20it.]

Some helpful videos to understand Lumens, Lux, Watts, Candela

I have to say I had hoped this thread would spark some conversation... LOL. Perhaps it was too long?

It is a lot to digest, but that comes with advancing technology.

Thank you for taking the time & effort to research and summarize your findings; I appreciate it.

pat

Today I learned. If you need performance, switch your units. Change the game board. Kobayashi Maru.

This is all interesting to me and I applaud them for advancing technology but the cost of both Whelen and AeroLEDs landing/taxi lights has taken them out of my realm..

So one of the things that tends to happen in niche segments of aviation is that people tend to get more or less exposure to particular facets than perhaps the general masses.

As it turns out, in our location, about 85% - 90% of our flying 'day' occurs after dark, and by nature of the task at hand, virtually all of the actual 'work' time occurs with high intensity lighting. The modern military pilots with lot's of night exposure call this flying 'unaided' because their main tool for night vfr is NVG's however, flying under lighting is really far from actually being 'unaided' and the key is selecting appropriate lighting, and of course developing the skills and knowledge to use said lighting efficiently.
A common lighting set up on an ag aircraft set up for night work is (3) 600W work lights, which shine directly ahead during level flight, and (2) 450W obstruction or 'wire' lights which point straight ahead in 3 pt, or essentially a touch down from the work lights. These are all typically wired to a trigger and illuminate from the descent into the field until the exit. There is no benefit to running these outside of the field, and a few detriments, but that is beyond the scope of what we're talking about here. Complementing those are a pair of 450W lights on the outboard portion of the wing angled out and down. These are turn lights used as a pivot point on the ground during a turn to aid in the turn and help with spatial disorientation (think; sighting device on an aerobatic plane) and are typically wired (momentary) to the China hat or top toggle on the stick.

The point on the above dissertation is to yield an idea of my lighting background and why I have the opinions on lighting that I do.

Greg really summed it all up well. I'm not so patient. When people ask me how or what to choose, the first words are make the lights match the mission. And then when they ask for more depth on the LED vs everything else, I point to the lumen vs candle power information Greg has posted. Being a simpleton, I say it like this;

If you think of light like another fluid (like air which really is a fluid), then lumens is volume, and candlepower is pressure. I then go on to explain the typical VW 12v headlight will light up your driveway and across the street quite well (lumens) but your kids 3v pencil laser will paint a dot a quarter mile away on a tailgate (candle power).

This is really important to wrap your mind around if you really depend on your lights for more than eye candy and bling. Here's an example, if you're dragging a disk all night behind your 9 series JD at a whopping 25 mph, you really want a lot of light. But at those speeds you're not out running how far anything stretches. A magnesium tranny case lit on fire would work fabulous, but probably land you in a world of shiv with greener minds... In my mind this is the exact lighting scenario (except in reverse) someone who depends on their lighting for recognition should be interested in.

On the other end of the spectrum, when that field gets planted and Johnny stink plane is running across it putting out insecticide at a buck fifty on the speedo, only concentrating on what's ahead of his wingspan, what he needs is 'reach out there and touch someone' light. My experience suggests that at these speeds you will have about 300' of useable light (best case scenario). At those speeds, if your recon has failed you and you see a wire in your lights you did not know existed, you will fly through it about the same time you blurt an expletive. This is why to date the vast majority of the night aerial application world is relying on incandescent lighting. Many of us continue to try out the latest / greatest LED offering in search of a better mousetrap, but those that don't fall back either don't care about the difference or have fallen prey to the hype without paying attention to the task at hand.

FWIW, I love better mouse traps, but in this case lives depend on them actually being better. To the best of my knowledge I have ran every PAR 36 and 46 LED available to date. I refuse to try the PAR 64's in replacement of our 600w work lights because I understand the math and have challenged it on the smaller bulbs, a $1,600 light bulb that will eventually get taken out by an owl really, really needs to be better than the $75 bulb it replaced. I want these bulbs to be better (safer), but the truth is the economics favor the guy who spends the majority of his time utilizing his lights at taxi speeds, with a little bit of fuzzy lit landing speed at an airport with incredible lighting in itself. Again, I really want the LED's to someday fit our mission, anyone who paid attention to the wattage above and maintains a fleet of starter / generators should understand that, but today's offerings just don't get it.

The main objective for me adding to Greg's post is because in my travels north I have seen more than one cub with LED cubes on a gear cabane. This would infer night landing ops in a place not as well lit as the airport, and that guy probably doesn't know that all the hype surrounding his Tooltime Tim lighting equipment probably isn't doing as good a job as he could have if understood what all the numbers represent.

Take care, Rob

To put numbers to the common ag example I used above, the 600w PAR 64 lights most people run are the old school GE Q4559X and for the for the 450w PAR 46's most folks run the GE Q4681. To be fair, these are GE's most recent offerings, but they are still a decade or so old, and still old school technology. Here's how they match up to the AeroLed Sunspot's designed to replace them, and yes IMHO the Sumspots really are the best of the LED world I have played with to date,

Bulb - Candle power - Wattage

GE Q4559X - 765000 - 600
Sunspot 64-4559 - 400000 - 225
GE Q4681 - 310000 - 450
Sunspot 46HX - 250000 - 175

So there it is, yes the old school stuff draws as much juice as a welder when you hit the trigger, but no, the current LED offerings are not going to put out the same useable light on less current.

Incidentally in the jumbo PAR 64 world of lights which don't generally fall in line with users of the GA variety there is another producer called Hoffman Engineering. Their PAR 64 lights are designed to put out the same or more Candlepower as the GEQ4559X. So the technology is there, unfortunately in their case, they market to the military and do not appear to offer anything in the PAR 36 size that would fit the typical GA buggy.

Take care, Rob

Interesting, however I don't cropspray, I don't land on a runway without at least edge lights, I just need a little light to get from the taxiway to the tie down. More landing light is like Mark Twain's list of things to take out of your burning hotel room.
In the helicopter world we use NVG of course, and one private owner bolted a Nightsun on his Agusta so he could "drive up to the ranch".
My last PAR36 LED cost $50, 7 years ago. Interesting to see what's new out there and if the trade-off for gas works for you.

Indeed, and while there are such things as efficiency and waste, there really are no free lunches when it comes to trading one form of energy for another. More amperage, wattage whatever your means of measurement, will yield more light all else being equal, and that is where the rub lies.

And then there's Black Chrome...

So Greg brought forward the facet of degradation of light if used continuous over the period of a flight. For the most part that loss comes back at the following usage. That kind of degradation, really doesn't mean much for the guy using them solely for recognition lighting but as Greg pointed out, it does affect the guy that needs them upon arrival to a dark strip.

What concerns me more is degradation of the reflector over time. This is why we discourage the use of work or obstruction lights for the purpose of recognition. I understand the junior bird man that uses these (as a placebo) while getting used to the idea of turning at night without succumbing to spatial disorientation, but beyond that you are wasting good bulbs, and there are better tools for the job. Our birds are outfitted with LED's in the wings and/or nose, which are independent of the work lights. But in reality, a quality set of strobes/navs suffice quite well.

To illustrate this degradation all one needs to do is look at an old quartz bulb being replaced with new. The old bulb will have a darkened reflector that still shines and reflects, but is reminiscent of a 'black chrome' vs the almost white sheen of the new reflector. This effect yields as much as 50% loss in candlepower over the course of the bulbs life. It is also in my opinion the reason why so many people think they see such a huge advantage when going to LED's. They are no longer comparing new to new, apples. They are comparing a clapped out candle to a shiny new flamethrower. We see this a lot when people test new spark plugs, exhaust, ad infinitum... But of course no one wants to buy new quality lighting of several flavors for testing, we just want to buy it once and be done. Those of us who have those items on the shelf as consumables, tend to have our hands a little freed up for testing.

Our ships with the LED recognition lights in the nose allow for an instant and repeatable comparison to the Quartz lights, because the there is one work light installed in the nose as well, and even the latest set up which houses 2 PAR 46 Sunspots is no comparison to the single PAR 64 GE. Reminds me of the old adage "there's no replacement for displacement".

Take care, Rob

Interesting post Greg. I’m curious on the average Cessna with the light in the wing how much cooling is actually happening for the light. My guess would be not much.
On the crop dusting side, I prefer the Whalen light simply for the fact the the lens is replaceable. That saves us big a fair amount as the chemical seems to cause the lens to crack a fair amount. Also the legality for us in Canada. The AeroLEDs only have STC in US, nothing for Canada. And TC being the PIA that they can be makes it a simple choice, halogens or the Whalen that is installed from the factory. I would love to try more of the AeroLEDs. But for now my hands are tied. Be nice if they see this and push for Canadian STC as well.

A1Skinner wrote:Interesting post Greg. I’m curious on the average Cessna with the light in the wing how much cooling is actually happening for the light. My guess would be not much.

I had a really nice conversation with Mark at Aeroleds about thermal throttling last week. He commented that our wings aren’t completely sealed to the point of being air tight. Apparently just the drafts through the wing is enough to cool the lights to the point that thermal throttling isn’t a factor.

I’m thinking about doing a comparison where I put Aeroleds 4000s on one wing & Whelen G3s on the other. Should be interesting to see the results.

Thanks Greg for doing the research and post it. I find all of it very informative and interesting. LED lighting is only going to continue to improve, but for many of us it offers some great benefits already.

AeroLEDs actually does hold Transport Canada certification for our Part 23 STC. This encompasses the SunSpot Landing/Taxi lights.

https://aeroleds.com/faa-documentation/

Feel free to reach out to Ryan@AeroLEDs if you'd like to discuss AeroLEDs for your aircraft. We'd love to show you the difference.

AeroLEDs wrote:AeroLEDs actually does hold Transport Canada certification for our Part 23 STC. This encompasses the SunSpot Landing/Taxi lights.

https://aeroleds.com/faa-documentation/

Feel free to reach out to Ryan@AeroLEDs if you'd like to discuss AeroLEDs for your aircraft. We'd love to show you the difference.

Thanks. How about the Nav/strobes?

Wow.