Cessna 182P Landing Light Replacement

Sinistar

Sinistar

En-Route
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
3,734
Display Name
Display name:
Brad
I noticed a landing light is now out after my last training flight. A couple of questions:

NOTE: Not switching to LED yet. I'd rather put the $$$ towards more flight instruction.

Questions:
1.) Do I need the 4509 lamp? I have a copy of the Service Manual and can not find any specified part number in Chapters 1, 2 or 15.

2.) Is the taxi light the same as the landing light? In Chapter 15 they're each just labeled lamp. I always thought the taxi light was a wider angle beam but perhaps it is just aimed down more?

3.) Some of the 4509's are halogen or is it quartz? Should I order one of those instead, the price difference isn't that much?

4.) Its looks like I need to pull the lower cowling to do this replacement? Is there a way to do it without pulling the lower cowling?

5.) Is a PAR36 the same as the 4509?

Thanks for any help. I was hoping to get the right info and order the lamps without pulling the lower cowling just to see a part number, then put it back on so I can do lessons and then pull it again to replace them.
 
I am now well versed in the 182 P model so my only advice would be to pull the top cowling and inspect to see whether you can get at it from the top only (which normally you should). A stubby Phillips should do the trick. Make sure the wires are tucked away before re-assembling so that they cannot get anywhere near the FW. Don't ask how I know. :)
 
Do your self a favor and replace light with an LED. As others said it will be cheaper in the long run.
I put PAR 36 for all 3 lights 2 on wing tips and one on nose cowl and after some research found that they are interchangeable.
PAR 36 is OEM replacement for 4509
 
Yes, go LED. The price is reasonable and it's a zillion times better. And safer.
 
Another vote for the LED.
 
Trust me....when that headlamp goes out at night and you're on the ramp in Boondock USA (angel flight to drop off a patient) and the local shop wants to charge you $50 for a $10 4509, and another $50 to install it, you'll wish you had the LED. Fortunately, I carried a spare 4509 in the box. The shop guys watched and laughed as I changed the bulb on the ramp, in the dark, in miserably cold weather. Had any of them offered to help, I would have paid the hourly rate.

Installed the LED soon as I got back home.
 
Standard 4509 bulbs cost less than $15 and worked great for a lot of planes for a lot of years. They still do. Are they the best? No, but they are the least expensive and they still work as well as they ever did.

Are LEDs better? It depends what you expect of your lights. Mine are in wig-wag mode 100% of the time and yes, LED works better for that.
 
The cowl mounts on the 182 subject the bulbs to too much vibration and you'll be constantly replacing the things.

Another vote for LED. Sorry. I know you'd rather spend the money on AvGas as did we, for a couple of years, but the constant bulb blowing becomes a huge hassle.
 
Cowl mounted? Yes, motivation to upgrade to LED.

Electrical load issues? Move to LED lol. Just the nav lights on the (12v) 177 consume 5.6 amps per the maintenance manual.
 
Okay...you guys are great at spending my money :) So my questions are now changing!

1.) This 182 had the two position landing light switch (half = taxi, both = taxi + landing). It seems that the they are both the same lamp? So are they just pointed differently?

2.) So should I order two of the samp LED or one taxi and one landing?

3.) Researching LED landing lights has a few links indicating the 4509 is not really a TSO or STC (???) part. So can any PAR36 LED lamp be used? Or does it have to be from Whelen, Aero, etc?

Yes, I do not want to be changing them all the time. And cutting the current (significantly) would be great.
 
Sinistar said:
1.) This 182 had the two position landing light switch (half = taxi, both = taxi + landing). It seems that the they are both the same lamp? So are they just pointed differently?
Click to expand...
On our club 1975 182P, there are separate lamps for Taxi and Landing. And separate switches.

Another benefit is that the LED's throw way more light. Old lamps, I'd be over the threshold (~60-70 feet AGL) before the runway surface would be illuminated. With the LED's, I'm seeing the runway surface from at least twice that high and several hundred feet back from the threshold.
 
LEDs have different lenses for landing and taxi. The correct replacement is to use one of each. My nose-mounted lights in my 180 have Whelens. My light switches went away years ago in favor of a MaxPulse light controller.
 
bnt83 said:
Cowl mounted? Yes, motivation to upgrade to LED.

Electrical load issues? Move to LED lol. Just the nav lights on the (12v) 177 consume 5.6 amps per the maintenance manual.
Click to expand...
On the cherokee, the 4509 draws 10 amps, the LED draws 1.2 amps (12 v).
 
Sinistar said:
Okay...you guys are great at spending my money :) So my questions are now changing!

1.) This 182 had the two position landing light switch (half = taxi, both = taxi + landing). It seems that the they are both the same lamp? So are they just pointed differently?

2.) So should I order two of the same LED or one taxi and one landing?
Click to expand...
Does the 182 have 2 lamps or one specialize lamp that has 2 settings?
3.) Researching LED landing lights has a few links indicating the 4509 is not really a TSO or STC (???) part. So can any PAR36 LED lamp be used? Or does it have to be from Whelen, Aero, etc?
Click to expand...
Paul Bertorelli is not the FAA, it's just his interpretation, as he clearly states to stay out of trouble
Yes, I do not want to be changing them all the time. And cutting the current (significantly) would be great.
Click to expand...

You can (can, not may) install pretty much anything on a non-experimental aircraft if you choose to accept a number of conditions:
1) the widget may or may not have been tested for RF/fire/smoke/other possible safety concerns
2) if you're not an A&P/IA, when it comes annual time, you may (not can) have an unpleasant discussion with the IA
3) should something happen and the insurance company gets involved, coverage may be denied
4) should something happen and the FAA gets involved, they can make life very interesting and possibly very, very expensive

Do the cost-benefit analyis yourself and decide.
 
Sinistar said:
Okay...you guys are great at spending my money :) So my questions are now changing!

1.) This 182 had the two position landing light switch (half = taxi, both = taxi + landing). It seems that the they are both the same lamp? So are they just pointed differently?

2.) So should I order two of the samp LED or one taxi and one landing?

3.) Researching LED landing lights has a few links indicating the 4509 is not really a TSO or STC (???) part. So can any PAR36 LED lamp be used? Or does it have to be from Whelen, Aero, etc?

Yes, I do not want to be changing them all the time. And cutting the current (significantly) would be great.
Click to expand...

They're different lamps. I've never seen a two-position lamp like you see in car headlights. Also, no need to replace both with LEDs. Perfectly fine to do only the landing light. The taxi light is used less frequently and during less critical operations. And you can always substitute the landing light if it burns out. I'll probably replace my taxi light with an LED when it burns out, but it hasn't done so in two years, whereas the landing light burned out within a couple months. (Also, mine are wing mounted, so YMMV.)

(Also, side note from above: Quartz and halogen refer to the same lamp technology. Adding a halogen, generally bromine, to the gas mix in the lamp helps re-deposit tungsten back on the filament instead of on the lamp walls. With that, the lamp can be run hotter, which makes it more efficient. For a number of reasons for the halogen to be effective, the bulb volume should be quite small. Putting glass that close to the filament would melt the glass, so quartz is used for the envelope instead. Since quartz is transparent to UV, you'll also always find a plain glass lens between you and the lamp to block UV.)
 
murphey said:
Does the 182 have 2 lamps or one specialize lamp that has 2 settings?
Click to expand...
Our version of the Cessna 182P (1972) has two separate lamps under the prop in the lower cowling, each having a single filament (4059 bulb). On the plane, there is a standard size rocker style switch for the lights that is split into two. I believe you can just turn on the left (taxi) or both (landing + taxi). Right now the taxi light is burned out. Hence all my questions regarding whether the original parts for the taxi and landing lamps are different. As I now understand it, they are identical lamps and a probably both pointed at the same angle. Taxi just uses one and landing uses both.

murphey said:
Paul Bertorelli is not the FAA, it's just his interpretation, as he clearly states to stay out of trouble /QUOTE] Yes, I had seen the goodies for pilots and the link to his article. Of all your arguments, there is always one that stands out more than all the others to us as aircraft owners...the insurance card...does what we do invalidate our weaken our insurability.
Click to expand...
 
arnoha said:
(Also, side note from above: Quartz and halogen refer to the same lamp technology. Adding a halogen, generally bromine, to the gas mix in the lamp helps re-deposit tungsten back on the filament instead of on the lamp walls. With that, the lamp can be run hotter, which makes it more efficient. For a number of reasons for the halogen to be effective, the bulb volume should be quite small. Putting glass that close to the filament would melt the glass, so quartz is used for the envelope instead. Since quartz is transparent to UV, you'll also always find a plain glass lens between you and the lamp to block UV.)
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for this explanation!!!! This was the main part of my question regarding the original bulbs. I was seeing Halogen and Quartz mentioned and had no idea if they were worth the extra $5, are they also approved, etc.
 
Sinistar said:
Thank you so much for this explanation!!!! This was the main part of my question regarding the original bulbs. I was seeing Halogen and Quartz mentioned and had no idea if they were worth the extra $5, are they also approved, etc.
Click to expand...

Generally, yeah, the quartz-halogen bulbs will be well-worth the extra money. They last much longer (halogen chemistry), burn brighter (quartz envelope), resist vibration (shorter, better supported filament), and look better (higher color temperature). They're still beat by the LEDs, of course. Beating both is HIDs, but the cost makes LEDs look cheap.

Note the inner envelope made of quartz, with the regular glass lens still over the front:
11-12157a.jpeg

The inner envelope will have a little bromine mixed in with the argon and/or krypton gas fill. It will also generally be filled to a significantly higher pressure.
 
Another 182P owner named Brad here: I held off on chiming in because you specifically did not want LED recommendations. I was replacing my landing light about every 25 hours before I went LED. These things burned out so frequently I once had a double failure on the same flight. Sigh.

The 4509Q's are quartz. They are a little brighter, but have just as short a lifespan as the 4509. Non-LED bulbs have gotten cheaper since I last bought them (used to be about $30, now about $15) but I would still swap at least one them out with a $250 LED so you have something reliable to use if the non-LED light fails.
 
Hold a good 4905 light against your ear and rap the bulb with your finger tip. Listen to the high frequency ringing and notice how lightly damped it is. Rinnnnnnnngggg! The filament support wires inside are like tuning forks and must be fatiguing the filament.

I found our 172M used fewer lights by far when we 1) sprayed silicon release agent in the baffle strips (to reduce the stick-slip forces into the cowl, and 2) (unapproved) replaced the screws holding the lights with instrument shock mounts to reduce the cowl vibration transmission into the light assembly. Both were done at the same time, so I don't know which had the most effect, but light life increased dramatically.
 
Brad Z said:
These things burned out so frequently I once had a double failure on the same flight. Sigh.
Click to expand...

Yup...I had the same problem on my 182P. Taxi light went out on trip down to a X-Country...landing light went out on trip back home.

Was fun landing at night...and that was the second replacement in two years. Went LED and never looked back....but I can now look forward at night!

Zero regrets on spending the $$$
 
Okay, I'm taking Brad's advice (because all Brad's are awesome!). I'm going to order up one LED for now and replace the burnt out bulb. I'll also order a new halogen bulb to replace the older working bulb.

I'm guessing I should put the LED in the landing light position?

Whelen or Aero or ????
 
Sinistar said:
Okay, I'm taking Brad's advice (because all Brad's are awesome!). I'm going to order up one LED for now and replace the burnt out bulb. I'll also order a new halogen bulb to replace the older working bulb.

I'm guessing I should put the LED in the landing light position?

Whelen or Aero or ????
Click to expand...
I'm happy with my whelen. They've been making LED light bars for emergency vehicles for years and seemed to have figured things out. I installed the LED taxi light; its light pattern is better for full-time use (I leave my taxi light on continuously for visibility). I have had no problem Landing using only the taxilight. As a matter of fact I usually don't bother to use the remaining incandescent landing light, which is probably why I haven't had to replace it since I installed the LED taxilight five or so years ago.
 
Ordered a Prometheus PLUS PAR36 Landing Light over the weekend. Now $228.

Later on this fall (during the annual) I will order another Prometheus PLUS Taxi light and the A&P can then tweak the W&B, etc if needed.

For a backup I ordered a non-STC PAR36 LED light from Larsen ($28). So I will have a really bright, low current, reliable backup if needed in a pinch away from the home base.
 
Sinistar said:
Ordered a Prometheus PLUS PAR36 Landing Light over the weekend. Now $228.

Later on this fall (during the annual) I will order another Prometheus PLUS Taxi light and the A&P can then tweak the W&B, etc if needed.

For a backup I ordered a non-STC PAR36 LED light from Larsen ($28). So I will have a really bright, low current, reliable backup if needed in a pinch away from the home base.
Click to expand...
Good move going to LED. I used a non-pma incandescent landing light for awhile prior to availability of the stc'd leds. I figured the longer life far outweighed any possible consequences of someone noticing the non-airworthy light.

Anyway, turn it on and leave it on. LEDs are very good for that and maybe it'll help some other guy see you some day. I even put a wigwag switch on to help make it more visible.
 
Okay, installed the LED landing light over the weekend. It seems plenty bright. Remove / replace the lower cowling is the biggest PITA. I could not do with the lower cowling in place so I am greatly humbled by those that can!!!

Since my backup LED light came in (non-STC) and I had the cowling off, I did mount it temporarily. Holy crap, that one is a 60deg flood light and its almost hard to look at the front of the plane when it is on. It has the same current draw as the Prometheus PLUS just a flood for taxi. This other light did have the notch for the ring so it fit very nicely. My goal is to have the A&P mount the second Prometheus light during our annual in October.

Its funny to think the two lights together probably don't even draw 3amps. My wife needs to get night current again...before the 4th of July :)

Thanks for all the help!
 
Steven Untet said:
Www.goodiesforpilots.com


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I've got both of these in my plane and I get a good amount of RFI... does anyone else have this problem? I'm considering switching to Whelen or Rigid Landing/Taxi lights, but I'm not sure if the problem is something in my plane specifically or with the lights. I've cleaned off the grounds as many have suggested. Sure would be a bummer to order $400 in LED's and find out that they aren't the problem. I know many people that have them and dont have this problem so I'm a bit perplexed.

@denverpilot Any suggestions on isolating the problem?
 
Last edited:
I currently have 1 Prometheus and 1 wide angle PAR36 LED, the later not PMA but it was from more of a tractor/equipment webstore. No RF noise noticed after nearly 100hrs. This is in a 182P (1972).
 
Sinistar said:
I currently have 1 Prometheus and 1 wide angle PAR36 LED, the later not PMA but it was from more of a tractor/equipment webstore. No RF noise noticed after nearly 100hrs. This is in a 182P (1972).
Click to expand...
Thanks. I've got a 1970 180... I think that almost definitely means it's a problem with the plane/radios. I'll hold off on ordering the fancy (expensive) LED bulbs then.
 
Does the problem go away when you turn off these installed lights?
 
Mtns2Skies said:
@denverpilot Any suggestions on isolating the problem?
Click to expand...

I think you have it isolated already. :)

As far as what’s causing it inside the lights, it’s usually a switching power supply that the engineer chose a poor switching frequency for in aircraft use. Usually not fixable without a redesign.

Wish I had better news for you.

These guys been doing aircraft lights very long? I hadn’t heard of the brand but that doesn’t say much.
 
denverpilot said:
I think you have it isolated already. :)

As far as what’s causing it inside the lights, it’s usually a switching power supply that the engineer chose a poor switching frequency for in aircraft use. Usually not fixable without a redesign.

Wish I had better news for you.

These guys been doing aircraft lights very long? I hadn’t heard of the brand but that doesn’t say much.
Click to expand...
Why would it be affecting my plane, but not others? Is it my crappy 70's Narco radios?
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Why would it be affecting my plane, but not others? Is it my crappy 70's Narco radios?
Click to expand...

Who says it’s not affecting others? :)

People often don’t pay attention to this stuff or think all the noise they’re hearing is normal.

Funniest one of that I ever saw was the half deaf homebuilder who had me look at his Icom radio in his panel. It was so far out of tuning it would receive a known on frequency signal from any source a couple of channels lower than it should have and he described that the “tower always has trouble hearing me, I think it’s my antenna”. LOL.

I explained his radio was way off frequency and he should probably get it bench tested. He never did it. He just assumed crappy radios were the norm or he didn’t want to pay someone $50 to look at it. I dunno. :)

Hmmm thought came to mind. Make sure the noise is entering via the receiver and not just getting into the intercom. Turn the intercom off and test with whichever Com radio is the failsafe radio.
 
P.S. Narcos aren’t totally awful. But that’s about the only nice thing one can say about them. :)
 
denverpilot said:
Who says it’s not affecting others? :)

People often don’t pay attention to this stuff or think all the noise they’re hearing is normal.

Funniest one of that I ever saw was the half deaf homebuilder who had me look at his Icom radio in his panel. It was so far out of tuning it would receive a known on frequency signal from any source a couple of channels lower than it should have and he described that the “tower always has trouble hearing me, I think it’s my antenna”. LOL.

I explained his radio was way off frequency and he should probably get it bench tested. He never did it. He just assumed crappy radios were the norm or he didn’t want to pay someone $50 to look at it. I dunno. :)

Hmmm thought came to mind. Make sure the noise is entering via the receiver and not just getting into the intercom. Turn the intercom off and test with whichever Com radio is the failsafe radio.
Click to expand...
Alright I've got 40W Rigids on the way from aircraft spruce. I can always return them if they dont help.
 
We made the move from 4509s to Whelen LEDs two years ago on the 172 when we wanted to go to a heated pitot and needed to shed some current on the power budget. Incandescent 4509s have about a 25 hour life while the LED lamps are 30,000 hours. The decision was a no-brainer.

whelen%20led%20taxi%20and%20landing%20lights%20med_zpslecb37ol.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top