Economical Runway Lights and Position Thereof

Just let the voltage drop if you need to. The lights will still work, just be dimmer at the end of the run. There is a limit of course. Eventually they wont light much at all (or any eventually). But thats way out there. But you can exceed 5% and it will work and not hurt a thing.

Two wire bury cable will work. Just take a bare copper wire at each light and bury it in the ground 12" for the extra ground. Save some money that way if code allows it.
 
He mentioned a “40W equivalent” LED bulb. Those (according to the Googles) draw about .36A at 110VAC.

How often do you space runway lights? I guess I’ve never noticed but I think it’s 100’?

So 20 per side, and let’s assume he’s running separate circuits for each side of the runway.

Each 100’, the .36A load will drop the voltage (using 120VAC for the calculation, YMMV on actual voltage present) .11V for each segment or about 2.2V total. So yeah, it’d work. That’s assuming 12 AWG wire. For 14 AWG wire it’s .18V dropped per 100’ segment. 3.6 VAC drop in 2000’.

Also assumes no connector losses or pigtails to get from the buried run to the light, etc etc etc.

Come all the way back down the other side, is double that if you want to cross over and return at the far end.

12 AWG is 4.4VAC drop total at 120VAC and 4000’, ignoring the wire to cross the runway.

14 AWG is 7.2VAC drop total at 120VAC; same deal.

Whether you’re allowed to design to those numbers or need a fudge factor for NEC or all that rot, I don’t know. Like I said, IANAE.

But sounds like you could handle it all on a 15A breaker with reasonable fudge factor if you bury single phase AC. I doubt an electrician would agree though.

There’s probably some rule against calculating it as all LED bulbs unless you make the bulbs a connector type that no one could just stuff an incandescent into the socket, too. Someone trying to be “helpful” down the road starts sticking real 40W bulbs in the sockets and you’ve got a real problem. :)
 
Bah. No a 15A breaker wouldn’t work. I added up the voltage drops. Didn’t add up the current draw. .36A * 40 is 14.4A. Too much to do on a single circuit.
 
Nate,

40W equivalent LED are only 6 watts. That's only 0.05 amps, not 0.36. Lights are 200' centers and I plan to put six at each threshold. That's 30 total, 15 per side, fed from the middle, so 90w, 0.75a total per side. And since I'm feeding from approximately the center where the house/hangar the total length of wire will be closer to 1250' than 2000'.
 
Last edited:
Just take a bare copper wire at each light and bury it in the ground 12" for the extra ground. Save some money that way if code allows it.
Having multiple grounds spread over a wide area invites blowing up an entire system with transient voltage resulting from a lightning strike. The best ground is a single ground, and the best single ground is a ufer.
 
Last edited:
Nate,

40W equivalent LED are only 6 watts. That's only 0.05 amps, not 0.36. Lights are 200' centers and I plan to put six at each threshold. That's 30 total, 15 per side, fed from the middle, so 90w, 0.75a total per side. And since I'm feeding from approximately the center where the house/hangar the total length of wire will be closer to 1250' than 2000'.

That’s 0.05 Amps if the power factor of the bulb chosen is 1. Most aren’t 1.

Many cheapies from China aren’t even better than 0.5.

You’ll have a hard time getting a power factor number from many of the LED bulb makers. Many “5W” LED bulbs actually draw up to 12W of real power. Dirty little secret of the industry.

(CFLs were often worse. Some had PFs down in the 0.3 range.)

“EnergyStar” rated LED bulbs have a power factor correction to at least 0.7 PF for “residential” bulbs. “Commercial” EnergyStar bulbs will have a PF of 0.9 or greater.

No EnergyStar, probably nothing on the package showing PF correction either. A great many YouTube videos of measured PF on cheap Chinese LED bulbs shows anywhere from 0.4-0.6 is typical. Naughty naughty.

Soooo. You get what you pay for on the bulbs. But doing the wattage to VA conversion with straight math and leaving out the PF will always get you a number that’s too low for actual amps drawn by an LED bulb. Never seen one hit 1.0 PF yet when I’ve tested them.

My cheapies from a bulk box at a big box store without an EnergyStar rating, ended up being about 0.65. Still kicked incandescent’s butt and since they finally made versions that weren’t the blue-pushed “bright white” they look like they belong in my older fixtures that were intended to be used with incandescent.

They compare to this mediocre Phillips bulb in the size you’re looking at. Even Phillips won’t call if a “5W”, they know the PF is too low.

http://www.ledbenchmark.com/display.php?id=110&name=Philips+6W+A55+Bulb

(You can look up a bunch of bulbs there and see what the manufacturer claims the PF is vs the measured PF. But most don’t have a PF measurement from the manufacturer. Even “good” brands like Phillips.)
 
We dug in solid river rock and converted to LED. All volunteer labor. Desert Aire Regional Airport.
knoYK0.jpg
 
P.S. but it’s good you can feed from the middle and not the ends, and 200’ separation helps too, @timwinters — You going to trench across the middle to do the other side also? Maybe put conduit in so if the wiring ever fails you can pull new without having to trench across again?
 
How much did those beasties cost? Any specs on them? Look nice.
We already had the fixtures from our old runway, which we dug up, painted, replaced gaskets, wired and re-buried. There are a total of three circuits, and the LED lights only have a 13 watt draw........and are MUCH more brilliant. We don't accept any FAA funding, but have a spectacular group of volunteers.
9Ug1RD.jpg
 
That’s 0.05 Amps if the power factor of the bulb chosen is 1. Most aren’t 1.
Point taken, but it's still a far cry from the 0.36a that you asserted and used in your calcs.

And is the "claimed" 6w before or after pf? I don't know, just asking. The lamp you linked above claimed 6w and actually drew 6.6w. At least that's the way I'm reading their testing data.

One other question @Mistake Not... can a standard A19 base LED be powered w/ 240v in lieu of 120v? This would cut the voltage drop in half if the wattage output remained constant. Guess I could plug one directly into the panelboard here, fire up my good ol' Sperry multi-tester, and find out!
 
.

One other question @Mistake Not... can a standard A19 base LED be powered w/ 240v in lieu of 120v? This would cut the voltage drop in half if the wattage output remained constant. Guess I could plug one directly into the panelboard here, fire up my good ol' Sperry multi-tester, and find out!

They're all different, depending on the driver that was installed by the manufacturer.

Gotta look at the spec for each bulb.

Here's a 24V DC LED with a driver that will take 85-264 V AC.

So.... a 240V source could droop all the way to 85V and the bulb output wouldn't change a bit. But that's a bit extreme, and the replacement bulb 2 years from now may not be rated the same.

s90pic2.jpg
 
Having multiple grounds spread over a wide area invites blowing up an entire system with transient voltage resulting from a lightning strike. The best ground is a single ground, and the best single ground is a ufer.

Why is that?
 
Point taken, but it's still a far cry from the 0.36a that you asserted and used in your calcs.

And is the "claimed" 6w before or after pf? I don't know, just asking. The lamp you linked above claimed 6w and actually drew 6.6w. At least that's the way I'm reading their testing data.

One other question @Mistake Not... can a standard A19 base LED be powered w/ 240v in lieu of 120v? This would cut the voltage drop in half if the wattage output remained constant. Guess I could plug one directly into the panelboard here, fire up my good ol' Sperry multi-tester, and find out!

I said it was from Google. First thing that came up for power draw on a 40W equivalent bulb. No idea why. (Because I didn’t care until you said it was way off. Haha.)

That’s a Phillips bulb so they’re fairly reputable about their ratings. Many aren’t. Thus, the website. :) Not enough websites and testers to keep up with the flood of garbage from China, really. Brand names do count in these bulbs.

(My favorite dangerous things out of China are the USB chargers that use a capacitive dropper for voltage and leave neutral connected to the shield of USB connectors. A great way to make a nice $800 smartphone go bang and make pretty lighting effects under the right conditions. Haha.)

I still think you’ll be required to show some way to keep an idiot from putting incandescents in the sockets if you ever have a string of A19 based stuff installed and want it inspected. If never inspected, then all is good but I’d still label the crap out of it. Of course all they’d do is trip the breaker, in theory.
 
As far as I know, the NEC hasn't been updated to reflect LED replacement bulbs (and it probably shouldn't because they share base types with incandescent). In that case 10 lights on a 20A circuit is the max allowed (to get it inspected). 9 on a 15A circuit. Even though you could put a ton of LEDs on the same circuit.

Purpose built LED lighting systems have other specs...
 
As far as I know, the NEC hasn't been updated to reflect LED replacement bulbs (and it probably shouldn't because they share base types with incandescent). In that case 10 lights on a 20A circuit is the max allowed (to get it inspected). 9 on a 15A circuit. Even though you could put a ton of LEDs on the same circuit.

I've never heard of that one and I used to design electrical systems on both commercial and residential (but that was long ago in a previous life...back in the 80's). Are you sure you're not thinking of outlets? We always assumed outlets to be 180W each and circuits are only allowed to be loaded to 80% capacity, so 120v x 20a x 80%= 1920w...or 10.6 outlets. When it came to lights though, we always loaded a circuit to 80% regardless of whether that was one light or fifty.

Why is that?

It's been a quite while since I read the information on this but I'll give it a try...but don't expect a lot of "technical words!" ;)

It's because you're providing multiple places for lightning to enter the system. Say a bolt of lightning hits a tree immediately adjacent to the last light. That current (possibly in the millions of volts) rushes from the tree into the ground and can enter your grounding system since there is a ground wire at that light. The ground wires at the other lights aren't energized (because they're well away from the strike) so that sets up "current potential" (a difference in voltage) in your grounding system and that introduced voltage rushes down the system's ground wire towards the other fixtures whose ground wires are sitting there at 0 volts. The small wire at the first fixture is likely not enough to completely dissipate that (massive amount of) energy...it may take two fixtures...or twelve...before all the energy is dissipated. And that energy will likely damage each device it passes thru until it is completely dissipated.

Now, maybe you weren't going to run a ground wire with the circuits? That would be better, the lightning would likely only blow out the light it entered and possibly one or two others (because the transient voltage could very well jump from the grounding conductor to either the hot or neutral at the first fixture's box and still run up line.) I'm not sure individual ground that aren't tied together meets code though. I'm not saying it doesn't, I'd have to check, but it doesn't sound kosher.

It used to be that every parking lot light pole base was grounded on big commercial parking lots. They've gotten away from that for the reason described above. These are worse case scenario because they're big freakin' lightning rods sticking in the air inviting a strike. Low profile runway lights would be far less vulnerable.

Not grounding individual fixtures doesn't completely eliminate the problem, a lightning strike very near a fixture could still enter the wiring system that's direct buried. It's not like the cable's insulation is designed for lightning strikes. But it's less likely.

Summary: If you don't have a direct path for lightning to take into your wiring system at each fixture then you're far less likely to have transient voltage issues from strikes.

One other thing about lightning energy, it doesn't do 90 degree bends well, it'll arc off of the wire at a tight bend. Thus the ground wire should be kept as straight as possible and/or use very long sweeps when turning, especially the main ground from the panel to the ufer.

That only covers transient voltage that enters the system thru your own ground conductor(s). Lighting (and idiot neighbors) can create transient voltage that enters thru your service wires...both the hot and the neutral/ground. That's where a whole house surge suppressor comes into play...I've had one of those installed everywhere I've lived for at least 15 years now. They're a lot cheaper than replacing electronics (which are included most appliances these days).

I think all of that is pretty accurate but it's been awhile...

If I hard wire a runway lighting system, I plan to install wiring that has a grounding conductor (12/2 w/ a ground or 14/2 w/ a ground, or somesuch) and it will be grounded at the panel only. (Until someone shows me that I'm full of **** that is, which is quite likely!)
 
Last edited:
As an aside, this property is in rural Laclede County Missouri. No codes, no inspections, no P&Z (i.e. no approval required to build an airstrip), etc.

I'll still design and maintain things to code, but there will be no one looking over any shoulders.

It definitely won't be like the freakin' Embassy Suites I was involved with in Irvine, CA. We were a week away from opening and I was talking with the inspector out by the water feature in the atrium.

He said "you got a tape on you?"

me, "sure, here."

him (sticking tape in the reflecting pool at the bottom of the 7' waterfall feature) "hmmm...that's 3'-2" deep, over 3' means you have to put a 4' fence around it or have a lifeguard on duty 24/7)

me, "....the f*** you say?"

him, "yep"

So I spread 4" of lava rock on the bottom which was cheaper than lowering the skimmer.

Another inspector made us raise all the urinals in the men's rooms 3/8" because the plumber had roughed them in off of the concrete floor and didn't account for the thickness of the floor tile. WTF?

I'm far removed from those days, thank god!!
 
Last edited:
But back to one of the original questions...

Does anyone see a downside to mounting a jelly jar fixture directly to the top of a cone? I don't but...
 
As an aside, this property is in rural Laclede County Missouri.
Someone should tell Tim that we're going to be neighbors. I'll take him some cookies and welcome him to the neighborhood, it seems like the Christian thing to do!:devil:
 
When I was wiring houses (late 70's- early 80's) we were told 20A circuit, 6 outlets, 10 lights or 9 in combination with no more than 5 outlets. 15A circuit, 5 outlets, 9 lights or 8 in combination with no more than 4 outlets. (I'm not sure about the 8 in combination number, it was a long time ago). That's what the inspectors counted and claimed it was according to NEC. I don't know that I ever read it, I just did what I was told. I was a helper and never had a license, though I ran jobs later.

The practical reality is you can put a bunch of LED lights on a circuit and mounting them on top of the cones seems like a great idea to me. The only drawback to the LED bulbs with a normal Edison base is, as others have mentioned, when somebody else comes along and starts putting incandescent (or even CFL) bulbs in their place because they fit.

John
 
That's interesting. Maybe the LEDs are more directional?

Actually, depending on the color of the reflector, it could be that the "white" LED doesn't have enough red light (say, for a red reflector) in it to be reflected back and be obvious. I would think incandescent is more wide band.
 
Interesting seeing you guys "re-engineer" the way to light an airfield. The typical airfield system is a high voltage current driven system. We have regulators in the vault that pump up the voltage going out to the airfield up to 5000 volts and are current regulated. Current varies from around 4 amps for low intensity up to 6.6 amps for high intensity. The circuit is a single wire series loop, with isolation transformers at each light. This allows the circuit to remain lit even with one or more lights out.

Of course we are talking about much larger distances, a lot more lights, plus the complexity of multiple intensity settings.
 
Interesting seeing you guys "re-engineer" the way to light an airfield. The typical airfield system is a high voltage current driven system. We have regulators in the vault that pump up the voltage going out to the airfield up to 5000 volts and are current regulated. Current varies from around 4 amps for low intensity up to 6.6 amps for high intensity. The circuit is a single wire series loop, with isolation transformers at each light. This allows the circuit to remain lit even with one or more lights out.

Of course we are talking about much larger distances, a lot more lights, plus the complexity of multiple intensity settings.

... and a lot more $$$$$, which is the issue here.

Hey Tim, want to build a high voltage vault to keep the squirrels and neighborhood kids from getting electrocuted, sink 4000'+ of special conduit with 5000V HV insulated wire, and mount a transformer under every one of your cones so you don't need to engineer out a cheaper solution for your private strip??? :confused:
 
Last edited:
... and a lot more $$$$$, which is the issue here.

Hey Tim, want to build a high voltage vault to keep the squirrels and neighborhood kids from getting electrocuted, sink 4000'+ of special conduit with 5000V HV insulated wire, and mount a transformer under every one of your cones so you don't need to engineer out a cheaper solution for your private strip??? :confused:

Oh I fully understand the $$$. What I meant is it could be interesting seeing the working solution. Sometimes thinking outside of the box creates revolutionary ideas.
 
... and a lot more $$$$$, which is the issue here.

Hey Tim, want to build a high voltage vault to keep the squirrels and neighborhood kids from getting electrocuted, sink 4000'+ of special conduit with 5000V HV insulated wire, and mount a transformer under every one of your cones so you don't need to engineer out a cheaper solution for your private strip??? :confused:
The good news is that the cones could act as vaults so access for maintenance is simple.

Can go with direct bury on the distribution line. Grounding will be a problem at 4,000 ft. Probably want to sectionalize it to make maintenance and troubleshooting easier. Can ground at the sectionalizers and solve that problem. I know a plow guy who can instal all the wire in a day. Wire depth will be good on average but the D-9 sorta goes its own way on any terrain issues. Prolly three to six months lead time on the wire, maybe more with the hurricane repair work.
 
Last edited:
Ya know another way to go would be candles. Tim could sponsor a small abbey on his land and the sacred duty of the monk would be to light candles and pray at each cone. Keep it small with just a monk and an acolyte. During the day they could tend a garden and perhaps a small flock of goats. Have to round up the goats to keep them off the runway at times but they would take care of mowing when no one was flying.

Or perhaps a nunnery if the thought of an abbey is unacceptable...
 
I think all of that is pretty accurate but it's been awhile...

If I hard wire a runway lighting system, I plan to install wiring that has a grounding conductor (12/2 w/ a ground or 14/2 w/ a ground, or somesuch) and it will be grounded at the panel only. (Until someone shows me that I'm full of **** that is, which is quite likely!)

I think you did a decent job describing the lightning problems. I do tower stuff, so we have to design that completely backward. We have to assume the tower WILL take a strike, and then we need everything that’s grounded to rise and fall together. Lots of 00 copper buried in a curved “halo” around the tower and the building and bonded together real well (usually cadweld) and continue all of that to the RF entrance panels with polyphasers to try to keep it all outside, and then everything inside grounded to another overhead halo with low resistance giant conductors and flat copper strapping many inches wide.

Like you said, it’s the electricity trying to get from somewhere it is to somewhere it’s not, that fries stuff. If you can give it a nice low resistance path to everywhere and a huge uniform surface area to dissipate to ground through, things go better.

But back to one of the original questions...

Does anyone see a downside to mounting a jelly jar fixture directly to the top of a cone? I don't but...

Thought came to mind: Install reflectors inbetween the lights at the same 200’ intervals so when you do come home and the stupid breaker has tripped on this thing, you can still land. :) Belt and suspenders. Or put reflectors on top of the cans. But then they’re starting to get tall.

It’d be nice to let the poor low wingers have a chance at missing them if they go off-roading. :)
 
I had a friend in the 70's that lined his private landing strip with car license plates to reflect his landing lights, and it worked. I think a viable, cheap & easy option will be to purchase a roll of conspicuity tape as is used on semi trailers and cut the white reflector squares out then apply one to the top each cone. When you get conspicuity tape reflectors out in the dark countryside they really stand out well with even lighting much less than airplane landing lights. If you experiment with this let us know your thoughts.
 
I had a friend in the 70's that lined his private landing strip with car license plates to reflect his landing lights, and it worked. I think a viable, cheap & easy option will be to purchase a roll of conspicuity tape as is used on semi trailers and cut the white reflector squares out then apply one to the top each cone. When you get conspicuity tape reflectors out in the dark countryside they really stand out well with even lighting much less than airplane landing lights. If you experiment with this let us know your thoughts.

Doesn't help you find the strip at night or to line-up on final very well. Sure, making a GPS approach to it helps that out, but I'd want something self-illuminating.
 
7B3 has some very good solar runway lights that are turning on via radio. No wires needed. They used to have the lights on top of the yellow cones, but you can't see those at night. Or barely can. These new ones work very well. I don't know the brand, but can snag a picture some time this week. They all have batteries, and are on a network (bluetooth) so one controls them all. They aren't cheap.

I agree. Hamptons lights are great. they are on heavy rubber mats so they can be moved (mostly for snow removal).

Edit: We have Avlites at Hampton.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top