Slashdot Mirror


Ultracapacitor LED Flashlight Charges In 90 Seconds

Iddo Genuth writes "The California based company 5.11 Tactical has recently introduced a new innovative flashlight — 'Light For Life' UC3.400. Unlike regular flashlights requiring constant battery changing this new LED torch offers a rechargeable battery that can be recharged in as little as 90 seconds using ultracapacitor technology. Various military and rescue units might benefit from this new development, ensuring them a light source at all times."

131 comments

  1. Future? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Replace AA batteries? Car batteries? Electric car charger?

    I like this idea...

  2. 90 seconds! by hansamurai · · Score: 5, Funny

    ensuring them a light source at all times.

    Except those 90 seconds.

    In which you will be eaten by a grue.

    1. Re:90 seconds! by click2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah and it'll be like every PC FPS with a flash light (HL2/F.E.A.R etc) where it lasts 30 seconds at a time.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    2. Re:90 seconds! by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 1

      But you don't understand. This will be a back up for my PrincetonTec Eos, PrincetonTec Quad, Photon Light, two Mag flashlights, and my wife's Mag Solitaire and Photon Light. I'll show that Grue who's boss!

      --
      We are the Borg...
    3. Re:90 seconds! by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      ensuring them a light source at all times.

      Except those 90 seconds.

      In which you will be eaten by a grue.

      I come on. Is it really that likely?

    4. Re:90 seconds! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it is dark.

    5. Re:90 seconds! by Elder+Entropist · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except those 90 seconds.

      In which you will be eaten by a grue.

      You should still be fine if you don't move more than once during those 90 seconds. You have to move twice in the dark to get eaten by a grue.

    6. Re:90 seconds! by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      In which you will be eaten by a grue.

      I come on. Is it really that likely?

      It depends. It needs to be pitch black. The LEDs from your router would drive it off.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    7. Re:90 seconds! by SupplyMission · · Score: 1

      Except for Doom 3, where the flashlight runs on power generated by essentially a perpetual motion machine.

    8. Re:90 seconds! by hawk · · Score: 1

      >I come on. Is it really that likely?

      We regret to inform you that the rest of this post is unavailable, as the author was eaten by a grue.

      hawk

    9. Re:90 seconds! by Java+Pimp · · Score: 1

      May it be a light to you in dark places, when all other lights go out.

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    10. Re:90 seconds! by hedwards · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's actually a myth, the flashlight in Doom 3 is actually grue powered.

    11. Re:90 seconds! by scribblej · · Score: 1

      Only if the lights go out. If you walk into the dark, you're boned.

      > GO NORTH

      It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

      > SHAKE FLASHLIGHT

      The shaking only attracts the grue! You are boned!

      Game over. You have achieved 1 of a possible bazillion points.

    12. Re:90 seconds! by SleptThroughClass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's actually a myth, the flashlight in Doom 3 is actually grue powered.

      Do they have a small grue on a treadmill, forever running away from the light which it generates?

    13. Re:90 seconds! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good reason to give Stalker a go, if you can get over some of the bugginess.

    14. Re:90 seconds! by orasio · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know slashdot is not what it used to be, when the explanation for the joke is Score:5, Insightful, and the actual joke is Score:2

    15. Re:90 seconds! by CaseyB · · Score: 1

      No, waiting also attract grues. You need to find a way to prevent time from passing, which is tricky in real life.

    16. Re:90 seconds! by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Well, the lights on my router blink.

  3. May I be the first to say... by ben0207 · · Score: 1, Funny

    What a bright idea.

    --
    cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
    1. Re:May I be the first to say... by SleptThroughClass · · Score: 2, Funny

      Brilliant! -- GENERATION 667: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.

    2. Re:May I be the first to say... by CnlPepper · · Score: 1

      I wonder how intelligent the search and collection algorithm will be.....

      GENERATION 28: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Then subtract 2.

    3. Re:May I be the first to say... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      GENERATION PURPLE: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.

    4. Re:May I be the first to say... by Barryke · · Score: 1

      you are doing good deeds, sun.
      -- GENERATION 1: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
  4. Hmm... by brian0918 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Slashvertisement, anyone?

    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 5, Funny

      None for me, thanks. I'm driving.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    2. Re:Hmm... by Java+Pimp · · Score: 4, Funny

      I was gonna mod this as Funny cause I almost spit out my Pepsi when I read this. Then I saw someone modded it Informative...

      Then I did spit out my Pepsi.

      --
      Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
      Kull: She told me she was 19!
    3. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      +1 insightful

    4. Re:Hmm... by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      -1, texting while driving on a windows mobile device

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    5. Re:Hmm... by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 1

      while driving on a windows mobile device

      Shouldn't that be +5 AccurateUseOfVehicle ?

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    6. Re:Hmm... by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      +google: touche

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  5. Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by jfengel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TFA says it's a $170 flashlight. It's got a lifetime warranty, but I always lose flashlights before they fail on me.

    What I want to know is, how quickly does it self-discharge? It doesn't do me any good to have it charge in 90 seconds if I don't need it until the power goes out.

    1. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Feanturi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I paid $10 for a wind-up flashlight that appears to have the same style of 3-LED array as this one. It's nice and bright, requires about 1 minute of winding to provide 15 minutes of full illumination, with less-bright light available after that. Considering that I never need anything other than a working pair of hands to charge it, I think the one I've got is much better for ensuring there will always be light when I need it. In a power outage, or out in a tent somewhere, a 90-second DC charge time doesn't do me any good at all.

    2. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      These two technologies are not mutually exclusive.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    3. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by IceCreamGuy · · Score: 1

      As long as it lasts half as long as the batteries in my Surefire, I'd be happy. After a couple packs of those you've pretty much paid for the flashlight all over again. That thing is bright though, enough to feel it on the back of your hand from half a meter away.

    4. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the article claims its limited 90 minute operation

    5. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by dfm3 · · Score: 1

      how quickly does it self-discharge?

      TFA says that it provides light for up to 90 minutes. But it uses a capacitor to store charge, so I imagine it could discharge very rapidly under the wrong conditions.

    6. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by pz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      TFA says it's a $170 flashlight. It's got a lifetime warranty, but I always lose flashlights before they fail on me.

      What I want to know is, how quickly does it self-discharge? It doesn't do me any good to have it charge in 90 seconds if I don't need it until the power goes out.

      There's a really simple answer to this: use high-quality non-rechargeable batteries in your it-must-work-when-the-power-goes-out flashlight and change them once every few years. You can get Lithim chemistry AA batteries that have a claimed shelf life of over 10 years.

      Then, use a separate flashlight with rechargeable batteries for when you just need it for a few minutes and can wait for a recharge, or can tolerate slightly-flat batteries.

      The ultracapacitor flashlights are a very costly solution to a problem that, for most situations, is easily remedied with traditional flashlights and properly selected batteries that cost 1/20th as much. Hell, you can get a new 4-pack of lithium AAs every year for two decades and come out ahead cost-wise.

      The ultracapacitors are for a different application, methinks. Like for the military, as suggested, where cost isn't an issue, power sources are readily available, and performance drives everything.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    7. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by PMuse · · Score: 1

      TFA wrote: Furthermore, the new flashlight is priced at $170; although this might not be suitable for private use, military organizations, police units and search and rescue teams might . . . be conned into replacing a cheap, widely available, reliable technology with an expen$$$ive, proprietary one.

      How many conventional rechargeable lights would $170 buy? How hard would it be to keep at least one charged at all times? Would they have a 2-hour limit?

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    8. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Honestly this has no use.

      EMT and Other emergency setups have a CRAPLOAD of flashlights at the command station. if you need to charge your 90 second recharging flashlight, it takes longer than the 2.2 seconds to grab a fresh one off the LiION charger stand.

      and at $170 it better have over 1,000,000CP output.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by nizo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This thing could be really awesome if you were holding it when you walked outside in the rain.

    10. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by computersareevil · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ultracapacitors have very low self-discharge rates. Lower than most battery technologies.

    11. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (if they can tolerate the 90 minute operational time limit). -TFA

    12. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      how quickly does it self-discharge?

      TFA says that it provides light for up to 90 minutes. But it uses a capacitor to store charge, so I imagine it could discharge very rapidly under the wrong conditions.

      I think you are shorting him on the shocking details of ultra capacitor discharge.

    13. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're buying the wrong batteries. Check out Titanium brand. $1/battery for 123A

    14. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by peragrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well both of my flashlights only require a regular shaking. The motion is something most slashdotters are good at anyways.
      Led, a couple of capacitors, and a easy charge method works well

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    15. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by sjames · · Score: 1

      I keep a combination power flashlight on my window sill. It has a solar cell in it which keeps it charged up and ready when it's needed immediately. It also has a hand crank to recharge it for continued use. It also has a radio so I can find out when the power is expected back on.

      I suspect the flashlight in TFA is more targeted to emergency services where presumably they will have a rapid charger in their vehicle and keep it standby charged at all times.

    16. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A bunch, but the cost is a secondary consideration in a lot of circumstances. Surefire has long been selling handheld lights at even higher prices. Even their small personal incandescents were in the $100 after they started enforcing their dealer MAP agreements.

      There are plenty of field applications where a person can't carry $170 worth of Wal-Mart flashlights, but needs something that stay lit for a while, recharge quickly, and is durable.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    17. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Gary · · Score: 2, Informative

      I do some work as a volunteer officer and the flashlights you get for $10 just don't compare. Most police-style flashlights are built much more ruggedly and are significantly brighter. When you find yourself facing a hostile assailant with nothing but a flashlight in your hand it's nice to know that the flashlight can function as an object for self defense if necessary, not to mention break-and-rake on car and house windows. Also the extra brightness is a safety feature too. Obviously searching a dark area with a brighter light is safer, assuming you need to use a light at all, not to mention being able to temporarily blind someone whose eyes are dark-adjusted.

      Then of course the price is related to the market size. Not many people need a flashlight with these extra capabilities so less market = higher price.

    18. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Aranykai · · Score: 1

      Try Coast LED Lenser lights. I have three, all of which can be found at retailers for less than $60 USD.

      They have one that will run 83 lumens for 5 hours on three AAA's. Compared to 90 minutes of 90 lumens, that's a reasonable sacrifice imho.

      --
      If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
    19. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      I have and their switches are nowhere near as reliable as, say, Surefire. And they don't resist water as well. And the bodies of the lights are not remotely as durable. And I question the accuracy of their lumen ratings.

      If you've not handled a (aluminum) Surefire light in person, try one. Very few people actually need that particular level of build quality for any reason other than satifying their flashlight geek needs, but the difference should be immediately obvious.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    20. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While specifications aren't given at the manufacturer's website, most "tactical" flashlights are extremely bright. A typical 2 CR123 cell light about 5 inches long, throwing ~60 lumens, will put a 3 D-cell maglite to shame. If this light offers performance similar to other tactical lights, it is impressive, indeed. The "nice and bright" of a windup flashlight isn't even comparable.

    21. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by kv9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ... a regular shaking. The motion is something most slashdotters are good at anyways.

      yes, from constantly making martinis to all the hot mamas, right? shaken, not stirred ladies!

    22. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      The technology has obvious weaponlight applications.

      You can't put a shake powered light on an M4, you don't just go grab another off a charging stand when your light goes out, and you don't typically need that many cp.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    23. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Lower? Try almost none - they are caps! Problem is the converter circuitry for voltage/current conditioning. But I hope they have implemented a very simple mechanical switch just between the ultracap and said circuitry, instead of relying on some fancy-ass electronic switch.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    24. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Nutria · · Score: 1

      never need anything other than a working pair of hands to charge it

      I only have 1 functioning hand...

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    25. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Adriax · · Score: 1

      Your capacity for puns is astounding!

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    26. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had three battery operated LED flashlights, all purchased for under $5. And have lost all two of them.

    27. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultra capacitors typically discharge at under 1/100th the speed of regular batteries.

      It's safe to say that it would still be quite charged after 1-2 years.

      The question is the capacity - if you have to recharge it every 2 hours, it may be less useful than some heavy-duty batteries/spotlights.

    28. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      TFA says that it provides light for up to 90 minutes. But it uses a capacitor to store charge, so I imagine it could discharge very rapidly under the wrong conditions.

      So it doubles as a taser? Bonus!

      Well, except that you'd then be in the dark with an only possibly incapacitated angry assailant.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    29. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by onkelonkel · · Score: 3, Funny

      One of my favorite old detective stories described a cop's 6 cell mag lite like this "except for the fact that it lit up when you pressed a button, it would not have been out of place at the battle of Agincourt"

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    30. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Missing_dc · · Score: 1

      Sounds like there might be some military applications after all.

      I can see using this for a few things,

        a full discharge at once to blind an opponent,
        flash tanning machine- use microwaves for extra points,(instant popcorn anyone?)
        portable painfield generator,
        perhaps an application in a portable HERF or EMP gun to freeze or disable IEDs,
        self contained tazer darts, no need for messy wires, and you can reload from a clip,
        laserguns that charge the ultra-capacitors off a power pack,

      the list goes on and on..

      --
      How amazed would you be to suddenly find that you just forgot what I wrote and you needed to reread my post.... again.
    31. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by inflex · · Score: 1

      Ultracaps still exhibit leaky, just obviously not as bad as things like standard electrolytes.

      A lithium-ion polymer battery will retain its charge for longer than an ultracap (60~80% of charge after 12 months vs 25% of an ultracap).

      As for the switches, they probably use a magnet + reed-switch, simple, effective and zero standby losses :)

    32. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      Bah, just fire a few rounds every hour. Problem solved!

    33. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by greenlead · · Score: 1

      If you are paying more than $1.75 / cell, you are buying from the wrong place. You can get them direct from Surfire for $1.75 /cell and from BatteryJunction (Titanium) for $1.00 / cell.

    34. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The brochure has the specification of 270 lumens (peak output 'estimate'), with 2 minutes charge time. The nearest competitor is listed at 200 lumens, with 12 hour charge time.

    35. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .. ugh ... make it less than 2 minutes of charge time.

    36. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by jcnnghm · · Score: 1

      I once heard that the US Southern Border patrol, in their search for race-independent terminology, started referring to illegal immigrants crossing the border as "thunks", because that's kind of what it sounds like when you hit one with your flashlight.

      --
      You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
    37. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by LNC3 · · Score: 1

      Your capacity for puns is astounding!

      Don't put too many of them in series, or the capacity will drop.

    38. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by krenshala · · Score: 1

      I've heard cops refer to the 6 D-Cell maglites as maces before. Quite a humorous, and accurate, description, in my opinion. ;)

      --

      krenshala

    39. Re:Better be a mighty fine flashlight for $170 by krenshala · · Score: 1

      The humor here is unparalleled.

      --

      krenshala

  6. Great for fire service... by crowbarsarefornerdyg · · Score: 1
    As long as it can handle high heat, repeated drops to hard surfaces and into water, occasionally containing corrosive chemicals. And as long as they can be charged from 12 volts DC, and aren't heavier than a hand held radio. It needs to have a large button on it too, gloves and all that.

    Preferably a blue or red LED as well, so it'll cut through the smoke.

    Law enforcement would have to deal with practically the same situation.

    --
    "Slapping lipstick on a pig does NOT make it Natalie Portman. Paris Hilton, maybe, but not Portman." - UncleTogie
    1. Re:Great for fire service... by Eg0Death · · Score: 1

      5.11 targets most of their products for law enforcement and other para-military usage. I receive email and catalogs from them frequently. Since I'm no longer in a law enforcement/para-military line of work, I can't justify buying all the nifty stuff they offer.

      --
      Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness?
    2. Re:Great for fire service... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Preferably a blue or red LED as well, so it'll cut through the smoke.

      Law enforcement would have to deal with practically the same situation.

      And movie studios - the "bright flashlight cutting through smoke and reflecting off all sorts of surfaces" cliche seems to have been very popular for a while.

    3. Re:Great for fire service... by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      And the blue / red LED cutting through smoke cliche is popular now.

      I wonder which one is next to be touted to preserve a person's night vision?

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  7. Limited usefull information. by B5_geek · · Score: 4, Informative

    VapourWare: Lights will be delivered on a first come, first serve basis in early 2009.
    90-minute runtime
    270 Lumens

    The claim is 270L for 1.5h, using three emitters. It looks from that close-up of the head that Crees are used, so most likely XR-Es. I'll use a rough 100L/W for my estimates.

    270L/3 = 90L per emitter

    90L corresponds to about 350mA at 3.2V (very roughly) from an XR-E.

    If*Vf*emitters*time = energy

    0.35A*3.2V*3*1.5h = 5.04Wh

    So, the supercap has about 5Wh in it (again, very roughly).

    The above assumes 270L at the emitter. Let's say it's 270L OTF, which would mean around 360L at the emitters.

    360/3 = 120L per emitter

    120L corresponds to, say, 450mA at 3.3V or so.

    0.45A*3.3V*3*1.5h = 6.7Wh

    This more optimistic estimate (in terms of both energy storage and lumen claims) puts us at a little under 7Wh for the supercap used in the light.

    Let's see what we get with a common AW 18650:

    3.7V*2.2Ah=8.14Wh

    So, this flashlight's power source has around 62% (pessimistically) or 82% (optimistically) of the energy of an 18650, but is several times the size.

    I think I'll pass on this one.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:Limited usefull information. by jdong · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually the reflector design makes me strongly suspect some 5mm's used. Even if they used premium quality 5mm emitters like the Nichia GS series, I doubt it'd have the same light output level of a Cree setup. Bottom line is parent is correct -- It takes me 5 seconds to swap out an 18650 or RCR123. Charging an integrated ultracapacitor for 90 seconds loses by any comparison.

    2. Re:Limited usefull information. by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      I don't think I'd ever like to go shopping with you... I think you'd remove all of the fun out of impulse buying! :)

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    3. Re:Limited usefull information. by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

      I wonder how come I still don't see any flashlights based on the fast charging lithium titanate batteries, such as the SCiB? They should charge in five minutes and shine much longer than an equivalent sized capacitor model.

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
    4. Re:Limited usefull information. by captaindomon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The AW 18650 is a lithium ion rechargeable battery. This is a capacitor system, they are a very different technology. Try to get an AW 18650 to recharge in 90 seconds. It will asplode.

      --
      Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    5. Re:Limited usefull information. by archermadness · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, this flashlight's power source has around 62% (pessimistically) or 82% (optimistically) of the energy of an 18650, but is several times the size.

      I think I'll pass on this one.

      Sure, it only has (according to your numbers) at most 82% of the charge capacity as an 18650 Li-Ion battery--but it can recharge in 90 seconds, and do that up to 50,000 times. That's something no battery can do. Plus, they shouldn't self-discharge (as that's typically an issue with batteries, not capacitors).

    6. Re:Limited usefull information. by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lumen ratings have become a marketing game and nearly everyone is quoting theoretical numbers rather than measured ones.

      Back in the incandescent days there wasn't as much advatage because most high end flashlight customers knew the ratings applied only to the first few seconds of operation. That and there wasn't enough competition among manufacturers to mean much. With constant voltage LED drivers lumens matter more, and now that there are several players in the emitter game, and making lights, things are getting out of hand.

      No way on earth 5.11 is measuring 270 lumens out of this light with an integratign sphere.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    7. Re:Limited usefull information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      But you have to look at the big picture.

      Lets say during an average 3-hour shopping experience, you may look at 15 items, and impulsively buy 2 items. Each impulsive buy brings you 10 mG* of fun.

      2 * 10mG = 20mG / 3 hrs = 6.66 mG / hour of fun (roughly)

      Guessing from your slashdot ID, you're fairly young, probably just past being teenage (again, very roughly.) Based on your age, looking at items that you might buy, but not actually buying them should give you about 5 mG of fun per hour.

      6.66 mG + 5 mG = 11.66 mG per hour of fun.

      B5 Geek shopping with you would admittedly remove much chance of you impulsively buying any items, but there's still the remote possibility of you buying one (say, for example, while he goes to the bathroom, or gets distracted counting ceiling tiles)

      We'll say that there's roughly a 20% chance of impulsively buying an item with him around.

      6.66 mG * 20% = 1.33mG of fun per hour from buying items

      But the joy gained by admiring the disgusted looks from the many females you'd be passing in the mall, and the sighs of boredom from the retail clerks while B5 explains to them the features of the products they're selling combined would provide at LEAST 10 mG of fun per hour.

      10mG + 1.33 mG = 11.33 mG per hour of fun.

      So you see, while shopping with B5 Geek, you would really only be losing roughly 0.33 mG of fun per hour.

      Combined with the fact that you could probably convince him to buy you lunch (He's probably lonely enough to pay just for your company) shopping with him might not be so bad after all.

      *mG = milliGrin

    8. Re:Limited usefull information. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Who cares about the battery charge time, I can refresh a primary cell light in about 15 seconds (20 if I have to take the new battery out of a blister pack). The whole advantage of rechargables is that they will be less expensive than primaries over time. At $170, you'd have to go through a lot of primaries to make it financially viable, and you could easily use a pair of swappable rechargeable batteries (one in the charger) to get the same effect for 1/5 the cost.

      Not saying it's not neat, it's just not useful enough to be economical. I mean, if you're going to carry around a charger, why not just have that spare battery with you instead? (Unless you happen to be somewhere with a constant, line voltage power source but no access to batteries or a traditional charger...which would be practically nowhere never).

      15 seconds to charge, two or three D cells worth of juice, and $10 should be the right spot.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    9. Re:Limited usefull information. by jdong · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oh without a doubt in my mind, from my experience with being a flashlightaholic (my collection of lights totals about $2000-ish), 5.11 is playing a few common low-grade marketing games here:
      (1) Advertising emitter lumens instead of out-the-front lumens. The number almost certainly doesn't account for losses in the reflector.
      (2) Advertising emitter lumens at peak driveable Vf and current. Almost every vendor except the Inova T-series and INFORCE (military) series does this -- they put a lumens number on the box that is taken from the spec sheet. Then, they do not actually drive the emitter at the power required to produce this amount, usually because it generates too much eat or returns too low of a runtime.
      (3) Advertising useless runtime. My NiteCore D10 is a 1xAA Cree Q5 based emitter. On a 2000mAh NIMH cell, it produces a little over 2 hours of full DC-DC regulated brightness. Then, the output tapers off and goes into a "moon" brightness for 24 hours so you can find your next set of batteries. So, does this have 120 minutes of runtime or 24 hours of runtime? I'd say realistically the former -- Nitecore advertises the former (runtime to 50% brightness) -- but I've seen far too many products in this industry advertise the latter.

      Bottom line is Inova's new INFORCE series military lights produce 150 or so out-the-front lumens and the light costs close to $200 MSRP. I don't see this product performing even in that ballpark. Press release = marketing speak; call me back when a reputable source produces a runtime graph and output graph.

    10. Re:Limited usefull information. by trickonion · · Score: 1

      Can I get you drunk one day and have you tell me all about flashlights?

      --
      I got you an Andes mint, but it melted in my pocket
    11. Re:Limited usefull information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you think this flashlight is VapourWare, because you don't have a use for a 90 second rechargeable flashlight... that's what I think I'm reading in your comment.

      So let's think of uses for this device.

      The producer of this device is catering to law enforcement, paramilitary and emergency service users.

      The AW 18650 you mentioned is a lithium ion rechargeable battery. It will explode and release a fume of toxic chemicals if it has to endure the slightest physical damage.
      Ultracapacitors usually are approximately as toxic as lead-acid batteries. Which is not ideal, but better than lithium.

      Try changing a battery if you're dressed in full firefighting/combat/whatever gear (handgloves and all), while driving in a truck at considerably high speeds down a bumpy road.

      Now try to put your flashlight in a 12V socket installed in the car.

      See?

      Or a recharge socket back at the watch, while we're at it. You still have advantages as ultracaps don't age near as badly as rechargeable batteries. So you won't have to cope with batteries holding half their rated charge just because they've been (ab)used for half a year.

      See? Energy density isn't necessarily the most important factor in deciding which flashlight to buy for some people.

    12. Re:Limited usefull information. by FrankSchwab · · Score: 1

      According to
      http://www.maxwell.com/ultracapacitors/products/large-cell/bcap3000.asp
      a commercial supercap is roughly 5.5 WH/Kg. So, sufficient Supercap to power this flashlight at your calculated 270 Lumen output is going to weigh roughly a kilogram, and take roughly a liter of volume.

      That's a really big flashlight.

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    13. Re:Limited usefull information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you don't only want a flashlight that charges in 90 sec, but it also has to be _way better_ in every other respect than flashlights already out there...

      I think this flashlight is for people who want one that charges quickly.

    14. Re:Limited usefull information. by sslo · · Score: 1
      Moderators, this needs to be modded down because of the blatant falsity of the calculations.

      B5_Geek:

      First, before doing your equations, please go and read the flashlight maker's own data sheet, which is linked from the Future of Things article. It explains that the 270 lumen output is only for 15 minutes, and that a longer runtime is available at a greatly reduced light output.

      Thus all of your hasty, uninformed and premature numerical calculations are off by a factor of four.

      Please read the much more accurate and informative post on the Future of Things site by Robert B., who correctly explained the engineering numbers that you have so eagerly pontificated about without bothering to look at the actual data.

    15. Re:Limited usefull information. by sslo · · Score: 3, Informative
      Actually, your calculations are even further off than I thought. Rather than multiplying the 60 minute runtime (on low) by the 270 lumen brightness (on high) from the 5.11 data sheet, you have somehow posited 270 lumens for 1.5 hours - which seems to have come straight out of thin air.

      This means that your calculations are off by a factor of six.

    16. Re:Limited usefull information. by khakipuce · · Score: 1

      Do you guys watch "The Big Bang Theory" by an chance?

      --
      Art is the mathematics of emotion
    17. Re:Limited usefull information. by ckthorp · · Score: 1
    18. Re:Limited usefull information. by ckthorp · · Score: 1

      The other option is that they aren't actually using an ultra capacitor and are instead using a nano-phosphate LiIon. You can stuff a decent amount of charge into one of those in 90 seconds.

  8. Sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they are the virus immune, anti-monopoly superfriendly corp they claim to be? yes.

  9. Man! by Facegarden · · Score: 1

    I had this idea years ago! I calculated out that i could do it, and it wouldn't be too expensive, but it would only last about 15 minutes per charge. I assume they have done better?
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    1. Re:Man! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you Dr. Rodney McKay? The one who hasn't published a paper in over ten years? The one who always claims "Oh! I thought of that already" and "Hey! You stole my idea!"? It's like you disappeared off the face of the Earth or something.

    2. Re:Man! by mrmojorisn72 · · Score: 1

      Looks like you are about right... From a comment of TFA - "Great start, not quite there yet (12/10/08 - 16:41 - by Robert B.) The manufacturer\'s data sheet states 15 minutes output at 270 lumens on high (67 lumen-hrs), or 60 minutes at 90 lumens on low (90 lumen-hrs). From this, I\'d estimate that on low the device draws approximately 1 watt from the ultracap, with each LED each operating at 0.3 watt at around 100 lumens per watt, with roughly 90% DC-DC converter efficiency. This is 1 watt-hour from the ultracap. On high, this device would draw about 4 watts from the ultracap, with a little over 1 watt reaching each LED, given a slightly lower LED efficiency at the higher brightness and a significantly lower converter efficiency, possibly a bit over 75%. Compare this with two AA NiMH cells (at 3 watt-hours each) that together store 6 watt-hours. Ultracaps are a breakthrough technology, but the energy storage density is still pretty low, as we see here. It will be a few years before ultracaps become the most satisfactory overall choice for flashlights."

    3. Re:Man! by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      Looks like you are about right...

      From a comment of TFA -

      "Great start, not quite there yet (12/10/08 - 16:41 - by Robert B.)

      The manufacturer\'s data sheet states 15 minutes output at 270 lumens
      on high (67 lumen-hrs), or 60 minutes at 90 lumens on low (90
      lumen-hrs).

      From this, I\'d estimate that on low the device draws
      approximately 1 watt from the ultracap, with each LED each operating
      at 0.3 watt at around 100 lumens per watt, with roughly 90% DC-DC
      converter efficiency.

      This is 1 watt-hour from the ultracap.

      On high, this device would draw about 4 watts from the ultracap,
      with a little over 1 watt reaching each LED, given a slightly lower
      LED efficiency at the higher brightness and a significantly lower
      converter efficiency, possibly a bit over 75%.

      Compare this with
      two AA NiMH cells (at 3 watt-hours each) that together store 6
      watt-hours.

      Ultracaps are a breakthrough technology, but the
      energy storage density is still pretty low, as we see here. It will be
      a few years before ultracaps become the most satisfactory overall
      choice for flashlights."

      Yeah, I got the idea from seeing that some company sells ultracaps that are the same form factor as D-Cell batteries, so it would be perfect for a maglite mod... If the capacity were there. And if I spend $180 on a flashlight it had better be BRIGHT. If those are only 1 Watt LEDs, you can buy similarly-equipped regular flashlights for $50. I'd rather just buy an LED Mag-Lite and two of those off-the-shelf rechargable battery packs for Mag Lites. I can swap out a charged pack faster than the ultracapacitor light can charge.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    4. Re:Man! by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      Just get a handful of these eternity lights.
      They have some kind of magnetic and capacitor thing that requires no battery.

      --
      music lover since 1969
    5. Re:Man! by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      Just get a handful of these eternity lights.
      They have some kind of magnetic and capacitor thing that requires no battery.

      Clearly you haven't used those before.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
  10. What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strange.. I have an LED flashlight that charges in under a second. You shake it, it's charged. Starts to dim? Shake it again.

  11. Patents by tepples · · Score: 2, Funny

    These two technologies are not mutually exclusive.

    Except perhaps if their respective patent holders refuse to cross-license to each other.

    1. Re:Patents by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      There are 4 billion Crank, squeeze, shake and twist flashlights out there. I'm pretty certain there is some way of doing it that would get around someone's patent.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    2. Re:Patents by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Fleshlight's technology still doesn't seem to be used for illumination purposes. I'm sure they could harness that and power most large metropolitan areas.

    3. Re:Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...where citizens can take shifts running on giant hamster wheels to power the city?

    4. Re:Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no no no, more like take shifts masturbating

  12. Fleshlight discharge times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I want to know is, how quickly does it self-discharge?

    I think the discharge time is dependent on the particular fleshlight user.

    1. Re:Fleshlight discharge times by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I think the discharge time is dependent on the particular fleshlight user.

      Turn on your fleshlight
      Let it shine wherever you go
      Let it make a happy glow
      For all the world to see
      Turn on your fleshlight
      In the middle of a young boy's dream
      Don't wake me up too soon
      Gonna take a ride across the moon
      You and--

      Yeah, I'm gonna stop it right there. Those lyrics are sounding a bit too perverted.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  13. What I did about my Surefire... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Consider yourself a fool for spending money like that.

    Inexpensive solution

    I bought a set of these for my SureFire and would never go back. They have about the same capacity and have lasted me a few dozen recharges with no apparent capacity problems.

    The funny thing, of course, is that police departments have public funding and wouldn't think twice about ordering thousands of CR123 cells.

    1. Re:What I did about my Surefire... by TFGeditor · · Score: 1

      The real value I see in this setup is in Fire/EMS service.

      We have rechargeable Streamlight flashlights in al lthe apparatus on the fire department where I am a volunteer (EMS). The problem is that the lights stay on the chargers in the apparatus all the time, so the batteries really take a beating. With this ultracapacitor setup, all the problems associated with constant charging, partial discharge then recharge, etc. are resolved.

      I plan to get one for evaluation, and if it makes the grade, persuading my department to outfit all of our apparatus with these.

      --
      Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
  14. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  15. Comes with mounting bracket. That means... by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    ...I have finally solved the problem of powerful, easily rechargeable bicycle light. No worries about self-discharge due to humidity, no NiMH batteries to swap and recharge daily... just ride the hell outta my bike in any weather condition while illuminating the road really propa' (maybe a tad too strong, even...) and then recharge it in a minute and a half at home - and since it's a cap, I can do this ad aeternum!

    Fuck yeah!!!!

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:Comes with mounting bracket. That means... by Synchis · · Score: 1

      You know, technically *you* didn't solve it. :)

      You simply found an application for a pre-made solution. :)

      --
      Thomas A. Knight
      Author of The Time Weaver
    2. Re:Comes with mounting bracket. That means... by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      er... okay, true.

      That said, I'm sure the USPTO would grant me a patent nonetheless.

      I just checked the mounting bracket, and it doesn't really work for what I had in mind. I'd have to fabricate something for the handlebar, that would somehow snap onto that bracket.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  16. Simple solution by phorm · · Score: 1

    Keep one flashlight in the charger, and one at-the-ready. That'll keep them Grues away, until a flashlight breaks, of course.

  17. Best part of the whole deal: works at low temp. by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    The biggest problem I have had with cycling during the winter is the ridicolously low capacity of NiMH cells at sub-zero temperatures (I sometimes cycle at -10C). In addition to a lower capacity during usage (and much higher self-discharge), the NiMH cells would break and degrade very quickly during the winter.

    I'm glad we have supercaps now. No matter how much lower capacity they have, it sure beats the 15-20 minutes of useful time I could ever suck out of the NiMH batteries in the winter.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  18. Finally by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

    Now I won't have to go stumbling around in the dark looking for fresh batteries next time there's a power failure!

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  19. constant pain by White+Yeti · · Score: 1

    Agreed. With my current flashlight I have to change the darn batteries every 4-6 hours! It's bankrupting me! I tried the crank/shake flashlights, but people kept snatching them away and smashing them.

  20. I think what we all *really* want to know is by Endo13 · · Score: 1

    ... will it blend?

    --
    There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
  21. car charger by SirLanse · · Score: 1

    If it comes with a charger for in the car it could be useful.
    Contractors and cops would keep it plugged in, while driving and have it for inspections etc.
    $170 is rather high, but a load of lithium that you are keeping out of the landfill might be worth it.

    1. Re:car charger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, that $170 is all you pay over the lifetime of the thing (except a few cents for electricity to recharge it), and it could easily work just as well for you son and grandson.

      That 3-D cell Maglite costs $3-$6 every time you change them. Since they last about 10 hours, you're paying 50 cents per hour just for electricity, quickly eclipsing the $25 you paid for the flashlight. So assuming you pay $150 more for the ultracapacitor light, the ROI is about 300 hours of use from not having to buy batteries (or lightbulbs).

      Not to mention that this things weighs as much as the 3-D light *before* you put in the batteries!

      dom

  22. 5.11 Tactical - Their most famous product rocks by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    They built their business on pants. Amazing product - comfy, incredibly durable, excellent pocket design, and don't look bad in any circumstances. I don't think I've worn any other pants for years.

    Special note for the Slashdot crowd: They're avaliable in waist sizes up to 54 inches. :-)

    1. Re:5.11 Tactical - Their most famous product rocks by keraneuology · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the pants be kinda smelly by now if you haven't worn any other pants for years?

      --
      If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
    2. Re:5.11 Tactical - Their most famous product rocks by daybot · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the pants be kinda smelly by now if you haven't worn any other pants for years?

      He bought the optional Washing Station that washes the Tactical Pants in 90 seconds.

  23. Ivus Lightning by greenlead · · Score: 1

    This was previously known as the Ivus Lightning, which was announced at the SHOT Show a couple of years ago.

  24. other hand? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, what are you doing with the other hand, dare I ask?

    1. Re:other hand? by JosKarith · · Score: 1

      What is the sound of one hand surfing...
      (fap) (fap) (fap)

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
  25. Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess what Gordon Freeman would like for Christmas.

  26. Useless slashvertisement by RichiH · · Score: 1

    What LEDs does that thing use? How many Lumen does it put out?

    I will pass and stick to my Fenix P3D. It lasts 65 hours at 12 Lumen or 6 1/2 at 210 (iirc). After that time, it will still burn for a few days (I got bored and threw away the old batteries after two days of contant burning). It has 5 output modes. It is made from aluminium, water-tight and as large as your thumb. Still, those 210 make it, quite literally, a searchligt. Oh, and the CR123A it uses have a shelf life of ten years.