600 Watt Short Arc M-134 Cannon Light - INFANT AN/ASQ-132

[get-lit]

BVH, the ballast doesn't control voltage, it's determined by the amount of and excitation of the lamp gas (Xenon in this case) between the electrodes. Voltage increases as the gas vapor heats up.

I'm confused about this configuration. I wouldn't think a 600W Xenon ballast would fit inside that housing because the current regulator circuit would be too large. Maybe just the high voltage ignition components are in the housing so as to not have to run potentially unsafe thick cables and connections. In the early stages of planning for my light I considered such a configuration to safely reduce the hand-held weight, but since Mercury-based lights operate at much lower current than Xenon and thus require a much smaller and lighter current regulator circuit, it didn't make sense to separate the circuit from the housing in my case.

Fortunately, there is a plus side to coping with the mass of the high current circuit for Xenon lamps over Mercury; the higher current better concentrates the light to a smaller point between the electrodes.

[FRITZHID]

This just popped into my brain. The Cermax PS knows its a 300 Watt PS and it knows the Amps it's going to provide based on the user setting entered prior to ignition. So isn't it just going to provide the Volts needed to make 300 Watts? (after warm up, of course) I did notice on the display which has a Watt meter built in, that it provides about 292 Watts on start up and within about 5 minutes it's up to about 302.

So based on this, I could program more Amps on the 500 Supply but it might just crank down the Voltage to maintain the 500 Watts so I may be stuck with 500 Watts.

yeah, thats pretty much what i was getting at. it's a 500w PS, it's going to provide 500w of power +/- x%.... and it's a XSA PS so its going to provide the power that those devices require. as opposed to a welding PS where it would provide 200a @ 6v (or what ever the case may be depending on the design) but none the less, its won't go much over what it's rated for, thus under driving the bulb. even if u did crank it up some, it still shouldn't be enough to damage the bulb or fully power it for that matter. it should however be enough to strike the lamp and power it even if its a lil on the dimmer side of things. maybe in the future a 600w PS can be found that could/would come close to fitting, keeping the ignition system in the tube and the rest on the ground or auto mounted? the electronics of today are far more advanced then the ones used when that lamp was built, so who knows what you'll find in the future! but until then, you can still get it up and running.
just like Get-Lit said, the control system may be to large to fit in the tube along with ignitor and such, but a large portion should be able to fit and make it as "hand portable" as possible, but keeping the power flowing to its still gonna take some pretty hefty cable and heavy batts. but with your tank lights kicking around, i'm sure your in no short supply of these
we'll just have to take a look at the schematics and see what we can come up with.

[BVH]

BVH, the ballast doesn't control voltage, it's determined by the amount of and excitation of the lamp gas (Xenon in this case) between the electrodes. Voltage increases as the gas vapor heats up. So would the bulb running Voltage ultimately be determined by the initial filling pressure of Xenon by the manufacturer? Or at least does cold fill pressure have a direct bearing on running voltage? I think this is what ARC was trying to explain to me when they were making my 150 Watt Communicator bulb. If so, then there must be charts/tables/calculators that mfg's go by when designing and making bulbs?

I'm confused about this configuration. I wouldn't think a 600W Xenon ballast would fit inside that housing because the current regulator circuit would be too large. Maybe just the high voltage ignition components are in the housing so as to not have to run potentially unsafe thick cables and connections. Yes, only the high voltage ignition components - ignitor, spark gap, transformer and some caps are in the can. The regulator board, some relays, lockout oscillator, pulse generator, ignition detection logic, converter ass'y, booster caps and other misc components are in the other "box" in the helicopter cockpit.In the early stages of planning for my light I considered such a configuration to safely reduce the hand-held weight, but since Mercury-based lights operate at much lower current than Xenon and thus require a much smaller and lighter current regulator circuit, it didn't make sense to separate the circuit from the housing in my case.

Fortunately, there is a plus side to coping with the mass of the high current circuit for Xenon lamps over Mercury; the higher current better concentrates the light to a smaller point between the electrodes.

[FRITZHID]

ok Bob, got the pix you sent of the schematics and block diagrams.... and at 1st glance... even if you had the main PS, .... it's designed for 2 600w XSA!!!!! (i can't imagine how bright THAT would be!) so it woulden't work with just the 1 lamp anyways... the safety system would detect the lack of lamp and cause shutdown...
i do have some good news however.... i'd say that 80% or more of the total circuitry is just control or "safety" circuitry... meaning it can be condensed into a much smaller package!
as nice as it would be to have one of these photon cannons on each side of your truck it would be a HUGE power draw!
so... in that, now we will have to come up some other PS for this, and since most XSA PS's have the striking systems built in, you can gut whats in the tube out and use it as a lamps holder/cooling system only. *you could keep the Spark Gap in as a stock starter preset device, but seems kind of redundant to me.*
i'm almost sure we can find SOMETHING that would mostly fit in the tube, minus a few small things. maybe something out of a VSS1 or 3 would do the trick, IDK, i haven't been inside of eather.
worst case you'll need a small external power source with heavy cables to the lamp.

(perhaps gutting the current gizmos would leave room for a servo focus system?)

[get-lit]

The Warner Power SafeArc PFC 500W is the smallest 500W Xenon power supply I've come across over the years, at just 5.8 lbs.
It's 90-265VAC input with PFC so it "should" take 90-265V DC for battery power.

[FRITZHID]

The Warner Power SafeArc PFC 500W is the smallest 500W Xenon power supply I've come across over the years, at just 5.8 lbs.
It's 90-265VAC input with PFC so it "should" take 90-265V DC for battery power.

see???!!!! Yes! this is the type of thing i'm talking about. compact units that COULD be parted out of their stock casing and crammed into a tube! then just a smaller PS to power it, or perhaps just the large bank of batts, lol.
only thing i don't care for on that particular PS is the "added features" that would seem un-needed to me, in a spotlight application.... RF/EMI protection, extra power outputs, ect... who needs that on a spotlight?? lol
so if those could be weeded out, theres even less to cram into the tube.
perhaps a home built PS is the best way to go?
using an industry standard PS as a template, it woulden't be that hard to come up with a slide in canister PS for this light.

[BVH]

Well that sounds like good news! At this point, I would be happy with a small external source and I could run some McMasterCarr 40KV rated, 60 amp cables to the external Anode and Cathode pins on the 9-pin connector. Kinda like the MR scenario with an umbilical. Of course, fitting a complete system inside would be the ultimate accomplishment and make for a great "hand held SA.

[FRITZHID]

Well that sounds like good news! At this point, I would be happy with a small external source and I could run some McMasterCarr 40KV rated, 40 amp cables to the external Anode and Cathode pins on the 9-pin connector. Kinda like the MR scenario with an umbilical. Of course, fitting a complete system inside would be the ultimate accomplishment and make for a great "hand held SA.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ thats my thinking! (this project is making me wish i lived in CA instead of the icelandic wasteland of WI!!) i'd LOVE to be able to get my hands dirty with this project! you have the lathe, would want access to a milling machine, and then an electronics test bench, and it could be done fairly easily!

[BVH]

WOW! That's a lot of "ifs"

I sold a big Delta 20" drill press and have been wanting to buy a mill for a while to double as a drill press. Every time I get into it, the size grows from an X2 size up to the PM25 or PM30 and then I find they won't be available for quite a while and even then, the importer isn't too happy with them right now. So I put it on the back burner.

[FRITZHID]

WOW! That's a lot of "ifs"

I sold a big Delta 20" drill press and have been wanting to buy a mill for a while to double as a drill press. Every time I get into it, the size grows from an X2 size up to the PM25 or PM30 and then I find they won't be available for quite a while and even then, the importer isn't too happy with them right now. So I put it on the back burner.

well maybe this is the project to get that pan on the front burner!

[BVH]

Was distracted for a while. Had to pick up that rare VSS-3 control box set off Ebay so I'll have two working -3's. Might split my for sale set and keep one. Long drive tomorrow 440 miles round trip.

[FRITZHID]

well those VSS's of yours are items i will ALWAYS be jealous of! if i were you, i'd Definitely keep one handy! (i can't imagine owning 2!)
Drive safe my friend!

[get-lit]

Even at just 5.8 lbs, I'd prefer the ballast to be carried in a separate enclosure in a backpack with the battery, rather than burdening the hand with that weight.

[BVH]

Even at just 5.8 lbs, I'd prefer the ballast to be carried in a separate enclosure in a backpack with the battery, rather than burdening the hand with that weight.

Yes, I agree, a 10- - 12 pound hand-held light is pretty heavy - think Costco HID +. Even though I don't want to look like the Megaray guy in the red hat, I don't find the battery vest that bad to wear.

[FRITZHID]

well, i wasent suggesting you take THAT exact PS and stuff it in there, i was suggesting building one, and in that, parts can be lessened and lightened
just use a standard PS as a template.

[BVH]

I'm just intimidated at the thought of trying to build a PS from scratch! Sounds very daunting!

[FRITZHID]

idk about Daunting, ... i guess can be intimidating, perhaps even scary at times () but in the end, you'd have the pride of say'n "I Built That!" for an impressive piece of equipment.
....maybe its just me. lol

[BVH]

OK, I'm game for it. Doesn't need to be quick, either. And I do enjoy soldering and pretty most all electrical work. Where do I start?

[get-lit]

I went down that road for a bit. I started by talking to short arc quartz lamp ballast engineers, and I soon found that they guard their secrets very closely. I realized it would take me years to learn it all and come up with a design and construction process, and it still wouldn't be as good as the ones made by people that dedicate a lifetime to optimizing them with smart features for the most arc stability and lamp life. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just a little background from my experience. I hope it works out well if you give it a go.

[FRITZHID]

well, thats kind of the point i was making with this,... does it really need to have smart features? does it need to be a perfect arc? i can understand these on a projection or medical/scientific lamp, but just a spot light, that may see 1000hrs in a year?
i think with some reverse engineering and practical application of new electronics, a ballast that serves up 18v @ 33a and then a small ignition system shouldn't be that hard to build. it should be more then adiquite for a hobby spotlight. and should as well, be able to fit in the can with little weight. i'm thinking ether a flyback transformer or small coil pack from a car as the lignitor, and keeping the spark gap as the flow-back preventer.

[get-lit]

While smart features would be a requirement for some applications, they're surely just a benefit for this application. You can increase arc stability with magnets. The difficulty I ran across was not with current regulation nor ignition, but in integrating a startup phase to transition from initial ignition to full operation. I was excited to go my own at first, but the research became mundane and I got terribly bored with it. It's a worthwhile venture for someone that's really into electronics. Going with a production unit freed my time to move onto other aspects that motivate me more.

[snake36bravo]

This is an amazing once in a lifetime find! At least from my perspective. I am authoring a publication on the INFANT system and this is proof that portions of the system survived. If you ever want to part with it I'd be interested. Thank you for posting these images.

Do you have an image the IR lens cap fitted to the unit? I would really be interested in seeing the unit with the cap on. The AN/ASQ-132 was manufactured by Hughes.

[BVH]

The light didn't come with a lens cap unfortunately and neither me nor my sleuth investigator, Phil Ament have yet to come across a pic of it. I'd be most interested in reading your publication when it comes out. Please provide a link to its' availability when the time comes. What is your connection to the INFANT system? Did you operate a system, maintain one, help design it? Can you give any other specifics on the lights' performance? Did Hughes actually manufacturer the light or was it subbed out?

I have a "thing" for military lights and I usually don't ever sell them off. (The VSS-1 and one my VSS-3's being the exception)

[BVH]

Maybe I mis-interpreted your "IR lens cap fitted" question. Did you mean a pic of the front of the light with the IR lens installed or was there a lens cap protective cover that you are referring to? I just went back to see and there are no pics of the IR lens installed. Yes, I have the IR lens and I can certainly rig a pic up. Have any preferences on camera angle, how close/far away, other preferences?

[snake36bravo]

The light didn't come with a lens cap unfortunately and neither me nor my sleuth investigator, Phil Ament have yet to come across a pic of it. I'd be most interested in reading your publication when it comes out. Please provide a link to its' availability when the time comes. What is your connection to the INFANT system? Did you operate a system, maintain one, help design it? Can you give any other specifics on the lights' performance? Did Hughes actually manufacturer the light or was it subbed out?

I have a "thing" for military lights and I usually don't ever sell them off. (The VSS-1 and one my VSS-3's being the exception)

Yes, indeed you do have a thing for military lights. If you can swing it a head on view and 3/4 view from the front would be choice. I understand your unwillingness to part with it. My hope was to find all the components one day. Cant tell you how excited I was to see a piece survived after the turn in at Phu Loi and Long Bihn. What happened to the whole systems is a great mystery. Most of those who operated them believed they were destroyed.

The 'package' was manufactured by Hughes who acquired Litton Systems, Inc of Garland, TX. This includes your IR searchlight.

My publication also addresses the various searchlights, C-123 and C-130 landing light arrays used on slicks for helicopter night warfare. I have plenty O images for you including shots of your MX-8688 IR Searchlight as they were in use in Vietnam and during testing at Fort Rucker, AL. The INFANT package was unique. Up to then Army pilots took the Sheridan and M-60 tank searchlights off, rigged up a mount sometimes equipped with a starlight scope on top, attached them to the gunships and slicks and used them to deny the Vietcong the night. They operated in gun teams and were coupled with lots of mean fire power. There were also flare ships, two 50 gallon drums cut in half, mounted starboard & port loaded with flares and sent up with crews who would drop them out.


Here are some images. I can provide more detail.

[snake36bravo]

Maybe I mis-interpreted your "IR lens cap fitted" question. Did you mean a pic of the front of the light with the IR lens installed or was there a lens cap protective cover that you are referring to? I just went back to see and there are no pics of the IR lens installed. Yes, I have the IR lens and I can certainly rig a pic up. Have any preferences on camera angle, how close/far away, other preferences?

My apologies, I meant the IR lens. I'm interested in a head on shot with it installed and a 3/4 view with an unobstructed view of the whole unit. I can always zoom the image for detail.

Now if you suddenly had the nose mounted unit with the other IR searchlight in the housing and the LLLTV housing that would be something and like me your quest would have no end. Talk about a holy grail.

There were a total of three IR search lights. The nose mounted searchlight could also be traversed giving the entire unit 1500w of lighting, in variable directions, all IR. To my knowledge the IR lenses were never removed as that would defeat the purpose of the system.

[BVH]

I've got all the parts out of the "can" since I am in the process of sending the probably damaged bulb to A.R.C. for a custom replacement to be made. But it's easy to simply put the lens back on and grab some pics. If you want other pics, OEM hi-res pics, let me know and I can send via email.

You mention 1500 Watts of IR. The two tail units are 600 Watts each. Was the front light a 300 Watt unit? I'm going to have to take another look at the manual to see where I missed the part about a 3rd light.

I also acquired an OEM INFANT system manual set consisting of two separate books from the guy on Ebay who sells tons of TM's. The largest one is about 5" thick when put in a loose leaf binder. The second is pretty much fold-out, 11 x 20 (more or less) schematics.

I'd love to see more pics and hear more about the systems use. Do you know how large and heavy the power supply is that powers all the lights? I assume it was a fairly large box located somewhere mid-ships or maybe in the toe-kick area? IIRC, the schematic shows the PS as powering a Right and Left light but nothing on a front light. Maybe it had a seperate PS?

How did you find this site?

My email is bvh at bvh dot net.

[snake36bravo]

BVH,

Thank for taking the time to set those shots up for me. Your faster than the speed of light! I had to....sorry =)

Great to see you have the right cable!

What the TM/FM calls for and what works are usually two different things all together. I will ask the electrician who worked on this at Can Tho but I'm sure he'll tell me they stepped it down. From every source I have including those veterans and avionics technicians/electricians who used these, the IR searchlights are always quoted at 500w including the official report on INFANT.

"At the cabin sides, perched atop the gun mounts, were two 500W Xenon infrared searchlights to aid in pin-pointing a target. Once a target was established, the XM-21 armament system did the rest. Significant modifications were made to the wiring, instrumentation, and control panels of the UH-1M, as well as strengthening the nose mounted XM-5 grenade launcher hard points, in order to accept the LLLTV periscope assembly. To avoid compromising the crew’s night vision and to avert detection, the miniguns were lipped with flash suppressors and fired ‘dim tracer” ammunition which was specifically developed for INFANT."

I'll send you an email with much more detail. I think you'll get real kick out of the history and images I can provide both of INFANT as well as Firefly, Nighthawk and Lightning Bug. A lot of what was used in INFANT was used in all the others.

I found the site while conducting research on the AN/ASQ-132 with the hope of providing better detail other than after action reviews or images. Technical aspects would be something I would not want to leave out.

[BVH]

I just had a re-read of Pg 2-46 in the DS GS Depot Maintenance Manual, TM 11-5855-208-35-1 to be sure I read it correctly. Section 2-12 b is indicating that, after strike and boost cycles and the light is operating normally, that the electronic regulator is providing 18 Volts and approx. 33 Amps to the bulb which translates to 594 Watts, give or take. I really would like to hear what you find out from your in-field experts about this. I wonder why the discrepancy. Might change what I do with the mfg of the new bulb.

Ready and waiting for more pics via email!

That's the earlier of the two VSS-3's in that pic. 8-sided housing versus a more 4-sided (with rounded corners) for the VSS-3a. There was a postcard on Ebay a while back showing the VSS-3 and the star scope you mentioned on a Huey. Quite a sight to see.

[BVH]

Got some great news today. Wife and I made the 410 mile round trip to A.R.C. today to deliver the old OEM bulb that, as it turns out, is not functional. The first bit of good news is that even though my light lamp is rated at 600 Watts, it is very similar to the Spectrolab 500 Watt Starburst lamp when it comes to physical dimensions and arc gap. The bases are a little different and will have to be special made. But they have all the raw products and tooling to easily make the bulb. The other great news is that I took one of my two, $100 Ebay scored ILC brand, new old stock variable 100-500 Watt Short Arc power supplies with built-in ignitor up with me just in-case there was some reason they needed to see it and because this is what I plan to use to power the INFANT light when it's got its new lamp - temporarily until I can find a used 600 Watt supply. They suggested I bring it to the test area of the shop and try to power up a 500 Watt Starburst lamp. To our great joy, it lit it off with no issues and......I had the power cranked up to full (thinking it's 500 Watts max output) and when I looked at the display, WOW!! - it was putting out 605 Watts! We confirmed this with Volt and Amp meter readings. It did this without overheating nor any other negative effects. So it looks like I won't have to try to find an almost non-existent used 600 Watt supply or buy a new one for $2100. Things are looking good to get this baby going. I've got a new, clear borosilicate lens coming for it, just waiting on some info on whether or not they can supply single or two-sided AR coatings that will take the heat. ARC will make the lamp during their next programmed production run of 500 Watt bulbs which is around 6-8 weeks away. I can't wait! By the way, the bulb will easily be capable of being powered with 750 Watts continuous and even up to near 1000 Watts for medium run times, if I can find a supply somewhat portable to power it.

I also got to fondle their engineer sample NightSun and Starburst! Sure would like one of each!