The SureFire 4xAA that never was

[Brownstone]

This is probably something that other people have noticed before, but I just came across it and thought it was interesting.

Looking over SureFire's patents it looks like they once intended to release a flashlight that could be configured with either 3xDL123A batteries, or 4xAA batteries.

These illustrations from their patent show what they had in mind:

​

"Accordingly, if the user of the appliance should be at an outpost or other remote location where lithium batteries are not available or have run out, he or she may nonetheless continue to operate the appliance with the more readily available one and one-half volt batteries."
​

As far as I know, this concept never saw the light of day.


_

 

[greenLED]

As far as I know, this concept never saw the light of day.

A proto L4 that could use AA's was displayed at the Shot Show SF party a couple of years ago.

Keep in mind that type of "blanket statements" are common language in patents. Doesn't necessarily mean the patent holder has plans for implementation, but they put it out on the patent anyway. Just in case? :shrug:

 

[Size15's]

That patent for the three-DL123A or six-AA battery light was the reason why the Insight VLI could only be supplied to the Military as part of the Special Operations Peculiar Modification (SOPMOD) kit as an accessory system for the M4A1 Carbine used by USSOCOM.

It was not allowed to be sold to the public due to the VLI infringing on SureFire's patent. The story goes is that SureFire developed and patented the light but the contract for supplying the light was awarded to Insight.
Over the years SureFire and Insight have manoeuvred back and forth between being the official contracted light supplier, and the unofficial light supplier to the SOPMOD program.

The VLI had significant weaknesses, not least the strength of the mount, the reliability of the switching, the life-span and robustness of the bulb; associated with dual battery chemistry power supply, lack of water-resistance, quickly corroding electrical contacts etc etc
This meant that operators were en mass purchasing SureFires instead either through supply chain or out of their own pockets.
The VLI was quickly dropped during Block 1 and formally replaced for Block 2 with SureFire's M96 (and M95) WeaponLights.

In light (sic) of the situation it became apparent that flexibility was required over which illumination tools could be purchased and issued or individually purchased and used - the Picatinny Rail allowed for a multitude of devices and variations.

It also became clear that the need for a dual battery chemistry illumination tool was not required as the supply of [SF123A] 3V lithium 'camera' batteries could be secured as easily as that of AA batteries. Furthermore the demand for AA batteries meant there are often better supplies of SF123A batteries due to the fewer number of devices requiring them.

SureFire did make their dual-chemistry WeaponLight but it was never released to the public and SureFire quickly released it was better to concentrate on CR123A-only based products.

Al

 

[BVH]

It's interesting and fun to read these types of historical posts!

 

[Size15's]

It's interesting and fun to read these types of historical posts!

Perhaps because I already have some awareness of this that I'm far more interested in where things are going rather than where they've been...

USSOCOM plan to extend the SOPMOD program by specifying a so-called "Crew Served" Visible Bright Light (CSBVL)

 

[Brownstone]

It was not allowed to be sold to the public due to the VLI infringing on SureFire's patent.

Not surprisingly, the US government has a special authority to infringe US patents. A key part of that authority is that if a government contractor acting under the authority of the government infringes a patent, the patent holder has no claim against the contractor and has to seek redress from the government under 28 U.S.C § 1498(a). So what you say makes perfect sense; Insight could infringe SureFire patents as long as they were manufacturing for the government, but could not produce the same product for the general market.

Perhaps because I already have some awareness of this that I'm far more interested in where things are going rather than where they've been.

To me, understanding the past makes appreciating the future easier.