MassiveProng wrote:
On Fri, 6 Apr 2007 08:10:25 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

We will have to see on that. It sure looks like they're burning out
in traffic signals and car tail lights fast enough.

That's bull****. Bus Lines, as well as traffic controllers switched
to them SPECIFICALLY due to the FACT that they have a longer life
span, and lower consumption rate.

And you don't see failures? Take a good look at traffic lights, you can
usually find dead pixels in them. They might last longer, but they aren't
eternal.

On a slightly different note, I'm disturbed at the number of vehicles I see
that don't have working tail lights. Not old vehicles, but newer ones (3
years old) that shouldn't have these kinds of failures. It looks to me like
over-all reliability is going the other way while expense and complexity are
going up. I know those failures are for other reasons, but they are
failures none the less.

The light source will be
expensive and it will have a limited life (man-made at least).

Bulbs yes. LEDs, no. That stats already exist.

Like always, they will be operated at the maximum power dissipation that
gives a life expectancy just longer than the warranty period. Why do you
think it would be any different? Just look at regular light bulbs, a 10%
reduction in voltage greatly increases life expectancy. Given that, it
stands to reason that manufacturers could just make the filament a little
sturdier to accomplish the same thing. Why aren't any manufacturers doing
that?