On Sunday, 22 April 2018 17:30:45 UTC+1, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 00:07:51 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:

I'd hope they are. But in this case with an existing fitting, I'd bet
a decent electronic ballast and tube will last longer. Added benefit
is you already know how much light it gives (and the quality of that
light), unlike with LEDs where you have to guess until you've fitted
them.


Some of the better manufactures do have proper spec sheets for their
LEDs. Most of what I fit in NHS, schools offices etc have already been
designed by the manufacturer to meet a certain lighting level.

Yes - but I'd guess those are all proper LED fittings. Not a LED
designed to replace a tungsten bulb directly. To me, those are in the
same class as CFL. A very badly engineered idea.

A complete LED luminair with non-user replaceable LED lamp is not always
a badly engineered idea (provided it's reasonably well engineered). A
classic example being a 30W LED floodlight alternative to the 'standard'
300W linear halogen bulbed floodlight that more or less demands a trip up
a ladder once or twice a year to fiddle about replacing a blown bulb
until the PIR switch itself blows up leaving you thinking you might as
well make do with a 60W porch light until decently efficient LED
equivalents to the 300/500W security flood lights finally materialise at
a less than eye watering price. One of those is likely to outlast a new
build house! No more repeat trips up that damned ladder in the depths of
winter any more. :-)

So instead of replacing a bulb you've got to replace the fitting, and for many people that means an electrician. Crazy.

I can't imagine many mfrs running their LEDs so conservatively that they outlast a house. The less time they spend on the harder they can hammer them & still get tolerable life expectancy. Businesses are there to profit, not to go under.


NT