*BLF LT1 Lantern Project) (updated Nov,17,2020)

USB-C for the input charging is being considered if it don’t increase cost. (

All rightey then.

I also, as I have noted, am buying several lanterns committed to in the very infancy of the project. It is getting very old to keep seeing “alternety should not be allowed to have one of these lanterns [or Q8s] ” in various formats. I consider them very very rude. Regardless of opinion; alternety is neither stupid or nor uneducated. I too am an engineer. Engineers have a gene that requires them to evaluate everything. And, if necessary, fix it.

I believe most of what I have written makes sense. That is why I write it. But the regulars despise/attack it. Fine. Everyone gets to put in their two cents (I think).

I honestly don’t know what was rude about my last post. To those I have hideously harmed psychologically ; my apologies. And I have fixed lamp/lantern in my last post. My fault. Lack of precision. I hate it when that happens.

However, may I suggest actually thinking about some of the points and trying to understand the basis and results being discussed rather than having your knee jerk. I understand it is late in the project. I have provided input much earlier. To no avail. But hope springs eternal. I am trying to point out some possible issues or improvements with minimal impact. And improve overall user utility/complexity.

I made a suggestion earlier about polling the buyers of the >1000 lanterns about features. There is a skilled core development group working on this. Their uncompensated work is irreplaceable and deserves kudos. My point about polling is to survey the unwashed masses view of what is useful, required, or not wanted. Logically, there are a lot of potential buyers that simple do not participate in (or understand) the definitions of the lantern. They just want the lantern; whatever. Rather than build a complex (and potentially more expensive) lantern for a subset of potential users; go for most useful and lowest reasonable cost. Reverse the point of view. Simple now; complex next rather than complex now and simple later. This has significant marketing issues. If people buy them and can not deal with the interface (and price), the sales for the manufacturer will suffer. That is rather important to ongoing projects with the offshore manufacturer. They have to make money. Two or more versions can be a significant advantage to the manufacturer. They have a price/performance range. It also determines the future willingness to deal with this sites projects.

Using the Q8 (I own several) as an example. In my opinion (from several experiments) the interface for untrained users is quite hostile. Alternate views of this are completely useless, but widely propagated. Using multiple test persons, regardless of what the designers and (skilled) web site users say, numerous people explain the interface as simple, it just needs to be understood/learned. Others view the interface as incomprehensible. There is a serious dejvue element here.

Asking the potential lantern buyers what they consider important would provide guidance to the development team. Again, I have not gone through and counted everyone’s wish list. Assigning a projected price (or impacts on other features) for the various build decisions in the poll would help map the buyer base into more understandable desires/requirements. It is not too late to do this. But there is a high probability of no one paying attention. I keep getting chastised for not seeing/understanding the “correct” configuration. The control of the design, if I understand correctly, is in the hands of a relatively small group. They are absolutely essential. No argument there. But do they serve the masses or their excitement about bells and whistles? I do understand the basis of the web site thread and the anticipated configuration. But configuration has become complicated for civilians.

IT IS A LANTERN should be a battle cry of the relatively unknowledgeable people lining up for the lights (yeah, they are lights).

If it is something you would like to investigate, it could be discussed via private message with people who responded. However, the public BLF Lantern thread is probably not a good place for that discussion.

The lantern design is mostly based on DBSAR’s extensive experience with long periods spent off-grid, using a wide variety of lanterns, with feedback from others who have similar needs. Some details are also based on feedback from BLF, CPF, Reddit, IRC, and at least two manufacturers. So… many people have already been consulted about what they consider important. The research phase of the project is mostly done, much of the development is complete, and now the priority is getting the product actually made.

Oh hot damn, there’s a flashlight IRC channel?

##flashlight on Freenode.

I am interested 1x

please add me to the list for one. Thanks

copy of latest additions to the list:

1013 jinjin19
1014 Flitsmal
1015 bd52
1016 bd52
1017 bd52
1018 finnegans
1018 finnegans
1019 Schkü
1020 deus1ex
1021 red72vw

DBSAR, if you want you could likely just copy and paste this to the last list update I provided and update the OP at your convenience, or I can send you a full update some time in the future. I plan to periodically show recent additions in this sort of format from now on. I will still try to welcome new members who post here in the interest thread first (I am sure I have missed some, sorry bout that and a belated welcome to BLF to those I missed, the second round is on me also :beer: :beer: )

The latest list can be found in the OP always (thanks DBSAR) and is posted here for conveniece also:

interest list sorted by entry number

interest list sorted by user names

I don’t see my name on the list :expressionless: (*BLF LT1 Lantern Project) (updated Nov,17,2020) - #2763 by Lothar)

Thanks for pointing that out. Surprised I don’t get fired from this job. . . :person_facepalming:

I added you for 4 Lothar, split the difference. I also added Gregor who I missed in the post just after yours.
I went through the last couple pages and think I got everyone, but it doesn’t hurt for you to check like Lothar did. :+1:

1021 red72vw
1022 Lothar
1023 Lothar
1024 Lothar
1025 Lothar
1026 gregor

interest list sorted by entry number

interest list sorted by user names

I’ve resisted long enough. Put me in for 1.

Count me in for interest in 1 please.

Please add me to the list for 1. Thanks.

you have one on the list at 599, and I have added you for a second as well at number 1027.

1027 toxiccoccyx
1028 beastlykings
1029 WES-7

Done deal :slight_smile: much easier to add the new interest list names in small lots like that. ( Updated the OP to #1029

I will keep doing it that way then, as it is also much easier for me. :beer:

sounds good.

Here below shows the shortened version of the lantern, based from Lexel’s modified drawing, with added knurling to the mid section. ( the battery tube can be the same exact one used for the Sofirn Q8 if that saves cost/price per unit, and eliminate the four flat spots ( like the Sofirn Q8) as the flat sections is not needed.

The flats section look good to me it can reduce some weight and also have the logo on it if the mid section is knurling.

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerm nope…. This is not the lantern you are looking for! (say is with a hint of jedi)