In the D4 era, BLF convinced a manufacturer to make a 6 lumen, single mode twisty (Sofirn C01). And the lantern was a very novel project, but BLF worked out all the key details for the body, the driver, and the UI.
If we show a sizeable interest list, a clearly defined and stable feature set, and keep the amount of development work reasonable, it seems like we can usually find a manufacturer to build it.
It might not be a good time, though, since the company that has been most accommodating of BLF requests recently seems to have quite a few things on their plate at the moment. Also, it always takes commitment ahead of time to conceive and prove out the concept and manage an interest list before a manufacturer will commit. I know I don’t have to tell you about how these projects can burn members out, so I’ve generally kept to making supportive comments when concepts like these are mentioned, but not pushed too hard.
A 14500 or 16340 based Anduril flashlight would be brilliant. Tint ramping would make it even better, and hopefully work without needing further modifications of the existing lantern firmware. It can be done in a compact host, if it’s ok to be floody - Clemence already offers an MCPCB for a Nichia E17A quadtrix that can be configured for multiple channels, and he recently found a spiral honeycomb TIR that blends the beam well.
Output would be modest, but easily meet my EDC needs - a 15mm, two-sided driver should be able to fit 2 channels of 3x7135 each.
Or keep it a single tint if a no-FET Lume1 variant could fit.
Less EDC-optimized, I also wonder if maybe Hank might try adapting his 5A linear driver to have 2 channels (no FET) for a tint-mixing quad. In fact, if he did that and also offered an alternate bezel option that was a lantern-style diffuser, then that right there would be both a great flashlight, and I think provide every desired feature of the LT1m mini-lantern except USB charging.
I’ve digressed, so to get back on topic, I agree with loneoceans that maximum turbo brightness is not my priority. In fact, one of the reasons I’ve been following the Lume1 development is I presume the better efficiency should provide a slight advantage in sustained output for the FW3A. Maukka measured 280 lumens under thermal regulation in his prototype review when the battery was nearly full, but 420 lumens when it was nearly empty, and the linear driver wasn’t burning off so much excess energy as heat.
That’s 1 of 2 theoretical advantages for sustained output. The stock FW3A driver also PWM’s the LED’s at ~933mA each. Lume1 should be feeding them constant current at around 400-500mA each, so the emitters will be slightly more efficient, too (example data and data source). That should raise the sustained output a hair more - perhaps close to 500 lumens.
Maybe the recent improvements in Anduril’s thermal control will eek yet a little bit more out of it.