[HN Gopher] Why do some radio towers blink?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Why do some radio towers blink?
        
       Author : warrenm
       Score  : 81 points
       Date   : 2025-10-28 19:38 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.jeffgeerling.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.jeffgeerling.com)
        
       | scblock wrote:
       | FAA details the marking and lighting requirements here:
       | https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/...
        
         | Johnny555 wrote:
         | One interesting fact I learned in a different discussion is
         | that when LED lights are used for obstruction lighting, the FAA
         | has standards that require infrared emitters to make them
         | visible to night vision goggles, since unlike incandescent
         | bulbs, some LED's can be invisible to NVG's.
         | 
         | https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/airports/engineering...
        
       | pizzalife wrote:
       | This blog post has a really verbose format.
       | 
       | TLDR; White lights are used during the daytime, red lights at
       | night (less annoying), towers under 200 feet don't need blinking
       | lights.
        
         | jamesbelchamber wrote:
         | It's a transcript of the video at the top.
        
           | skrebbel wrote:
           | Wow that wasn't clear to me either, thanks for pointing it
           | out
        
           | pizzalife wrote:
           | Yes, reading transcripts is a terrible way of ingesting
           | information in my opinion.
        
             | geerlingguy wrote:
             | But at least you can scan and read through it instead of
             | having to sit through an entire video :)
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | and thank you for doing it, at least!
               | 
               | next, you'll be expected to turn that into an outline,
               | index cards, and then a full term paper lest you be
               | ridiculed for your work on the internet!
        
       | rollulus wrote:
       | Slightly off topic: typically, lights of neighboring towers blink
       | asynchronously. But sometimes they are synchronized. Very
       | satisfying. Anyone knows how this works? My best guess is e.g.
       | DCF77. Thoughts?
        
         | asdefghyk wrote:
         | One option - Maybe the blinking time is set to a INDEPENDENT?
         | accurate time piece - ie Blink on the change of a second
        
           | anyfoo wrote:
           | That's what DCF77 is. Or GPS.
        
         | winrid wrote:
         | It's probably just a side effect of them being powered on at
         | the same time or not?
        
           | anyfoo wrote:
           | If they don't sync to a common clock source, they won't stay
           | in sync for long. Probably not even for a few minutes or so.
           | 
           | You'd get the same phenomenon that you see when operating
           | turn signals in traffic. They seem to weave "in and out" of
           | sync. The frequency at which _that_ happens is the beat
           | frequency, i.e. the difference between the two blinking
           | frequencies.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | There's got to be some rubidium frequency standard that's a
             | drop-in replacement for a 555 timer ;)
        
               | scblock wrote:
               | GNSS (GPS) is the typical standard used.
        
               | georgefrowny wrote:
               | A chip scale atomic clock (with a handy 1Hz output) can
               | be yours for barely over five thousand euros and half
               | that if you buy 250 of them.
               | https://www.microchip.com/en-us/product/csac-sa65
               | 
               | It's a bit larger than a 555, but it should keep you
               | within a small handful of microseconds per day until the
               | aging effects start to add up which make getting more
               | than a millisecond a year dicey, even if the thing
               | doesn't die on you: https://www.ipgp.fr/~crawford/2017_Eu
               | roOBS_workshop/Resource...
        
             | georgefrowny wrote:
             | A cheapo 20ppm quartz watch crystal definitely doesn't
             | drift by a second every few minutes, but it will over about
             | about half a day at maximum error. A 5ppm one (still sub
             | one Euro) will keep a second about every two days. A 0.5ppm
             | TCXO can be had for about 15 Euros from Mouser and that
             | gets you two weeks.
             | 
             | If you have shared line power you can just use that and
             | everything will be locked in sync forever.
             | 
             | If you don't want to use that or radio, and you are
             | outside, you could try to be really clever am sync your
             | flash phases to a specific position of the sun. This is
             | what the Long Now clock does. It'll be a different time
             | each day, but it'll be the same for all units, within a
             | small tolerance.
        
               | anyfoo wrote:
               | Well, yeah. I was sort of assuming that you won't use a
               | TCXO or even just a cheapo quartz crystal, because it
               | doesn't make a lot of sense: You've now thrown money at
               | something that will relatively quickly desync anyway.
               | 
               | I mean, sure, the TCXO will mean that you only start
               | seeing a phase difference between the two after weeks
               | instead of minutes, but what's the point of that? I you
               | _want_ them to be at the same phase, you 'll need to sync
               | them at some point, and you do that by using a common
               | clock source.
               | 
               | So either you shell out some effort for a _real_ solution
               | (power line is nice, and also qualifies as a common clock
               | source as I 've predicated), or you don't. And if you
               | don't, there's no point in using a precise-ish clock at
               | all, and you'll likely end up with very quick desyncing.
        
               | georgefrowny wrote:
               | Well yes, obviously, but I'm just being a internet
               | pedantic about "a few minutes".
        
               | anyfoo wrote:
               | And you are technically correct, which is the best kind
               | of correct anyway.
        
             | lxgr wrote:
             | Wouldn't the mains frequency be a common clock source, if
             | nothing else?
             | 
             | But presumably these lights at least have battery backup,
             | given the obvious risks in case all of them were to fail at
             | the same time due to a grid issue.
        
               | anyfoo wrote:
               | Yeah, the mains frequency qualifies, if you explicitly
               | use that.
               | 
               | (Doesn't solve the problem if you want them to be in sync
               | phase-wise, i.e. blink at the same time or similar, but
               | at least they won't drift apart, which was what this is
               | about.)
        
         | scblock wrote:
         | When it's on purpose it's typically done through GPS driven
         | clocks. This is how wind farms manage it, where all towers are
         | required to blink together.
        
           | floatrock wrote:
           | Yeah, I've seen it with windfarms. Always wondered _why_ do
           | they need to blink at the same time. The scale of the blink
           | is pretty jarring at night (but also awe-some, in the same
           | way any big enough infrastructure project inspires a kind of
           | awe).
           | 
           | Wind farms have a certain amount of nimbyism because they
           | "spoil the natural landscape." (So do regular farms --
           | nothing natural about grain silos or row crops, but that's a
           | side topic...) Anyways, having that many towers blink in
           | unison across that big a landscape is a weird effect when you
           | first see it. I think there's an argument that if they
           | blinked independently it would feel more natural in a way.
           | 
           | But since the blinking is all FAA requirements, I assume it's
           | to help identify all the individual towers from the air. I
           | suppose if they were all blinking independently, it would be
           | a predator-trying-to-focus-on-a-single-zebra-in-the-herd
           | problem, except in this case the predator is a pilot trying
           | not to crash into a turbine.
           | 
           | Sure would emit more subtle 'part of the landscape' vibes
           | though.
           | 
           | (Which I guess is exactly what you _don 't_ want when you're
           | flying above them. Sigh.)
        
             | evertedsphere wrote:
             | > Always wondered why do they need to blink at the same
             | time.
             | 
             | presumably this makes it more striking, and thus easier to
             | notice and avoid
        
             | scblock wrote:
             | It's so pilots see the entire wind farm as a single entity
             | and can interpret what they see and understand the extent
             | of the wind farm easily. There is a pretty good study you
             | can read on this:
             | 
             | https://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/DesktopModules/EasyDNNNe
             | w...
             | 
             | As to community impact, radar-activated lighting is an
             | approach that is being used in places this is a concern. It
             | allows the lights to remain off unless there is a plane
             | within the envelope that requires the lights to activate.
             | It's expensive though.
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | Does it have to be radar? Can it use ADS-B?
        
               | scblock wrote:
               | The FAA document says "sensor-based" but every
               | installation I have seen in the US uses radar.
        
         | daemonologist wrote:
         | I believe it's usually GPS/GNS (they all receive the time via
         | GPS independently, and flash at predetermined times). The FAA
         | requires synchronization for many classes of obstruction
         | because it makes it clear that you're looking at obstruction
         | lights rather than e.g. brake lights or traffic lights on the
         | ground.
        
           | geerlingguy wrote:
           | Could they also use power grid sync? Not sure as I haven't
           | talked to anyone in wind power, but grid sync would be pretty
           | close to 1 Hz at least in the US.
           | 
           | Building a product that would sync at 1 Hz via GPS that works
           | in the US and other countries with 50 Hz power would be a
           | little easier than syncing to grid phase though.
        
             | scblock wrote:
             | Definitely GPS. Other methods have been used in the past--I
             | remember reading operating reports from a wind farm nearly
             | 20 years ago that slowly brought all its lights in line
             | with each other over several months--but these days you can
             | buy mainstream lighting with the GNSS receiver built in
             | from a number of suppliers. They make it easy.
             | 
             | For wind farm use most also have an external input for ADLS
             | triggers, though that usually also requires a separate
             | controller and communications connection to manage the ADLS
             | signals.
             | 
             | The flashing red lights are L-864 type. The requirements
             | are 20 to 40 flashes per minute (FPM), and typically 30 FPM
             | is used.
        
               | geerlingguy wrote:
               | Hmm... maybe I could build a 1pps GPSDO based on light
               | flashes from nearby towers, then. No need for my own GPS
               | antenna!
        
         | askvictor wrote:
         | My observation is not that they are sometimes synchronised, but
         | some subset of the towers are synchronised (this was my
         | observation in Melbourne AU). Upon asking reddit, it appears
         | that it is the FAA-preferred option that all lights are
         | synchronised:
         | https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/...
        
         | rts_cts wrote:
         | Driving through a massive wind farm at night is a trip since
         | they all blink in unison. Having them all independently would
         | look interesting but could rapidly descend into madness:
         | 
         | https://archive.org/details/bigclive_20230516
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | muuuuch better article, lol
       | 
       | https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2024/what-happens-when-you...
        
       | barbazoo wrote:
       | These beacons are also great for navigation. Aeronautical charts
       | usually show the color/pattern of the light. You can use those as
       | points to triangulate your position.
        
         | gorgoiler wrote:
         | You have brought back to me memories from 30+ years ago,
         | playing Microsoft flight simulator, trying to triangulate my
         | position using VOR beacons as quickly as possible before my
         | aircraft had moved so far on that I was no longer anywhere near
         | my triangulated position, hah!
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | IIRC, light houses are marked on charts similarly. The lights
         | have different patterns, maybe color too?? Maybe not on
         | aeronautical charts though.
        
       | skinwill wrote:
       | I worked at a television station years back that was designed in
       | such a way that the lights going up the tower were powered by the
       | separate phases of three phase AC with the one at the top powered
       | from all three combined. This was pretty normal but what the
       | engineer had done was rotate them at every level so that if a
       | phase was dropped you could count the lights and quickly see from
       | a distance that the power wasn't right. 4 lights was good, 3
       | meant you dropped a phase, and so on. I thought it was a pretty
       | clever way of keeping light on all sides of the tower while being
       | able to tell from a distance that a phase was out.
        
         | butlike wrote:
         | Fascinating
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | Phascinating
           | 
           | I couldn't help myself, downvote at will.
        
         | xenadu02 wrote:
         | This is best practice for anyone who uses three phase power.
         | 
         | A machine shop should connect 1/3 of their lights to each phase
         | so it is immediately obvious if a phase gets dropped. Lots of
         | equipment will suffer on two of three phases but with lower
         | performance or even damage.
        
           | quickthrowman wrote:
           | > This is best practice for anyone who uses three phase
           | power.
           | 
           | No, it's not. It's a neat trick that visually reveals when
           | the utility drops a phase, but there are better ways to
           | handle avoiding equipment damage.
           | 
           | Best practice is to use phase monitoring relays that can de-
           | energize a motor when a phase is dropped/reversed to prevent
           | damage. The trip time is adjustable and it's more reliable
           | than manually hitting an e-stop. It also won't let a motor
           | with incorrect phasing start up either. You see phase loss
           | relays on a lot of compressor motors and other large motors.
           | 
           | Here's a flyer for an Eaton product: https://www.eaton.com/co
           | ntent/dam/eaton/products/industrialc...
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Clever! I know I talked to the folks at Masterclock in St.
         | Louis recently about one of their clock displays; they
         | intentionally default the separators to flash if the clock is
         | not synced to NTP, and then they go solid once the connection
         | is established.
         | 
         | It's a quick way to know if something is down, using context
         | clues that are already there to begin with!
        
       | ortusdux wrote:
       | Blinking the lights also helps prevent bird deaths -
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towerkill
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | > Joe: [...] So whenever there's a project on the tower, it's not
       | unusual to see the guys in some kind of a, what do they call
       | those?
       | 
       | > Jeff: A full ghillie suit? Or I don't know what they're called.
       | 
       | If you see someone up in a tall tower wearing a ghillie suit
       | [0]... that sounds like time to call emergency services while
       | avoiding their line-of-sight. :p
       | 
       | (Perhaps they meant "Hazmat" [1])
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghillie_suit
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazmat_suit
        
         | mr_toad wrote:
         | I can't imagine why they'd need a hazmat suit either. It's
         | probably just protection from the cold.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Haha, yes. For some reason, ghillie suit was the only thing I
         | could think of at the time. I think they wear basic tyvek suits
         | while doing paint work, not sure if they need full hazmat
         | (maybe if the tower has lead paint?).
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | Why do some radio towers NOT blink? Is the better question.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Their height. Below a certain height, lights are not required
        
       | ofalkaed wrote:
       | In the past year or two they have also added a quick periodic
       | flash of white light for when visibility is low; like a camera
       | flash that happens every few seconds. I think it was added this
       | spring but don't quite remember.
        
       | loph wrote:
       | It's not just radio towers. I've seen aircraft warning lights on
       | tall buildings, particularly those near airports.
       | 
       | see
       | https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-E...
        
       | lxgr wrote:
       | Related: Some wind turbines apparently only turn on their
       | position lights when there's any aviation traffic nearby (as
       | detected by either local transponder interrogators (possibly
       | ADS-B receivers?) or radar)!
        
         | scblock wrote:
         | Radar, called Aircraft Detection Lighting Systems (ADLS). The
         | requirements are summarized in the FAA Advisory Circular
         | covering aviation marking and lighting.
        
       | Razengan wrote:
       | To clean their eyes?
        
       | punnerud wrote:
       | Never seen a blinking light on a tower in Norway. Why the
       | difference between countries, can't be that huge difference risk
       | if some don't have them?
        
       | WalterBright wrote:
       | Blinking uses less power.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Blinking attracts attention which is the real purpose. I'd
         | assume based on how we detect motion more easily, these add a
         | bit of "motion" to attract our attention
        
           | WalterBright wrote:
           | I know. But when I was programming LEDs for my single board
           | computer, I found that blinking the LEDs used a lot less
           | power. If the blink rate was fast enough, your eye did not
           | distinguish that from the LED being on 100% of the time.
           | 
           | I don't know if battery powered devices generally use that
           | trick or not.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | all dimmable LEDs use blinking, but interesting case for
             | your suggestion for an even more efficient use of a
             | "steady" LED. what blink frequency did you use to keep it
             | from being visible to the eye? did it not dim the overall
             | brightness to a meter? early LEDs were atrocious with their
             | slow blink rates that quickly scanning across them could
             | see it, but even more noticeable if you pointed your camera
             | at them. now, they blink incredibly fast, fast enough even
             | for some slo-mo to not strobe.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-28 23:00 UTC)