senatorflyer wrote:

neutronstar73 wrote:

senatorflyer wrote:

I have never been on an A350 but I remember my first 787 flight with BA. I did have high hopes and was looking forward to fly on it. Then reality hit me. First impression, it’s one noisy plane, especially during pushback and taxi. The ride on the ground felt as hard as when driving in a Mini. My overall impression was it feels and looks cheap, like it was build in a Peugeot factory. I prefer to fly on any other plane but the 787.

Sure. Whatever you say. Shall we queue up a DeHavilland Comet for you, then?

Meant more the alternatives which are around today. I fly an awful lot and if I can avoid the 787, I’ll do. Sorry to hurt your feelings but that’s just my opinion.

Lack of power choices is always an issue.

Error. Double post.

StTim wrote:

glideslope wrote:

The perception of noise on the A350 is not an issue. The lack of engine options on the other hand, well, ...............

It would appear that the era of engine choice is over.

The only ones with options now are the 787, 380 and the 320 families. I am ignoring the 330ceo.

Further it seems we have Boeing with GE and AB with RR on the widebodies.

Somewhat, however still a front and center issue with certain aircraft/engine frames.

glideslope wrote:

senatorflyer wrote:

neutronstar73 wrote:

Sure. Whatever you say. Shall we queue up a DeHavilland Comet for you, then?

Meant more the alternatives which are around today. I fly an awful lot and if I can avoid the 787, I’ll do. Sorry to hurt your feelings but that’s just my opinion.

Lack of power choices is always an issue.

Then Boeing is in a deep doodoo when 2/3 of their most important plane families have this problem.

So a simple question, the noise regulations that exist today that is driving engine makers to produce engines with much less noise has a hard range, it is not subjective but based on numbers.
So where exactly are they measuring the noise, what the pax hear inside or the citizens residing around the airports?

How and where noise from an A/C around an airport is measured is clearly defined in the same regulation that defines the limits. Noise inside the A/C and how it is measured is not regulated. There is a standard (forgot the number) that defines some basics. And otherwise you measure where what and how you want measure.

Gruß, masi1157

par13del wrote:

So a simple question, the noise regulations that exist today that is driving engine makers to produce engines with much less noise has a hard range, it is not subjective but based on numbers.
So where exactly are they measuring the noise, what the pax hear inside or the citizens residing around the airports?

For Community Noise measurements, see FAR Part 36.

Just flew LH YVR-MUC on an A350-900 up front. Have done a few long-haul segments on several of AC's 787's. Where you sit is a huge factor but I must say the A350 is quieter for sure!! Take-off, however, I found to be noisier but it soon quiets and cruising is almost disturbingly quiet, I could hear every conversation around me and could hear people snoring a few rows away. When I removed my noise-cancelling headphones there was almost no difference in the surrounding noise.

I find the 787 pretty quiet, I noticed last time in the crew bunk that I could hear that a passenger was snoring.

However, the -9 is very loud in the flight deck due to the lower circulation fan being extremely noisy. Poor design, but I heard that the newer ones off the assembly line are quieter.

ba319-131 wrote:

All depends upon where you sit, but from my experience, the 350 is quieter than the 788 if sitting forward of the engines.

And it could be especially if you look at the distance from the fuselage where the engines are mounted on the A350 Vs the B787. But! take note of the Range with full tanks of the B787 Vs the A350 and the fuel per mile burned and you might see a difference.
The airplanes have completely different architecture as far as systems go, So there should be a difference. Because in the B787? You're sitting on top of the operating pneumatic generation systems which are producing cabin bleed and pressurization.
While on the A350? The Bleed generation is accomplished from the Engines and controlled below the fuselage.
Thus it stands to reason that the A350 might be quieter in the cabin.
But Airlines didn't buy the B787 over the A350 because of the quieter cabin you "claim" the A350 has.
They bought it for the Range and performance. I've seen nor Heard no complaints about the comfort of the B787 vs the A350.

I have not yet flown on a 787. I did fly on my first A350 a few weeks ago, next to the engine intake, and I felt it was *absurdly* quiet. It sounded like being in a simulator. There was almost no low frequency rumble or roar; just a little bit of high pitched whine on takeoff. I could easily hear the conversation of the people in front of me during takeoff, and they were speaking at normal volume.

At cruise, there is a bit more wind noise. But engine noise is almost non-existent.

I'm not making a comparison to the 787; I don't know how quiet it is. But the A350 is by far the quietest airliner I've flown on to this point.

I was talking to my friend this morning who just got back from a trip on the new Qatar A350-1000. He was absolute amazed at how quiet it was. He admitted that he likes the 787 in terms of looks etc over the A350 but he didn't deny the fact that the -1000 was quieter than any other Airbus and Boeing offering. He even stated that it was quieter than the -900. Very interesting indeed.

I'm actually quite curious about the A330neo now. I reckon it will be just as quiet if not quieter than an A350 or 787.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

He even stated that it was quieter than the -900. Very interesting indeed.

Even if that should really be the case it wouldn't be more difference than a dB or maybe two, given that both fly and are tested in the same conditions. But you need to control the conditions very carefully and need calibrated test equipment to see that difference. It is impossible to do that just "from memory".

LoganTheBogan wrote:

I'm actually quite curious about the A330neo now. I reckon it will be just as quiet if not quieter than an A350 or 787.

Why would you expect that?


Gruß, masi1157

Well if Airbus says it's quieter it must be so....

In 2013 John Leahy said: "The A350 reached over 600 sales in much quicker time than the 787 ever did, so the markets have spoken for themselves in demonstrating overwhelming demand for the A350."

Fact: after four years of sales 787 had 817 sales vs 508 for the A350. The 787 sales lead ratio is even greater today.

So if Airbus say's it it must be true. I guess... maybe... sort of

As you seem to understand claims made by Airbus better than the rest of us you can surely give us a hint what exactly has been claimed, who at Airbus did that and where to find it.

Gruß, masi1157

masi1157 wrote:

As you seem to understand claims made by Airbus better than the rest of us you can surely give us a hint what exactly has been claimed, who at Airbus did that and where to find it.

Gruß, masi1157

I did tell you the who and the when, as far as the where goes...you're a tad snarky so i'll leave it to you and Google to find. I will leave you with this prediction though.... at the end of the three year span of 2016 - 2018 Boeing's 787 program will garner more orders than all (3) of the Airbus Wide Body programs combined.

We have been talking about "quieter" in this thread, and that is what I asked you. So what did Airbus claim about the A350 being quieter, who said that and where can we read what he said?

Gruß, masi1157

the A350 and the B787 are differentas night and day, The B787 has bleedless all electric systems. While the A350 has the standard Engine Bleed Air cycle machine pressurization of the A330 and earlier airplanes which is why the B787 will be much more efficient in fuel costs and Engine's Serviceable life costs. The niggling aspects of the A350 vs the B787? Inconsequential !! Only time will tell and sales will determine which is the more efficient airplane. Since the airplanes are virtually the same in performance? One has only to wonder why the B787 is outselling the A330neo and the A350.
And? Why the Airbus "Fanboys" are so toutng the A350 when the issue has not been set up head to Head and more than likely will NEVER be a heads up competition. I only know of one airline that will fly Both Models and that will be United. they'll fly the A350-900 and the B787-8, 9, and 10
so I'll hold judgement until I get to see them side by side to judge the fit, finish, and performance in the "real world" .. the same way I got to compare the A319,A320 and the B737-322,-522. 724, 824, 922 and 924. And? I found NONE of ANY models "lacking". Each had their strong points, and their flaws. And as a Maintenance Controller on BOTH fleets? I got to see them up close and personal. And frankly?
I enjoyed the challenges of Both Boeing and Airbus. They were more alike than most people would notice except for the unusual effort Airbus put in to call their equipment something OTHER than what it was when Boeing, Lockheed, or Douglas Invented it..

So for the Airbus fans it is a given that the A350 has dethroned the A380 as the most quiet airplane in the sky...I guess being dethroned by your own product is preferable...

strfyr51 wrote:

which is why the B787 will be much more efficient in fuel costs and Engine's Serviceable life costs...

You might have noticed that the topic in this thread is "quieter", not fuel cost, service cost or sales numbers. And we still don't know what the exact claim "by Airbus" is about the A350 being quieter, who said it and where we can read what he said.

Gruß, masi1157

strfyr51 wrote:

and more than likely will NEVER be a heads up competition. I only know of one airline that will fly Both Models and that will be United. they'll fly the A350-900 and the B787-8, 9, and 10

If you discount the rest of the world. (Off the top of my head) Qatar Airways, Vietnam Airlines, Singapore Airlines already do. British Airways, Etihad, JAL, Air France intend to operate both. It also looks like Vietnam Airlines will operate both their A350 and B787 on their SGN-NRT route, so will be a direct dogfight.

I have flown both the front of the B787 and the A359. All I can say is this is a ridiculous argument. Both aircraft are truly wonderful and if anyone says one is quieter than the other then they are full of it. Ask them to bet thier life savings the one is quieter than the other and they’ll back off because you simply only think their is a diiference, but its all based on bias and bs.

Yes A350 cabin defiantly quieter. I flew back to back sectors on A350 and B788 in similar window seats, both had RR engines.

I have flown both the 788 and A359 ahead of the engines and the A359 is quieter, But I found even the 788 quieter than the 77W which quieter still than the 744. 748 is somewhere between the 77W and 744 except the UD which is A350 kind of quiet...And A380 is by far the quietest of the airplanes I have flown.

This quiet discussion goes on and on and on. Is it really that much of an issue in modern airliners or are some looking to grab any perceived advantage no matter how irrelevant? Personally, I don't want to hear the conversations or breathing disorders of others. Today flew a 739 sat at the wing and it was perfectly fine...in fact quite comfortable (UA E+ helps of course) and the 737 is forever bashed around here.
The topic reminds of those absurd Ford commercials from the '60s comparing their LTD to a Rolls Royce.

So do you apply the same requirement to any travel? Then you should better never travel on modern high speed trains.

Noise causes a lot of health problems, and that is particularly true for the cabin crew who spend much of their working time in the rather noisy environment of an aircraft cabin. If it is only for them we should all wish that all manufacturers make their aircraft cabins as quiet as they can.

Gruß, masi1157

Fiend wrote:

Interesting debate....

I'll be able to make my own subjective comparison next week when I fly MAN-DOH on a QR788, DOH-BKK on a QR A346 and BKK-CNX on a TG A359...

Well, Of my three flights the A346 and A359 were about even noise wise, and the 788 was noisiest for me... Why? It was the sound of the air feed iinto the cabin....

And my wifes verdict? The A359 was the best plane she has flown on...... comfortable and very quiet.

masi1157 wrote:

So do you apply the same requirement to any travel? Then you should better never travel on modern high speed trains.

Noise causes a lot of health problems, and that is particularly true for the cabin crew who spend much of their working time in the rather noisy environment of an aircraft cabin. If it is only for them we should all wish that all manufacturers make their aircraft cabins as quiet as they can.

Gruß, masi1157

Good point there.
Even for those of us who travel frequently, it's a big deal so imagine what a hell job it is to have the back of the plane as your second home.

I also wonder how the B788 compares against the B789. I was once in the back of a NH Star Wars B789 and it felt a bit noisy while the flight back on a B788 was quiet. Most here seem to be flying on B789's the most while I find myself very often on JL B788s.

I once asked JL cabin crew whether they preferred the B77W or B787 and the galley unanimously voted for the B787. The arguments were the air and the noise. I was surprised about the air argument, but they said that it's not only marketing talk, it's real.
As a pax it's difficult to notice the difference, but as cabin crew moving around in the cabin, that must make a huge difference.

bgm wrote:

I think it also depends where in the cabin you're sitting. I'd say they were pretty comparable when seated in J, and are much quieter than the 777/747 by a long shot!

This is the key. I agree fully. If you are at the back of business / cabin one or front of cabin 2 then there is more noise. The first time I did 789 in that location seated by the window I couldn't believe the noise on take-off but once at cruise altitude and throughout the rest of the flight the 789 was very quiet. It is more quiet further up front IMHO. Same applies to the A350 (just as for all other airliners) and because we are in different seats for different flights it's kind of hard for us as passengers to make a valid side by side comparison other than to talk about our experience. Personally, I don't feel there is much in it. Perhaps a smidgeon to the A350 but if it is it's very slight.

masi1157 wrote:

So do you apply the same requirement to any travel? Then you should better never travel on modern high speed trains.

Noise causes a lot of health problems, and that is particularly true for the cabin crew who spend much of their working time in the rather noisy environment of an aircraft cabin. If it is only for them we should all wish that all manufacturers make their aircraft cabins as quiet as they can.

Gruß, masi1157

Are you serious with this argument? The sound of one modern airliner is not that different from another, this is a discussion akin to hair splitting.

"You know what I find annoying? The barking dogs on the A320...makes the plane sound and feel sooo cheap!"
Is this what you want in a forum?

Btw, one is clearly outselling the other in the market place. Go figure...

caljn wrote:

Are you serious with this argument? The sound of one modern airliner is not that different from another, this is a discussion akin to hair splitting...

Of course I am serious, but I am arguing for something that it seems you can't imagine: They are all still much too noisy.

caljn wrote:

"You know what I find annoying? The barking dogs on the A320...makes the plane sound and feel sooo cheap!"
Is this what you want in a forum?

Hu? What are you talking about?

caljn wrote:

Btw, one is clearly outselling the other in the market place. Go figure...

Again, this thread is all about "quieter", not about sales numbers. So I won't go off-topic with you.

Gruß, masi1157

All I can say is that some forum members are louder than others... ha,ha (a joke of course)

On a more serious comments I am booked on my first 737 Max flight (to Iceland) on Air Canada., by the end of June..will report when back...

Hu? What are you talking about?

Well then sir, your credibility has taken a hit. You don't know what I am talking about? The "barking dogs" during push back and taxi on a 320? (it does sound cheap and tacky.)
There should be minimum standards for people to comment.

caljin,
Are you not aware that masi1157 is actually a professional in this field? He's someone we can all learn a lot from when it comes to noise in airliners.

You're going off topic by bringing in the A320 "barking" and sales numbers.

gatibosgru wrote:

"Airbus' claim is wrong because in my opinion it is wrong."

Doesn't this by the same logic make your argument irrelevant?

Yep, the OP is calling out Airbus for being subjective with a subjective statement.

A higher volume steady noise from a steady sound source, like wind or engines, helps mask intermittent noise sources, which are more irritating and noticable. On a recent A350 trip, sitting ahead of wing, it was so quiet that the couple talking behind me was so clear that it was disturbing, since no noise was there to drown out their voices.

trauha wrote:

...it was so quiet that the couple talking behind me was so clear that it was disturbing, since no noise was there to drown out their voices.

Are you also disturbed when you sit in a restaurant and hear people talking on the next table? Or is it just that you are used to it in a restaurant, but not on an aircraft? I can tell you that it is still much too noisy in any modern aircraft, most of them easily above 70 dB(A) during cruise, especially when compared to modern cars or high-speed trains.


Gruß, masi1157

Waterbomber wrote:

I've flown the A350-900 and B788 back to back within 4 days on long haul flights and I'm not happy to read the Airbus claim that the A350 is 6 decibels quieter than the B787.

6 decibel is nowhere near anything you can judge without having a direct comparison, i.e. leaving one plane and walk over to the other. At cruise.

trauha wrote:

A higher volume steady noise from a steady sound source, like wind or engines, helps mask intermittent noise sources, which are more irritating and noticable. On a recent A350 trip, sitting ahead of wing, it was so quiet that the couple talking behind me was so clear that it was disturbing, since no noise was there to drown out their voices.

That is just what comes to your conscious attention, but for noise stress related fatigue that is irrelevant.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

I've flown the A350-900 and B788 back to back within 4 days on long haul flights and I'm not happy to read the Airbus claim that the A350 is 6 decibels quieter than the B787.

6 decibel is nowhere near anything you can judge without having a direct comparison, i.e. leaving one plane and walk over to the other. At cruise.

6dB is enormous in terms of noise.

keesje wrote:

6dB is enormous in terms of noise.

6 dB more means 4 times the sound power or 2 times the sound pressure. In direct A-B comparison it would sound not even 2 times as loud (given the spectra are similar). But tommy1808 is absolutely right: You can't judge a 6 dB difference when you fly on plane A and 4 days later on plane B. You can't remember "noisiness" that precisely. And you wouldn't know if both flights were in comparable configurations.

But apart of that: I still didn't get an answer here what exactly has been claimed by Airbus (Noise inside or outside? In cruise? During climb? On the ground during boarding?), who in Airbus said that and where I can read his statement. The whole discussion therefore is quite useless.


Gruß, masi1157

The vote is in. The A350 is the quietest!

Friend flew on both, he's a 777 captain... and too my surprise he said as a passenger he likes the A350 more

Somebody and 10 friends should buy spl meters and book flights on both aircraft in seats evenly spread from front to back. Hold the meters the same on both aircraft and take measurements at cruise (hopefully at the same altitude and air speed). Report back and we will know. Without data this debate is a waste of time.

planecane wrote:

Somebody and 10 friends should buy spl meters and book flights on both aircraft in seats evenly spread from front to back. Hold the meters the same on both aircraft and take measurements at cruise (hopefully at the same altitude and air speed). Report back and we will know. Without data this debate is a waste of time.

Even if you do that with professional equipment (which I did the last >30 years) it is far from easy to get reliable readings. "10 friends" with "SPL apps" on their phones could as well just guess the numbers. And that is even if they "measure" at the same moment on the same flight.

But who told you the claim was about cabin noise in flight?


Gruß, masi1157

keesje wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

I've flown the A350-900 and B788 back to back within 4 days on long haul flights and I'm not happy to read the Airbus claim that the A350 is 6 decibels quieter than the B787.

6 decibel is nowhere near anything you can judge without having a direct comparison, i.e. leaving one plane and walk over to the other. At cruise.

6dB is enormous in terms of noise.

Yes, it is. Now our hearing works on a logarithmic scale and we adjust our sensitivity according to the noise floor. Really adjust, by flexing some muscles that make the pipe to our ear drum smaller. That is why our hearing needs a while to be fully back after hearing loud music in the car. And why we had those "sh*t is this loud" moments when we got back into the car and the music started again, before car stereos started to return to a less loud setting when you shut the engine off.
Landing, walking to another plane, taking off again is already far, far to long to subjectively compare noise between the two.

6db is a lot, but it is still nowhere near anything you can judge without having a direct comparison.

best regards
Thomas

How does noise feel quieter?

I recorded noise recently on my flights in May-June on a phone app.
A350 High 78db Low 58db
787 High 78dB Low 66dB and second flight and Max 75dB min 65dB
A320 NEO High 75dB Low 67dB
738 High 83dB Low 79dB
764 High 82dB Low 70dB.

Yes in all cases except the 764 I was ahead of the engine. It does also feel quieter at cruise on an A350, but as you can see it is pretty close and likely subject to what kind of takeoff, how heavy the aeroplane is, where it is taking off from etc and how sensitive we are as passengers to NVH levels. (as they call it in cars).

Let's get the app's & get it over with. Sidelining the OE marketing departments as we should always do.



Unless some doesn't like the answer. Then again w'll see attempts to discredit, confuse, demand sources, dismiss as AvsB, generalize, false comparisons, strawman's etc.

aerorobnz wrote:

... but as you can see it is pretty close

To be honest there is not much to be seen in those numbers. Apparently they are not "dB" as you wrote, but "dB(A)" (which is a huge difference). And how can you have 20 dB diffence between "high" and "low" on the A350, but only 4 dB on the 738? Obviously the flight conditions were far from constant and not comparable anyway. But what would be useful flight conditions to compare A350 and 738?


Gruß, masi1157

masi1157 wrote:

aerorobnz wrote:

... but as you can see it is pretty close

To be honest there is not much to be seen in those numbers. Apparently they are not "dB" as you wrote, but "dB(A)" (which is a huge difference). And how can you have 20 dB diffence between "high" and "low" on the A350, but only 4 dB on the 738? Obviously the flight conditions were far from constant and not comparable anyway. But what would be useful flight conditions to compare A350 and 738?


Gruß, masi1157

Firstly, the screen grabs recorded it on the screen as dB, not dB(A) so naturally, I just wrote down the screen what it said. dump on me all you like, but I am no sound engineer or scientist I just felt that I should at least try and casually record something to compare as I was unconvinced there would be any difference at all. - you are welcome to provide your own data too if you have the expertise..

My phone did not record the very first part of takeoff roll on the 738 etc as I was tired after 6h in transit and the preceding 24h travelling and initially forgot to record when we started rolling which would likely have put the 737 higher. Also, it was out off ADD at some 2300m altitude above sea level and there were some rather violent thunderstorms which I don't know if it is relevant or not, I'm not a pilot either. On all of them, I did take several readings at different phases, but the 737 measure was only to provide a context as most people would agree that 737s are noisy buggers by today's standards (I just wish I had tried to download/record in time for my 737-200C flight from 5 rows from the back.)

I'm not trying to prove one is quieter or not, I have no agenda - I know which aircraft I prefer as a passenger regardless. I just got sick of all the "I think/feel.." kinds of posts where no one offers any measurements to support their claim. I fully expect others to go and do more measurements to support or disprove.

keesje wrote:

Let's get the app's & get it over with. Sidelining the OE marketing departments as we should always do.

So you are expecting reasonable results from a bunch of people that don't really know what they are doing, using a wide variety of smartphones (and apps on their smartphones) producing uncalibrated and widely scattering readings, without knowing what the aircraft they are sitting in is currently doing, how it differs from the aircraft of the same type that somebody else tried to "measure", and don't know what it should be like and what it should be doing to produce comparable results? Enjoy!

I can tell you, you will find levels varying by easily 3 dB(A) or more measured by professionals with professional equipment at the same position on 2 aircraft that should have been (from all the parameters you can control and compare) exactly identical in terms of cabin noise. It is just aircraft to aircraft (or even flight to flight on the same aircraft) scattering. And it can be 20 dB(A) and more if you only compare different locations and/or flight conditions on those 2 "identical" aircraft. So how many data sets do you want to collect before you come to any reliable conclusion? It will be hundreds if not thousands just to find a tendency comparing aircraft type A to type B.

keesje wrote:

Unless some doesn't like the answer. Then again w'll see attempts to discredit, confuse, demand sources, dismiss as AvsB, generalize, false comparisons, strawman's etc.

Is that the game you want to play? Then play it without me. I very much hope your bunch of "test data" will be looked at very very critically by somebody else then. Btw, I am as critical with that "6 dB quieter" claim. But it seems nobody else but the TO ever saw or heard that anywhere and can tell us, what that claim was all about.


Gruß, masi1157