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.
The B787 definitely is a lot quieter than the A350. Also, the A350-900 that I flew on (AY) had a piece of paper tissue between the side panels to remind me that I sat in that exact same plane and exact same seats a few months ago. Indeed, I slid that piece of tissue because the side panels were vibrating against eachother to produce the unbearabale rattling sound. The same issue can also be found on their window paneling.

I really wonder how Boeing could make the B787 so quiet in the cabin.

IMO Airbus' claim is incorrect and they really need to get those rattling cabin furnishings worked out.
I also hope that Boeing applies lessons from the B787 to the B777X to make it at least as quiet as the A350.

Using that logic one can state that at least cabin panels in the A350 dont fall on top of passengers getting people injured. But that would be biased and unfair, am I right?

2018, one more year stating biased opinions as facts

I guess the only way to measure is using instruments as humans are not "scientific" and reliable...

Where were you seated?
I was on an A321-100 last week and found it very very noisy. Much noisier than the -200.
Most quiet plane I've been on currently is the CS100. A320neo is the second.
Never been on an A350 nor on a B787.

Edit: it was D-AIRC and I was seated on B7 or B6

Having flown on both planes, no I disagree to the statement. 787 is simply noisier, but that's my view. And surely I know someone will bash me before I realise.

Michael

I doubt the OP understands that panels need to be slightly loose. It's a necessity of airliner construction. They need that bit of ability to move as the cabin flexes under changing loads.

That's also why the baggage bins actually float rather than have hard bolting points. They run on rails that allow flexing.

The alternative to that slight rattle is fatigue cracking and sharp plastic down the life of the aircraft.

eamondzhang wrote:

Having flown on both planes, no I disagree to the statement. 787 is simply noisier, but that's my view. And surely I know someone will bash me before I realise.

Michael

They shouldn't, since you're right. In my experiences, yes, 787 is just a little noisier that the 350s. But even then, I still find the 787 about comparable to any A330 with RR powerplants. This is all to say that they there are all very adequate for noise issues, especially compared to anything else made in the past 40 years. Not seeing what the fuss is about.

I just flew out on a 787 and back on an A380 and the A380 is way quieter than the 787. Unfortunately, I haven't flown an A350 yet. On the other hand, the 787 is much quieter than a 777 but so are most aircraft.

I guess it depends on where you sit? In addition were does the 6 decimals come from? Might be more quick from the outside (i.e. people that live near airport benifit)?

devron wrote:

I guess it depends on where you sit? In addition were does the 6 decimals come from? Might be more quick from the outside (i.e. people that live near airport benifit)?

As with any of these claims from either side, it all depends on where you sit, what load the aircraft is under, where it takes off from, what airline is flying it, the weather conditions, even the cabin lay out.
All of these variables (and I'm sure many, many more) contribute to the in cabin decibel rating. Unless each and every factor is identical for both aircraft (near on impossible) and repeatable (the mark of a true test) then the claim from either side is merely subjective and not quantifiable fact.
Also, not to be forgotten is the unconscious bias people have when making these claims purely on personal observation and no hard, scientific data.

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

Channex757 wrote:

I doubt the OP understands that panels need to be slightly loose. It's a necessity of airliner construction. They need that bit of ability to move as the cabin flexes under changing loads.

That's also why the baggage bins actually float rather than have hard bolting points. They run on rails that allow flexing.

The alternative to that slight rattle is fatigue cracking and sharp plastic down the life of the aircraft.

Thank you Channex757. I learned something new on a nonsense thread, that doesn't happen very often.

I've also flown both many times and found the A350 to be quieter during cruise and landing but the 787 to be quieter during takeoff. The A350 is simply louder on takeoff due to the higher power engines (I'd imagine). The 787 during cruise and landing just has this annoying high-pitched whine. Bother had relatively cheap looking interiors compared to the original stuff but neither of them had any issues with vibrating panels etc.

But as others have mentioned, it all depends on various amounts on factors. Engine type, seat location, airline, age, weather, takeoff weight etc.

Having flown both types on QR days ago, must say that the A350 (for me) is quieter than the 788 - at least the ones I flew on. Also noticed that A350 handles moderate turbulence just a tad better than the 788 (was seated at the back in both aircraft) and we endured some pretty feisty jetsreams...

Bottom line, both aircraft are very nice and I have no complaints when I see either of the two at my gate.

“An A350 XWB is nine decibels quieter than a Boeing 777-300ER, and it is six decibels quieter than the newer 787 Dreamliner,” Caudron said. “Decibels are not measured in a linear scale—it's an algorithmic scale—so three decibels is actually double the noise energy.”

Source: http://www.travelandleisure.com/airline ... rst-flight

I am a little bit surprised that there is such a large difference in A350 and B787 cabin noise levels, as they are same generation aircraft. It is quite understandable that the B777 is noisier, as it is an older generation aircraft.

Just flew an AY A350 (seat 27D, seat 27E was empty) yesterday, it was very quiet, no rattling panes or anything, just very pleasant flight from Tokyo back to Europe.

An independent comparison is needed to see if the Airbus claims hold against the 787.

There are so many variables at play (location inside the plane, airline specific things like interior furnishing, thrust setting ---very different depending on flight length, and amount of fuel onboard--- and even other passengers ---are they making noise or not), that it is really hard to make anything out of the experience of a single passenger on a couple of flights.

As an example, I usually found 77W quite noisy, but I recently did two 77W flights on JL, and found it much less noisy than on previous flights. Not sure what explains the difference in perception, but there it is. Could even just be the way my ears felt on these flights. Thus, I would not draw any general conclusion from my experience of course.

the 787 is so quite that you can hear the airplanes crossing 1000 or 2000 feet above or below the airplane

Well, I recently flew both the A350 and B787 of Qatar Airways and I must say Id take the 350 any day over the 787. I just don't like the Dreamliner, to me its too cramped and the air too dry compared to the 350 which is currently my favourite airliner. I didn't notice any glaring differences in noise level between the two, but comfort wise the 350 beats the 787 hands down.

Milka wrote:

Well, I recently flew both the A350 and B787 of Qatar Airways and I must say Id take the 350 any day over the 787. I just don't like the Dreamliner, to me its too cramped and the air too dry compared to the 350 which is currently my favourite airliner. I didn't notice any glaring differences in noise level between the two, but comfort wise the 350 beats the 787 hands down.

Interesting thing is my A350 and 787 flights are mostly with Qatar and I agree with all of your points. They are both beautiful machines but I'd take an A350 any day.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

Interesting thing is my A350 and 787 flights are mostly with Qatar and I agree with all of your points. They are both beautiful machines but I'd take an A350 any day.

I bet QR's birds are the highest quality standard available. It must be, AAB will chase you it they're not!

As an AY shareholder I hope the next time you get caught for vandalizing their aircraft.

Milka wrote:

Well, I recently flew both the A350 and B787 of Qatar Airways and I must say Id take the 350 any day over the 787. I just don't like the Dreamliner, to me its too cramped and the air too dry compared to the 350 which is currently my favourite airliner. I didn't notice any glaring differences in noise level between the two, but comfort wise the 350 beats the 787 hands down.

That was your perception and not reality. The A350 doesn't have a lower cabin altitude pressure than the 787. The air will be just as 'moist' on the 787 as the 350.

Jayafe wrote:

I bet QR's birds are the highest quality standard available. It must be, AAB will chase you it they're not!

Yes and no, QR aircraft tend to age badly especially in economy class. I have now flown on QR A320, A330, A350, B77L, B77W and B787 and the business class seats were always in perfect condition but the economy seats left much to be desired.

Case in point, last week I flew A7-ALN, a one year old A350 and everything was in perfect working order. My return flight was on A7-ALC, a three year old A350 and the seat was squeaky, the outside cameras not working and some broken elements in the toilets.

I've only flown on the 787, but I have observed numerous A350s and 787s taking off and landing. The A350 may be quieter overall, but I have sensed that the Trent XWB has a more pronounced "buzzsaw" noise than both the Trent 1000 and GenX. That being said, after sitting in 7A and 6J on the DY 789, I found the Trent 1000's buzzsaw more evident than I had heard from the ground, so perhaps the designation of "quieter" is derived from airframe noise as well as the engines.

I just had my very first A350 flight the day before yesterday and I thought it was very quiet (except at takeoff, but those RRs sing such a pretty song, I didn't mind at all). It seemed quieter than the 787 I took. But I was in front of the engine on the A350 and I was behind the engine on the 787, so that may have had something to do with it.

I just had my first ever 77W flight yesterday and that was noisy as hell.

DocLightning wrote:

(except at takeoff, but those RRs sing such a pretty song, I didn't mind at all).

I don't mind it either, but I do have to wonder why the A350 takeoffs I've observed have been so loud. FWIW, I've seen a number of 787s and A350s take off from BOS, flying both medium long-haul (LHR/MUC) and "longer" haul (PEK/DOH) off the same 10,000 ft. runways and the A350 has seemed to be louder across the board. Is it perhaps the way the engines are built?

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.
The B787 definitely is a lot quieter than the A350. Also, the A350-900 that I flew on (AY) had a piece of paper tissue between the side panels to remind me that I sat in that exact same plane and exact same seats a few months ago. Indeed, I slid that piece of tissue because the side panels were vibrating against eachother to produce the unbearabale rattling sound. The same issue can also be found on their window paneling.

I really wonder how Boeing could make the B787 so quiet in the cabin.

IMO Airbus' claim is incorrect and they really need to get those rattling cabin furnishings worked out.
I also hope that Boeing applies lessons from the B787 to the B777X to make it at least as quiet as the A350.

I think this problem is only limited to AY as they have chosen a cheap furnishing for their A350s. Try SQ or CX; they might have chosen one that blocks out more sound. I have also noticed this problem on the AY A350 that I flew in 2016; however, I can't compare it to the 787 because I haven't flown one yet. What I can say is that it is quieter than almost everything else on the market except for the A380.

Milka wrote:

Well, I recently flew both the A350 and B787 of Qatar Airways and I must say Id take the 350 any day over the 787. I just don't like the Dreamliner, to me its too cramped and the air too dry compared to the 350 which is currently my favourite airliner. I didn't notice any glaring differences in noise level between the two, but comfort wise the 350 beats the 787 hands down.

QR also chose an old and cheap economy seat for their 787s.

Having flown both types i just have to say that i couldn`t find that much difference noisewhise between these two types.
Based on a 9-seat abreast configuration in the 787, the A350 is definitely more comfortable in eco but apart from that i cound`t find that much difference between these two types in eco cabin.
Anyway none of these two can beat the A380 in terms of noise.

The electric demand pumps on the 787 are noisy and quite annoying, other than that it’s quiet but I think the 350 has the edge. The 777 is the nosiest widebody I’ve been on!

I have been on the 787 and it is very quiet, haven't got a chance to fly on the A350, in the future if I fly then I would be able to tell.

FriscoHeavy wrote:

That was your perception and not reality. The A350 doesn't have a lower cabin altitude pressure than the 787. The air will be just as 'moist' on the 787 as the 350.

That's possibly quite right, however I base my preferences on my perceptions of a flight. I just felt better after my A350 flights than my B787 flights overall and so therefore will choose the A350 every time over the B787 if I have the choice.

This thread might make Spirit charge more for "quieter" seats.

I find the 787 pretty noisy in the cabin to be honest, in terms of engine noise it is obviously much quieter than previous generation aircraft but the cabin features a lot of additional noise for some reason. During engine start and taxi there’s that loud high pitched whistle or whine followed by a lot of other buzzing, whirring or other kinds of clicks and banging that fill the cabin. It’s like being inside a hi-tech washing machine.

The A350 is loud of take off but I kind of like that, it’s the classic buzzsaw sound of the RR engines. It gets very quite once at altitude and stays that way until landing, there’s very little cabin noise but I do find on modern aircraft there’s a lot of creaking and vibrating from the cabin fittings, the A350 is no different.

The quietest I’ve ever been on? The CSeries! I sat just ahead of the engine in Air Baltic’s CS300 a few month ago and couldn’t believe how quiet it was, only for a split second during spool up does it make this deep, whale like whine.

6 dB is a sham number if they are referring to the inside of the plane. That is simply not possible. That must be exterior noise levels at cruise because the 350 is certainly louder at takeoff. Which is louder in the cabin? Oddly enough, they both have the exact same dB readings and one still seems louder based on the frequency of the sound waves. While the 787 is most likely slightly louder due to its age, it would be minimal. When you factor in the type of material used for the seats, type of carpet, and angles of the overhead bins, you could easily fly on a brand new 350 and it sounds like an old 777 (okay a bit of an overstatement there). The point is, the differences are just as nuanced as one person liking bright red and another light red. As always, trying to do A-B comparisons (see what I did there!) a lot has to do with personal preferences.

I just flew 787-8 with AA and found it very noisy. I was very disappointed. I flew back on a 77W and found it much quieter. It is possible that it was noisy due to be seated at the wing level vs in front on the 77W?

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

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

I would think there is quite a weight difference between a B788 and an A359. If you were on a Finnair 336-seat A359 taking off with a full house on a long flight, the engines will certainly make some noise lifting all those tonnes off the ground. A 250-seat B788 will weigh less and engines will rumble less overall, me thinks...

Most comparisons I google on "A350 787 db cabin" give the A350 a quieter cabin.

https://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com ... -787-a350/

But what if one is objectively more quieter? Would that be accepted or dismissed, generalized and drowned with additional questions?

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.

Would you have been "happy" if they said 5?

Ive seen A350s and 787s take off on the same day from the same runway in IAH, I gotta say the A350 is definitely quieter at least to my ears.

icareflies wrote:

I just flew 787-8 with AA and found it very noisy. I was very disappointed. I flew back on a 77W and found it much quieter. It is possible that it was noisy due to be seated at the wing level vs in front on the 77W?

It has everything to do with it. I found the 77W rather quiet when I first tried it, sat comfortably in the 1A suite with EK. During the flight I took a stroll down the back, and found it was both a bit wobbly and much, much more noisy.

I've only sat down the back on a 787, and found it to be about on par with an A330. Way pp front you'll be hard pressed to beat an A340-600, whilst down the back on an MD-80 is an experience only a hard-core enthusiast will enjoy. It's all about where you're seated, and for quietness specifically how far in front of the donks. Even on an A380, which is the reference for quietness in any cabin.

Flown both of Qatar airways A350 & 787 in a connecting flight both are quiet that said A350 is noticeably quieter!

Waterbomber wrote:

IMO Airbus' claim is incorrect and they really need to get those rattling cabin furnishings worked out.
I also hope that Boeing applies lessons from the B787 to the B777X to make it at least as quiet as the A350.

Both manufacturers likely claim their aircraft are quieter. Both are probably correct since they don't specify when or how they are measuring noise. Is it inside or outside the plane, if inside at what location, in which cabin, how is the cabin configured, what phase of flight (takeoff, cruise, landing), what is the weather, how many people are on board, how much noise are the people on board creating, is the airplane fully or lightly loaded, and so on. No doubt both manufacturers can claim their plane is quieter by measuring in locations and conditions where their plane is, indeed, quieter. You see the same thing in cars, tractors, HVAC systems, vacuum cleaners, and on and on, where every competitor has data showing their product is the most efficient and most powerful and quietest. What they don't necessarily show is they are most efficient or powerful or quiet only in certain specific operating conditions which may or may not matter to you.

Channex757 wrote:

I doubt the OP understands that panels need to be slightly loose. It's a necessity of airliner construction. They need that bit of ability to move as the cabin flexes under changing loads.

That's also why the baggage bins actually float rather than have hard bolting points. They run on rails that allow flexing.

The alternative to that slight rattle is fatigue cracking and sharp plastic down the life of the aircraft.

Broken parts is not the alternative, it's only one of the alternatives. A better alternative is flexible materials that allow movement while eliminating noise. Cars have them, houses have them, and airplanes have them, or at least they can. They can be as complex as spacers or pads made from highly engineered foam or rubber compounds, or they can be as simple as the piece of tissue paper the OP inserted between two panels which allowed them to move but stopped the noise.

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.
The B787 definitely is a lot quieter than the A350. Also, the A350-900 that I flew on (AY) had a piece of paper tissue between the side panels to remind me that I sat in that exact same plane and exact same seats a few months ago. Indeed, I slid that piece of tissue because the side panels were vibrating against eachother to produce the unbearabale rattling sound. The same issue can also be found on their window paneling.

I really wonder how Boeing could make the B787 so quiet in the cabin.

IMO Airbus' claim is incorrect and they really need to get those rattling cabin furnishings worked out.
I also hope that Boeing applies lessons from the B787 to the B777X to make it at least as quiet as the A350.

Did you use a soundlevel meter to draw this comparison? 6dB implies that the apparent level is 50% louder. Were you fwd of the engines or aft? Were you equidistant to the sound levels in both of the planes. Also remember cabin furnishings play a big part. Were the frequencies the same, any change in any these parameters will cause a change in sound level.

33lspotter wrote:

DocLightning wrote:

(except at takeoff, but those RRs sing such a pretty song, I didn't mind at all).

I don't mind it either, but I do have to wonder why the A350 takeoffs I've observed have been so loud. FWIW, I've seen a number of 787s and A350s take off from BOS, flying both medium long-haul (LHR/MUC) and "longer" haul (PEK/DOH) off the same 10,000 ft. runways and the A350 has seemed to be louder across the board. Is it perhaps the way the engines are built?

I think a direct comparison between the engine noise of an A350 & B787 is slightly unfair due to the power outputs. GEnx/Trent 1000 (B787) 75, 000lbs thrust approx, RR XWB-84, 84,000 thrust, true the XWB is later tech, but 10,000 lbs ish extra would be a stretch to make quieter. A case in point would be everyone's displeasure at B77W noise, but at 115, 000lbs each those GE's just can't compete the lower powered RR & PW B772 versions let alone what seem to be better insulated carbon-fibre frames of A350/B787. I think a much fairer comparison would be between GEnx & Trent 1000 varients of the B787, two very different sounding engines from outside on take-off at least, but very similar in power output.

Kikko19 wrote:

I guess the only way to measure is using instruments as humans are not "scientific" and reliable...

Easy to down load a app for measuring decibel level.

Redacted. What’s the point.

The posters here need to understand that the noise in the aircraft is highly dependant on your location in the plane. If you sat in the front of a 787 and just behind the engine of an A350, the A350 is going to sound louder. Obviously Airbus would take the time to standardize their testing methods.