7 ms·

I'm not knocking what they are doing, at all. Really nice progress. But the title is pretty misleading. This article is about an attachment nozzle. Unless I

I'm not knocking what they are doing, at all. Really nice progress. But the title is pretty misleading. This article is about an attachment nozzle. Unless I missed it, it is nothing resembling a "new engine design."

mc32 5y ago
And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. This could make more sense for jetliners, especially for late night take-offs. Granted, this would help people who live next to active airbases, but noise form commercial traffic is a bigger issue as more people are exposed to it and are usually closer to dense cities.
- topkai22 5y ago
  I imagine a quieter jet also helps marginally improve its war fighting capability by making the enemy less aware of its presence, although More importantly, as the article mentions it would also help protect the hearing of sailors, airmen, and marines that help operate those airframes.
- silisili 5y ago
  Yeah, UPS bought out my entire childhood neighborhood because of all the noise they generate. It did say in the article it could be applied to other jet engines. I'm guessing the military is bankrolling the research.
- jdavis703 5y ago
  > And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. Growing up in the DC area in the post-9/11 era fighter jets were quite a common experience. Except for 9/11 every other time there was really nothing to worry about. Obviously this might be different if you live in say Syria or Palestine.
  - bdamm 5y ago
    They do need to train in the airspace. Would you want pilots unfamiliar with the terrain to show up when they’re needed in a hurry?
    - celrod 5y ago
      I assume they were responding to: And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. I.e., they meant their primary concern with pilots familiarizing themselves with the terrain is the noise, rather than any risk of imminent danger.
    - WalterBright 5y ago
      When I lived in Germany in the late 60s, it was commonplace to see NATO fighters hedge-hopping over the countryside. My dad said the Germans didn't complain about it, they knew why the fighters were training that way.
- laurencerowe 5y ago
  While we do have larger problems in San Francisco it would still be nice if the fighter jets buzzing by weren’t quite so loud.
  - mc32 5y ago
    From engines or from sonic booms? I think this is to make take off quieter for personnel and people in the vicinity of activity ANG/airbases. SF flyovers going after incursions occasionally have booms.
    - nradov 5y ago
      When was the last time a military airplane actually caused a sonic boom near SF?
      - WalterBright 5y ago
        Growing up in Kansas in the 60s, I heard window-rattling sonic booms all the time. I enjoyed them :-) I'm sure the pilots were having a good time, too.
      - fragmede 5y ago
        Here's a recording of the F-35 making one in 2019, and this also serves as a reminder to all San Francisco residents that fleet week is coming up. I don't think they'll get these upgrades installed in time, which sucks for anybody that lives here that hates disruptively loud airplanes, however. https://youtu.be/y30nuNFeQAo https://youtu.be/y30nuNFeQAo
        kataklasm 5y ago
        There is no sonic boom visible or audible in that video.
        HPsquared 5y ago
        Notice the gradual fade-in of the sound. That's not a sonic boom, those are a sudden pressure change with lots of sound waves packed together in a single wavefront. https://youtu.be/1pf-Is2S1_Q https://youtu.be/1pf-Is2S1_Q
- mchusma 5y ago
  The article discusses many advantages to quieter planes. Including stealth, plane longevity, and health of the crew around the planes. It would be a big deal to the military to "instantly" have things be 1/2 as loud.
  - ISL 5y ago
    Indeed -- the only loser for a quieter fighter aircraft is the enemy. If fighters could be made silent, they'd be even more effective. The 'sound of freedom' can take on many interpretations. A major winner would be the communities near airbases. Hornets, in particular, are quite loud. https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2021-08-19/naval-air-station-whidbey-island-growler-jet-noise-2600379.html https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2021-08-19/naval-air-s...
    - WalterBright 5y ago
      My dad flew ground attack jets in the Korean War. He said it was easy to sneak up on a target, as you were traveling close to the speed of sound and so the sound didn't get there before you were in firing position. You only hear the jet after it passes you. The ground crews at the target had to be very vigilant.
  - avereveard 5y ago
    Audio stealth doesn't seem a big deal, missile won't lock to sound and by the time you hear the sound plane is already not there.
    - dotancohen 5y ago
      You don't think that the guardposts at the border will report the jets they heard screaming overhead in the direction of the nation's nuclear reactor or capital 1200 km away?
      - avereveard 5y ago
        How convenient for them the jet flew so near a checkpoint. And how do they know they have to report something, if they hear the plane but can't identify it since it's long gone anyway? Are they going to report anything they hear from any source along the whole border? Imagine the control center having to match every hearing with every domestic and recognized flight
- bdamm 5y ago
  Reducing noise from training runs would be welcome in many communities.
- pezezin 5y ago
  I live 1 km away from an air base (Misawa, Japan, for those curious). Just a few minutes ago a couple jet fighters took off. I don't really care so much, but they are loud as fuck. I'm pretty sure the whole city would appreciate quieter engines.
  - avereveard 5y ago
    Parents live very close to Damiano but the runway is at an angle so they don't have it as bad as, say, people at cavalese had.
themodelplumber 5y ago
Attachment nozzles sound more economical though. Maybe it starts a new trend. "JET PILOT tries 3 different attachment nozzles from Wish"
- HPsquared 5y ago
  A fighter jet is just a fancy hairdryer, really.
Voloskaya 5y ago
The design of the nozzle is part of the design of the engine. They are starting with an attachment as it means it can easily be retrofitted to existing planes and tested. If it works there is a good chance it will be the default design on a new generation of engines. I don’t think this is misleading.
- silisili 5y ago
  That's pretty loose. It's akin to saying that headers are a part of car engine design. Technically, literally, perhaps correct, but not what is thought of when hearing the words.
  - TylerE 5y ago
    Exhaust is a VERY important part of engine design. Except that in the case of a jet engine, this is more like the exhaust, transmission, and differential.
    - silisili 5y ago
      It's a muffler for a jet engine. Mufflers are great things for humanity, there's nothing wrong with that. They are not even included in drawings if you asked the average person to draw an engine.
      - TylerE 5y ago
        The exhaust on a jet engine is where the energy comes out. Look into tech like thrust vectoring. It's WAY, WAY more than a muffler
        silisili 5y ago
        I'm seriously not trying to be confrontational and say you're wrong, you're not. I'm perfectly familiar with typical ICE and the design of jet engines. Exhaust is no less important in ICE. If you block it, the engine doesn't run. Jet engines use exhaust as propulsion, so it just moves the mechanism from inside to out, in a way. A muffler is a device that baffles air to quiet it. That's -exactly- what this device does. You can argue, rightly, that more is at stake and more considerations must be made here. But it's still, by definition, a muffler.

mc32 5y ago

And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. This could make more sense for jetliners, especially for late night take-offs. Granted, this would help people who live next to active airbases, but noise form commercial traffic is a bigger issue as more people are exposed to it and are usually closer to dense cities.

topkai22 5y ago
I imagine a quieter jet also helps marginally improve its war fighting capability by making the enemy less aware of its presence, although More importantly, as the article mentions it would also help protect the hearing of sailors, airmen, and marines that help operate those airframes.
silisili 5y ago
Yeah, UPS bought out my entire childhood neighborhood because of all the noise they generate. It did say in the article it could be applied to other jet engines. I'm guessing the military is bankrolling the research.
jdavis703 5y ago
> And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. Growing up in the DC area in the post-9/11 era fighter jets were quite a common experience. Except for 9/11 every other time there was really nothing to worry about. Obviously this might be different if you live in say Syria or Palestine.
- bdamm 5y ago
  They do need to train in the airspace. Would you want pilots unfamiliar with the terrain to show up when they’re needed in a hurry?
  - celrod 5y ago
    I assume they were responding to: And if you have fighter jets buzzing by, the least of your problems is noise. I.e., they meant their primary concern with pilots familiarizing themselves with the terrain is the noise, rather than any risk of imminent danger.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    When I lived in Germany in the late 60s, it was commonplace to see NATO fighters hedge-hopping over the countryside. My dad said the Germans didn't complain about it, they knew why the fighters were training that way.
laurencerowe 5y ago
While we do have larger problems in San Francisco it would still be nice if the fighter jets buzzing by weren’t quite so loud.
- mc32 5y ago
  From engines or from sonic booms? I think this is to make take off quieter for personnel and people in the vicinity of activity ANG/airbases. SF flyovers going after incursions occasionally have booms.
  - nradov 5y ago
    When was the last time a military airplane actually caused a sonic boom near SF?
    - WalterBright 5y ago
      Growing up in Kansas in the 60s, I heard window-rattling sonic booms all the time. I enjoyed them :-) I'm sure the pilots were having a good time, too.
    - fragmede 5y ago
      Here's a recording of the F-35 making one in 2019, and this also serves as a reminder to all San Francisco residents that fleet week is coming up. I don't think they'll get these upgrades installed in time, which sucks for anybody that lives here that hates disruptively loud airplanes, however. https://youtu.be/y30nuNFeQAo https://youtu.be/y30nuNFeQAo
      - kataklasm 5y ago
        There is no sonic boom visible or audible in that video.
      - HPsquared 5y ago
        Notice the gradual fade-in of the sound. That's not a sonic boom, those are a sudden pressure change with lots of sound waves packed together in a single wavefront. https://youtu.be/1pf-Is2S1_Q https://youtu.be/1pf-Is2S1_Q
mchusma 5y ago
The article discusses many advantages to quieter planes. Including stealth, plane longevity, and health of the crew around the planes. It would be a big deal to the military to "instantly" have things be 1/2 as loud.
- ISL 5y ago
  Indeed -- the only loser for a quieter fighter aircraft is the enemy. If fighters could be made silent, they'd be even more effective. The 'sound of freedom' can take on many interpretations. A major winner would be the communities near airbases. Hornets, in particular, are quite loud. https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2021-08-19/naval-air-station-whidbey-island-growler-jet-noise-2600379.html https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2021-08-19/naval-air-s...
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    My dad flew ground attack jets in the Korean War. He said it was easy to sneak up on a target, as you were traveling close to the speed of sound and so the sound didn't get there before you were in firing position. You only hear the jet after it passes you. The ground crews at the target had to be very vigilant.
- avereveard 5y ago
  Audio stealth doesn't seem a big deal, missile won't lock to sound and by the time you hear the sound plane is already not there.
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    You don't think that the guardposts at the border will report the jets they heard screaming overhead in the direction of the nation's nuclear reactor or capital 1200 km away?
    - avereveard 5y ago
      How convenient for them the jet flew so near a checkpoint. And how do they know they have to report something, if they hear the plane but can't identify it since it's long gone anyway? Are they going to report anything they hear from any source along the whole border? Imagine the control center having to match every hearing with every domestic and recognized flight
bdamm 5y ago
Reducing noise from training runs would be welcome in many communities.
pezezin 5y ago
I live 1 km away from an air base (Misawa, Japan, for those curious). Just a few minutes ago a couple jet fighters took off. I don't really care so much, but they are loud as fuck. I'm pretty sure the whole city would appreciate quieter engines.
- avereveard 5y ago
  Parents live very close to Damiano but the runway is at an angle so they don't have it as bad as, say, people at cavalese had.

themodelplumber 5y ago

Attachment nozzles sound more economical though. Maybe it starts a new trend. "JET PILOT tries 3 different attachment nozzles from Wish"

HPsquared 5y ago
A fighter jet is just a fancy hairdryer, really.

Voloskaya 5y ago

The design of the nozzle is part of the design of the engine. They are starting with an attachment as it means it can easily be retrofitted to existing planes and tested. If it works there is a good chance it will be the default design on a new generation of engines. I don’t think this is misleading.

silisili 5y ago
That's pretty loose. It's akin to saying that headers are a part of car engine design. Technically, literally, perhaps correct, but not what is thought of when hearing the words.
- TylerE 5y ago
  Exhaust is a VERY important part of engine design. Except that in the case of a jet engine, this is more like the exhaust, transmission, and differential.
  - silisili 5y ago
    It's a muffler for a jet engine. Mufflers are great things for humanity, there's nothing wrong with that. They are not even included in drawings if you asked the average person to draw an engine.
    - TylerE 5y ago
      The exhaust on a jet engine is where the energy comes out. Look into tech like thrust vectoring. It's WAY, WAY more than a muffler
      - silisili 5y ago
        I'm seriously not trying to be confrontational and say you're wrong, you're not. I'm perfectly familiar with typical ICE and the design of jet engines. Exhaust is no less important in ICE. If you block it, the engine doesn't run. Jet engines use exhaust as propulsion, so it just moves the mechanism from inside to out, in a way. A muffler is a device that baffles air to quiet it. That's -exactly- what this device does. You can argue, rightly, that more is at stake and more considerations must be made here. But it's still, by definition, a muffler.