4 ms·
This is a lie. They write "Overture’s takeoffs will blend in with existing long-haul fleets, resulting in a quieter experience for both passengers and airport c
by foobarqux 2y ago
This is a lie. They write "Overture’s takeoffs will blend in with existing long-haul fleets, resulting in a quieter experience for both passengers and airport communities, meeting or exceeding ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) requirements for all subsonic aircraft operating over land and at or near airports."
Note that they are talking about takeoffs (and presumably landings) only where there isn't any sonic boom anyway, not cruising.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> This is a lie Hell of a claim with zero evidence. By your logic, I could disprove the Sun by not observing it at night. Yes, the ICAO rules are for takeoff and landing. When subsonic planes are the loudest. Concorde, for example, couldn’t have met these requirements. We don’t know what Boom are targeting for in-flight noise. But we can guess, based on its parity with ICAO take-off and landing requirements, that it aims to match subsonic noise levels on the ground. There is strong evidence we can soften and disperse a high-altitude boom [1]. Whether it’s doable by Boom is an open question. So no, it’s not a lie. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/langley/nasas-supersonic-x-59-quesst-coming-together-at-famed-factory/ https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/langley/nasas-su...
- foobarqux 2y agoWhat? I cited their own document to show that your claim was not about the sonic-boom noise (which is what people are worried about). You say yourself "we don’t know what Boom are targeting for in-flight noise". What do you mean about "its parity with ICAO take-off and landing requirements"?