MplsRich

Man. Hate to start this with pessimism. For noise to be tested a neutral third party should be brought in early.

And regardless of noise profiles, noise is noise. And when people complain about aircraft noise it’s usually about ongoing noise. Ie the length of operations from morning to night. Also what time should flights be allowed? After midnight? Four am? So what I fear here is that the noise testing will set an arbitrary level that the company can say they’re operating within limits thus clearing them from restrictions. I hope I’m wrong but I predict in major cities a small percentage of the population will live with very annoying noise issues and with no power to change anything. Add to that all the package delivery drones and that won’t be a great out one in terms of real noise pollution.

1 reply

system

I’m still not convinced there actually is a valid business case for “VTOLs everywhere”, so maybe noise worries will prove to be a non-issue.

system

The test was conducted by NASA - check out the first linked article. Their intent was to collect data, not to advance (or to retard) the eVTOL business. I accept them as a neutral, third party.

system

Another aspect to this is (very) subjective: What is the sound of the noise like? Car companies spend a lot of money tuning the sound of exhaust on sports car to sound “right.”

(Not to condone wikipedia. But at this time, this entry seems valid: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustics )

45 dBA isn’t very loud. But if it sounds like nails on a chalkboard, then it ain’t gonna fly. (Pun intended.)

A low rumble is easier on the human ear than a high whine. And does the noise dither? Constantly changing noise that sound like bees nearby (drones at my local park) get my attention more than a gas powered generator.

I don’t know if there’s a psychoacoustic standard for what is considered “acceptable” noise.

system

Did it pass the noise test when it crashed and was destroyed?

system

What kind of a metric is 100 meters? These things are supposed to be “urban mobility”. 100 meters is not urban. Applying the inverse square law, that 65db figure at 100 meters becomes 79db at 20 meters.

system

Hummmm,

Here we have two current articles on AvWeb, at the core discussing rules.

Here’s a comment on the Red Bull article:

“Whether the rules are “right” or not is irrelevant–they exist and we’re bound by them.”

These drone operators, like it or not, are following the rules. Whether the rules are “right” or not is irrelevant-they exist and we’re bound by them.

How is it that with one article, rules are to be followed without question, and in this article, proper operation and following the rules is frowned upon?

1 reply

system

My apologies, I posted under the wrong article.