One more point on the Misleading Table in the article. The comparison of the F-35 to the F-16C does not pass the test of common sense/reasonable intelligence for 3 reasons:
-First, as already pointed out in comments above. The table does not specify if the airspeed is knots or not. No reference to what the 500 or 450 refers to is actually on the table. Assuming it is knots which is a normal unit for measuring airspeed No one flys 500kts over Tucson so the decibel noise rates at that speed are irrelevant. The average speeds over Tuson are less than 300 kts and usually closer to 200 and below near the airport
-Second, The misinformed individual who thinks that increases in Dba/pressure and perceived noise double at those small intervals especially at those distances is just not understanding the transmission of sound. They are satisfying themselves with specatcular but irrelevant numbers that do not translate to real experience. Bottom Line; the actual perceived noise DOES NOT double when increased 3decibels heard from 500-1000 feet away from any source.
-Third, A quick look at the table will show how deceptive the author of the table is being. The F-16 data is listed at airspeed 450 for noise levels while the F-35 is at airspeed 500. (Units? kts?mph?) No rocket science degree is required to see that this data is misleading why dont they compare the noise level at the same aircraft speeds. Somehow I think the difference was not dramatic enough to make their point. Comparing one aircraft at a slower speed therfore less engine RPM to a newer aircraft at Higher speed, (read greater RPM) does not make any sense. Making a point with scientific sounding but irrelevant data looks impressive until it is recognized as such.
Recent Comments
-First, as already pointed out in comments above. The table does not specify if the airspeed is knots or not. No reference to what the 500 or 450 refers to is actually on the table. Assuming it is knots which is a normal unit for measuring airspeed No one flys 500kts over Tucson so the decibel noise rates at that speed are irrelevant. The average speeds over Tuson are less than 300 kts and usually closer to 200 and below near the airport
-Second, The misinformed individual who thinks that increases in Dba/pressure and perceived noise double at those small intervals especially at those distances is just not understanding the transmission of sound. They are satisfying themselves with specatcular but irrelevant numbers that do not translate to real experience. Bottom Line; the actual perceived noise DOES NOT double when increased 3decibels heard from 500-1000 feet away from any source.
-Third, A quick look at the table will show how deceptive the author of the table is being. The F-16 data is listed at airspeed 450 for noise levels while the F-35 is at airspeed 500. (Units? kts?mph?) No rocket science degree is required to see that this data is misleading why dont they compare the noise level at the same aircraft speeds. Somehow I think the difference was not dramatic enough to make their point. Comparing one aircraft at a slower speed therfore less engine RPM to a newer aircraft at Higher speed, (read greater RPM) does not make any sense. Making a point with scientific sounding but irrelevant data looks impressive until it is recognized as such.