787 Cabin Quieter than the A380?

[EmadIV]

Hey guys,
I have a bit of a question to those who were lucky enough to travel on a Boeing 787. Is it quiet during cruise? I've only flown on two aircraft, the 777 and A330. I found the A330 really quiet during cruise (but not really on takeoff), whereas the 777 was quite loud with lots of wind. I know for a fact the A380 has the quietest cabin, but there is increasingly a number of reports which say the 787 might be even quieter. This (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/11/flying-the-787-this-passengers.html) is an example.
Also, another question, is the 787 strong on takeoff, like the 757 (which is said to be a rocket)?
Thanks.

[PAXboy]

Hi, EmadIV and welcome to the 'cabin'. Bear in mind that cabin noise is highly subjective. Each person perceives noise as relative to their previous experience, indeed cannot do otherwise!

I might read the paperwork that the cabin dB levels are 'x' but think it 'y'. I might be hard of hearing or particularly sensitive to the frequency at which the air is passing through the vents. Not to mention that the range of noise varies widely within the cabin. Are you near the galley? The toilets? Forward/aft of the wing? By the window or in the middle of the row?

The dB levels that are given tend to be averages and are absolute on the meter - not what each human thinks they are!

As to take off, again, perception is most everything. Here the other factors are: How loaded the a/c is, the elevation of the runway above sea level, the length of the runway and, again, where you are in the cabin. If you are near the front, the rotation will have you lifted more strongly, if you are in the back row, the first movement is a small downward shift, as the nose rises - before the whole machine lifts. If sitting in at the wing line, the feelings are reduced.

[L'aviateur]

Not really an answer to your question, but the A380 is incredibly quiet.

[EmadIV]

Thanks for the replies. I am generally speaking, and even though the A330 is really quiet during cruise, it is quite noisy on takeoff. On airliners.net, many say that the A380 has thicker walls. So I was simply wondering whether Boeing managed to 'win' the cabin quietness contest Airbus has been leading since the A330 and A340 came out.

[PAXboy]

Just a guess but, if your seat is on the upper deck, you are already further away from the engines? There is wind noise outside the wall and air venting noise inside. The list goes on.

[EmadIV]

I don't think cabin quietness is greatly impacted by the engines based on my flying experience on the 777. YouTube videos do not seem to get me anywhere, as in some you hear lots of wind in the A380 and in others no wind in the 777! I guess the 787 is not far from the A380 (if not already quieter) because I've asked another person who sad behind the wing on an ANA 788, and he said it is probably quieter than the A380. The thing is that the 787 (when more get delivered) will be a lot more common than the A380 on medium-haul routes. It sort of replaces the A330, which is very common.
Another question: is it possible for the 747-8 to be quieter than the 747-400 during cruise, or is it going to be the same? Just curious. Sorry for any disturbance caused.

[L'aviateur]

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/353419-emirates-a380-pilots-find-aircraft-too-quiet-sleep.html

[givemewings]

As for interior acoustics, the A380 is very quiet. I can hear the crew yapping across from me, whereas on 737, 767, A330 and others I could not. Same goes for when seated as a pax... can clearly hear conversations during flight (outside of service times) from 5 to 6 rows away, something which I could defintiely not do on any older aircraft.

Have surely heard some 'interesting' galley gossip I'm sure wasn't intended for my ears!! :E

[EmadIV]

It does seem so. One of my friends said it's too quiet to be good, and that having some wind to drain out such noises as babies, etc. is better.
Have surely heard some 'interesting' galley gossip I'm sure wasn't intended for my ears!! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif
It's that quiet? WOW. :ok: I literally laughed out on that one.
Too bad no one says such things about the 787, as there will be more 787s than A380s in the next few years. The only thing I'm concerned about is that the A380 accelerates so sluggishly that it removes the hype of taking off like in the 757. givemewings, I can tell that you traveled on an A380. Do you feel the 'power' of the takeoff like on the other aircraft you mentioned? Thanks.

[givemewings]

Compared to a 777, no. Compared to a Dash 8, yes :E

You certainly don't get the intense "engines spooling up racing down the runway feeling"- though that does vary depending on where you are sitting. Just forward of the wings seems to be most similar to other aircraft, i.e. loudest. Still not that loud in the scheme of things though.

Sitting most aft definitely results in a 'firmer' feeling landing... it tends to drag its ass a little bit ;)

[EmadIV]

Nice 'trip report' ;)
Well since I'm really intrigued by takeoffs I guess I need to hope that the A350 will strike a good balance... or travel on the 787 myself. It seems like Qatar will receive its 787s late by 6 months this June :/
My 'weakest' takeoff was on a lightly-loaded 777-200ER with the GE90s and I guess the A380 will be much weaker. We just need to wait till another airline gets the Dreamliner.

[givemewings]

Well since I am living in the region I am definitely planning to take a trip on QR's 787 as sson as I am able... missed it at DXB airshow sadly!

[EmadIV]

Same for me. If you get on it first share your experiences.

[garybell]

Is the following true? If so can someone explain.

Given in the paper as one of the benefits of the 787

Eight times less turbulence than conventional jets due to a massive 60-metre wing span.




Read more: Boeing's latest jet, the 787 Dreamliner, touches down at Dublin Airport - Republic of Ireland, Local & National - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/boeings-latest-jet-the-787-dreamliner-touches-down-at-dublin-airport-16109603.html#ixzz1kfN90eVV)

[EmadIV]

All the reviews I read on the 787 by passengers (trip reports) confirm this feature. Don't know why, the 777 has an even longer wingspan and doesn't do a good job at avoiding turbulence. I find this an important feature since turbulence really can cause trouble (sometimes, in the worst cases, flight attendants can get injured). Any explanation guys?

[MathFox]

Eight times less turbulence than conventional jets due to a massive 60-metre wing span.
I can not confirm the number, but I understood that the wings of the 787 are more flexible and absorb some of the turbulence.

[ExXB]

I can not confirm the number, but I understood that the wings of the 787 are more flexible and absorb some of the turbulence.

:confused: Er, doesn't that mean that they would bounce more, rather than less?

[EmadIV]

I have found a proper explanation through some Googling on CNN GO (http://www.cnngo.com/explorations/life/whats-so-special-about-Boeing-dreamliner-766616).
While the 787 won't exactly sail bump-free through turbulence, passengers can anticipate less motion sickness, thanks to a system that detects turbulence and changes wing control surfaces to counteract its effects.
Straightforward explanation. The review (http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/trip_reports/read.main/201947/) on Airliners.net helps emphasize this point a bit more:
I felt that there were times when I forgot I was flying, it was such a smooth and quiet ride, helped by the complete lack of turbulence.
My guess is that this aircraft is currently the best at avoiding turbulence. Good job Boeing :ok:

[FlightlessParrot]

Other things being equal, a twin is always likely to be more nifty on takeoff since it needs to have double the power needed for flight, instead of only 133%. The most urgent takeoffs I've experienced were on DC-9s on the short flight between Canberra and Sydney, often with a light load. Nearest thing to a glider winch launch.

[givemewings]

If wingspan were the reason, the A380 should be the smoothest ride at a wingspan of approx 79.5m.

Passengers do say it feels smoother, however I would guess it's due to a) the system mentioned above and b) pilots actively avoiding the worst of the turbulence and being proactive in keepign the ride as smooth as possible (yes I am sure there are some who are more 'picky' about that than others) ;)

[KBPsen]

c) There are so few of them flying that the sample size is representative of nothing.

[trauha]

Sound level meters are cheap. Takes the guess work out of comparisons. I always measure the dB level in aircraft. Many seats are subject to sound levels that would be illegal in a place of work in my country.

[a1rm4n]

Hi EmadIV, this is my personal account having flown on the 757, 787 and A380.

I found the 787 quieter than the A380 on take-off. Having also flown on the A346, I found the A380 slightly quieter than the A346 during take-off but the 787 is the quietest aircraft that I have flown to date during take-off. While on A346 and less on A380 you hear the engines spool up but the sounds makes it feel that "they're not quite there yet so when will they be" and before you know it you're rotating, on the 787 you'd have to really concentrate to hear the engines spool up. It was really impressive!

However, the comparison isn't like for like since:

- On both the 787 and the A346 I was sat near the leading edge (seat 10K on a QTR 787 and 20A on a VIR A346).

- On the SIA A380 I was sat halfway the rearmost lower deck area in seat 56K.

- The Qatar 787 was flying flight crew familiarisation sorties between DOH and DXB so it was a very lightly loaded.

- The A346 and A380 were flying full (at least in all the cabins) from LHR to JFK and SIN respectively.

However, during cruise I found that the 787 became significantly louder than the A380 and probably more than the A346. Remember I was sat near the leading edge so I wonder whether the ram air intakes had something to do with that. I recall getting very surprised by the noise! John Ostrower said that he found that in the entrance archway which I couldn't check because I was flying economy and you have to go through business to get there. Also, I didn't check further back in the 787 cabin to see how the sound changed.

However, I did that on the A380 and can definitely confirm that if you want the quietest flight of your life then fly as much as possible towards the centre on the lower deck. People say that they enjoy the engine noise lull as it helps put them to sleep. I say I'd rather be able to listen to some music at whatever noise level I wish without having to blast my ears at high volume to be able to make out the music.

As for how powerful the 787 vs 757 take-off feels question, this is a thrust vs weight vs drag question and so the 757 will always be a rocket whereas my assumption is that the 787 will feel more like the 767 that it replaced. Having said that, I've flown on the 757 several times but never on the 767 and definitely remember the 757 feeling a lot more powerful than other aircraft at take-off.

[Mr Mac]

Emad 1v
Have flown 330/340/380/787 and would rate 380 as the quietest. All flown in Business class with airlines being EK330/340/380 SQ 380/340 ANA 787 Lufty 330/340. The take off on 380 seems effortless in comparison with the others with regards to the noise issue, and cruise also I found better. Having said that as a passenger on the routes I do, and times of depp I spend most of my time in the air on 777. I do have a soft spot for 340 but that is just because the way she looks, as all my LH flights as a young man/boy were predominantly on 707 / DC8 !.


Regards
Mr Mac

[Wannabe Flyer]

330 is a noisy clunker especially when the landing gear is lowered. All airbuses have a squealing sound post landing related to some hydraulic pump. 787 and 380 both very quiet.....i could hear myself pass gas, though for some reason 787 made me have less flatulence. I still like the sound of the 747