bose-x is obsolete ...

[soay]

I mean the headset of course. It seems the original was not the ultimate in ear protection after all:

Making The Cockpit A Quieter Place (http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ca7e6090-c7c2-419b-8621-085aff58910d&)

[IO540]

That sounds like good news.

Bose had to do "something", in the face of the Zulu and probably others.

[kms901]

So they are louder then !

[IO540]

I wonder how good the bluetooth feature is. I did a quick test of a Zulu and it was terrible, but it could have been the phone...

Not that this is useful in Europe. ISTM that in the USA one can indeed just phone up the tower to collect clearances etc. But not here... the numbers are mostly unpublished.

[dublinpilot]

I've always struggled to get any sort of phone connection when in the air, even at low level. But I understand others have.

It would be useful though none the less for making a quick call to someone that you're meeting at the far end to say that you've above to take off.

Also, with people who use their smart phones as a gps, it may be possible for the sound (warnings etc) to be routed direct to their headset via the bluetooth.

It might also be useful for listening to music which I know some people like to do. I'm pretty sure you can get bluetooth headphones now four your mp3 player, so it could be used in a similar way I suppose.

dp

[IO540]

I think the main selling point of the BT feature is to do ground calls, to save using the radio/battery. But, in Europe, most of the useful numbers are confidential and anyway I doubt the controller would take the call - even for a departure clearance call.

I have done such calls where I know the number, to check if e.g. they had received a slot.

But given one is on the ground, one doesn't need a BT headset; one can just use the phone :) Unless the engine is running.

The other use is airborne, with a BT equipped satphone, like the Thuraya model(s). The call quality is really crap though.

[Bigglesthefrog]

I have tried a couple of these ANR type headsets and whilst I agree that the noise attenuation is to a certain extent useful when trying to make out radio instructions in a high noise level cockpit or even open cockpit, I haven't found them that fantastic. But to pay the rather ridiculous price of $1095 for this slight improvement is just throwing good money after bad. Added to this the regular requirement to change the batteries or fiddle with the volume control and bulky electronics unit ruins any perceived advantage in my view.
Years ago, I bought a pair of Harry Mendelssohn HM10 cans which were clearly modelled on David Clarke, albeit they were black. They cost somewhere around a hundred quid or so if I remember rightly and their cockpit noise attenuation due to efficient ear seals was excellent. I still have them today after many years of faithful service and they are still as good as the day I bought them.
Lastly, I have no time for mobile phones in the cockpit. Whilst flying an aeroplane is very enjoyable we have a responsibility to carry this out in a safe and businesslike manner without the distraction of fiddling around with mobile phones.
I have been directly involved with communications for some 40 years and some amazing advances have been made in this science, but I have never been able to understand why some people these days are unable to feel that they can live their lives without a mobile phone virtually growing from their ears. If a pilot needs to get a quick update on the weather, then what is wrong with using the radio and if he wants to phone someone on the ground, then how about doing so after the aircraft has landed?

[IO540]

I think you will find a bose-x is way way way ahead in quality and comfort of any £100 headset.

Try it.

Sure the prices are obscenely high but how much value do you put on your hearing long-term, and on your ability to hear marginal ATC transmissions?

For local flying between the creases in the map, a cheap headset might be OK but I have tried a number of them and all were basically crap. Even a £500 D-C one was very uncomfortable compared to the bose, due to the clamp pressure.

Personally I would not pay money for a bluetooth feature.

[Bigglesthefrog]

I'll give it a try IO, but it will have to be very very good to justify the huge price tag on it.
With a headset, the protection to ones hearing is actually the attenuation of the loud noise environment within the cockpit or anywhere else for that matter, by good quality ear seals on the cups of the headset. Ear defenders worn in industry work this way too. The ANR headsets work by sampling the background noise and then inverting the main waveform and playing it back into the ear cup to cancel it out, so as far as protecting the hearing is concerned my old HM10s probably do as good a job. But of course if one removes, or partially removes the background cockpit noise, then one can hear Air Traffic, or whoever it is that much clearer and this is where these headsets score over the rest. But let's not forget that Air Traffic are no "Classic FM" and none of them transmit in a digitally clear HD radio quality, so if the controller is using a scratchy old radio set and a lousy microphone with plenty of background noise in the tower, the posh and expensive headsets are going to be of little use. As the old saying goes.... "You can't polish a turd"

[Mark1234]

I confess, that apart from being tight, one of the reasons I'm not sporting an ANR headset is that I worry about hearing protection - there are plenty of frequencies outside the ANR coverage, and the passive attenuation of the X at least wasn't great.

The 'traditional' DC's, plus in noisy aircraft earplugs and turning the radio volume up work for me - though not as pretty and probably less comfy. I've alos pondered that my rather nice inner-ear-monitors I use with the ipod might go nicely under the regular headset, and they're about 40db isolation in their own right..

[IO540]

The 40db figure is certainly bogus. There is a lot of bogus db figures going around this business. No non-ANR headset can possibly achieve 40db - except at several kHz or higher. 20db is much more likely. I collected some evidence for this practice years ago (from the manufacturers themselves) and wrote to some pilot shops; I think they just ignored it.

You can make a non-ANR headset work arbitrarily well by using a lot of pressure to create a good seal. ANR headsets deliver a given level of attenuation without needing the high earcup pressure, and the bose-x and the zulu deliver higher levels of attenuation than any non-ANR headset, while using lower levels of pressure than most of them.

BTW an ANR headset doesn't inject anti-phase noise into the earcup, as such. They way it works is that there is a mike inside the earcup which senses the instantaneous acoustic pressure, and the earcup speaker is driven (by an amplifier) to null out this pressure. Due to the finite size of the chamber relative to the wavelengths involved, the nulling process works only over a limited frequency range (low frequencies) but the improvement is still vast.

Cheap ANR headsets, such as the crappy £80 ones sold for airliner passengers etc, often do a bad job and you get whistling/hissing. The aviation bose-x doesn't do that, but the £300 consumer version sure does (we bought one and sent it back right away).

"You can't polish a turd" True, so if you are talking to RAF Benson and they are on their crappy mike, they will be hard to make out, but with a decent headset you have a better chance.

I fly a fair bit out of the UK and a lot of the ATC out there is only just hanging in there on their "ICAO Level 1 English" ;)

Of all the junk in pilot shops (and 99% of it is junk), a top end headset (bose or zulu) is the one thing worth buying.

[Pianorak]

. . . True, so if you are talking to RAF Benson and they are on their crappy mike, they will be hard to make out, but with a decent headset you have a better chance. . .
Mercifully RAF Benson no longer want to speak to us and ask us to call Farnborough North. Thank god for that!!! :ok:

[boomerangben]

Mark1234
I confess, that apart from being tight, one of the reasons I'm not sporting an ANR headset is that I worry about hearing protection - there are plenty of frequencies outside the ANR coverage, and the passive attenuation of the X at least wasn't great.

The 'traditional' DC's, plus in noisy aircraft earplugs and turning the radio volume up work for me - though not as pretty and probably less comfy. I've alos pondered that my rather nice inner-ear-monitors I use with the ipod might go nicely under the regular headset, and they're about 40db isolation in their own right..

My concerns too and the Bose X has been analysed by my employer and was found wanting (albeit in an extremely high noise environment). I too have tried earplugs and turning the volume up, but that increases the noise energy in the earcups - a bit counter productive. I also suspect that it causes hearing damage in the band of frequencies associated with the human voice. CEP-USA (no connection) do a foam earplug with a tiny speaker inside which you plug into you existing headset (after a bit of DIY fitting) -a bit like the in ear monitors you get for mp3 players. They claim a minimum of 30dB at the lower frequencies, increasing at higher frequencies. The result is much clearer coms (due to the quality of the speaker), a fantastic noise attenuation of around 50dB total, comfortable for long periods, reduced fatigue all for around US$100. They are so good, the US military issue them to all their helicopter pilots.

[IO540]

In-ear headsets are always going to be better, even without ANR.

The catch is that one needs custom-moulded earplugs, and the usage needs to eliminate tugging on the cable(s) otherwise the plug gets pulled out a little and suddenly a lot of noise gets in. I bought the Mach 1 in-ear headset (not cheap) and while it worked very well, it was very sensitive to cable movement, and after I while I went back to the Bose and flogged the M1 on U.S. Ebay.

For extreme applications, one can use a headset together with earplugs, and turn the headset power way up to compensate. This is OK with cheap headsets but not so good with the Bose whose max volume is limited.

I've done flights over 7hrs with the Bose and had no discomfort whatsoever.

[boomerangben]

I have to say that I have a set of custom made earplugs and they are ok but take a lot of getting used to. The CEP system uses foam earplugs, which are far more comfortable than custom fitted and of course fit perfectly. I have never had an issue with them pulling out, despite jumping in and out on every leg.

[SNS3Guppy]

It seems the original was not the ultimate in ear protection after all:

The bose headsets are excellent for improving communications. Not protecting one's ears.

Simply because background noise isn't as perceptible to the user, doesn't mean the user is being protected from that noise.

Whether the bose headsets are "the ultimate" or not isn't meaningful, in that they are comfortable to wear for extended periods, provide excellent communication capability, and reduce user fatigue substantially.

I've done flights over 7hrs with the Bose and had no discomfort whatsoever.


Likewise, I use them regularly on 10+ hour flights; they're comfortable, improve communications, and reduce fatigue. I've worn them up to 26 hours on long flights, without any difficulty at all.

I've taken to using the Bose QC-15 with the uflymic most of the time, however, because it's more compact and even quieter, less expensive, fits in the flight bag better, lighter in weight, and has music input or earbud redundancy.

[soay]

The bose headsets are excellent for improving communications. Not protecting one's ears.

Simply because background noise isn't as perceptible to the user, doesn't mean the user is being protected from that noise.
My Clarity Aloft headset is excellent on both counts, and more comfortable than Bose-X and Zulu headsets.

[Fuji Abound]

Likewise, I use them regularly on 10+ hour flights; they're comfortable, improve communications, and reduce fatigue. I've worn them up to 26 hours on long flights, without any difficulty at all.

What where you doing setting an air distance record. :}

[jxc]

I must say I am very pleased with my Clarity Alfot as well was wondering on whether to buy a pair of normal bose quiet maybe 2nd hand and trying them on top of the clarity's

[SNS3Guppy]

What where you doing setting an air distance record.

Nope. Working.

Eight to ten hours is a normal leg.

[Fuji Abound]

Nope. Working.

Eight to ten hours is a normal leg.


You flying airships these days?

I wouldnt have thought you need the Boses in one of those.

:)

[The Heff]

ANR headsets may be great for commercial and/or IFR flying; but for student and low-hour private pilots I reckon these (http://www.flightcom.net/headsets/4dx-headset.php) are better value.

What I like most is that one can also buy a cotton pad for the headband, which makes it a helluva lot more comfortable. I've never had any compatibility issues with other headsets, it does the job and they're reasonably priced.

To be honest, I feel that Bose-X and Sennheiser, etc, are over-engineered for weekend VFR flying.

(Donning helmet and standing by for incoming!)

[IO540]

I would fully agree that if you are flying around a bunch of chimps who sit, stand, spill beer on the headset, and then use the cable from it to help themselves down from the footsteps ;) then a $100 headset is the way to go.

Similarly if you fly a PA28, where everybody has to climb in over the seats, thus standing on any headsets lying on the seats.

Which is why the flight training business uses crap headsets.

When I was training, one even had pleasure flight (oops I meant to say "trial lesson") punters stealing the headsets :ugh: Not sure what they could do with them; maybe they got a tenner for it down the pub?

But if you look after your kit, there is no contest.

I do explain to passengers fairly carefully that the headsets they will be wearing are "extremely expensive" and I show them how to insert and withdraw the little plastic bose plugs, etc. It seems to work. But on the school/club scene they would not last 5 minutes.

[SNS3Guppy]

You flying airships these days?

No, something a tad faster.

I have had a couple of chances to go fly an airship, before. I'd like to have done it for a year, just to have experienced the lifestyle and the job. Perhaps even just to say I did it. The pay wasn't enough to get by, and the job required 330 or more days on the road each year. Easy enough if one's single, but at the time, I wasn't.

Our trips presently are often long enough to require two crews on board, to be legal. Duty days get long, too. I've got a 26 hour duty day coming up in a few days, and it's not uncommon to deadhead ten hours into a trip...before I actually go to work. I was at twelve hours a few days ago by the time we pushed back...and that's the day just getting started. Add to that some long legs with lengthy flight hours, and a headset that is comfortable for extended periods is an absolute must.

ANR headsets may be great for commercial and/or IFR flying; but for student and low-hour private pilots I reckon these are better value.


I used the Flightcom 4DX for a number of years, along with other similar headsets, in all kinds of equipment. I used them regularly for large, four-engine radial powered airplanes...which are extremely loud, inside. (I measured the noise level in the 4Y once, then took the db meter to the edge of the runway, where I stood while two F-16's departed in full afterburner. The 4Y was louder, inside).

With any of the passive David-Clark type headsets (such as the Flightcom), I install the Oregon Aero hush kits, which are high-density foam for the earcups, thick memory-foam earseals, and a wide, sheepskin and wool headband. These become comfortable and quiet, and in the PB4Y-2, I wore them with EAR foam earplugs, as well. I tried some of the various noise-cancelling active ANR headsets, but they couldn't keep up, especially at high power settings, with the extreme noise in the cockpit. The passive headsets worked very well. The one thing that the noise-reduction headsets did do (such as Lightspeed, Bose, etc), was improve communications at lower power settings, when the headsets could actually keep up.

I've also used the Oregon Aero hush kits in my helmet, which makes it a lot quieter and more comfortable. I don't use ANR in the helmet at all, and where the helmet only gets used with turbine equipment, it doesn't need anything else. I'd still prefer to be able to hear the airplane, which I couldn't do if the helmet were any quieter.

Stock DC-style helmets such as the Flight Com tend to cause hot spots on my head and they make my jaws ache after an hour or three. I've worn them on long days with long flights of 11+ hours, and I feel like my head has been on a blacksmith's vise after some time. When I wore the Flightcom's and David Clarks regularly, I always carried aspirin or ibuprophen in my flight suit, because it was needed.

Last year I did a lot of light airplane flying, and I mostly used the Bose X for that. It improved comfort and communications in the cockpit enough that I'd say it's well worth the cost.

That said, I bought mine on ebay for two thirds the price, then promptly took it to the middle east where it sat in very hot cockpits, got covered in find sand, and generally abused, without the least complaint.

I learned to fly in airplanes without electrical systems or radios, and often flew without any hearing protection. My first flying job was ag work, and we used wwII headsets with the fiberglass insulation and flocking falling out...old,worn headsets. I still have my original telex headset, the first one I bought, with huge microphone, and big, square earcups. It's been around for some time, and the old earseals are worthless, but it still works like it did when it was new. I've had in-ear professional headsets, various Plantronics units, Lightspeeds, many of the basic GA style David Clark units from DC, Flightcom, Sigtronics, Softcom, etc. Of them all, the Bose have proven the best, the most durable, and have provided the best service, by far.

In my opinion, whether one is flying a 747 internationally, flying air attack over forest fires, or enjoying a peaceful weekend flight to see the leaves changing color in the fall, a good-quality headset is well worth the price. The days of going without a headset are past, for the most part, and the headset should be considered an investment in a piece of quality communications equipment. Spending six hundred dollars or more on a headset should be a no-brainer. One buys proper training, one buys proper equipment, one spends a small fortune to rent an airplane for an afternoon...a single outlay of cash or credit for a quality headset is a natural choice that's money well spent....even for the private pilot who wants nothing more than to enjoy the flight as best he or she can.

In that case, getting a descent headset like a Bose is all the more important. Go try one, and you'll understand why.

I would fully agree that if you are flying around a bunch of chimps who sit, stand, spill beer on the headset, and then use the cable from it to help themselves down from the footsteps then a $100 headset is the way to go.


I understand what you're saying, and I understand that it's tongue-in-cheek, but if one is operating in an environment that's going to be abusive, all the more reason to invest in a quality headset that can take it. My Bose X has held up to some fairly rough conditions, all over the world, better than most any other headset I've tried. It's also a lot more comfortable. Better yet, if I do manage to wear it out, fora few dollars, Bose will refurbish it as good as new. It's seen service in everything from Cessna 210's to King Air's to Learjets to 747's...and is still going strong. It's been frozen, baked, tossed, dropped, banged, rained on, snowed on, beaten and abused, and it's still good to go.

[Fuji Abound]

No, something a tad faster.

Whatever.

:)

[IO540]

Better yet, if I do manage to wear it out, fora few dollars, Bose will refurbish it as good as new.Not here in the UK :( All the great Bose U.S. warranties are comprehensively hand-washed over here. For example their free replacement of the thousands of partly duff mikes (sold c. 2002/3) was not implemented here.

The aircraft powered bose-x has a flimsy plastic plug, made by Lemo who deliberately do not sell this specific pin configuration within their normal circular connector range, so one cannot get just the plug, and the only way to fix a broken plug (if epoxy doesn't do it) is to buy a whole new bose-x mike + cable assembly for £135 (last time I did it). I used to think that Bose imposed this restrictive practice on Lemo in return for the business, but Lemo have done the same deal with Lightspeed whose Zulu is available in a bose-compatible aircraft powered version.

Other than the plug, the bose is reasonably robust but no way will it outlast a real Russian combine harvester (a David Clarke).

[Pianorak]

ANR headsets may be great for commercial and/or IFR flying; but for student and low-hour private pilots I reckon these are better value.

You may well be right - but it’s a bit like saying that any old joanna is good enough for little Wayne to start learning the piano, instead of getting him a half-decent Steinway or even Yamaha. Little Wayne obviously soon stops piano lessons and wants a drum kit and proceeds to drive the neighbours insane.

[Shunter]

but for student and low-hour private pilots I reckon these are better value.

I see you've never tried Bose headsets...

I picked up a second hand pair a few years ago and would never go back. Outstanding audio quality, don't clamp your head like a vice.... 2hrs or 20mins, the difference is noticeable as soon as you put them on.

A chap I used to work with got his PPL this year. He took my evangelism with a pinch of salt considering the retail price, then he also got a 2nd hand pair and will never go back.

I don't think they're worth the retail price, but I do think they are the best money can buy. If the price is right it's money well spent. Commercial/IFR has little to do with it except for the comfort factor; you'll get just as much value from the audio quality in a noisy SEP on a busy weekend with London Info than you will on a quiet radar frequency dropping onto an ILS in the soup.

[The Heff]

I see you've never tried Bose headsets

Not completely accurate, I'm afraid.

They had a mock-up at the Aero Expo in Wycombe, last year; and the fellow was simulating engine noise from various different airfraft types (SEP, MEP and corporate jet, if I recall correctly). For the short time that I was wearing them, I found the Bose-X to be comfortable and I was impressed with the ability of the headset to eliminate the "background" noise.

However, in all honesty I balked at the price. I dare say that compared to my Flightcom 4DX the Bose-X is more technologically advanced, more likely to prevent future loss-of-hearing from flying usual club aircraft and maybe a little bit more comfortable on longer flights; but the Flightcom 4DX is more cost-effective, as they perform the same job to an acceptable standard at a much reduced price.

Its why I advocate them to students and low-hour PPLs. Learning to fly is expensive enough without factoring in the cost of expensive headsets; but then again it always will be a personal choice.

[W2k]

ANR headsets may be great for commercial and/or IFR flying; but for student and low-hour private pilots I reckon these are better value.
Being a low-hour PPL I would respectfully disagree. While cheap headsets certainly "do the job", my experience going from non-ANR Peltors to Zulus (which I bought used for about 50% of retail price) was that they helped me relax more, removing pretty much all the annoying noises from the cockpit. Both as a student and a beginner PPL I find that anything which reduces my percieved workload while flying is a blessing, no matter how small ;)

Now, if you're only flying occasionally then the cost of a Bose-X or Zulu may seem disproportionately large. The solution for that is to do what I did, buy a used pair. It didn't really take me long to find Zulus for sale and they are really durable - any excessive wear or damage should be serious enough as to be obvious at first glance.

[IO540]

I found the Bose-X to be comfortable and I was impressed with the ability of the headset to eliminate the "background" noise.

However, in all honesty I balked at the price.

That's a reasonable POV but value for money is absolutely nothing to do with the performance/comfort argument :)

To a lot of pilots, the price is almost immaterial. They are buying a new Cirrus for... how much are they now? Even I have four bose-x headsets; two came with the plane, but I bought two even before I bought the TB20 for myself and my then GF, because I used to self fly hire (PA28s) and could not stand the crap headsets at the school.

The used Bose headset also fetches a reasonable amount on Ebay, while the others are mostly almost worthless.

And if the additional cost is that important, you probably don't fly much anyway; perhaps sticking to local flights where the radio may be almost irrelevant. A large chunk of GA falls into that category.

The loss of hearing / clarity argument is evidently wasted on many pilots (who seem content with flying around with radio installations which would literally not have been acceptable in the Battle of Britain) but it becomes relevant as one flies further afield (abroad) where ATC English is not so good, and if (or as) one's hearing gets worse with age.

The Bose is hugely overpriced for what you get in terms of material and manufacturing cost (I design and make electronic products) but that's their choice... I too sell (industrial) products for £200 which cost £30 to make, and that is really quite normal in business.

[RTN11]

Does the ANR only cancel out the noice inside the cockpit, or can it also reduce radio static?

At my school I fly 2 aircraft which have terrible radios, with a lot of static just on the intercom. Would the Bose A or X reduce this? If so it's probably worth a punt.

[IO540]

Does the ANR only cancel out the noice inside the cockpit, or can it also reduce radio static?

Only the former.

"Radio static" is just a crap radio, or a crap intercom, or both.

At my school I fly 2 aircraft which have terrible radios, with a lot of static just on the intercom. Would the Bose A or X reduce this? If so it's probably worth a punt.

A good headset will always help you hear properly though, and will save your hearing too. Obviously I can't tell you what you can or can't afford, but if you e.g. plan to later join a syndicate (which, apart from outright ownership, is generally the only way to go long-term, since rental is usually an expensive way to fly garbage) then a decent headset will really stand out.

Plus they are much more comfy :)

I have been told by a few people I know well that while the bose-x and the LS Zulu are comparable, the Bose A20 is well above anything else. I have just ordered one (aircraft powered but without the Bluetooth gimmick) from the USA; some firms out there are offering a $400 trade-in on a bose-x which is more than one would get on Ebay.

One interesting thing about the A20 is that for $49 you can convert the aircraft powered (single Lemo plug) version into the standard twin jacks, which is useful if one wants to use such a headset in somebody else's plane. With the old X the only way to do this was to change the whole mike+cable assembly which was about £140, years ago.

[RTN11]

I thought that would be the case. My David Clark cancels out cockpit noise well enough for me, it's just the duff intercom that gets on my nerves.

[tmmorris]

You may well be right - but it’s a bit like saying that any old joanna is good enough for little Wayne to start learning the piano, instead of getting him a half-decent Steinway or even Yamaha.

Hmm. I think the Bose-X is a Steinway Model D. Way over the top unless you plan to use it every day to a professional standard.

I think comfort and noise reduction are being conflated. My Sennheiser headset is way more comfortable (particularly with the gel ear seals) that my old cheap Flightcom one. The latter clamped horribly and gave me a headache after an hour. But it's only a bit more expensive - whereas the Bose-X is in a different league. (I'd say it's... like an old Welmar upright, or perhaps a new Yamaha though they are nothing like as civilised.)

Of course if you are buying a Cirrus it's trivial. But for those of us renting at £60-90 an hour wet, the Bose is indeed rather on the pricey side...

Tim

[IO540]

But for those of us renting at £60-90 an hour wet, the Bose is indeed rather on the pricey side...

But surely then you must have loads of money left over... a bit like people living in Wales, Liverpool, etc

:)

[Cows getting bigger]

I bought a Bose A20 at Oshkosh and find it noticeably superior to the Bose X (I have had Bose X for about 5 years). I've yet to play with the Bluetooth etc. Is it really worth $1100? Probably not. But in the same breath is a 10 year old PA28 with poor paint and tattered trim worth $100,000? :rolleyes: