F-15 Eagle
New Member
There still louder than today's engines at least by 1-2 dB which no one will be able to tell, so in the end the F-35 is the same as the F-22, F-15, and F-18 and just a tad bit louder than the F-16.
Question on comparing the F-35 with the F-15/F-16.
- Thread starter AICfan1989
- Start date
F-15 Eagle
New Member
I wonder that since the AF wants to reduce the number of afterburner takeoffs with the F-35, how loud is the F-35 in full burner then?
F-15 Eagle
New Member
Yep again the F-35 in AB is the same as the F-15 and F-18 SH.
My last question is why is the USAF concerned about limiting the number of AB takeoffs with the F-35 is the same as the F-16?
F-15 Eagle
New Member
The F-35 does have more internal fuel than the F-16.
F15, this thread is a perfect example of why your line of questioning is irritating. Now I know you are going to get all het up and angry and probably be telling me I'm picking on you - but I'd ask you to open your mind and read the comments. Remember this is one thread.
Now, in a thread lasting 27 posts (before this one), 12 of the posts are yours. Here's a two tips to further debating:
1. Repeating the same worn out line over and over does not make it right.
2. Evidence is the best way to back any point you make. It may be missing from the school system in the US, but the way to properly discuss something is make a point, prove your point with evidence and fact, then restate why you believe your point is correct.
Take the advice or leave it. You could have just posted effectively once or twice in this thread - that means the other 10 posts were spam.
Why? Why does the F35 have to be louder? Is it because the single engine produces more thrust than any of the others?
Firstly, Spudman commented about exhaust velocity, not top speed The two are not necessarily congruent. Secondly, if you are so certain that the PW229 does not have a higher exhaust velocity post a link showing your expertise in this area.
So, now you are pretty sure the exhaust velocity is no different than an F15 or F16. Proof? Link?Two boards?
Anyway I'm pretty sure the exhaust velocity for the F-35 is no different than an F-15 or F-16.
What I want is for the USAF to just release a study of the F-35s noise levels compared to legacy fighters and stop remaining quiet about it.
BTW is that PDF your posted an official noise study by the USAF?
"Can't be"? How so, given that you have not posted anything backing your claims I'm guessing you must regularly hear these aircraft taking off and compare them side by side? Maybe? Do you?
I think I'm correct in saying the only 'people' repeatedly endlessly questioning this topic on this board is you.
Now you can assure me? How? It must be the proof you are reading somewhere but not posting.
First sentence you give away that you have never heard an F-35 in person. Given the lack of objective evidence to back your arguments, now we find out even your subjective analysis isn't there.Wait you heard F-35s? Man I never get to hear sonic booms.
Anyway the F-35 is the same in noise level to the F-22 and F-18 Super Hornet and less then 10% louder than the F-15/F-16, Lightning II's those suckers will be loud as with all current F-15s, 16s, 18s and 22s.
In afterburner the F-35 is the same as the F-15C and F-18 and close to the F-22. No noise difference between them all though.
So you are still claiming it will be louder but that no-one will be able to tell. So how is this a problem? Then you go on to rate the existing fighter inventory without posting a shred of evidence that your observations are correct.
I don't think it's a case of the AF not wanting to - but finding no need to use the AB. If the dry thrust, runway length and field performance of the F35 will allow it to safely take off without using afterburner, why waste the fuel in using it?
Is it concerned about limiting the number of AB takeoffs? I have only seen it stated that in all likelihood there will be a reduced need for AB on takeoff. Oh, and if you say that the F35 is the same as the F15 and F18 SH in AB - and these aircraft use current bases without problem, why do you continue to pursue this?
Immaterial to the argument. Just because the F35 has a higher fuel fraction does not mean it has to use AB on take off because it can better afford to compared to an F16. You may not have noticed but fuel costs money, greater fuel use causes increased CO2 (and the military is trying to turn green), and finally, I have yet to hear of a pilot complain about having too much fuel - its better in the tank than being squirted into the AB chamber needlessly.
Now, in a thread lasting 27 posts (before this one), 12 of the posts are yours. Here's a two tips to further debating:
1. Repeating the same worn out line over and over does not make it right.
2. Evidence is the best way to back any point you make. It may be missing from the school system in the US, but the way to properly discuss something is make a point, prove your point with evidence and fact, then restate why you believe your point is correct.
Take the advice or leave it. You could have just posted effectively once or twice in this thread - that means the other 10 posts were spam.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Yes, so? What does this have to do, with a desire to perform more takeoffs in mil power rather than reheat?
Are you suggesting the F-35 carries more internal fuel than the F-16 because the USAF WANTS to burn more fuel than it does now, as you seem to be suggesting?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
How? Please show me some evidence the F135 and F136 don't have a lower IR signature than current engines.
It would be an astounding oversight if they did not...
Spudman has provided his patent link, which shows the LO exhaust nozzle for the F-35 is specifically designed to reduce noise and IR signatures compared with "standard" exhaust nozzles.
So far, you have only provided your word, that this is not the case...
F-15 Eagle
New Member
With respect the Spudman, he did not prove that newer F-35s are any different in noise than AA-1.
He did prove that there are experimental engines with the LOAN nozzle that can reduce noise but did not provide a comparison of AA-1 and AF-1&AF-2 F-35s.
I stand correct that the F-35 noise is comparable or close to the F-15C, F-16, F-18 E/F and F-22 in Mil and AB.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]Marc 1[/FONT]: I stopped reading at the first sentence. Not wasting time with your rant.
Let's see some links supporting your point of view then, otherwise you're contributing nothing but opinion. Particularly your assertion that the IR management of the F135 is no better than current fighter jet engines - the F-35 is designed to be an LO platform, and IR management is a facet of signature management. So it's hard to take your claims seriously, especially when you present nothing to back them up.
Spudman went out of his way to provide a patent describing noise and IR reduction efforts, and you response was to assert the F135 does not have any advantage in noise or IR reduction over current engines. This flies in the face of the information presented in the patent. So present some links to support your argument, or withdraw.
Please see this for what it is, I'm not trying to attack you, I'm trying to get you thinking about the content of your posts and how you present your opinion.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
For crying out loud provide a damn link that shows the newest F135 engines have reduced noise over the F135 used in AA-1!!!
Here is some links please read:
http://idahof35.com/news-events/faq/#answer3
http://www.valp.org/?dl_id=119.
http://www.florida-edc.org/DSI/F35 Edwards Noise Results Briefing 7 April 09.pdf
OLFEIS | FAQ | General Questions
Decibel level jacks up in debate over whether to host F-35s
http://www.nrac.navy.mil/docs/2009_Tactical_Jet_Noise_TOR.pdf
DoD Buzz | Docs Say F-35B Too Hot, Noisy
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/03/26/jsf-not-too-hot-for-carriers/#axzz0l6WvdQPr
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/article_b99cddb7-7153-5c6b-8c19-72ab8dfff840.html
http://www.tucsonf35.com/faq.cfm#
That is just a few....
Last edited:
What you said that I took exception to was this:
You did NOT say you were specifying varied types of F135, you said the F135 does not have a lower noise or IR signature than current engines. You then elaborated by saying "the F-35 is comparable to current fighters in noise", thus making it clear you are making a comparison between the F-35 and different types of aircraft, not different models of F-35. Re-read the quote from you that I've included above - do you understand the difference between what the quote says and what you're saying now?
Additionally, YOU are the one who opened his post with "I can assure you". So assure me. Why is the onus of proof on me when YOU'RE the one making assurances?
I tried to make clear in my post that I was being civil and was interested in discussing the content of your posts rather than attacking you personally, and you respond with "for crying out loud this, for god's sake that". Try not throwing a hissy fit just because someone disagrees with you - it does wonders for the discussion.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
Yes I said the F135 is about the same and maybe a little more noisy than current engines whether its twice as loud as an F-15/F-16 still remains to be seen, I also said there is no factual source saying the F-35s AF-1 and AF-2 are any different than AA-1.
Also I want to apologize for what I said because I'm just a little fed up with getting private troll messages from a certain somebody...
Frankly I don't know what the fuss is all about. Fighter jets are loud. Who gives a hoot whether one makes a few decibels more than another...
I can guarantee I can't tell the difference between a few decibels... I don't think anyone else can either...
And I haven't noticed much of any difference between the fighter aircraft flying in and out of the Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base. I doubt anyone in Fort Worth has either. If anyone had noticed a significant difference, it would be front page news in the Fort Worth newspaper, television media, and the Fort Worth city council...
Sonic booms are another story though. Sonic booms have led to city council actions...
I can guarantee I can't tell the difference between a few decibels... I don't think anyone else can either...
And I haven't noticed much of any difference between the fighter aircraft flying in and out of the Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base. I doubt anyone in Fort Worth has either. If anyone had noticed a significant difference, it would be front page news in the Fort Worth newspaper, television media, and the Fort Worth city council...
Sonic booms are another story though. Sonic booms have led to city council actions...
localhost127
Member
there was already a rather long thread discussing f-35 acoustics and perceived loudness, no?
from what i can recall from that thread, there were serious misunderstandings about dB/logarithmic scales that seemed to confuse many.
again, if you can hear the difference between 1-2dB ... that is mighty impressive.
again, incorrect. everything you stated was before my PM...and it was a single PM ... not plural like you lead to believe.
carry-on
Last edited:
meat_helmet
New Member
Yes, any difference between two sources of the same sound that are <= 3dBA is pretty much inaudable to humans from what I can remember.
Your right about it beign a bit confusing though. Percieved loudness is quite different to a dBA rating. If you have two sounds of different pitch that are the same dBA rating, the one with the higher pitch will usually sound louder to humans. Humans are more sensitve the higher the pitch [until you reach very high pitches].
So if the F-35 has a sound that has a lower pitch for example it probably will actually sound quieter than say an F-16 at a similar dBA.