FedEx senior pilot on a mission to quiet the jet noise around LAX

[rocketman5150]

I deal with these people - heard from them at a community sustainability meeting the other night. They all seem to think that airports are getting noisier and that planes are flying different paths closer to their neighborhood. Very little you can do to reason with them. They all imagine the airport being quieter in the past, when in fact, it's quieter now.

Airplanes are quieter, but when you consider the growth of the air transportation industry in the past 30 years, I would daresay airports HAVE become noisier. Which would you rather have; 1 loud departure per hour, or 10 "quiet" departures?

Quieter airplanes do necessarily translate to a quiet airport,

 

[Murdoughnut]

I don't trust a pilot who doesn't like jet noise.

Wow, after nearly 11k total posts in 7 years, that was my most popular ever? Ha!

 

[Roger Roger]

Considering slumming it huh?

On topic... jets are quiet neighbors. Non stop Seaplanes are Fing noisy. I enjoy them though.

185 with two blade prop...

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

But what about when you're feeling frisky?

 

[z987k]

185 with two blade prop...

Yep. That is probably the loudest airplane ever. Louder than a dozen JT8D's all screeching at the same time.

 

[GypsyPilot]

It's one thing to emphasize no TRs when your company is operating on the back side of the clock, likely one of the only airplanes out there. But I really don't see this as practical for most operators that are landing during busy periods with tight spacing. Try coasting to the end at ORD, SFO, and LAX during the landing rush. You would NOT be popular.

 

[JustinS]

Tower told us our Cessna 206 was LOUD when our school first got it. So right after takeoff now the procedure is to dial it back from 2850 to 2700 RPM to be nicer to the surrounding population's ears. Any loud airplane engine sound is music to my ears. Radials, and JT8Ds are about all I really need though.

 

[Cal Goat]

Airplanes are quieter, but when you consider the growth of the air transportation industry in the past 30 years, I would daresay airports HAVE become noisier. Which would you rather have; 1 loud departure per hour, or 10 "quiet" departures?

Quieter airplanes do necessarily translate to a quiet airport,

I was LAX based for 6 months and spent some time around El Segundo and the neighborhoods just to the north west of the field. The noise is really a non-issue IMO. I'm the type of guy who looks up when I hear an airplane and I don't do a lot of looking up in El Segundo.

Another thing to consider is with El Segundo in particular is that the property values there are still pretty incredible considering the vicinity to the airport in addition to the fact that there is A GIANT OIL REFINERY in the middle of that town.

LAX built that town into the community that it is today because before that it was just farmland and A GIANT OIL REFINERY. I love El Segundo because it really is a nice little town that is both near the airport and the ocean (2 things I'm quite fond of). But if anyone in that town has the gall to whine about airplane noise, they deserve some form of unpleasant karma that would balance out that level of arrogant stupidity.

 

[seagull]

He's management. Nuff said. Where I work a line guy could get fired for willing having his name published in an article like that referencing the company.

He's not management, our fleet check airman are not management. He has been very active in the union in the past, and is still a strong member, left EAL on strike, etc. Dawg is well respected and well liked across the board. Worked several accidents with him.

 

[seagull]

Some people really try to make this job more difficult.... Or hell, life even.

It's an airport, it provides an excellent service that outweighs the negatives associated with noise and like others have pointed out before, they're quieter these days.

O and since when does Fedex have an LAX base?

LAX MD-11 pilot base (co with ONT, and technically SNA) since 2003.

 

[derg]

LAX isn't even loud these days. Back in the early 1970's, now THAT was airplane noise.

I had a relative that lived under one of the approach paths and when DC-8's, 707's DC-9's, straight-pipe 747's and such would fly over, it would rock the house.

There are days when I was walking under the approach path for 31R gettin' me a Subway in Five Towns and my first thought it, "Is that A-320 dead sticking?"

But NADP-1 departures, CDA arrivals and night "STARs-to-Arrival Transition-to-final-Approach-Fix" is probably going to eventually come.

The Brits are annoying as hell with the CDA. They want at least -200 fpm in the descent, but not SO much as you level out before reaching GSIA. And if their sensors, well, sense that you're in less than -200fpm descent (probably because they gave you an unanticipated airspeed chance or got their 'air miles' wrong), you get a nastygram sent to your airline about "Her Majesty" thinks you're a rotten pilot.

On the thrust reverse, most Euro's just want you to go into reverse idle. But if you're using autobrakes on the 757/767 (your planes, I have no idea) the school house that it doesn't make that much of a difference as the auto brakes look at "total" deceleration rate.

 

[Bandit_Driver]

LOL...The Canucks don't like noise either. Try taking anything old in or out of CYYZ outside of normal business hours.

I also heard someone's 727 set a noise alarm off on take off out of a west coast airport...

 

[typhoonpilot]

It's one thing to emphasize no TRs when your company is operating on the back side of the clock, likely one of the only airplanes out there. But I really don't see this as practical for most operators that are landing during busy periods with tight spacing. Try coasting to the end at ORD, SFO, and LAX during the landing rush. You would NOT be popular.

Doug said it already just above.

Reverse idle on modern jets with autobrakes does not increase the stopping distance. The autobrake setting determines the stopping distance. The only thing adding reverse thrust does is reduce the amount of brake pressure applied.

At my airline we use idle reverse as a first choice. However, we add the extra step of calculating brake cooling based on ambient conditions, weight, and autobrake setting. At higher landing weights, high altitude airports, and when it is hot we need to use reverse thrust to keep the brakes within a reasonable temperature range when using autobrake settings above low/medium.


Typhoonpilot

 

[derg]

It was an emphasis item during Continuing Qual this year.

I was a "Autobrakes 2 or 3, if it's wet, 4" guy.

But, 1 thru max, it's going to decelerate at a predetermined rate with the brakes.

Throw in a bunch of reverse, it'll use less brakes and decelerate at the same predetermined rate.

So the guidance that we're getting is using more autobrakes and less reverse

 

[MikeD]

Radials, and JT8Ds are about all I really need though.

 

[GypsyPilot]

Doug said it already just above.

Reverse idle on modern jets with autobrakes does not increase the stopping distance. The autobrake setting determines the stopping distance. The only thing adding reverse thrust does is reduce the amount of brake pressure applied.

At my airline we use idle reverse as a first choice. However, we add the extra step of calculating brake cooling based on ambient conditions, weight, and autobrake setting. At higher landing weights, high altitude airports, and when it is hot we need to use reverse thrust to keep the brakes within a reasonable temperature range when using autobrake settings above low/medium.


Typhoonpilot

Not sure I see your point... There are a lot of other a/c types operating in the airports I mentioned.

 

[Bumblebee]

of

But what about when you're feeling frisky?

course I can make Yankee

 

[ASpilot2be]

Tower told us our Cessna 206 was LOUD when our school first got it. So right after takeoff now the procedure is to dial it back from 2850 to 2700 RPM to be nicer to the surrounding population's ears. Any loud airplane engine sound is music to my ears. Radials, and JT8Ds are about all I really need though.

That's our procedure in the 207.

 

[typhoonpilot]

Not sure I see your point... There are a lot of other a/c types operating in the airports I mentioned.

Carbon brakes became widely available for commercial airplanes in the 1980s. They are or were basic equipment on the Boeing 747-400 and -400ER, 757-300, 767, and 777 and the MD-11 and MD-90. They are basic equipment on the 787 Dreamliner and 747-8.
Carbon brakes are optional and will be available for retrofit for the Next-Generation 737 via no-charge service bulletins. They are also available for retrofit via master change service bulletins on the 757-200, 767-200, and 767-300 and MD-10 models.

A300/310, A330/340, and A320 series can all have carbon brakes as well.

EMB 170/190 series have carbon brakes.


Granted there are some older types without them still, but a significant percentage of today's aircraft have carbon brakes.



Typhoonpilot

 

[derg]

We have a couple "steel brake" 76's.

Oh, they get spicy too!