Hell of a claim with zero evidence. By your logic, I could disprove the Sun by not observing it at night.
Yes, the ICAO rules are for takeoff and landing. When subsonic planes are the loudest. Concorde, for example, couldn’t have met these requirements.
We don’t know what Boom are targeting for in-flight noise. But we can guess, based on its parity with ICAO take-off and landing requirements, that it aims to match subsonic noise levels on the ground. There is strong evidence we can soften and disperse a high-altitude boom [1]. Whether it’s doable by Boom is an open question.
What? I cited their own document to show that your claim was not about the sonic-boom noise (which is what people are worried about). You say yourself "we don’t know what Boom are targeting for in-flight noise".
What do you mean about "its parity with ICAO take-off and landing requirements"?
Hell of a claim with zero evidence. By your logic, I could disprove the Sun by not observing it at night.
Yes, the ICAO rules are for takeoff and landing. When subsonic planes are the loudest. Concorde, for example, couldn’t have met these requirements.
We don’t know what Boom are targeting for in-flight noise. But we can guess, based on its parity with ICAO take-off and landing requirements, that it aims to match subsonic noise levels on the ground. There is strong evidence we can soften and disperse a high-altitude boom [1]. Whether it’s doable by Boom is an open question.
So no, it’s not a lie.
[1] https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/langley/nasas-su...