flippant question.

why do propeller airplanes lack mufflers?

i mean, if you’re on the aircraft, wouldn’t that make the in-cabin flight quieter? and if an engine dies in midair, wouldn’t that be less stressful if it wasn’t nearly as dramatic a sound?

and do propeller airplanes use catalytic converters?

17 Responses to "flippant question."

janelleovl says:
Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 04:45:03
What’s a catalytic converter?
1. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 11:11:42
  it’s that doohickey in an automobile exhaust pipe that converts some of the exhaust from polluting gases to water vapour and carbon dioxide, i think.
2. lisaparratt says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 13:12:44
  No point in a catalytic converter. Aeroplanes tend to run on kerosene, which is an inherently clean fuel.
  Also, remember, these things have to go bloody fast, and I’m afraid catalytic converters, etc. are no good if you want to go fast.
  There’s a reason why jets have taken over. They’re up there with the sterling engine, tesla turbine and ramjet in terms of beauty.
3. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 13:21:08
  Also, remember, these things have to go bloody fast, and I’m afraid catalytic converters, etc. are no good if you want to go fast.
  uh, correct me if i’m wrong, but sports cars go pretty damn fast pretty quickly, and they have catalytic converters. so, uh, i guess i don’t understand.
  anyhow, the main bent of my curiosity stemmed from the muffler thing. we have a nearby air field where many propeller-powered aircraft take off, and some sound really loud, like a thirty year-old car with a broken muffler.
  it gets mildly annoying.
4. lisaparratt says:
  Thursday, 4 September 2003 at 00:15:47
  Maybe in the motorsports on your side of the pond, but in the rest of the world, the engines are tuned wel enough not to need them. Yes, I know that Americans are utterly awful at tuning an engine, but that’s why you have your own leagues.
  Anyway, lean-burn engines are better for the environment than catalytic converters, because they don’t require the same warmup time. A catalytic converter is only needed on a bad engine or with bad fuel.
  As for the muffler thing, it’s probably because they only take the pilots view into account, and the thing’s damned noisy anyway, so the engine noise plays a very small role in the overall racket.
5. Astrid says:
  Thursday, 4 September 2003 at 10:38:42
  lisa, lisa, lisa.
  i love how you trash American stuff the way i do, even though you don’t have to endure living here. i know that catalytic converters are not exclusive of America, either.
  but seriously. on my LJ, let me take the lead on trashing this really fucked country for everything it isn’t worth. i’m the one who has to make the most of this “right to dissent” thing. follow my lead. *smile*
  on the muffler bit: it just doesn’t make evolutionary sense, that’s all.
6. sexysecretagent says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 13:43:39
  Okay, pet peeve, but — Stirling. Stirling engines are about to change the world in big ways.
7. janelleovl says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 18:41:23
  Next question
  What is that on lisaparrat’s head?
8. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 18:51:28
  Re: Next question
  uh, those are cotton candy-coloured wool hair extensions. :)
robyn_ma says:
Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 09:55:32
ok, so. now you’ve commented on automobiles and planes.
are you going to go for the john hughes trifecta and say something about trains?
:)
*sits back down, averts eyes*
1. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 11:15:07
  somewhere in my archives, you’ll find me talking about light rail transit and monorail, if that counts any.
  and Planes, Trains and Automobiles was a John Hughes flick? i didn’t know that. i’ve never sat and watched the entire movie, though it was on cable a lot back when i was enduring my turbulent adolesence. i tend to mix it up with Throw Momma From the Train.
2. caladri says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 16:06:36
  I always mix it up with Silver Streak. Or a few random John Candy movies.
  Anyway, thought I’d contribute to the entropy.
3. robyn_ma says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 21:26:43
  somewhere in my archives, you’ll find me talking about light rail transit and monorail, if that counts any.
  i am snatched from the jaws of despair yet again by this news. :)
  and Planes, Trains and Automobiles was a John Hughes flick?
  yes’m.
  i didn’t know that.
  nor should you, for you have a life.
  i’ve never sat and watched the entire movie
  you’ve not missed much, though roger ebert apparently had a brain fart and proclaimed it one of his Great Movies.
  though it was on cable a lot back when i was enduring my turbulent adolesence.
  *snork* adolescence? try ‘late teens.’ :) the movie came out in ’87. would’ve been on cable around ’88 or so. by then you would’ve been college age. nice try though. ;)
  i tend to mix it up with Throw Momma From the Train.
  s’easy. one is a fun little black comedy. the other is a rather overrated and banal odd-couple road movie. then again, i have little use for john hughes anyway…
4. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 21:35:53
  uh, not to confuse you (rather, that icon thing was cautious obfuscation), but in post-April 1987, i was fourteen.
  and i <3 John Hughes.
  now, pardon me while i go back to my “life”, listening to Device’s 1986 one-hit wonder, “Hanging on a Heart Attack”, which i personally re-edited in 2001 to make longer than the previously long version commercially available.
  talk about not having a life? i’m it.
5. robyn_ma says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 21:41:01
  uh, not to confuse you (rather, that icon thing was cautious obfuscation), but in post-April 1987, i was fourteen.
  fourteen? fourteen?? that makes me older than you. but no wiser, likely.
  and i <3 John Hughes.
  i like his early stuff, before he turned into a bitter little hack.
  now, pardon me while i go back to my “life”, listening to Device’s 1986 one-hit wonder, “Hanging on a Heart Attack”, which i personally re-edited in 2001 to make longer than the previously long version commercially available.
  i’m afraid.
  talk about not having a life? i’m it.
  i bet my life is more no-having than yours.
  did i just say ‘more no-having’? i’m going to bed.
6. Astrid says:
  Tuesday, 2 September 2003 at 21:48:14
  uh, at least you live in the city. i live out on the isolated edge of nowhere. you have more of a life than i do, so.
  and yes, be very afraid. i also remixed and extended the following:
  Bruce Cockburn’s “Lovers in a Dangerous Time”
  Madonna’s “Live to Tell”
  New Order’s “Vanishing Point”
  Duran Duran’s “Serious”
  Towa Tei’s “Batucada”
  Lindsey Buckingham’s “Go Insane”
  Scritti Politti’s “Perfect Way”
  Pat Metheny Group and David Bowie’s “This is Not America”
  Hubert KaH’s “Wenn Der Monde Die Sonne Beruhrt”
  The Human League’s “Don’t you Want Me”
  Billy Ocean’s “Loverboy”
  Paris By Air’s “C’mon and Dance With Me”
  now you can be scared of me. *grin*
7. wohali says:
  Thursday, 11 September 2003 at 02:13:17
  Part of it was filmed in a house just down the street from where I lived while in high school.
  Actually, most of the Hughes flicks were. Home Alone, etc. The Breakfast Club was about my highschool.
  For your original comment: prop aircraft do have mufflers. Check out this listing of Cessna mufflers. Lots of the noise from a prop aircraft come from the actual propellor cutting through the air, just like a helicopter makes a hell of a racket…planes just move faster.
  And don’t forget that jet engines are way louder than prop aircraft…this is the current reason why jet aircraft can’t land at the Toronto Island Airport (not because of runway length, but because of noise abatement requirements.)

Comments are closed.

April 2026
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« May
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30