Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Committee on SST-Sonic Boom Subcommittee on Human Response Report on Human Response to the Sonic Boom June 1968
Subcommittee on Human Response Members Professor Raymond A. Bauer CHAIRMAN Graduate School of Business Administration Harvard University Boston, Massachusetts Professor William D. Neff VICE CHAIRMAN Center for Neural Sciences Department of Psychology Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana Dr. Henry David Executive Secretary Division of Behavioral Sciences National Academy of Sciences Washington, D. C. Dr. Irwin Pollack Mental Health Research Institute University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan Dr. Howard Raiffa Graduate School of Business Administration Harvard University Boston, Massachusetts Dr. Peter Rossi Department of Social Relations John Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland Staff John P. Taylor Executive Secretary Committee on SST-Sonic Boom National Academy of Sciences Washington, D. C.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL 2101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE. N.W., WASHINGTON. D C. 20418 COMMITTEE ON SST-SONIC BOOM June 7, 1968 Dr. John R. Dunning, Chairman Committee on SST-Sonic Boom National Academy of Sciences 2101 Constitution Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20418 Dear Dr. Dunning: In accordance with your directive, the Subcommittee on Human Response has reviewed available information on the current status of matters relating to individual, group and community response to sonic booms preparatory to deciding what further human response research should be conducted. In brief, the results of our review of sonic boom research on individuals and groups, whether under laboratory or field conditions and whether performed here or abroad, indicate that: 1. Field studies of responses to supersonic overflights, limited though each study has been, report generally consistent findings on levels of public response and complaint to currently available supersonic aircraft. 2. No damage to hearing is expected even for booms of 100 psf, many times above any level anticipated from the current version of the commercial supersonic transport even under extreme superboom conditions. 3. No direct physiological damage is expected even for booms of 100 psf. Indirect physiological responses, however, can result from the startle produced by sonic booms of even moderate proportions. These are
Dr. Dunning -2- difficult to predict because persons differ in their response both as to kind and degree. While physiological studies to date indicate little cause for concern, a review of field studies of the psychological impact of the sonic boom shows a growing consensus that is discouraging for the use of the current version of the commercial supersonic transport (SST) over populated areas at speeds at which it will be generating a sonic boom. However, the Subcommittee wishes to express cautious optimism in its belief that in the future it may be possible to design and build a commercial SST that will, when flying supersonically, generate a boom of acceptable characteristics. How soon and the methods by which a design team can achieve this goal we do not know, but we have confi- dence that American ingenuity can resolve the technical problems involved in due course. To this end the Subcommittee has listed the human response research it considers necessary to provide the aircraft designer with essential sonic boom design criteria. To clarify a point which has caused recent general concern, I would like to take this opportunity to point out that there is little likelihood that residents of our major metropolitan centers will hear a sonic boom generated by the currently proposed version of the commercial supersonic transport arriving at or departing from com- mercial airports, such as those serving intercontinental flights in the vicinity of our large metropolitan centers. Performance calcula- tions for the current version of the commercial SST indicate that the aircraft will require approximately 100 miles after takeoff to accelerate to, or, on preparing to land, to decelerate from speeds at which a sonic boom can be generated. The exact distance will depend on the interaction of a number of factors such as payload, fuel load, climb and letdown procedures, variations in the weather, etc. Sincerely, Raymond A. Bauer Chairman Human Response Subcommittee
Subcommittee on Human Response /A ^ Henry David D. Neff Irwin Pollack n ' p\jS7L*-0L Raiffa Peter Rossi Jo)tf P. Taylor, Executive Secretary fc Rayrngmd A. Bauer, Chairman June 1968
CONTENTS I. Introduction 1 II. Recommendations 1 III. Work of the Subcommittee 2 IV. Research Required 5 Psychoacoustic 5 Determination of Annoying Acoustical Aspects of the Boom 5 Simulation 5 Relationship of Impulse Vibration to Annoyance 6 Magnitude Estimation 6 Effect of Sonic Booms on Behavior 6 Sleep 6 Social Psychological 7 Studies of the Distribution of Individual Responses. ... 7 Community Response Studies 9 Problems of Measurement 10 Certain Reviews of Literature 11 V. Methodological and Organizational Support 11 Standby Research Plans 11 Standby Research Facilities 11 Coordination of the Work of Interested NAS-NAE Groups and the SST-Sonic Boom Committee 12 Coordination with Suitable International Agencies .... 12 Maintenance and Interpretation of Existing Knowledge 12 VI. Conclusion 12
