|
In doing a little research it appears that the
dominant opinion is that conventional ANR headsets are more effective at killing
the noise while the in-ear systems are more comfortable. Of course this is
subjective so I guess the only way to know for sure is to try them.
One thing I did note. While the Clarity Aloft and
Quiet technologies headsets are designed to be used in place of a conventional
headset, the CEP earpieces that the DAR mentioned to me are intended to be used
in addition to a conventional headset. Hmmm....
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:24
AM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] [FlyRotary]
Re: SPAM-LOW: [FlyRotary] Re: Headsets
Not sure about some of the other in-ear headsets, but I fly with the
Clarity Aloft headset and have for a couple of years. It's got an
expanding foam tip that's attached to the ear tube, similar to foam expanding
earplugs, only softer. I can't say that I've had any problems with
pressure equalization, perhaps because of the porous nature of the foam.
But then again, I don't usually fly above 4000 ft anyway :-)
But I will say that they are fabulously comfortable, especially on a hot
day.
Best regards,
Chris
On Sep 23, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Steve Thomas wrote:
But, these ear-plug type of headsets need to have
some facility for equalizing air pressure in the ear. I believe with
the Clarity headsets, you need to pull them out every-so-often to let the
air pressure equalize (though don't quote me on that.) For most
helicopter operations, this is a non-issue.
Best Regards,
Steve Thomas _______________________________________________________
On Sep 22, 2009, at 11:23 PM, George Lendich wrote:
Mike,
Their similar to the Clarity Aloft headsets
which use hearing aid ear plugs - bloody good idea.
George ( down under)
OK Al, sorry about that. I read everything
from Fly Rotary so rarely pay attention to the subject line - even when
I'm the subject originator.
George, the Bose is $1000 and the Zulu is
$850. Until I flew with the Zulu I wouldnt have believed it was worth
it.
One more possibility. Anyone familiar with
these:
I had a DAR inspect my glider a few months
ago. He flew down in an open cockpit Pitts. He said he had a terrible
time hearing comms and these solved those problems. He reported that it
worked better than any ANR headset he'd ever tried.
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009
9:12 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: nothing to
report...
Mike,
As you might be aware, we pay
significantly more here in Aus for such equipment, can you tell me
what the Bose -X and the Zulu go for in the states.
George (down under)
My headset is the original Lightspeed 20K
- about 12 years old and still fine. I've tried a Lightspeed 33K
swapping back and forth between it and the 20K in my buddy's Mooney.
The 33K is slightly better than my old 20K, but not enough to justify
upgrading.
I borrowed another friend's Lightspeed
Zulu a few weeks ago and flew with it in the RV for about an hour.
Significantly better than my 20K and I plan on making that upgrade
once I can scare up the cash.
Another friend has the Bose which he
just bought. Havent been able to talk him out of it yet for a test
flight but I hope to.
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, September 21,
2009 8:40 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: nothing
to report...
Is there anyone out there with a Lightspeed Zulu
that can report on its effectiveness?
Best Regards,
Steve Thomas _______________________________________________________
On Sep 21, 2009, at 8:33 AM, Mark Steitle wrote:
Lightspeed 33G.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Steve
Thomas <glasair2@me.com> wrote:
Mark,
Which ANR do you use?
Best Regards,
Steve
Thomas _______________________________________________________
On Sep 21, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Mark Steitle
wrote:
Good report Mike. I know what you mean about a
quieter muffler. My ANR headset does a good job of
killing the low frequencies, but a poor job on the higher
frequencies. The rotary has both. So take
your pick, turn the ANR on and listen to the high
frequencies, or turn it off and listen to the low
rumble. If I could only find an ANR that can do both I
would be a happy camper.
Mark
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM,
Mike Wills <rv-4mike@cox.net> wrote:
I added another 1.3 hours to
my total flight time today. And for the first time I
landed and was completely satisfied with the flight. I'd
still like to quiet it down a little, but this was the
first flight where I didnt feel like there was anything
that had to be fixed before the next flight. Even the
landing was pretty decent.
I've got just over 9
hours of flight time and about 40 hours of engine run
time now. So far all of my flight time has been
directly over the airport because to venture away requires
flying over about 50 miles of mostly unlandable
mountainous terrain. But I'm starting to think seriously
about stretching the legs a little...
Mike Wills
RV-4
N144MW
|