What is the standard of evidence that we should require in answers?
Do we simply rely on the upvotes and downvotes to moderate what is true and untrue? What about myths that are widely believed that will gather upvotes regardless of their truth? Or should we be striving to provide authoritative sources for the claims that we make in answers?
I'll take one question as an example: Why tap the brakes on take-off in fixed gear aircraft?
The answers make the following claims:
Spinning wheels are not a problem in fixed undercarriage aircraft, there's no good reason to tap the brakes after takeoff if the gear is nailed down.
- Says who? Why are we to trust this answer?
I'd say you are probably safe to ignore that in a TB-10, however that is just my opinion and it may be worth contacting a TB-10 club and asking them what they think.
- Is speculative opinion useful in an answer?
This answer to another question has a link suggesting, that the spinning wheels may be sufficiently large gyroscopes to affect handling of the aircraft.
- Do we care what a link "suggests"? Isn't what is actually the case what matters? Are the spinning wheels in fact sufficiently large gyroscopes to affect handling of the aircraft?
You have a decent amount of angular momentum fighting any maneuver that the aircraft wants to make.
- Does any reliable source say that the additional angular momentum of the wheels is relevant to any flight maneuver? Does it warrant tapping the brakes?
On a Cessna 172, spinning wheels do create vibrations.
- If this is true, why not provide a reference for this?