I don't really feel any of those questions are particularly bizarre or inappropriate. From what I understand, this Stack Exchange is not just for professionals. As such, questions from those who are unfamiliar with aviation are worth careful, reasoned answers.
To address your points, one by one, because I feel that is appropriate to do so here:
I personally don't see much of a problem with "Would X work?" or "Why don't we do X?" questions as long as the asker is honestly looking for the answer to that question. The problem is that, in many of those cases, the asker is more trying to promote their "great new idea" rather than honestly ask whether it's useful or feasible.
For example, the question ...
"Would X work?" is essentially the same as "Why don't we have X?", which is often a legitimate question because as you said yourself above, there may be "non-obvious engineering reasons" that a non-expert won't know. I can't see how questions like that should be systematically closed or sent to another site as a matter of general policy. Engineering is a ...
AV.SE, and SE in general, exists primarily to answer difficult questions, ones that haven't been answered in your basic textbook. Or, if they have, to answer specialist-grade questions in a way that a layman can understand. Or to give a broad perspective on open-ended, controversial, or simply interesting questions.
Most homework questions are none of that.
I would like to quote Bret Copeland for this answer
I think passenger questions which relate directly to the operation of an aircraft seem on-topic. Questions which relate more to "travel concerns" like frequent flyer miles programs, would almost certainly be off-topic.
Each off topic vote must be viewed case by case. I believe if enough wrong doing is ...
It has to relate to aviation.
Aviation · Weather
It has to relate to how a pilot, a controller, or a manufacturer would factor that into flying. It has to be applied in aviation.
Some questions which are not related to aviation but weather only:
How are typhoons formed?
What is the electricity power of a lightning strike?
How high can cumulus clouds be?
Your guess is exactly right. This is a community of pilots, air traffic controllers, aerodynamic engineers, mechanics, and other people who are interested in aviation as an activity - whether professional, or as a hobby. It's not a site for searching for commercial flights, and people here are not interested in helping you find or book air travel.
I can't ...
Our stance on questions about rocketry should be similar to model aircraft. As discussed regarding model aircraft and hobby-grade drones, it depends on the subject of the question.
Anything that is very specific to model rockets would be off topic.
Questions about airspace regulations or physics/aerodynamics would have more relation to aviation in general ...
This is the problem with broad close reasons, they're not very specific. You have to follow a couple of links to the on-topic help and then you will see one of the off-topic guidelines states:
Where to buy a specific part, "Which headset is the best?", Where can I get a feed of flight-related data? etc.
Are shopping-like ...
I agree with kevin's answer as a general approach. In this specific case it seemed to me that the question is actually very useful and relevant for pilots: knowing how and where clouds form is very valuable for flight planning, especially longer VFR cross-countries. I edited the question to make an aviation connection and it was re-opened so I assume that ...
You have two different question there, I'll try to address them separately.
Does the drone community cause significant clutter in Aviation community?
Depends on the meaning of clutter. Speaking as a mod, I would say no, I don't see major clutter right now. Speaking as a user, I feel the various posts about quadrocopters a bit borderline, if not off-topic ...
I believe the problem is when the question appears copy pasted with no effort made by the OP to explain their current understanding of the question or explain where they're struggling. To me it feels like they're expecting me to do all the work for them so they don't have to think.
I'd suggest such questions should be downvoted with a comment but not closed ...
Visa requirements & finding lodgings would be off-topic for the main site as they're not really "aviation related" (some of it would fit on Travel, but stuff like what type of visa you'd need may be something you need to work out with a US flight school or Customs/Immigration.
You could definitely ask about all of this in chat though. (I also know there'...
Personally I think that we should not accept questions that are not leading to any new aviation knowledge for the asker or any reader.
In particular, I would add the following to our "not about" list:
And the following to our "about" list:
Aircraft design and construction
I am ready to consider the tracking ...
I agree with Federico's stance in principle, but often an asker does not have enough knowledge to discriminate whether a question has enough of an aviation component. It is up to the community to fill in this gap.
The countermeasures one is a good example, the only aviation part of it is that helicopter kinematics play a role in the lack of countermeasures, ...
It has nothing to do with travels and it has a lot of to do with aviation, as per my personal opinion.
It's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but I'm going to have to disagree in this case: The "markings" you are referring to are landside, and aside from the fact that they're at an airport they have nothing to do with aviation as an activity or field ...
In my opinion, as the question stands, it seems to ask about military aircraft losses sustained without enemy intervention, and an attempt to correlate whether they came from a carrier or not. Although aircraft are involved, it's hardly about aviation or the operation of aircraft per se. If he's asking about the number of aircraft lost on landing and/or ...
If I remember, we are asked to be greedy with migration - to migrate only when the question is off-topic on the origin site. In the absence of Travel.SE, I think this question would not get closed as off-topic, as it is reasonably closely related to flying. Therefore, I believe we should not migrate this question.
I don't think we've discussed this much. What we have in the help center just says that "resource location" is off topic:
Where to buy a specific part, "Which headset is the
The intention is to discourage people from asking which headset to buy, which flight planning software to use, or where to find spare parts for ...
This particular question is definitely on topic here. The Help Center says that 'The "passenger aspects" of commercial air travel' are off topic here. But this question doesn't mention commercial air travel at all; it applies equally well to flying that is not commercial, as well as flying that is not for the purpose of travel.
I think almost any accident-...
IMO it should be closed; it is off-topic for more than 1 reason:
Resource finding, if no photo(s), then:
Opinion based, and lastly:
Not aviation related – whaaaaat?!
It is an event, that happened to an airport, that disrupted air travel.
The same event can happen to a sensitive government building, disrupt road traffic, and also make the news.
The question ...
I agree that some can be useful questions but the majority tend to be one of:
"What is the best....." - probably subjective, and not the good type of subjective.
"Where can I find...." - the location often does change over time, rendering any answer useless.
"Where can I get a feed of data on...." - possibly the least ...
I believe these are classic examples of shopping questions and as such should be considered off topic.
It would be my preference to simply close those questions as off topic. Most are old, and therefore possibly outdated.
My opinion is as I have commented twice:
Asking a question stemming from a sim is on-topic if it is about the real life application of that question. Pursuing product support is off-topic.
Similar situations where I have previously answered:
Is center tank fuel required to start the 737-800 engines?
How to guess the actual name of the SID, waypoint, etc., ...
The crew requirements of naval vessels would not be on topic for an aviation site (even if the primary purpose of that vessel is to launch aircraft).
There is no Stack Exchange site which would be a good fit for this question, However I can tell you that an aircraft carrier is more complicated than a simple runway for launching jets: There are thousands of ...
I think this would make an excellent topic for chat, maybe even a blog posting, but I don't think that it's a good fit for a "Q&A" topic on the main site.
This question is insidious because it ticks every box for "Great Subjective Question" on Jeff's blog posting:
You can give great "Why" and "How" answers
You can write long, detailed explanations ...
I believe this is already fairly well-defined -- "Questions about airport operations" is intentionally broad, but at the same time it should not be construed so broadly as to mean "Questions about anything I saw at, on, or near an airport" -- It's mainly intended to cover things like:
Questions about ARFF procedures
Questions about runway/taxiway ...
Initial intention: "Aviation weather" is not simply "weather", that could mean the group of people who created this site had a particular view on this.
Rules can be challenged. This is a living site, rules are not engraved in stone. We may want to adjust our use of the initial rules, because the shared opinion is this will make the site better, or clarify ...
If nothing has changed (locally or network-wide), is it something the community wishes to revisit?
I don't read that answer the same way you do.
Yes - if it's a valid question, then why not answer the question.
copy-pasting a test question is not really a valid question on SE.
We want to be able to help the widest possible amount of people, ...