15

I'd be in favor of reversing the colors (make "unselected" arrows dark & "selected" ones light) - I think that would make the difference more intuitive and the unvoted arrows less obtrusive - probably with the least work :)


14

The Hangar A possible idea for the general chat room This was the winning suggestion. Our Aviation Chat Room is now officially The Hangar


14

My suggestion: Tip: Questions about accidents get better answers if they: are specific (don't just ask "what happened?") can be answered factually and accurately (speculating about accidents that have just happened is explicitly off-topic) refer to reliable sources like aviation authorities and official accident reports focus on the aviation ...


13

It's hard to say if it's useful or not: it only has two questions today but that doesn't mean we won't get more in the future. I think we should leave it there, but rename it to faa-wings-program. And if someone has a question on FAA regulations applied to aircraft wings then IMO the most appropriate tagging is faa-regulations plus wing.


13

100% agree, the blue is definitely too bright


13

It is my opinion that this whole question, and speculative answer, should be deleted. It is accident speculation of the worst kind.


13

Personally, I agree to the burnination. I'll wait to see if there is any dissenting opinion


12

I agree, furthermore I'd recommend renaming the gps tag to the generic gnss, to cover the rest of the constellations. By 2020 the total number of GNSS systems should be 4: GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, and Galileo.


11

on topic: Broadly, any question about aviation is on-topic except the ones specifically identified as off-topic below. Some specific types of questions we welcome are: Flying technique, maneuvers, navigation, etc. Air Traffic Control Aviation Weather Aviation Regulations Aircraft systems Airport Operations Aviation Safety Operational Procedures ...


11

I would propose a pop-up text that would look like the following (simple adjustment of a few words from the accidents pop-up): Tip: Questions about investigations get better answers if they: are specific to a part of the investigation, rather than a blanket question (don't just ask "what happened?") can be answered factually and accurately (...


10

Update: Yes, we can, and in fact we have reached the design-independent graduation milestone. See Congratulations, Aviation is graduating! for more information. The new design-independent graduation that started going into effect in September has a basic criteria of 10 Q/day as a threshold. If you look at our site-analytics page (5000 rep required) you ...


10

The general idea is that if you don't have at least 5 up-votes in a tag you probably don't have enough domain-specific knowledge to be suggesting synonyms. A good question (or answer) can easily garner the 5 upvotes required to meet this threshold. Of course this leads to edge cases like this one, where it's pretty obvious a synonym should exist but nobody ...


9

I think that we should have a generic accident-investigation tag for all questions related to investigations. I can't see having enough questions about each specific accident to warrant having their own tags.


9

I agree with this complaint! At first glance, would you say that I upvoted or downvoted the question below? When I visited the site the first time after the redesign, I thought: "Why did I downvote such a good question?" On Stack Exchange sites, the more brightly coloured arrow is the one what was selected. (When you press the flight attendant call ...


9

It was discussed that we do not need variant-specific tags of aircraft models here. Unless there is a change in consensus, I support the tag merge.


8

I just (unilaterally, sorry) created synonyms. airbus-a321 and airbus-a319 now point to airbus-a320. They're the same type, and there's no value in doing the same thing for, say, 737-700.


8

My feeling is that a loading tag isn't very useful because it's ambiguous, as your question says, and it's only used for 3 questions today anyway. Instead, I'd suggest using aircraft-limitations (or maybe aircraft-performance) for load factor and ground-operations for loading payload.


8

I think it is a pointless tag. Tags are supposed to say what the question is about so that people can decide before opening if they might be able to answer or not. Highlighting that a question is about "homework" is not informative in this sense: is it about aerodynamics? or about construction? or something else? Well, for all those things we ...


7

I am in support of this. Normally I would say that we have the on-topic page to make clear what is accepted and what is not accepted on Aviation.SE, but given the amount of accident questions after real accidents, I would say this is a subtle reminder, which could help the OP reconsider or rephrase their question to meet our on-topic guidelines.


7

Agreed. It would be good to get international input, as you suggest, but unless it's commonly used elsewhere, unpowered would certainly be preferred. I think glider pilots would take offense to being called powerless.


7

Based on the existence of What regulations exist for ATC real time RADAR simulator software? and Where can I find an ATM simulation software to investigate traffic flow capacities? I've created a new ATC-Simulator tag for ATC simulation software. If there are no strong objections I'm going to start gradually re-tagging questions out of simulator into atc-...


7

I'd say create chart-supplement with afd as synonym, plus added description of the change.


6

I agree with the point that "regulations" is meaningless by itself but I'm not sure what the alternative is. I tried to find other Stack sites that might have similar issues with regions and countries: Politics uses country tags Money also uses country tags, and decided that they are useful even when the question itself is obviously referring to only one ...


6

Yes, I think that unmanned-aerial-vehicle should be used, and since the UAV acronym is so commonly used, a tag synonym should be made for uav as well.


6

This sounds reasonable. The term correctly written "Class B", so it is preferable to use the correct vernacular. Fixed. Now when users enter the tag (c-l-a-s-s...), the text completion will show them the correct tag to use. Once the site gets moving along (past the private beta), the increased reputation requirements to create new tags will make it more ...


6

For mods, I would call it The Tower For general chat The Hangar is hard to beat


6

I say that we get rid of aircraft altogether. It is a general concept that covers most of the questions that we will have on aviation, and even a question that is general to all aircraft doesn't really need it at all. For questions that are actually specific to a class of aircraft, they should be tagged airplane, rotorcraft, glider, lighter-than-air, ...


6

It's not something we typically do, in fact it's not even something we allow a normal moderator to do because it's essentially rewriting history and moving reputation around. I'll reassign the question, but with a couple of warnings: This is the one reassignment you get. If you post under the wrong account in the future, you'll just have to live with it, ...


6

We can certainly enable YouTube embedding assuming there is a need for it. Over on Movies & TV (a natural candidate for the feature), we asked the community to list posts that could benefit from embedding video. Because text searches (primarily via Google) provide much of the traffic to Stack Exchange sites, it's important that video supplement the ...


6

status-completed Please see the update of the original post.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible