What turn to intercept a radial and how to tune in B737ng sim?

Does this clearance allow me to fly a reciprocal of 020 inbound to the station? Or will I just have to fly away from the station on 020 radial?

A radial is always pointing away (radiating) from the VOR. The clearance therefore instructs you to fly away from the VOR on the 020 radial.

  Will a left turn be more appropriate than a right turn to intercept radial 020?

I think the image should answer that: right turn is better.

  In a Cessna 172, I would twist the OBS to get a from flag and then select 020, how do I ago about this in a 737 sim? Is it the same thing?

You can tune the VOR frequency on the ground using the NAV tuning panel on the center pedestal (left image) and then dial in the course of 020 on the Mode Control Panel (MCP) on the glareshield (right image):

(737 NG FCOM)

  Do I select the radial before or after take off?

You can do it before takeoff because you will depart using runway heading (in HDG SEL mode) initially.

  Finally, the b737 uses ADI with a movable pointer or "sky up"which is different from what single pistons and light twins use. I will appreciate any tips to help me nail the movable pointer ADI/attitude indicator on the sim.

You depart in HDG SEL (8 in image below) with a heading of 300 (or runway heading) until 2000ft and then turn right onto a 065 heading (still in HDG SEL). This will set you up for a 45° intercept of the radial. Note: With strong winds, you need to correct this heading to get a 065 track.

To arm the intercept, you select the VOR LOC mode on the MCP (5 in the following image):

(737 NG FCOM)

This will arm the VOR intercept (should show VOR LOC as an armed mode on the FMA (Flight Mode Annunciator), which is located at the top of the Primary Flight Display). Now all you have to do is follow the flight director (or turn on the autopilot and watch it do all the work).

If you don't want to use the flight director, you can switch the Navigation Display (ND) to VOR mode on the EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrument System) on the glareshield (2 in the following image, when turning 1 to VOR you also get an ADF like pointer towards the VOR):

(737 NG FCOM)

The ND will then look something like this:

(737 NG FCOM)

Here, you find familiar things like lateral deviation (10), TO/FROM indicator (12, also shown as arrow inside) and the selected course (3). It is using heading up or track up, but it works exactly like in a C172. The easiest way to fly the intercept is however to use the flight directors.


The builders of an FDR must comply with DO-178C (the older DO-178B may also be of interest here) as per AC 20-141B issued by the FAA. These documents do not specifically define a data format but provide requirements for what it must be resilient against. Here is an interesting research paper that covers some of the topics you are asking about. Since most avionics use ARNIC 429 as their standard of communication some FDRs provide ARNIC 429 inputs to record the avionics instructions at the time. I would assume these inputs dump the bus data right to the storage medium (most likely solid state memory these days). Since the formats the device uses may be proprietary as well as very low level (and memory efficient) I am sure they make software to dump it to other formats. For example L3 makes a full unit for their FDRs.

After some more searching I found what may be the most comprehensive answer from this Boeing summary document

  What Is a Data Frame?

  A flight data recorder (FDR) data frame is the
  order of the words that are transmitted from the digital flight data
  acquisition unit (DFDAU) to the digital FDR (DFDR) each second over
  many seconds (see ARINC 717 for additional information). Most FDR
  system data frames are made up of four subframes within one
  superframe. For a 64-words-per-second (wps) FDR system, a DFDAU will
  output 64 12-bit words to the FDR each second, where each word
  typically contains the value of an analog parameter. The order of the
  words (for example, word number 12 of the 64 words) within a subframe,
  as well as the order of the subframes, define an FDR data frame. This
  order is important to understand in order to decode the data recorded
  in the DFDR.

It should also be noted although they may have all been phased out by now, some older cockpit voice recorders and FDRs recorded on analog mediums and may still be inservice doing so.


How does cultural difference impinge upon human factors in aviation industry safety?

What you are asking looks like a university assignment on Interface design and sociology. It is a very complex area and your question does not suggest a simple answer but here goes:

These cultural factors are covered by Hofstead's theory of Cultural dimensions. Specifically the Cultural factors of Power Distance, Individualism and Uncertainty Avoidance. I have studied Hofstead (and others) and its relation to Interaction Design and Interface Design for a computing degree.

Power Distance (PD). The higher the score then the more likely the culture is to vest  power in an elite and accept that their decisions. The lower the score the more power is devolved and people are more likely to question leaders.

Individualism (IND). The higher the score the the more loose the societal structure. The lower it is then the society tend to collectivism and rigid structure.

Uncertainty Avoidance (UA). The higher the score then the more the society prefers rigid rules and procedures for all events. The lower then the more relaxed the society is to rules unexpected events.

Note that these overlap considerably.

What this means is that cultures with high PD, UA or Low IND are more likely to follow instruction or even crave instruction and rule. Checklists and instructions are more likely to be followed. Cultures with the opposite may be inclined to be a little more relaxed and may be more of a risk to safety due to a laissez-faire attitude to checks.

However a high PD, low IND and high UA may result in a subordinate unquestioningly accepting instruction from the captain despite knowing that the order was wrong even to the point of crashing.

It is a massively complex subject and to get an answer you really need to be specific with scenarios and cultures.

To see the scores for various cultures then go to geert-hofstede.com/countries.html and try some countries


What are the considerations to make when altering logbook entries?

I couldn't find any specific regulations, but correcting errors or omissions in the time logged is fine. You should never change an actual endorsement, though.

To take a simple example, if your CFI wrote in 1.1 hours instead of 2.1 hours then I assume you wouldn't hesitate to correct it later because it's an obvious error of fact. In the same way, if your CFI didn't write in PIC time when he should have then there's no problem if you add it yourself. Provided of course that you're sure that you were indeed allowed to log PIC time for that particular flight.

If you want, you could add a comment or keep a record of changes on a separate sheet in case someone ever questions it. But for what it's worth, I have a number of corrections in my logbook and no one has ever asked about them. There's a high degree of trust involved in logging time because it's so difficult to verify the information independently.

But you shouldn't touch an endorsement. Only an instructor can make an endorsement and even if there's some mistake then you should ask the instructor to enter a new one rather than change it yourself. Endorsements get much more attention that time logged, and I think it would be tough to explain why you changed one yourself.

Finally, you mentioned your instructors' "thinking" or "ideas" about logging PIC time. I don't want to make assumptions about their intentions (and I'm not a CFI), but logging PIC time is defined by regulation, not by what individual instructors think. If you're still in contact with those CFIs, it would be a great topic to discuss with them. Perhaps they didn't deliberately omit the PIC time, they just forgot or overlooked it. Or maybe they did have a reason, but in that case they should at least be able to explain it to you with reference to the regulations.


Would an airliner be allowed to take off in snow?

Don't worry about it
While snow can sometimes cause a delay, airports are really good at snow removal.  (Especially airports like Denver that are used to getting a lot of snow.)
According to flydenver.com DIA has 500 trained snow removal people and 270 pieces of equipment to clear 12.2 million square feet of runway, taxiways, etc.
To put that in perspective, a typical highway (2 lanes each way, with shoulders) is around 38 feet wide each way, or 76 feet for both directions.  If I've done the math correctly, 12.2 million square feet is about 30 miles of road.
The state of Minnesota knows a thing or two about plowing snow.  They use about 1500 drivers and 839 plows to handle 12,000 miles of road.  To plow snow the way the Denver airport does it, they would need 200,000 drivers and 108,000 plows.
Here's a YouTube link that shows off some of Denver's bigger snow removal tools.
Chances are, if you can get to the airport you'll be able to fly (but perhaps not on time)


Is ADS-B UAT required below 18,000 ft for ADS-B ES equipped aircraft?

No. ADS-B ES equipped aircraft do not have to have UAT to allow ADS-B UAT equipped aircraft to 'see' them. Below FL180, they are tracked by ATC radar and their track is translated and re-transmitted to UAT equipped aircraft via TIS-B service. More information, as well as coverage maps are available at the NextGen ADS-B site.


Relation between Squawk code and ICAO adress

The ICAO 24-bit aircraft address is encoded in every ADS-B (Downlink Format = 17) message. It is the primary means of associating messages to the same aircraft in ADS-B.
What you have in your question is not an ADS-B message but a surveillance identity reply (DF = 5). This is the reply to a Mode S radar interrogation. The Mode S radar already knew the 24-bit address of the aircraft when it asked the transponder to send a short (DF = 5) or long (DF = 21) identify reply.
The Mode S radar verifies the aircraft address during the parity check and reports the 24 bit address, squawk code, azimuth, range and additional information to the ATC surveillance data processing system.
The air traffic controllers do not use the 24 bit address; this is only used in the data processing. The air traffic controllers see the position of the aircraft on their display, with a label containing the squawk code and other information.


What are the requirements for grass height around runways and taxiways?

The faa limits grass height around 12 inches in the United States. http://bettervm.basf.us/frequently-asked-questions/case-studies/small-airport-with-big-history-cuts-cost,-time-&-mowing-with-vegetation-management.html


A plane (airfoil) can stall at any airspeed and/or power setting so long as the critical angle of attack is exceeded. Airplanes stalling only below a specified airspeed is a common misconception largely due to the fact planes are usually listed with a “stall speed” below which the aircraft will generally stall in most situations. However if the critical angle of attack is exceeded at a higher speed a stall can also occur. The only way to know the critical angle of attack is from an angle of attack measurement device installed on the airframe it is inherently somewhat different than the aircrafts attitude.


What is the name for a flight crew that includes extra members for a longer flight?

A crew that consists of the basic required cockpit crew for the aircraft plus relief crew for long flights is called an "augmented flight crew." As far as I know, this designation is used by ICAO, the FAA, and the EASA (and likely others.)

This ICAO document defines augmented flight crew as:

  Augmented flight crew. A flight crew that comprises more than the minimum number required to operate the aeroplane and in which each flight crew member can leave his or her assigned post and be replaced by another appropriately qualified flight crew member for the purpose of in-flight rest.

The FAA's Federal Aviation Regulations define it nearly identically in 14 CFR 117.3:

  Augmented flightcrew means a flightcrew that has more than the minimum number of flightcrew members required by the airplane type certificate to operate the aircraft to allow a flightcrew member to be replaced by another qualified flightcrew member for in-flight rest.


It is a C-130 Hercules.  Of the four engines , the only feature prominently visible is the outboard left propeller.
I'm not sure why you thought it might have a "pusher" configuration-- the nose is to the left (off the edge of the photo), and vertical tail (with the "ANG" logo) is showing near the center of the photo.
Other prominent features are the flap attached to the trailing-edge of the (left) wing, and the (lit-up) back end of the fuel tank attached below the left wing between the two engines on that wing.


To be most effective chocks should be placed on both of the main gear of light aircraft. This prevents the aircraft from rotating or pivoting about the chocked wheel.There's a nice article from the Flight Safety Foundation which talks about this.
The FAA, in an overabundance of caution, advises you to chock ALL the wheels (see AC 20-35C).

Practically speaking, on a flat ramp and a calm day chocking any single wheel is usually enough to keep the airplane where you put it for a short while (say long enough refuel the aircraft, or to get lunch).
When using a single chock my preference in these cases is to chock the nose wheel as it's the most visible (I fly a low-wing airplane, and an inattentive line person who needs to tow the plane could miss a chock on the main gear). With two chocks the main gear should be secured on each side of the aircraft to keep it from pivoting.

For anything longer than that a brief food and fuel stop, or when high winds are anticipated, aircraft should be properly secured (by tying them down and chocking at least one wheel).
In these cases the tiedowns serve as the primary securing mechanism, and the chocks as a secondary mechanism (keeping the plane from rocking fore and aft in high winds and breaking the tiedown ropes).

  Note that there is an exception to the "high winds" bit here: If winds strong enough to blow chocks around on the ramp are anticipated, such as a hurricane, the chocks should be removed unless they can be adequately secured to ensure they don't get blown into an aircraft.
  Of course if winds that strong are anticipated you should really have flown away before they got to you, or you should be looking for a hangar to weather the storm in.


Waco Aircraft was originally called "Weaver Aircraft Company of Ohio" in 1919. The first Weaver Aircraft Company aircraft was the 1920 "Cootie" but was it also called the "Waco Cootie". It was a monoplane that crashed on it's first flight and then rebuilt as a biplane.

The aircraft designs were called "Waco" as in "Waco 9" "Waco 10" even though the company became "Advance Aircraft Company" in 1923. In 1929 the name was formally changed to "Waco Aircraft Company".

The last Waco production aircraft design was the E Series "Aristocrat" biplane. There was also one prototype Model W "Aristocraft" which was a pusher prop, monoplane.  All the other Waco types had model designations consisting of letters and numbers, or military designations.


During spin recovery, can you just release the yoke/stick to neutralize the ailerons?

You do not want to put aileron inputs during a stalled condition, as this can induce and/or further aggravate a spin.  So a neutral control position should be assumed with the stick prior neutralizing the spin with opposite rudder input.

Spin recovery techniques vary a little between manufacturers and specific aircraft but the PARE method (Beggs/Muller technique) is one of the most common recovery methods out there.  Alsways use the approved spin recovery technique listed in your airplane’s AFM.


Does load factor limit actually change with aircraft weight?

Yes, the limits are always set by the worst combination of weight, loading, flight speed and expected gust speed. They are valid over the full range of parameters for simplicity reasons.

Note that the load factor limits are not directly proportional to the aircraft's overall weight, but the weight of the non-lifting parts. An empty fuselage and full wing tanks allow the aircraft to pull more gs or fly faster until the maximum wing bending moment is reached when flying through the maximum expected gust. Calculating the precise load limit during each stage of a flight would put excessive demands on any pilot and increase the risk of errors.

All components should be sized so that they fail at 150% of calculated maximum loads. In real aircraft some secondary considerations like the availability of sheet metal gauges or extruded profiles put a limit to this local optimization, but technically the chance for breaking is the same for all structural parts. All the failures described in your question have happened in the past when aircraft were overstressed or improperly designed.


Does using wings with different wing loadings work the same as a swing wing, without swinging the wing?

For a triplane, wouldn't you want the top wing for flying and the other wings just for takeoff?

No.

Form drag is proportional to dynamic pressure and frontal area. By varying the lift coefficient between the planes you are not doing much to the frontal area, so the form drag is roughly the same.
Induced drag is proportional to square of lift and inversely proportional to square of span and dynamic pressure. By generating three times more lift with one of the wings, you are making it produce more than tree times the induced drag.

It is not all the nine times the basic equation suggests, because the efficiency is still significantly reduced by interference when all the wings are producing lift, but it is still worse, and it is worse whenever the lift is not distributed uniformly (maybe the interference makes a slight increase in the middle wing desired, I am not sure here, but it won't be big difference).

So the configuration is not better than evenly distributed lift in any flight regime.


Trying to identify large WWII aircraft by aileron position on rudder

The Boeing 314 Clipper had a very distinctive triple tail, but it also had (what appears to be) a trim tab half way up the rudders, so maybe that's it?


Can one pilot lock the other out of the cockpit?

Yes, see the Ethiopian Airlines hijacking in February 2014.

From this BBC article about MH370:

  The security of the cockpit door offers protection against intruders, but it also prevents action being taken if something does go wrong. Last month the co-pilot of an Ethiopian Airlines flight waited for the pilot to go to the toilet before hijacking the aircraft and flying it to Switzerland.

As for higher authority codes, from the same answer you linked to:

  Even if the stronger code is entered that will open the door the pilots still have some time to cancel the unlock request.

Meaning that if a pilot is willfully locking the other out of the cockpit, there is no way for the other to regain access to the cockpit.


Why is the takeoff decision point based only on speed and not time or distance?

Manually checking:

My guess from a human factors perspective, focusing on 2+ things (e.g., speed and time) is harder than one.

Newer aircraft have installed automatic monitoring though. For example for the 787:

This message is inhibited 6 knots before V1.

Or the similar system (supposedly) on the A350. Airbus calls it ACUTE:

  The Airbus Cockpit Universal Thrust Emulator
  (ACUTE) converts the engine control parameter into a
  common Thrust parameter (THR) for all engine types.
  The thrust parameter varies between 0% and 100% in
  all flight conditions.

This would understand a faulty/blocked EPR probe for example.

For inadvertently holding down the brakes (extremely rare occurrence), the brake temp should rise considerably. And with today's glass cockpits, a warning will be easy to spot.

Automatic accurate monitoring of acceleration:

A warning system built to use the accelerometers on board will need to measure the acceleration against flight test data. But not just acceleration, a plane's acceleration on takeoff varies, due to increasing drag and decreasing friction (landing gear decompression).

See this PDF, and this post: Does acceleration increase linearly on a takeoff roll?

An average positive runway slope value used in real life can be down to a runway sloping down, then sloping up at the end of the runway. Some dispatchers note that, others do not need to. But this false value can trip the system.

My point is the variables are immense—even nose heavy acceleration will be different—and would require lots of money to test, verify, test again, then have a system that can monitor all that. I'll bet there will be many false positives.

Add to that when to start measuring it, a pilot pushing TO/GA at 10 knots (ground speed) versus 40. IAS is useless here due to wind.

If the system will allow for big tolerances, then properly trained pilots can notice it much easier. To borrow what Carlo said here, using TLAR (That Looks About Right) is enough.

Let's not forget that there is a speed trend arrow on the airspeed indicator on most of today's airliners:

Green arrow shows what the speed will be in 10 seconds on a Boeing 787.

Coming soon:

For the generic very slow acceleration (as far as I can tell), Honeywell is developing that system as part of their SmartRunway package. (Thanks to fooot for mentioning that.)

  He advanced the throttle to a setting too low for the weight of the aircraft and started the takeoff roll, with distance remaining ticking down on the display. At 80 knots, a yellow box framed the runway and “ACCEL LOW” appeared at the top of the screen. “Caution: acceleration, acceleration,” said a female voice from the simulator setup.

Regarding the method used by the USAF (explained here): it does not work for the big civilian airliners due to the disparity between an empty plane and a fully loaded one (compounded by the environmental variables). A 777-300ER can carry anywhere between say 20 tonnes (fuel for a short hop), and 183 tonnes (payload and fuel).


Can passengers use headphones during takeoff and landing?

Jan Hudec was right.

Passengers are not to wear headphones during critical phases of the flight (understand : takeoff, landing, taxi, emergencies), because this could prevent them to hear announcements or directions made by the crew in case of emergency, and because headset cables could create an obstruction in case of an evacuation.

Also, this would prevent them from listening to the safety briefing.

This safety rule is enforced, as far as I know, by several European airlines.


When an aircraft experiences changing winds as it climbs or descends, this is technically "windshear" and it can have consequences (changes in airspeed and turbulence), but the much more dangerous phenomena is the microburst, and discussions of windshear avoidance and recovery are mostly concerned with that.
There are some good tools available for avoidance: major airports typically have Doppler radars that are designed specifically to detect microbursts and significant windshear events, and tower controllers broadcast those warnings.  Airliners and other aircraft with modern radar systems have similar capabilities, looking ahead into their flightpath for the next few miles.
Without those capabilities, windshear detection was essentially accomplished by comparing groundspeed (from an INS or GPS) with indicated airspeed, and noting any changes in that relationship.  So if your GS was 120 and your IAS was 100 (the difference due to combined effects of the wind plus the delta between True and Indicated Airspeed), then suddenly you had 130 knots GS and 95 knots IAS, you've suddenly picked up some tailwind, and if that trend continues, the loss in indicated airspeed could become catastrophic, and so an escape is necessary.
On a more basic level, some cues are typically published that may indicate windshear on approach:

± 15 knots indicated airspeed

± 500 fpm vertical speed

± 5 degrees pitch attitude

1 dot displacement from the glideslope

unusual thrust lever position for a significant period of time
(Source)

When you receive a warning from Tower or your onboard systems, aircraft that haven't started taking off (or are very early in the takeoff roll) stay on the ground, and aircraft on approach will discontinue the approach (go around).  Since the effects of a microburst are much more pronounced close to the ground, the difference between encountering the microburst at 3000' AGL instead of 500' AGL may be the difference between a bumpy ride instead of a truly dangerous event.  Also, if the microburst can be localized, either from radar or visually by observing virga or a storm cell, then turning away from it is often appropriate.
What is also practiced (in the simulator!) is what is referred to as a windshear escape maneuver, which is the aircraft manufacturer's (and possibly, operator's) best guidance for your best chance of surviving a windshear encounter.  This would typically involve steps like advancing the power to the maximum available, retracting speedbrakes (if extended) to reduce drag, rolling wings level, and climbing as quickly as possible.  At least in Boeing aircraft, it is not advised to change the flap configuration because doing so would increase your stall speed, and it's also not advised to retract the landing gear, because even though this would reduce the drag, it would also make any contact with the ground far more damaging.  Each aircraft has its own procedure, but that's a general case.
A couple of links:

Excellent discussion from Airbus of windshear & dealing with it
FAA Discussion of Microbursts


What is the procedure for landing on an aircraft carrier?

Landing on "The Boat"

Glossary

Approach turn/ 180: The approach turn itself is a 180 degree turn (190 degrees at the boat because of the angled deck) that is usually broken down into 5 segments: the 180 position, the 135, the 90 (halfway through the turn), the 45 and the groove.  Each respective position indicates the number of degrees left in the turn prior to rolling out in the groove.
(The) Ball or Meatball: an orange orb of light emitted from the IFLOLS.  A green horizontal row of lights (known as the datum) indicates proper glide slope.  If the ball is below the datum, the aircraft is low, and if its above the datum, the aircraft is high.  Aircraft should strive to keep the ball on the happy side.
Ball Call: Format: "(Side-number) (aircraft type) ball, (fuel-state), (auto-throttles)" Example: "123 Rhino ball, 9.0"
Carrier Break: A type of left hand overhead performed at 800ft AGL and 350+kts (for hornet guys)
BRC: the basic recovery course.  The course at which the ship is currently traveling, which does not include the offset for the angled deck.
Groove: the final portion of the approach (what civilians might call short-final)
Initial: on BRC, 3-5nm behind the ship, 800ft AGL, 350+kts, the starting point for the day approach
Interval: the specific aircraft in the pattern whose approach will commence just prior to yours, and whose separation you are responsible for not violating.
On speed: the proper AoA that will achieve the correct hook angle to catch the target wire of the carrier.  On speed airspeed can be approximated by the aircraft weight, but the term on speed does not refer to airspeed specifically, but units of AoA.
Side number: The 3 digit number assigned to the aircraft.  This is not the buno number (military aircraft don't have N numbers), it is a squadron specific identifier.  I will hence refer to '123' as the default side number.

Carrier Procedure

For simplicity's sake we'll pick it up at initial.  Glossary items have been italicized for ease of reading.

"123 flight of x, initial", ATC will then give the required instruction.
The flight will then side-step to the right of the carrier island, and begin looking for their interval.
Reaching the carrier, the flight will then perform the carrier break on their interval, ensuring that aircraft will arrive in 60 second intervals.
Landing checklist: 3 down and locked, flaps full, hook down, antiskid off, dispenser off, on speed XXX.
Once turned downwind, the aircraft will descend from 800ft AGL to 600ft AGL (the carrier pattern is flown at 600ft), and the aircraft will ensure it has proper lateral separation (abeam distance) from the carrier so as not to overshoot or undershoot on the approach turn.
Once abeam the LSO shack (or when the white of the round down is visible), the aircraft will increase VSI to approximately 200-300fpm and begin a 27-30 degree AoB turn.  Proper time in the groove is limited to only 15-18 seconds.  Too long or too short in the groove and the LSO can wave you off, so it is paramount that the approach turn be performed at the proper position.
At the 90, altitude should be 450ft AGL, and VSI should increase to 500fpm.
At the 45 the aircraft should be crossing the wake of the carrier, altitude should be 325-375ft AGL, and the ball should appear to rise. Note: Rolling into the groove, the ball should appear either centered or slightly high.
Once in the groove, with a visible ball, the aircraft makes its ball call.  The LSO will respond with "roger ball", which is the aircraft's clearance to land.
Once established in the groove, the aircraft should be roughly 700fpm and flying the ball for glidepath.  The pilot's scan becomes: meatball, lineup, AoA, meatball, lineup, AoA, meatball, lineup, AoA (you get the point).
As the aircraft flies in the groove the runway will constantly slip to the right requiring small, almost imperceptible, lateral stick inputs (and matching power corrections to account for the loss in lift).  The pilot will strive to keep the aircraft on centerline, on speed, with a centered ball.  Note: failure to keep the aircraft on speed can result in either a bolter, or an in-flight engagement.  It is imperative the aircraft maintain the proper AoA.
Just prior to touchdown, as the aircraft passes over the ramp, the pilot's scan will shift to ball, ball, ball, ball, ball, and the touchdown should come as a surprise.  This is referred to as "flying the ball all the way to touchdown".  Pilot's that deck spot (ie, attempt to fly to a specific spot on the deck) often fly down through the glideslope at the last moment and land short.
Once on the deck, the throttles will go to full military power (just shy of AB), and when landing has been assured, then the power will be reduced and the aircraft taxied off the landing area.

Shore Procedure

Naval aviation revolves around flying at the boat.  It is imperative that the procedures used at the boat become second nature, that they become ingrained in muscle memory.  To this effect, all shore based VFR approaches will be flown in exactly the same manner as would be at the carrier, with a few minor exceptions:

Antiskid will be on
The hook (for a non-emergency) will be up
Aircraft aren't required to have 60 seconds of separation, we routinely land with aircraft taxiing down the runway.
The throttles will be retarded unless executing a touch and go.

Otherwise, naval air stations that house carrier based aircraft all have I/FLOLS installed, and the ball is flown during normal VFR approaches to the field.

Further Reading

(Edit)

The following link, provided by the Chief of Naval Air Training Command (CNATRA), is an unclassified, publicly available, training guide used to train potential Naval Aviators to land on the boat for the first time.  The procedures are nearly identical, with a few nuances related to T-45 training operations, to the procedures used daily by fleet aviators.

Legal Notice.

Link to document provided by CNATRA.


Can you identify those parts (sensors), on test aircraft and the purpose?

On the super jet that's a pitot tube rather large but still it's a testing aircraft. Aircraft's use pitot tubes to measure airspeed. The example, from an Airbus A380, combines a pitot tube (right) with a static port and an angle-of-attack vane (left). Air-flow is right to left. A pitot (/ˈpiːtoʊ/ PEE-toh) tube is a pressure measurement instrument used to measure fluid flow velocity. And so on, The basic pitot tube consists of a tube pointing directly into the fluid flow. As this tube contains fluid, a pressure can be measured; the moving fluid is brought to rest (stagnates) as there is no outlet to allow flow to continue. This pressure is the stagnation pressure of the fluid, also known as the total pressure or (particularly in aviation) the pitot pressure. Go here, for evidence.


How does British Airways permit a 23 kg bag in hand baggage?

Easyjet has no firm weight limit and advertises this fact. From the website

  There’s no weight restriction for cabin baggage, as long as you can place and retrieve the cabin bag safely in the overhead lockers without assistance.

They also use vague language like “within reason” or “lift comfortably” but most people probably won't have 20 kg with them. Given the limited size of cabin luggage, you would need to deliberately carry dense, heavy stuff to reach that weight (books maybe? wine bottles and other liquids are off-limits and if you don't want to check in any bag you still need space for your other things).

And then, comes this (from the BA website you mentioned):

  Occasionally we may not have space to stow all hand baggage safely on board and you may be asked to check in some or all of your hand baggage at the boarding gate.

Bottom line: Airlines don't need to rely on a prespecified weight limit at all. They rely on the size restrictions and general common sense to keep things manageable and if it somehow does not work out, they can always gate check a few bags.


Why does this regional jet have its air brakes wide open before touchdown?

(Source) F-15 landing with airbrake extended.
(Source) Airbrakes on the Fokker 70.
1. It allows steeper approaches
From Wikipedia:

The engines [on the Avro] lack thrust reversers due to their perceived reduced effectiveness in anticipated conditions. Instead, the plane features large airbrake with two petals below the tail rudder at the rear of the fuselage, which has the advantage of being usable during flight and allowing for steep descent rates if required.

... also...

Airbrakes on the Fokker 70's tail section – similar to that found on the BAe 146 / Avro – allows it to conform with the 5.5° glide slope at London City Airport.

2. It allows better speed control
Some aircraft are overpowered with high power-to-weight ratio. The thrust lever range alone won't be enough to hold the approach speed.
The thrust-to-weight ratio for the RJ100 is 0.28:1, compared to 0.16:1 for the comparable Boeing 717. It's even higher for the smaller RJ's.
Low power and the plane loses speed, some power and the plane gains speed. So, more power is used in conjunction with airbrakes, such as the F-15 shown above.

Once on the ground, they help slow down the plane, same as spoilers.
(Source) Spoilers.
Spoilers have the added benefit of spoiling the lift–transferring more weight to the tires for increased braking capability.

Related: Why do some aircraft (e.g. Avro RJ85) have rear-mounted air brakes?


Are the pitching moment and pitching moment coefficient of an airfoil given w.r.t. the aerodynamic center?

A moment is a free vector. There is no need to add a reference point - it can be shifted fore and aft or up and down without changing its effect. This effect is a rotation without translation.

So yes, as you suspect already, the pitching moment is a pure moment.

If there is also a force around (like on a wing), you have two vectors: One for the force and one for its moment. Put the reference point along the vector of the total force, and that moment disappears. Shift your angle of attack to the zero-lift point, and the force will disappear, leaving you with a pure moment (which is the sum of all the remaining forces along the chord which balance at this angle of attack).

In two-dimensional potential flow theory, all angle-of-attack-dependent forces act on the quarter point. If you now define your reference point at this quarter point, all variations in lift with angle of attack have no moment around this point! What is left is the pure pitching moment which does not depend on angle of attack.

If, however, you choose some other point as your reference point, the change in the lift force with angle of attack will add a moment, so your pitching moment is some constant value plus an angle-of-attack-dependent contribution. If you pick your reference point behind the quarter point on an airfoil with positive camber, there will be one angle of attack where those two moment components balance and the pitching moment will disappear. Then your reference point is the center of pressure at that angle of attack.

So the split of the aerodynamic forces into a force and a moment is purely arbitrary. Technically, we could always sum up all forces in the center of pressure, but then we need to keep track where it is, because it moves with angle of attack. Therefore, we decided to make things a bit more complicated and express the aerodynamic forces as one force at the quarter point and a separate moment. Why the quarter point? Because then this moment does not change with angle of attack. That is the advantage of defining all forces in the neutral point. We always know where the force acts at the price of carrying an extra moment with us. At least, this moment is constant over angle of attack - that is the big advantage of choosing the neutral point as the reference point.

EDIT

When looking for older answers to link to, I found that the two of us are discussing pitching moments since years without getting anywhere. Like here, here or here. I'm afraid I will repeat the same stuff like a broken record, and you keep asking the same question over and over again. Maybe it is better that you explain in a new question what your current understanding is so I can work out where exactly we two talk past each other.


Alphanumeric flight identification in flight plan

when flight delays cause a duplication of a flight number- there is a suffix added.  For example- flight 1423 DFW/OKC is also operating as OKC to DFW. Normally a turn of equipment- however, DFW/OKC delayed significantly- equipment and crew is available to operate 1423 OKC/DFW.  These 2 could be in route simultaneously- one is usually designated as a suffix- 1423J  Call sign American 1 4 2 3 Juliette


What is the purpose of D-Bag in skydiving parachute?

Qualifier: I am a master parachute rigger.

The bag serves two functions - it allows the suspension lines to straighten out in a controlled manner, and it prevents the canopy from inflating before the lines are fully stretched out.

It is not always required - people who want a very fast opening can pack without a bag, I have done this many times myself. However, you do NOT want to do this after a drop of more than about 5 seconds. These jumpers open the main canopy immediately after exiting the aircraft.

On main canopies the bag and pilot chute are connected to a ring on the top of the canopy. The assembly just follows behind. Some canopies have a mechanism to collapse the pilot chute and/or retract it onto the top of the canopy.

The bag for the reserve canopy is not connected. This allows the reserve to still deploy if the pilot chute gets caught on something else, the bridle is extra long (longer than the suspension lines). It falls separately and usually lands within a kilometer of the airport, near the main canopy if that one was released when it malfunctioned. As they cost about $200 a set the jumpers will put considerable effort into finding it. We usually don't find it in high crops, and we usually don't try to find it at some places in Florida where there is an alligator ranch beside the airport.


What are the difficulties and dangers faced by low flying aircraft?

A lot depends on how low you are and what aircraft you're flying, but any low-level flight has some risks and difficulties. Here are some, I'm sure there are others:

If the aircraft loses power you have much less time and distance available to execute a forced landing, and your choice of landing sites will be more limited
You can't see as far ahead so it's more difficult to look out for obstacles and pilotage may also be more difficult in some circumstances
You may accidentally break the law on minimum safe flying height because the terrain changes too quickly, you don't see an obstacle or town until it's too late etc.
There's a greater risk of collision with terrain or obstacles like radio towers, especially if your aircraft is a fast one and you have less time to react
The likelihood of both thermal and mechanical turbulence is higher when flying low, increasing risks of loss of control and collision with terrain and obstacles
If you're scud-running in VMC there's a high risk of entering IMC accidentally, which is extremely dangerous (incidentally, despite the title of that question, even instrument-rated pilots have a poor safety record when they enter IMC unintentionally)
Radio reception may be poor
ATC radar may not be able to see you
Your engine may not operate very efficiently

That's not to say that low-level flying is always a bad idea, but it I think it does require more preparation, alertness and even local knowledge from the pilot.


Let's look at two cases, choked exhaust and complete expansion:

1. Choked exhaust

With a convergent exhaust pipe, the jet engine thrust reaches a maximum at the speed of sound of the exhaust gas stream.

The velocity of the gas flow increases if it was subsonic at the entrance of the pipe. In a convergent nozzle the maximum gas exhaust velocity is M = 1, the speed of sound at the temperature of the hot exhaust gas. With a choked exhaust, at M = 1 in the exhaust outlet, the static pressure is higher than ambient pressure.

The exhaust area needs to be reduced until the gas exit velocity is M = 1, which at for instance 800 ºC is 657 m/s. The pressure $p_e$ at the exhaust outlet will then be:

$$ p_e =\frac {\dot{m}\cdot R \cdot T_e}{V_e \cdot A_e }$$

which is greater than the ambient pressure $p_0$.

The net thrust $F$ of a pure jet engine is
$$ F = \dot{m} * (V_e - V_0) + A_e * (p_e - p_0)  $$

$R$ is the gas constant. Parameters you need to know:

outlet mass flow from the turbine $\dot{m}$ in kg/s
gas outlet temperature $T_e$ in ºK
speed of sound at $T_e$ in m/s, which for a choked exhaust is equal to $V_e$
outlet area $A_e$ in $m^2$
airspeed $V_0$ in $m/s$ and ambient pressure $p_0$ in $N/m^2$

If we use the following example of an aircraft flying M 0.85 at 30,000 ft, choked converging exhaust, exit area 0.1 $m^2$, mass flow 70 kg/s, exhaust temperature 1073 K, we get:

F = 70 * (657 - 258) + 0.1 * (328,106 - 30,100)

= 27,962 N from kinetic energy + 29,801 N from pressure difference, about the same amount.

2. Complete expansion

$p_e$ is now equal to $p_0$. This condition occurs if total pressure at the turbine exit $p_{Tt} \leq \epsilon_{kr} * p_0$, with $\epsilon_{kr}$ for a hot exhaust gas being around 1.95.

Analogous to the choked exhaust case:
$$ A_e =\frac {\dot{m}\cdot R \cdot T_e}{V_e \cdot p_e }$$

For the same conditions at 30,000 ft follows: $A_e$ = 1.09 $m^2$

and F = 70 * (657 - 258) = 27,962 N

The net thrust in this case is a lot lower because the turbine exit pressure is lower than in the choked case, and therefore the propulsive power of the jet engine is lower. Usually, in the case of a turbojet the turbine exhaust pressure $p_{Tt}$ is a lot higher than $\epsilon_{kr} * p_0$, which will lead to the choked exhaust case above.

Turbofans with a high bypass ratio have a low enough $p_{Tt}$ to allow complete expansion, most of the gas generator power being used for the bypass air compression.


Why is this 777 with doors and windows covered?

The aircraft is in storage. The Boeing 777-212(ER) seems to operated by Singapore Airlines under lease from Pembroke before being withdrawn from use in Dec 2014. After that, the aircraft is under storage at Southern California Logistics Airport.

The windows are covered in aluminium foil for storage; however, the engines appear to be still there (which will usually be removed), which indicates that the storage was planned for only a short time.


How likely could there be a loss of cabin pressure?

Aircraft incidents are an extremely remote event (they say that you're more likely to be killed in a car accident on your way to the airport than a plane crash). Within all the incidents that engineers foresee, some are more likely than others. These incidents are included in pilot training (and passenger briefing if applicable) to increase the likelihood that it can be handled properly. Loss of cabin pressure is one of them.

Technically air pressure inside the cabin cannot be "lost", but the term is used to describe a significant drop in air pressure. The masks deploy when cabin altitude is around 14,000 feet.

Cabin pressure is provided by two methods:

The engine actively pumping air into the cabin
The fuselage is sufficiently sealed to contain air pressure inside (it is not 100% sealed, but the pump is powerful enough to overcome the small leakage)

Failure of any of these two components would lead to a loss of cabin pressure.

Historically, causes of cabin depressurization has included:

Failure of all engines, whether due to volcanic ash, fuel exhaustion, or any other reasons
Failure of all air conditioning units on the aircraft
Incorrect setting of the air pressurization unit
Rupture of fuselage
Door flew off the aircraft
Cockpit window flew off the aircraft


Typically light normal category aircraft make use of either a 14 VDC or 28 VDC electrical systems powered primarily by an engine driven alternator. This provides power to one or more power bus bars which provide electrical power to the various aircraft systems requiring it.  Below is an example light aircraft electrical system from a Cessna 172S.

One notable deviation from automobile electrical systems is that the engine spark plugs receive electricity from a separate pair of magnetos which produce their power independent of the main electrical system for reasons of redundancy.


Why are planes allowed to fly with just one pilot?

Well I guess there are multiple angles to this. Perhaps someone can chime in with reference to regulations, but I can offer a more pragmatic answer.

Like it or not, aviation, like many other things, is a trade-off between risk and cost and I think that's what it boils down to. So what is the risk of single-pilot incapacitation and what is the potential consequences versus what is the cost to have all aircraft have at least two pilots aboard (not withstanding the impracticability of fitting two people in most single-seater aircraft.

So, I guess, we as a society have accepted the risk of single-pilot incapacitation and it seems that mostly the consequences are acceptable compared to the cost. It would be unlikely that we would mandate against single-pilot cockpits, but where to draw the line between single-pilot and multi-crew aircraft is certainly an on-going and active regulatory discourse.

In the end, I could ask you why don't we mandate two people with two steering wheels in cars? It would certainly prevent some accidents (hell, maybe many!), but it could also cause some too. And, practically, it just isn't going to happen is it?


Is there truly no way to get information about medical application status?

Dealing with the FAA medical is always a tiring process. Best places to consult would be services like AOPA medical assistance, or through Aviation Medical Advisory Service (AMAS).

There are other options probably, but I know AMAS is the go to consulting group for controllers and a lot of airline pilots. AMAS will often help guide you with knowing ahead of time what information you need and what forms to have filled out to try and make the process go quickly.


Is there any advantage to having both wings integrated into a single wing unit, rather than being attached separately to the fuselage?

The bending moment is produced by the lift generated by the wings and the weight of the fuselage in the middle, or on the ground the weight of the wings and the support (gear) mounted on the fuselage or fairly close to it. So it is always there.
The only choice you have is how to build the structure to carry that load. You can:

Have a central spar, a solid beam that carries the load, and unstressed or lightly stressed skin. That's how all the early planes with fabric-covered wings and fuselage were built.
Have a hollow wing with stressed skin supported by mesh of ribs and longerons. That's how most aircraft are made today. You have tension load on the bottom and compression load on the top and the centre is not doing much, so not having it there makes a lighter structure.
Anything in between, with solid spar, but some load carried by the skin.

Independently of that, you can

Build the structure in one piece and and attach the fuselage to it (from above, below or build it around).
Build the structure in several pieces and join them with rivets, bolts or glue.

In either case the structure is continuous through the fuselage. The fuselage walls would have no chance of handling the load if you didn't have any connecting structure inside and would bend easily. The only difference is whether it is joined from multiple pieces or not.


Is a compressor blade slowing down the airflow or accelerating it?

are compressor blades actually a barrier to the air flow, or is the airflow accelerated by the compressor

These are not exhaustive alternatives. Keep in mind that subsonic fluid flow when constricted accelerates and pressure decreases (Bernoulli's principle).

What the compressor does is increase the pressure. The speed decreases slightly.

  are compressor blades actually a barrier to the air flow

Actually it's complicated. In a sense they are. The compressor always takes the air at around M0.5 irrespective of flight speed. That means at slower speed the engine needs to suck air from wider stream while at higher speeds some air is spilled over the intake lips. So in a sense, the compressor is a barrier.

But then, the compressor must increase the energy of the stream, otherwise the engine could not produce any thrust. Just the energy goes in pressure, not velocity. So in this sense it is definitely not a barrier.

In fact, the thrust acts mainly on the compressor, because that is the most significant aft-facing surface on which the pressure in the combustion chamber can act.

At supersonic speed it works differently. Now pressure changes can't affect the flow upstream, so the air can't be spilled over the intake lips anymore. Instead now the intake must decelerate it by shock waves and then expansion in a diffusor.

This is needed, because turbomachinery only works well in subsonic flow¹. Since pressure increases as the flow speed decreases, this also increases the overall pressure ratio of the engine and thus its efficiency.

Note that the air also heats up, via adiabatic heating, as it slows down and compresses. Somewhere around M5–6, the air becomes so hot from the compression that adding more heat to it by burning fuel is no longer practical, so above that speed, the combustion must occur in supersonic flow. This is the scramjet engine. It does not have any compressor or turbine, because it gets all the compression from constricting the flow and it turbomachinery wouldn't work at that speed anyway.


What happens to the spinning wheels of the landing gear after takeoff, before retraction?

In most common passenger aircraft brakes are automatically applied when the gear is retracted. The wheels stop spinning before they enter the wheel well. This is particularly important because a spinning damaged tire may cause damage to hydraulic and fuel lines which are usually routed near the wheel bay.

The nose wheels have no brakes, so they are spinning while they are being retracted. Most aircraft have rubber brake pads (snubbers) fitted in the nose gear bay that stop the spinning of the gear once the wheels are retracted.


On a modern Aircraft like the A320 or B737, is it possible to disable computer interference with the control inputs of the pilots?

For A320 it is possible also in the real aircraft. The problem with disabling flight control computers is that it also disables associated control surfaces. If you disable all five computers, you disable all surfaces and the aircraft goes in to "Mechanical backup" mode, which leaves pilot only the control of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (ie. pitch trim) and rudder. Wide bodies are similar, although they have more redundant flight control computer architecture.

The correct procedure to override normal law in Airbuses is to switch two ADRs off, which forces controls to alternate law. This disables most of the protections leaving only load factor protection. All control surfaces would still be operating with automatic pitch trim. This would be used only in undue protection activation.


What is the A320's procedure for dual engine failure at very low altitude?

Every pilot is taught that in an emergency you fly the plane first and everything else is secondary. Aviate, then communicate. At 1,000 ft there's not going to be much you can do other than figure out how to try to get back down in as few pieces as possible. If you have done your pre-flight planning correctly, long before you line up on the runway you have already thought of what you will do if you find yourself in such a scenario, and discussed it with your FO so you are both on the same page.


What made the below flight path to have very low speed during the middle of its course

What you are seeing is merely a glitch in the publicly available telemetry sites like FlightAware use.

They aggregate flight data from the FAA (ASDI), EUROCONTROL and others to feed their sites, but this data is not always accurate, and doesn't need to be.

For that interval, the speed was either malformed or reported as 0/unavailable (don't remember exactly) due to bad data.

The aircraft did not slow to 100mph or lower unless it landed :)


What do the number at end of model numbers mean?

In the case of the 737, the first series produced was the 737-100.  Not many were made.

Then the 737-200 was built, which was very popular.

The third generation of the 737, known now as the "Classic", had three variants, the -300, the -400, and the -500.  All are very similar, the significant difference being the size.  The -300 has bigger (more powerful, as well as physically larger) engines than the older -200 did, and a longer cabin.  With its success, Boeing decided to lengthen the cabin further, resulting in the -400.  They also made a variant that was essentially the length of the shorter -200, and since it came along third it got the next designation, the -500.

The next generation of 737's, known as the "Next Generation", runs from the -600 through the -900, and this time Boeing decided to make the numbers correspond with the fuselage length, so the -600 is about as long as the -200 and -500 (roughly), the -700 is comparable to the -300, the -800 is longer as the -400 was, and the -900 is longer than anything before.

Now they're out of numbers, and so the NEXT generation of 737's, known as the Max, gets single digit numbers... the Max -7 (i.e. 737-7) corresponds roughly to the length of the -700, the Max -8 to the -800, the Max -9 to the -900, and so on.

The point of this long discussion is simply that the numbers following the dash represent different variants of the aircraft.  In some cases, it may be a new generation design; in other cases it may simply be a different fuselage length.

As the suggested-as-duplicate question discusses, HOW those numbers are chosen is sometimes driven more by marketing than it is by mathematical progression.  Often, though, the higher number indicates a later version, and often-but-not-always, a newer generation.  But you really have to know the particular aircraft line to know which it is.


What are the difficulties of landing on an upslope runway?

As far as landing in a up-sloped runway is considered, the pilot will make a lower approach if not careful as he/she may consider the ground before to be sloping up as well. From flytime.ca:

  When a runway is upsloping, the pilot thinks that the runway continues on an upslope from the terrain before it, hence thinking the terrain in front of the runway is upsloping as well.   The pilot will judge their altitude as too high, because they perceive the terrain continues on an upsloping, positive angle towards the runway  and will consequently plan a low approach that can cause landing short of the runway.

Image from flytime.ca

Another thing to note is that the landing roll will be reduced (on the other hand takeoff roll would be increased, if takeoff is on uphill direction; else, it's reduced). For example, in this airport, the actual landing point is level- shortly after the aircraft touches down, it will start traveling uphill, and the landing roll will be shorter. One (passenger) describes the landing as:

  During the approach we were below the runway and climbed up to it to land. After touchdown, we slowed down very fast due to the upslope. Very different than the normal runout after a landing.

Of course the location of this particular runway means that the landing has to be done correctly the first time around.


Does an A320 revert to Direct Law if both engines flame out?

The airplane will no longer be in normal law mode if both engines fail and no other electrical generator is online.

The airplane needs a primary source of electrical power in order to remain in normal law (among other things of course). If both engines lose power, then the generators on those engines also lose power. The only other primary electrical source is the APU generator. In addition to the batteries, the RAT (ram air turbine) is also available to supply electric power (along with hydraulic power) in an emergency situation. In this mode, the flight controls reconfigure to alternate law until a generator is brought back online.

From the US Airways 1549 report, page 88:

  ...the captain started the APU, which improved the outcome of the ditching by ensuring that a primary source of electrical power was available to the airplane and that the airplane remained in normal law and maintained the flight envelope protections


I received a 1st Class medical certificate in May 2005. Do I qualify for BasicMed?

Your first-class medical certificate issued in May 2005 granted, since you were under 40 at the time:

First class privileges until May 31, 2006
Second class privileges until May 31, 2006
Third-class privileges until May 31, 2010

Since that last date is after July 14, 2006, then assuming it expired valid and you have not applied for another medical certificate since, you would qualify for BasicMed.


Why does Lift and Drag calculation over an airfoil ignore shear stress?

We "Do" take viscous shear stresses into account when calculating the drag of an airfoil.
This is ALWAYS true for subsonic flows. The underlying reason behind this is called D'Alembert's paradox. For incompressible and inviscid potential flow, the drag force is zero on a body moving with constant velocity relative to the fluid.

BOTH pressure drag and profile drag on an airfoil is viscous phenomena.

In order to provide a numerical example, please see the inviscid and viscous calculations of SD7037 airfoil. What you see in the inviscid case as drag, is merely a numerical error (- value).

PS: In order to really understand how drag is formed, best to start looking up the "Von Kármán Momentum Integral" equation. Also to convince on the analytical results one can use XFOIL's VPlo menu under OPER and observe the momentum defect via delta* distribution and kinetic energy defect via CD distribution


How does a U.S. military air traffic controller become a civilian air traffic controller?

Wasabi's answer is not correct, or at least not fully correct. You actually ask two questions: does a military controller need to take additional tests and training to get hired, and do they need additional training to work as a civilian controller. The answers, respectively, are "no" and "yes."
The hiring practices change every so often, but here's how it is now:
"Off-the-street" FAA controllers receive training at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City. This training starts with Air Traffic Basics and continues to Initial Tower Cab (for Terminal-track new hires) or Initial Enroute (for Enroute hires). New hires do not go directly to standalone TRACONs anymore. People who graduated schools in the Collegiate Training Initiative do not have to attend Basics but do attend Initial.
In order to get to Basics, new hires must take the ATSA aptitude test, as well as undergo medical and security investigations.
After graduating the Academy, new trainees are sent to their field facilities and go through classroom and simulator training before eventually progressing to On-The-Job instruction (plugged in working live traffic alongside a trainer who retains ultimate responsibility for the control position). Any controller, even one who has been previously certified at an FAA facility, must go through this facility-specific classroom/sim/OJT progression any time they transfer to a new facility.

Prior-experience new hires (who mostly come from the military) may elect to go through the off-the-street hiring process if there is a bid open at the time they are discharged. But usually they apply though a separate bid that is only open to prior-experience controllers. This bid allows them to be placed directly at a facility that should, in theory, correspond to the type and level of their prior experience; this is almost always a Terminal facility (tower, up/down, or TRACON) but an Enroute facility may be offered very rarely.
If necessary these new hires may be sent to the Academy for training, for example if they only worked radar before but were assigned a tower facility, but for the most part they enter the training process at their new facility immediately. This process is not waived just because they have previous experience. They do benefit by not having to take and pass the ATSA aptitude test, however.

As far as "tests" go, in the FAA, there are annual or biennial "refresher" simulator problems and "skills evaluations" where a supervisor does a limited checkride with the controller to ensure they don't need additional training in any area. But this is based on when the controller certified at their facility and has nothing to do with any tests they might have done in the military.


When taxiing a taildragger across a kerb, is it best to cross straight-on or at an angle?

The rule I was always taught is to cross any 'step' - up or down - at an angle with the elevator full back:

It minimizes the chance of a prop strike, which is much more expensive than a wingtip strike
When going 'up', you avoid having both wheels up against the step at the same time, which usually means you need a burst of power to get over it, which could lead to sudden acceleration and sharp braking
When going 'down' you avoid the aircraft dropping down suddenly, with the same risks of strikes or an increase in speed
Lifting the elevator reduces the chance of it striking

There may be some differences for specific aircraft types, but I've always followed that advice and never had a problem. I've also never seen an aircraft get close to a wingtip strike doing this, but I suppose it could happen if the step is large enough. Although in that case you might want to just find another taxi route.


What is the cooling air exhaust velocity for the piston engine of a propeller driven aircraft?

There are cases, as in the P-51 Mustang, where the cooling air adds to the THRUST of the aircraft as it is heated and expelled out the back of the air vent, much like a jet.  This actually added a few knots its speed.

There is always an issue of cooling as one scales up a fuel burning engine.  Towards the end of their time, piston engines for aircraft had grown exponentially in power in the race for performance.  This lead to major issues in cooling of engines such as the "corn cob" R-4360 Wasp Major.  Turbo or Super chargers also unavoidably raise the temperature of incoming air by compressing it.

So to estimate the velocity of the cooling airstream, one might begin a study of the principles of a jet engine.  Since no mass is added to the cooling stream and there is no compressor (as in a turbo jet, although prop wash may give some effect) the only considerations are ram pressure and thermal expansion of the cooling air.  Forward speed of the aircraft will be a major factor.

Study of the P-51 design may be a good place to start.


Why are the in-flight refueling probes of French-built fighter aircraft non-retractable?

According to Dassault, this configuration was chosen in order to reduce complexity and therefore avoid deployment/retraction problems:

Failure-prone systems have been eliminated early on in the design process:
... and the refuelling probe is fixed in order to avoid any deployment or retraction problem.

There are some other advantages as well:

A non retractable probe takes up less space in the forward fuselage (where space is at a premium) compared to the retractable one. For example, when the F-16 was fitted with a retractable probe (Conformal Air Refueling Tanker/System (CARTS)) for the Indian MMRCA competition, it had to be done via a change to the forward section of the right conformal fuel tank.

Modifications for retractable probe in F-16; Lockheed Martin photo , image from f-16.net
Another good example for this is the French Mirage F1s supplied to Libya, which had their radars removed to accommodate the retractable probes and the Mirage F1C-200 version, which necessitated the lengthening of the fuselage to accommodate the (non-retractable) probe.
The French aircraft, especially the Rafale are not exactly known for their large noses. in such cases, it is better to have a fixed probe, thereby saving the space required for the deployment/retraction mechanism.

It weighs less as the system is simpler- basically, you are eliminating the deployment/retraction system of the probe.

This system offers increased fuel flow and reduces maintenance requirements.

One thing to note is that the Mirage 2000's refueling probes are removable (it appears like Rafale's too is removable), so the drag penalty is not there when the mission doesn't call for it. At the same time, this reduces the weight penalty. Interestingly, it means that the number of probes can be less than that of the aircraft itself, with the probes installed as per requirement.

Another thing is the French doctrine- Unlike US, the Armée de l'Air  doesn't put too much into mid air refueling or stealth requirements.

It can also be interpreted as a design choice- all the French aircraft, right from Mirage F1 have had fixed refueling probes (while some were modified to accept retractable ones).


What is the largest flight school in the U.S. that does not offer a degree?

According to Wikipedia, "ATP Flight School ... is the largest flight training company in the United States."

However, volume does not necessarily mean quality, and the focus of ATP and other big-name flight schools seems to be on students who want an airline career—and pushing them through the training as quickly (and profitably) as they can. If that doesn't meet your goals, or you don't have large amounts of both time and money available to dedicate to it, you are probably better served going another route.


How do they prevent pressurized air to leak from the doors?

They don't. The seal does not have to be perfectly airtight.

The requirement is that it will create enough impediment to the air that wants to gush out, where "enough" is defined by the capability of the conditioning system to input new air into the cabin.

In other words, everything is fine as long as the air mass that gets out of the doors is less than the maximum air flow that the air conditioning system can input into the cabin.

Note also that, as stated on Wikipedia, aircraft are equipped with one (or more) "out-flow valve(s)" and "pressure relief valves": these valves intentionally let air out of the cabin to avoid over pressure in the cabin and thus they prevent possibly dangerous scenarios.


Trying to identify an aircraft from a photo

Based on the wing/canopy position and yoke rather than joystick, I think this is some version of the Lockheed P-38 Lightning.  Everything I can see in the photo agrees with what I can find online in terms of canopy style, relative position of the wing leading edge, and the relatively unusual (for WWII era) yoke primary control.
http://warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/found-lost-squadron-p-38-piloted-by-lt-col-robert-wilson.html
And what might be another photo of the same pilot, credited as the 475th Fighter Group, actually dressed for work:

P-38s of various generations were flown in both Europe and the Pacific -- including the Aleutians, where the heavy jacket would be more appropriate than the Philippines or Coral Sea.  They were, as far as I recall, not flown from carriers, however, so it would be an Army (before the Air Force split) or possibly British livery aircraft; that's not discernible in this tight crop.


Why, after decades of redesign and enhancement, does it still rain inside B737?

I've never heard of this on a 737. The last rows in a DC-9/MD-80 series is where I seen this the most.

The simplest solution is for the flight crew to set the cabin temperature control to not be full cold on a humid day. Just a little heat will cut down on the condensation being developed while sitting at the gate.

Here's an interesting article on moisture in the airplane, though it is not specific to the gasper vent rain.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_05/m/m01/index.html

Some larger aircraft have dehumidifiers, but as the Boeing article states

  Dehumidification systems (ground-based or onboard) are effective at removing moisture but are not cost effective.


What training is required to become an air traffic controller?

Training for US path is(I'll take this information, post hiring, since they keep changing how they hire, and assign facilities, also length of times are approximate and might vary):

FAA Academy(Oklahoma City, OK):

~6 week AT Basics Course(If you went to a CTI(College Training Initiative) school, this course is skipped)
Then if you're split depending on which area you're going to, Enroute, Tower, or TRACON.
Tower course is ~8 weeks,  TRACON course is 1 month (or 2 if you're going to a bigger facility and they put you in a supplemental course), and Enroute, I'm not positive is around 10 weeks or so.

Then you move to your facility. At your facility, your first days you'll spend learning various materials, and then be given classroom training, including Computer based instruction, an actual instructor time(if the facility is large enough), and also lots of study time to memorize all the maps, and various items you will be tested on. Then, if your facility has the ability, you'll do some simulator problems. Note: you might only get the classroom and simulator for only a subset of positions at the facility, depending on how they break up the training.

Then after all that, you head out to the operation, and will usually start training on some subset of positions that are at the facility. You'll receive training on each position, until you've demonstrated that you're competent to work it on your own. Once/if you get to that point, you're given a certification check by your supervisor, and if you pass you're certified to work that position. And you repeat that process for each position, and possibly having to return to classrooms/simulators for any additional positions, and repeating the process again. Once you've finished all the positions you need you're a fully certified controller at that facility.

Each time you move to a new facility, you will have to repeat the classroom and simulator, and on the job training at the positions at that new facility.

There's far more detail and nuance than I can easily explain here, but this is a general overview of the process.


Do the effects of turbulence change when banking/turning compared to level flight?

Turbulence affects aircraft in the same way whether it is banked or not.  The difference however would be the end result of the turbulence.

For example, if an aircraft were to encounter turbulence strong enough to roll the aircraft 20 degrees to the right, the end results would be a 20 degree bank if starting from level, but 45 degrees of bank if they were already in a 25 degree banked turn.  If this were to happen it puts them closer to their stall speed because of the higher bank angle, and if they were already going slow and the airplane is at a low altitude, it could be a problem.

Fortunately, most turbulence strong enough to cause this while at low altitude is caused by the wake turbulence of other aircraft or microbursts, and we have pretty good procedures in place to keep it from being a problem these days.  If they aren't at a low altitude it matters even less because there is altitude for the aircraft to recover even if it does get into an unusual attitude.


Is it possible to use refrigeration technology to cool the skin of supersonic aircraft?

Is it possible to use refrigeration technology to cool down the aircraft's skin so it can reach much higher speeds?

Fundamentally: no.

Refrigeration technology moves heat energy around, it doesn't get rid of it. Your fridge moves heat from inside to the outside.

To get rid of it, you have two means, broadly speaking:

Heat up some mass and throw it away
Radiate it away as light/IR

Air cooling fundamentally heats up the surrounding air, and moves the now hot air away.  I believe the SR-71 used it's fuel as heat sink as well, heating the fuel before combusting it, and ultimately throwing it away.

Radiating it is inefficient at low temperatures. And it's directly dependent on surface area, which is at a premium on a plane.

So in essence you'd have nowhere to put the heat energy you removed from the skin of the aircraft...


Why does CFR §91.215 part (b) list specific areas for transponder operations?

I think what you're missing is that not all aircraft have transponders. The key words from 91.215(c) are (emphasis mine):

[...] each person operating an aircraft equipped with an operable ATC
transponder maintained [...]

To put it another way, (b) says "in order to fly in these areas you must have a transponder". Whereas (c) says "if you have a transponder, this is when it needs to be on".


Does an FAA pilot certificate qualify as an ICAO pilot licence?

My understanding is that most FAA licenses would also qualify as "ICAO Licenses" (certainly the ATP seems to as we have a bunch of US/FAA certificated ATPs acting as international captains for US airlines flying to/from ICAO member states). From a quick read I think anything from Private up meets the ICAO Annex 1 (personnel licensing) requirements. (It appears that ICAO charges for Annex 1, but the fine folks in the Republic of Serbia have made the 2011 edition available on their Civil Aviation Directorate's website for us to all read and enjoy).

In addition to the Annex 1 requirements, ICAO's FAQ has the following to say about licensing:

  ICAO licence or international licence

  ICAO does not issue any licences. Licences issued by ICAO Contracting States on the basis of Standards and Recommended Practices of Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing, are habitually called ICAO licences. This has led many to believe that there is a specific ICAO or international licence. The fact is that there is not one single international licence issued by ICAO or any other organization. States issue their own licences based on national regulations in conformity with Annex 1 specifications and validate licences issued by other Contracting States on the basis of bilateral or multilateral agreements or the fulfilment of nationally legislated requirements.

and

  International recognition of flight crew licences

  The Convention on International Civil Aviation, often called the Chicago Convention, provides for worldwide recognition of flight crew licences issued by any member State of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) provided that:

  the licence meets or exceeds the ICAO licensing Standards of Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing to the Convention on International Civil Aviation; and
  the licence is used on an aircraft which is registered in the State which has issued or validated the licence.

  If the licence is to be used on an aircraft which is not registered in the issuing State, the licence holder must obtain a validation of the licence from the State of Registry or alternatively obtain a new licence issued by the State of Registry.

So basically your US/FAA license is a valid "ICAO License" as long as you're flying a US-registered aircraft & the nation you're flying to/through accepts US/FAA licenses (possibly with some additional requirements on a per-country basis).

If you got a job for a Serbian airline and needed to fly an aircraft registered in Serbia you would need the Serbian Civil Aviation Directorate to issue you a license (or validate your FAA license) because they are the state of registry.

From what I've read you can get a private license issued pretty easily in most ICAO member states - the procedures are roughly analogous to US FAR 61.75 - but if you want anything more than that there are other hoops to jump through to "convert" your license, which can range from just a written exam to a full-fledged checkride or more -- this is probably what people are referring to when they say it's difficult to get an "ICAO License" issued.


The F-16s that were scrambled to intercept United 93 did not have time to arm the jets, so the pilots were going to “ram it” how does that work?

(disclaimer - Former USAF armament specialist)
The intention was not necessarily to "ram", but rather get eyeballs on the situation and take whatever action was needed. That may have, eventually, been a "ramming".
Obviously, that was not their first choice of action.
And ramming a 757 was not a thing that was practiced or planned for.
As far as " this was in the days before armed jets stood ready to take off at a moment's notice", that is false. There were 7 bases around the country, with fighter jets on alert. On that specific day, 2x F-15 from Otis AFB, MA and 2x F-16 from Langley AFB, VA had already launched to intercept the other airliners that were in play. Those 4 were fully armed.
Andrews AFB MD was not one of those few alert bases.
The pilots from the DC Guard knew that the WTC had been deliberately targeted, and would take whatever action that turned out to be needed.
For them being 'unarmed', that is the usual case for 99% of fighter jets on US soil. They don't all sit around with missiles and hot guns.
And to put missiles on them takes time. Time they didn't have. It would be a minimum of 30 minutes to get the missiles out of the storage area, tow them to the flightline, and load them on the jets.
Munitions are NOT stored right next to the jets.
While the DC Guard jets were being launched, other jets were being prepped with missiles. Turned out not to be needed.
The question often asked is how the USAF was caught with their pants down.
Well, the alert jets around the country were mainly for threats coming in from the coasts or over Canada. Russian Bears, for instance. Perimeter defense.
Not a known friendly civilian airliner, suddenly turning hostile once it is already inside the perimeter.
And up until the mid-90's, there were many more jets on alert around the country. East coast, probably every couple hundred miles. Loring ME, Griffiss NY, Langley VA, Shaw, SC, on and on all around the coast and borders.
The drawdown of the mid 90's did away with most of that tasking.


How are type ratings created for new aircraft types?

Seems you guessed right, actually.  FSIMS 5.9.3 does indicate that you can get a letter of authorization in lieu of a type rating:

  B.    Requirements for Aircraft Undergoing Certification. During the type certification process, it is sometimes necessary for industry pilots or FAA inspectors with airman certification responsibility to be qualified in a particular aircraft before a pilot certificate type rating designator is established for that aircraft. In these circumstances, and at the discretion of the manager of the aircraft evaluation group (AEG), an LOA (Figure 5-187) may be issued in lieu of a type rating. This LOA and Letter of Application (Figure 5-188) must be in the pilot’s possession when exercising the authorized privileges. The LOA can eventually be surrendered to a district office in exchange for a temporary airman certificate bearing the category, class, and type ratings.


Why vacuum instead of pressure to power gyros?

There are piston aircraft that use positive pressure to power gyros.  The Beech Baron and Bonanza lines as well as the Piper Navajo line use pressure instead of vacuum. We're not talking about one-off airplanes here!  The Baron/Bonanza and Navajo are some of the most popular airplanes in their respective categories which, when summed, total many thousands of airplanes (and pressure pumps).

The turbines I've flown used ejector pumps, not mechanical pumps, to draw vacuum so I will assume that this class of plane is out of scope for the purposes of this question.

A technical answer to your question will require an aircraft system engineer (perhaps Peter?) to weigh in.  My guess is that vacuum pumps were installed to replace venturis.  Since systems (and instruments) were already designed to run vacuum, the pumps were installed to draw vacuum instead of apply pressure.  Why change what works?


Are pilots allowed to let passengers fly the plane?

For a non-commercial flight under Part 91 rules there are no issues I'm aware of with letting a non-rated passenger handle the controls - and it's done quite frequently (I can't think of any pilots I know offhand who haven't had someone else take the controls for one reason or another).

The rated pilot is still pilot-in-command of the flight and ultimately responsible for everything that happens, so they need to be relatively certain their friend will let go of the controls if told to do so, and they need to maintain situational awareness (traffic scan, airspace, etc. -- if the friend blunders into Class B airspace it's going to land in the pilot's lap) and be ready to take over if the friend starts doing something that could jeopardize the safety of the flight.

There are some common-sense limits here: something insane like have two non-rated friends at the controls the rated pilot being PIC from the back seat giving them instructions over the intercom would be a no-go.
Similarly while this sort of thing is a total non-event in an aircraft with typical dual controls you would probably want to have a higher level of trust in your friend if you're flying something with a throw-over yoke.


What gas turbines have the following configuration?

I couldn't find any that exactly match. The closest ones I found where
PW1000G-56 : 2-8 and 2-3
PD-14 : 3-8 and 2-6
What is the reason your looking for such specific architecture?


What types of maneuvers increase the load factor on the aircraft?

The load factor of an aircraft is given as the ratio of lift to weight.

i.e. $n = \frac{L}{W}$

So, an maneuver that changes any of these two forces acting on the aircraft causes a change in the load factor. Usually, it is the lift which is considered the variable.

Consider an aircraft in a level turn. In addition to the lift and weight, the aircraft experiences centrifugal force, which is counteracted b the horizontal component of the lift.

Courtesy: www.rainierflightservice.com

For a bank angle of $\theta$, it can be shown that the load factor can be given as,

$n = \frac{1}{cos\theta}$

So, as the bank becomes 'tighter', the load factor increases. A load factor greater than one will cause the stall speed to increase by the square of the load factor.

Basically, as the load factor is increased, the aircraft minimum speed should be increased to prevent stall.

For aircrafts in steady climb, the principle is essentially the same.

Picture Source: classicairshows.com

Here, the weight is less than the lift and as such, the load factor is (slightly) less than one.

As the aircraft stalls in level flight or unaccelerated straight climb, the lift becomes zeros and the load factor also becomes zero.


Is everything OK with engine placement depicted in Flight Simulator poster?

No, Microsoft's image is not doctored.  It looks very much like the image from a 2010 press release for the A320 NEO.
(Dictionaries say that doctored means deliberately altered or manipulated, in the same sense as the original question's "artificially modified".  That would apply equally well to developed photographic film, a software rendering, or even a cocktail napkin sketch.)


Why don't flight attendants get tired when passengers can, despite sleeping?

This is bordering on opinion based as its a bit subjective from person to person but generally speaking flight attendants and pilots are more accustomed to the typical stressors of flight and potentially less subject to them after some time as the human body adjusts.

Perhaps more importantly this is also their day job, its what they do. When you get on a flight it may be in the evening, or early in the morning, maybe you are coming off a long work week and really burnt out or that weekend in Vegas really got to you. When you get on a flight you may likely be tired, and small, dry, noisy spaces are not where you want to be. This is not the case for the crew. They are there to do a job, presumably well rested and ready to go.


Which radio altimeter is the Boeing 737NG call outs based on?

The FCOM (volume 2, 15.20.17) states:

  The GPWS provides height callouts based on altitude set by the
  Captain's Minimums selector.

According to the investigation of Turkish Airlines 1951, the captain's and FO's radio altimeter are feed independently, and the autopilot is wired to react to whatever is happening on the captain's side. This includes the aural warnings.

Curiously, I cannot locate anywhere in the FCOM, FCTM nor QRH what happens when the RAs disagree. The only related information I find is, to use the autopilot for landing you'd need both RAs to be functional. If one of them fails while the autopilot is in landing mode (i.e. glideslope and/or localizer mode), the autopilot disconnects.


How can the zero-lift drag coefficient (parasitic drag) be calculated?

Yes, the wetted area is roughly twice the reference area. Now details depend on how well the reference area captures the exposed area of the wing - dihedral will already increase the wetted area by a factor proportional to the inverse of the cosine of the dihedral angle.

But there is more. Airfoil thickness means that the air has to flow around the airfoil. This displacement effect causes the flow around a thick airfoil to speed up more than around an equivalent but thinner airfoil. The thicker airfoil pushes the air aside and around itself more, causing the flow to accelerate and create more friction than the slower flow around a thinner airfoil. This effect is normally approximated with an additional term in the friction drag formula which is proportional to relative thickness.

Next, the type of boundary layer flow needs to be known. Rough surfaces or high sweep angles will provoke an early transition from laminar to turbulent flow. Read this answer for a more detailed discussion.

Another correction is needed for the Mach number, even in subsonic flow. Of course, once flow becomes transsonic or supersonic, wave drag needs to be added, too.

First you need to calculate the friction coefficient which depends on the Reynolds and Mach numbers of your airfoil flow and the relative mean roughness R:
$$c_f = \frac{\frac{0.43}{log(100/R)^{2.56}}-\frac{1700}{100/R}}{\sqrt{1+0.14\cdot Ma^2}}$$

Next, you approximate airfoil drag as explained above:
$$c_{d0} = c_f\cdot \left(2 + 4\cdot\delta + 120\cdot\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-Ma^2}}\right)^3\cdot\delta^4 - 0.09\cdot Ma^2\right)$$
where $\delta$ is the relative thickness of your airfoil.

The term $\frac{1700}{100/R}$ in the friction drag equation allows for the initially laminar boundary layer. Change the factor 1700 depending on how much laminarity your airfoil offers. This answer shows a graph with the possible range. In the airfoil zero lift drag formula you see first the factor 2 which accounts for the fact that the wing has two sides. To that you add the thickness summand to allow for the displacement effect. The third term with the Prandtl-Glauert factor shows that the formula only works well for Mach < 1, and both the third and fourth term are empirical factors to improve accuracy over Mach.


Do pilots know which heading to fly in case of a go around?

Is the heading to go around always well-known at every airport?

The initial heading for a go around should always be well known based on a pilot's knowledge and understanding of the procedures associated with the type of approach being made.  Generally, outlined below are the procedures used in U.S. airspace (unless modified by NOTAM, special notice, etc. for a particular location):

Go Around -

Tower Controlled Airport -VFR

Fly runway heading and advise the tower of your missed approach.  The controller will issue further instructions (normally to stay in the traffic pattern for another VFR approach).

Go Around -

Non-Tower Controlled Airport -VFR

Report your missed approach on the VFR advisory frequency (or common traffic advisory frequency [CTAF], as appropriate) and fly runway heading until you turn back into the traffic pattern for another approach or depart the pattern for another destination.

Go Around -

Tower Controlled Airport - Radar Environment- IFR

Aircraft under IFR using a published Instrument Approach will initially start flying the published Missed Approach Procedure noted on the Approach Chart for the runway and procedure in use. Then, after reporting the "missed approach" to the control tower, the controller will normally assign a heading and altitude (i.e., alternate missed approach instructions) to fly putting the aircraft back into the traffic flow for another instrument approach or clearance to some other airport.
Aircraft under IFR flying a "Visual Approach" will report the Missed Approach to the tower.  Since a "Visual Approach" has no "published" missed approach procedure the tower controller will normally issue a heading and altitude to fly for re-sequence into the IFR traffic flow or, if weather conditions and traffic allows, keep you into the local traffic pattern for another landing attempt.

Go Around -

Tower Controlled Airport - Non-Radar Environment- IFR

1.Aircraft under IFR using a published Instrument Approach will fly the published missed approach and contact the controller for further instructions.

2.Aircraft under IFR flying a "Visual Approach" will report the Missed Approach to ATC and will be issued further instructions by the controller.

Go Around -

Non-Tower Controlled Airport - Radar Environment- IFR

Aircraft under IFR using a published Instrument Approach will initially start flying the published Missed Approach Procedure noted on the Approach Chart for the runway and procedure in use. Then, after reporting the "missed approach" to the radar controller, the controller will normally, after radar contact is reestablished, assign a heading and altitude (i.e., alternate missed approach instructions) to fly putting the aircraft back into the traffic flow for another instrument approach or clearance to some other airport.
Aircraft under IFR flying a "Visual Approach" aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as
possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the
aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and
contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance.
Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained
under these circumstances [ref: AIM/Aeronautical Information Manual, para. 5-4-23 e.].

Go Around -

Non-Tower Controlled Airport - Non-Radar Environment- IFR

Aircraft under IFR using a published Instrument Approach will fly the published Missed Approach Procedure noted on the Approach Chart for the runway and procedure in use. Then, after reporting the "missed approach" to ATC, the controller will issue instructions putting the aircraft back into the traffic flow for another instrument approach or clearance to some other airport.
Aircraft under IFR flying a "Visual Approach" aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as
possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the
aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and
contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance.
Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained
under these circumstances [ref: AIM/Aeronautical Information Manual, para. 5-4-23 e.].


Is the term "small" applied differently between piston engine planes and jet engine planes?

I wouldn't expect press headlines to adhere to the FAA or ICAO definitions of "small", "large", "heavy", etc. This would be a public vernacular definition of "small", which would distinguish from the big airliners most people think of when hearing about jet planes.


Why is there no instrument taxi system for low-visibility operations?

If I were an airline executive in charge of determining the configuration of new aircraft being ordered from a manufacturer, and one of the options was an instrument taxiing system to allow so-called zero-visibility taxi, the aggregate cost of that system (purchase, maintenance, training, fuel to carry it) would have to be very low before I would consider it. My initial thought would be to reject it out of hand, but perhaps the ability to help a taxiing pilot navigate the taxiways of an unfamiliar airport would bring me around if the only cost was additional software for existing equipment. I say this as a pilot who on his first trip into Chicago O'Hare succeeded in getting some deservedly unkind words from a ground controller when I didn't turn when I should have and necessitated the rerouting of other aircraft.

In 10 years on the 747 I only once called for a follow-me car because of low visibility, and had the taxiway been better marked or my eye level lower I might not have needed that.

  So it wasn't worth it even for airports where crap weather is common?

Consider the Arcata-Eureka Airport in McKinleyville, CA. The airport was deliberately built during World War II where they could depend on it being very foggy, and in that they succeeded. While the approach and landing were often challenging, there was never any real difficulty in taxiing if you were familiar with the airport.


Is there any common research model for supersonic transport?

According to NASA here:

  This test case is an aircraft concept previously used as an optional
  case (LM1021) in the 1st Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop. This
  configuration is described in the following reference: John
  Morgenstern, Nicole Norstrud, Jack Sokhey, Steve Martins, and Juan J.
  Alonso, “Advanced Concept Studies for Supersonic Commercial Transports
  Entering Service in the 2018 to 2020 Period,” NASA
  CR-2013-217820,DOI:2060/20130010174. See NTRS Record. There is also a
  description in the following reference: John M. Morgenstern, Michael
  Buonanno, and Frank Marconi, “Full Configuration Low Boom Model and
  Grids for 2014 Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop,” AIAA-2013-647.


If a typical passenger plane had total failure of all engines mid-flight, is it possible for passengers to survive?

Air Transat Flight 236 experienced a complete power loss over the Atlantic Ocean in 2001. Yes, all passengers and crew survived after the aircraft glided 75 miles to a runway on the Azores islands.

Even in the event of the loss of all engines, an aircraft can keep its critical electrical systems running thanks to the ram air turbine which allows the crew to maintain control of the aircraft and to communicate with ground crews to determine the best course of action for the situation. This was the case with Air Transat Flight 236.

Moreover, consider US Airways Flight 1549 which experienced a complete power loss after takeoff due to a double bird strike. Even in the situation where the pilot had very few options due to being at such a low altitude and being over a populated area, all passengers and crew survived after ditching in the Hudson River. However, in all fairness, ditching attempts do not normally end well.

In all, complete power loss in a modern airliner is extraordinarily rare. While gathering links for this answer, I ran across the "List of airline flights that required gliding" article on Wikipedia. The short length of the list speaks for itself (4 flights in the last decade).