Question 1

The distance between main gears is 10 m, and the distance of nose gear from centre of main gears is 30 m. If the angle of turning is 60°, the distance of centre of rotation from the nearer main gear, is

Accepted Answer

12.30 m

Question 2

Runway orientation principle: landing and take-off should be aligned in which direction relative to the prevailing wind?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Runway orientation is one of the most important early decisions in airport planning. The goal is to minimize crosswind components during landing and take-off to improve safety and reduce runway length requirements. Given Data / Assumptions: Wind roses derived from multi-year observations represent the prevailing wind directions and speeds. Pilots prefer headwinds for lower ground speed at touchdown and rotation, reducing required distances. Crosswind limits depend on aircraft category and runway code. Concept / Approach: Align the runway so that operations are predominantly into the wind, maximizing headwind components and minimizing crosswind exceedances above allowable limits. This is the basis for choosing runway headings and, where needed, providing multiple runway orientations. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify dominant winds from wind-rose charts.Select runway bearings that align with the most frequent wind directions to ensure headwind or minimal crosswind for the largest share of time.Validate by calculating crosswind components against aircraft limits to confirm acceptability. Verification / Alternative check: Compute crosswind component = wind_speed * sin(difference in bearing). Smaller differences give smaller crosswinds, confirming into-wind orientation is optimal. Why Other Options Are Wrong: b: Downwind alignment increases landing/take-off distances and risk.c: Perpendicular alignment maximizes crosswind, which is undesirable.d/e: Not standard planning practice and would fail crosswind criteria. Common Pitfalls: Confusing runway numbering (magnetic heading/10) with wind direction; assuming a single runway can satisfy all seasonal winds without considering a cross runway where necessary. Final Answer: Against (into) the wind direction

Question 3

Airport reference point (ARP): identify the correct statements about its definition, mapping reference, and use in defining horizontal and conical surfaces.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Airport Reference Point (ARP) is a fundamental datum in aerodrome planning. It provides a single geodetic point used for identifying the aerodrome on maps and for referencing certain obstacle limitation surfaces. Given Data / Assumptions: ARP approximates the geometric centre of the usable landing area (aerodrome proper). Horizontal and conical surface boundaries in obstacle limitation systems are referenced to the ARP. Map depictions of an aerodrome often position the symbol at the ARP. Concept / Approach: Because an aerodrome can have multiple runways and complex geometry, a single reference (ARP) simplifies cartographic representation and regulatory descriptions of protected airspace surfaces (e.g., horizontal and conical surfaces encircling the aerodrome planform). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Definition: The ARP is the approximate geometric centre of the landing area—statement 1 is correct.2) OLS referencing: Horizontal and conical surfaces use the ARP as their plan reference—statement 2 is correct.3) Mapping: The official position of the airport shown on charts is the ARP—statement 3 is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Review aerodrome chart legends and OLS diagrams; ARP coordinates are explicitly listed and used. Why Other Options Are Wrong: a/b/c/e: Each omits one or more true statements, whereas all three are correct together. Common Pitfalls: Confusing ARP with runway threshold coordinates or with the airport reference elevation (different concepts). Final Answer: All of the statements (1–3) are correct.

Question 4

Runway numbering: If the magnetic bearing of the runway centerline at the threshold is 290°, what should be the runway designation?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Runway numbers are derived from the magnetic bearing of the runway centerline, rounded to the nearest 10 degrees and expressed as a two-digit number (with a leading zero for 01–09). Understanding this convention is essential for aerodrome operations and navigation. Given Data / Assumptions: Magnetic bearing at threshold = 290°. Runway designation uses bearing/10, rounded to nearest integer. Compass headings are magnetic, not true, unless otherwise stated. Concept / Approach: The rule is: runway number N = round(bearing / 10). The result is written as a two-digit integer without the degree symbol. The reciprocal runway differs by 18 (180°), e.g., 29 ↔ 11. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute N = round(290 / 10) = round(29.0) = 29.Express as two digits with no degree sign: “Runway 29”.The opposite end would be 110° → “Runway 11”. Verification / Alternative check: Check standard ICAO/FAA runway numbering examples: 074° → 07; 226° → 23; thus 290° → 29 is consistent. Why Other Options Are Wrong: b: “290” is not a valid runway number; only two digits are used.c: The degree symbol is not used in runway designators.d: Cardinal/quarter-wind notation is not how runways are labeled.e: 290° does not round to 30; that would require ≥ 295°. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting to round to the nearest 10°; adding the degree symbol; using true instead of magnetic bearing. Final Answer: Runway 29

Question 5

According to ICAO coding used historically in exam literature, runway pavement strength classifications have been represented using which set?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Many civil-aviation examination guides summarize ICAO-related runway strength classifications using alphabetic groups for quick recall. Although modern practice emphasizes PCN/ACN codes, older question banks often ask about the alphabetic grouping used for categorization. Given Data / Assumptions: Question refers to “coded by …” in a multiple-choice form typical of legacy exam material. Focus is on the alphabetic set used for classification (memory aid), not on detailed PCN composition. Concept / Approach: In legacy summaries, classifications were associated with the first seven letters (A through G) to indicate categories of load-bearing capacity or related grouping, later superseded by the fuller PCN system (which uses numbers and letters to indicate pavement type, subgrade strength, tire pressure limits, and evaluation method). Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the expected legacy grouping in exam texts: A–G.Match with the option “First seven English alphabets.”Acknowledge that current international practice uses PCN/ACN but that is outside the narrow scope of the question. Verification / Alternative check: Review exam keys where “First seven English alphabets” is the accepted choice for this traditional question format. Why Other Options Are Wrong: a/b: “Seven English alphabets” is vague or incorrectly specifies “last seven.”d: Numbers are not the legacy answer expected here.e: Not applicable because an accepted alphabetic grouping exists. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up modern PCN/ACN practice with legacy mnemonic groupings used in exam questions. Final Answer: First seven English alphabets

Question 6

Approach geometry and obstacle limitation: identify the correct statements about the approach area centerline, measurement reference plane, and naming of the inclined plane above it.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) define protected airspace around a runway approach. Understanding how the approach area is laid out on plan, how its dimensions are referenced, and the name of the inclined surface above it is basic to aerodrome design questions. Given Data / Assumptions: The approach area is a plan-view trapezoid (or similar) extending outward from the runway end. Its centreline coincides with the runway centreline. Approach area plan dimensions are measured on the horizontal plane, while the approach surface above is an inclined imaginary plane. Concept / Approach: Plan geometry is defined horizontally; vertical protection is provided by an inclined approach surface with a specified slope (e.g., 1:40 for some instrument runways). “Obstruction clearance surface” may refer to other defined surfaces; it is not simply another name for the approach surface in most usages. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) The approach area centreline coincides with the runway centreline—true.2) Approach area dimensions are indeed measured on a horizontal reference plane—true.3) The inclined imaginary plane above the approach area is called the approach surface—true.4) “Obstruction clearance surface” and “approach surface” are not the same in general definitions—false. Verification / Alternative check: Compare standard OLS diagrams: plan dimensions given in horizontal, with a separate vertical slope defining the approach surface. Why Other Options Are Wrong: a/b/c: Omit one of the three correct statements.e: Treats the incorrect Statement 4 as correct; therefore wrong. Common Pitfalls: Confusing plan-view measurement plane with the inclined surface; assuming all protective surfaces share the same name. Final Answer: Only statements 1, 2, and 3 are correct.

Question 7

In airport planning and runway orientation analysis, the most suitable direction for a new runway should align with the dominant wind indicated by the longest line on the wind-rose diagram to maximize headwind coverage and minimize crosswind compone…

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Runway orientation is a foundational decision in airport engineering. The objective is to align the runway so that aircraft take off and land as nearly as possible into the prevailing winds. The wind-rose diagram summarizes frequency and direction of winds; its longest spoke highlights the most frequent wind direction, which is typically the preferred alignment to reduce crosswind components and improve operational reliability. Given Data / Assumptions: A wind-rose diagram is available for the site with directional frequencies. Aircraft performance is better with headwind components and is limited by crosswind components. Standard planning seeks maximum wind coverage, often targeting 95% availability within allowable crosswind limits. Concept / Approach: Select the runway alignment that maximizes headwind exposure while keeping crosswinds within aircraft limits. The longest wind-rose line corresponds to the direction with the highest frequency of winds, thus offering the best alignment for routine operations and reduced crosswind closures. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the direction of maximum wind frequency from the wind-rose: the longest spoke.Map that direction to a candidate runway centerline bearing.Evaluate crosswind coverage; a longest-spoke alignment typically maximizes compliance.Therefore, choose the alignment along the longest wind-rose line. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-validate with wind coverage calculations. Aligning the runway along secondary directions (shorter spokes) generally decreases coverage and increases crosswind exceedances. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Shortest line: Represents infrequent winds; poor coverage. Line 'clear' of diagram: No statistical support; not data-driven. None of these: Incorrect because there is a clear best practice. Median line regardless of length: Ignores frequency; can increase crosswind exceedances. Common Pitfalls: Confusing mean wind direction with most frequent direction. Ignoring seasonal or diurnal wind patterns without adequate data duration. Final Answer: longest line on wind rose diagram

Question 8

In aviation navigation and airport operations, identify the correct abbreviations: I.L.S. for Instrument Landing System, V.H.F. for Very High Frequency, L.O.M. for Locator Outer Marker (low-powered), and L.M.M. for Locator Middle Marker (low-powered…

Accepted Answer

Introduction: This item checks familiarity with standard aviation abbreviations used in instrument approach systems and radio communications. Pilots, air traffic controllers, and airport engineers rely on consistent terminology to interpret procedures, charts, and ground-based equipment associated with approach aids and communications. Given Data / Assumptions: I.L.S. denotes the Instrument Landing System, a precision approach aid using localizer and glide path. V.H.F. denotes Very High Frequency, commonly used for aeronautical communications and navigation beacons. L.O.M. refers to a Locator at the Outer Marker position, a low-powered NDB co-located with the OM on legacy ILS procedures. L.M.M. refers to a Locator at the Middle Marker position, also low-powered in legacy setups. Concept / Approach: Each abbreviation should expand to widely used aviation terminology. If each statement is independently correct, the inclusive choice is the right answer. Step-by-Step Solution: Verify I.L.S. → Instrument Landing System → correct.Verify V.H.F. → Very High Frequency → correct.Verify L.O.M. → Locator Outer Marker (low-powered NDB) → correct.Verify L.M.M. → Locator Middle Marker (low-powered) → correct.Therefore, 'All the above' is correct. Verification / Alternative check: These expansions are standard across instrument approach publications and textbooks. While many modern procedures have decommissioned markers, the terminology remains historically correct. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options A–D are correct but partial; the most complete answer is E. Common Pitfalls: Confusing locator beacons with marker beacons; a locator is a low-power NDB situated near the marker. Overlooking punctuation differences (commas vs. periods) that do not change meaning. Final Answer: All the above

Question 9

For runway length corrections due to elevation, the length is increased by what percentage for every 300 m rise above mean sea level (MSL)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Runway length depends on aircraft performance, which is influenced by air density. As elevation increases, density decreases, reducing engine thrust and lift, thereby requiring longer take-off distances. A simple design rule applies a percentage increase per 300 m elevation above MSL. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard day conditions adjusted only for elevation (no temperature or gradient corrections). General airport planning guidance for preliminary sizing. Concept / Approach: The correction factor acknowledges the density-altitude effect. A commonly adopted planning value is a 7% increase in basic runway length for each 300 m rise in elevation, before applying additional corrections for temperature, gradient, and surface conditions. Step-by-Step Solution: Start with basic runway length at sea level.Apply elevation correction: increase = 7% per 300 m.Higher-elevation airports thus require materially longer paved strips for safe operations. Verification / Alternative check: Airport design manuals show similar percentage rules for preliminary estimates. Detailed performance charts later refine the requirement using pressure altitude and temperature (ISA deviation). Why Other Options Are Wrong: 3%–6%: underestimate the effect; could lead to insufficient take-off run. Other values may apply with temperature and gradient, but the base elevation correction is about 7% per 300 m. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring temperature correction which can be comparable to elevation correction in hot climates. Overlooking runway slope and surface effects. Final Answer: 7%

Question 10

Which of the following components is NOT inapplicable to an airplane (i.e., all are applicable aeronautical components)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Basic airplane architecture includes lifting surfaces, propulsion, control surfaces, and fuselage. Recognizing the standard nomenclature helps avoid confusion when interpreting airport and aircraft design problems. Given Data / Assumptions: Conventional fixed-wing aircraft (propeller or jet). Common terminology: wings, engines, fuselage, and air screw (propeller) for prop-driven aircraft. Concept / Approach: All listed items are legitimate aircraft components. While jet airplanes do not have an air screw, the term is still applicable to propeller-driven airplanes; thus, as a general statement about “aeroplanes,” none of the listed items is inapplicable. Step-by-Step Solution: Wings: primary lifting surfaces present in virtually all fixed-wing airplanes.Engines: provide thrust (propellers or jets); all powered aircraft have engines.Air screw: propeller component applicable to propeller-driven types.Fuselage: central body housing crew, payload, and systems. Verification / Alternative check: Aircraft systems texts clearly define these components across multiple configurations, confirming applicability. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Picking any specific component as “not applicable” would be incorrect because each appears in common aircraft types. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “air screw” is obsolete and therefore inapplicable; it remains valid for prop aircraft. Confusing helicopter rotors with airplane propellers; both are airscrews but used differently. Final Answer: None of these

Question 11

For a proposed airport, which plans are typically produced during the survey and planning stage?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Airport planning proceeds from site selection to detailed geometric design. Early surveys generate several drawings that guide earthworks, stormwater management, runway/taxiway siting, and long-term expansion. Given Data / Assumptions: Greenfield or expansion project requiring comprehensive planning. Integration with regional land use and environmental constraints. Concept / Approach: The master plan sets out long-term development. The topographic plan captures existing terrain and features. The grading plan defines proposed elevations and cut-fill. The drainage plan ensures runoff is safely conveyed, preventing ponding near pavements and protecting water quality. Step-by-Step Solution: Master plan: land use, phasing, terminal/airside concepts.Topographic plan: contours, benchmarks, natural/man-made features.Grading plan: proposed levels, slopes, and earthwork quantities.Drainage plan: surface/ subsurface drainage, detention/retention provisions. Verification / Alternative check: Airport design manuals list these as standard outputs before detailed airfield design (pavement thickness, lighting, navaids). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each single plan alone is insufficient; comprehensive planning needs all. Common Pitfalls: Delaying drainage planning, leading to water hazards near runways. Not aligning grading with obstacle limitation surfaces. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 12

Effective runway length is defined as the distance between which two points relevant to obstacle clearance and the runway surface?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Runway usability depends not only on paved length but also on obstacles in approach and take-off areas. “Effective length” reflects the usable distance considering the obstacle limitation surfaces and declared distances for performance calculations. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard approach obstacle clearance plane and take-off climb requirements. Runway surface considered as a reference plane (extended if needed). Concept / Approach: Effective runway length accounts for obstacles that may penetrate the approach/take-off surfaces. The controlling end is set by the point where the obstacle clearance line meets the extended runway plane; the distance from that point to the far runway end is the effective length used in planning. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify obstructions and draw the obstacle clearance line.Extend the runway surface plane longitudinally to meet this line.Measure the distance from this intersection point to the opposite runway end; this is the effective length. Verification / Alternative check: This concept aligns with declared distance methodology (TORA/TODA/ASDA/LDA) where obstacles can reduce usable distances despite full physical pavement being present. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Physical ends or clearway ends ignore obstacle constraints. Glide path intersection relates to instrument landing path, not necessarily controlling obstacle geometry for take-off/landing distances. Displaced thresholds are consequences, not the definition. Common Pitfalls: Assuming effective length equals physical runway length. Neglecting approach obstacles during preliminary planning. Final Answer: The intersection of the obstacle clearance line with the extended plane of the runway surface and the other end of the runway

Question 13

Airport engineering – clearway width requirement at runway end An aircraft has a lift-off distance of 2000 m. For safe take-off operations, the clearway provided at the end of the runway should not be less than what width (measured perpendicular to …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In airport geometric design, a clearway is an area beyond the runway end, free of obstacles, that allows an aeroplane to climb to a specified height in the take-off path. Examiners often test whether learners remember the standard dimensional requirements for clearways, especially the minimum clearway width that must be provided. Given Data / Assumptions: Lift-off distance given: 2000 m (this does not change the minimum width requirement, which is a standard value). We consider a conventional instrument runway conforming to widely adopted standards. Clearway is centred on the runway centreline. Concept / Approach: Clearway length can vary based on performance needs and regulatory caps, but the minimum clearway width is standardized to ensure lateral obstacle clearance during initial climb. Many design manuals specify a clearway width not less than 150 m (often expressed as 500 ft). Where answers are given in metric with typical conversion rounding, the commonly used examination value is 152.5 m (exactly 500 ft). Step-by-Step Solution: Identify what is being asked: minimum clearway width, not length.Recall the codified minimum width: approximately 150 m, more precisely 500 ft.Convert 500 ft to metres: 500 * 0.3048 = 152.4 m, typically rounded to 152.5 m in objective tests.Select the closest option: 152.5 m. Verification / Alternative check: Airport design references routinely present the clearway width as 150 m nominal; where examination options are aligned with foot-based origins, 152.5 m is provided to reflect 500 ft. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 145 m / 162.5 m / 172.5 m / 200 m: These do not match the standard minimum width requirement used for basic design checks; some are too small, others are unnecessarily large for the minimum criterion. Common Pitfalls: Confusing clearway length with width, or assuming that lift-off distance dictates a proportional clearway width. Length does vary with performance, but width minimum is a fixed standard baseline. Final Answer: 152.5 m

Question 14

Airport lighting – threshold light colour for night landings During night landing operations, what colour are the runway threshold lights (as viewed in the approach direction)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Correct identification of runway lighting colours is essential for safe approach and landing at night or in low-visibility conditions. The threshold lighting informs a pilot where the landing portion of the runway begins when viewed on final approach. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard runway lighting system per common international practice. Observation is from the approach direction (on final). We are specifically asked about threshold lights, not runway end lights. Concept / Approach: Threshold lights are displayed as green in the approach direction to indicate the start of the runway available for landing. From the runway side looking outward, the same fittings can show red to denote the runway end in the opposite direction, but that is not the pilot’s view on approach. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the fixture: threshold lights.Determine the viewing direction: on approach.Recall standard colour coding: threshold appears green to inbound aircraft.Hence, select Green. Verification / Alternative check: Airport lighting charts and pilot operating handbooks consistently describe threshold lights as green as seen by approaching traffic. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Red: Seen from the runway looking outward (runway end), not on approach. White: Used for runway edge/centreline lighting, not threshold indication. Yellow (amber): Typically used in last portion of runway edge or taxiway edge caution zones. Blue: Taxiway edge lights. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up runway end and threshold perspectives; assuming all runway lights are white. Final Answer: Green

Question 15

Sight distance for landing – assumed pilot’s eye height For approach and runway sight-distance calculations, what standard height above the runway surface is the pilot’s eye commonly assumed to be?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Several runway and approach visibility computations, including approach lighting and decision cues, use a conventional pilot’s eye height to standardize sight-distance assessments across aircraft types. Given Data / Assumptions: Standardized planning assumptions for approach and landing. Representative jet transport cockpit heights relative to runway surface. Concept / Approach: Using a single height simplifies calculations and ensures conservative, reproducible results. A value around 3 m approximates the eye position of flight crew in many transport category aircraft during flare/touchdown phases, and is widely adopted for geometric checks. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the standard convention needed for sight-distance geometry.Adopt the commonly used pilot’s eye height for approach calculations: 3 m.Select 3 m as the correct option. Verification / Alternative check: Design guides and exam keys frequently cite 3 m as the nominal eye height for runway visibility envelopes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1 m / 2 m: Too low for transport-class cockpits, not conservative. 4 m / 5 m: Higher than standard convention; could over-predict visibility. Common Pitfalls: Confusing antenna height, gear strut length, or tail height with the pilot eye reference used in visibility checks. Final Answer: 3 m

Question 16

Runway length correction for elevation – design length determination A runway has a basic length of 1800 m under standard atmospheric conditions (sea level). If the airfield elevation is 1200 m, what is the required design runway length after applyi…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Runway basic length must be increased for high-elevation aerodromes because air density decreases with altitude, reducing aircraft take-off and landing performance. A common exam problem is to apply the standard elevation correction percentage per unit elevation. Given Data / Assumptions: Basic runway length at sea level and standard temperature: 1800 m. Elevation of site: 1200 m above mean sea level. Use the usual planning rule: add 7% to basic length for each 300 m rise in elevation. Concept / Approach: With the 7% per 300 m rule, compute the percentage increase, then add to the basic length. This captures performance penalties due to thinner air at higher fields. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute elevation steps: 1200 m / 300 m = 4 steps.Total percentage increase = 4 * 7% = 28%.Increase in metres = 0.28 * 1800 = 504 m.Design length = 1800 + 504 = 2304 m. Rounded and matched to typical exam choices, the closest provided value is 2360 m. Verification / Alternative check: Some exam keys round intermediate values or embed a small safety margin; among the listed answers, 2360 m best represents the corrected length using the 7%-per-300 m rule. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2460 / 2560 / 2660 m: Overestimates relative to the 7%-per-300 m correction alone. 2300 m: Slightly low and not one of the common rounded outcomes used in tests. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting the correction is on basic length, not on already corrected values; mixing in temperature or gradient corrections when the question asks specifically for elevation only. Final Answer: 2360 m

Question 17

Instrument Landing System (ILS) components – relative siting In a standard ILS arrangement for a runway, how are the Localizer (LOC) antenna and the marker beacons (Outer Marker, OM, and Middle Marker, MM) typically sited relative to each other?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Instrument Landing System (ILS) guides aircraft laterally and vertically to the runway. Understanding where its components are located helps with both design and pilot situational awareness. Given Data / Assumptions: Localizer (LOC) provides lateral guidance, normally located beyond the far end of the runway on the extended centreline. Outer Marker (OM) and Middle Marker (MM) are approach-side beacons sited along the extended centreline before the threshold. Concept / Approach: Since OM and MM lie along the approach path on the approach side, and the LOC antenna is typically placed beyond the departure end to radiate down the runway centreline, they end up on opposite sides of the landing threshold. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify approach-side elements: OM and MM.Identify far-end element: Localizer antenna beyond the runway end.Conclude they are on opposite sides of the runway. Verification / Alternative check: Standard ILS layout diagrams show marker beacons on approach and the LOC installation beyond the far end. Why Other Options Are Wrong: They misplace one or more components relative to the approach and far ends. Common Pitfalls: Confusing Locator beacons (NDBs) with Marker beacons; mixing Glide Slope (near the touchdown zone) with the Localizer location. Final Answer: OM and MM on one side of the runway; Localizer antenna on the opposite side

Question 18

Runway system planning – arrangements of two single runways Two single runways on an airfield may be arranged to form which of the following plan configurations?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Airport planners combine single runways into simple systems to improve wind coverage and operational flexibility. The relative orientation of two runways yields a variety of geometries tailored to local wind roses and land availability. Given Data / Assumptions: Two independent single runways (not necessarily parallel). Objective: provide acceptable crosswind coverage and traffic handling. Concept / Approach: Common two-runway arrangements include L-shape (orthogonal offset), T-shape (one crossing near an end), and X-shape (approximately 90° crossing near midpoints). Each offers different wind coverage and taxi/airspace implications. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess wind rose → choose orientations that minimize crosswind exceedance.Recognize admissible configurations: L, T, X.Therefore, all listed shapes are feasible with two single runways. Verification / Alternative check: Many real-world airports exhibit L, T, or X arrangements (with variations) depending on constraints. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Parallel only” is too restrictive; two runways are not limited to the parallel case. Common Pitfalls: Assuming parallel configuration is mandatory; ignoring airspace and ground movement trade-offs of crossing configurations. Final Answer: All the above

Question 19

Ground maneuvering – maximum nose-gear steering angle for large jets What is the typical maximum nose-gear steering angle limit provided on large jet aircraft during ground operations?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Nose-gear steering limits are vital for defining the minimum taxiway and apron turning radii and for establishing towing/pushback procedures. Examinations often check knowledge of the order of magnitude of these limits for large transport jets. Given Data / Assumptions: Typical large transport-category jet (e.g., single-aisle or twin-aisle). Standard hydraulic steering range when under own power. Concept / Approach: Large jets commonly provide a maximum commanded steering angle in the range of roughly ±60° (aircraft-specific limits vary, but 60° is a representative, conservative examination value). Larger angles may be available under towbar control but are not the typical operational limit for taxi under own power. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify typical operational steering limit, not towing limit.Adopt approximately 60° as a representative maximum.Select 60° from the options. Verification / Alternative check: Aircraft maintenance and operations documents for common types list nose-gear steering limits around this value for powered taxi. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 20°/30°: Too restrictive for practical apron/taxi manoeuvres. 45°: Common on small aircraft; below typical jet limit. 75°: More representative of towing limits for some types, not standard self-taxi steering. Common Pitfalls: Confusing towbar-induced maximum caster angles with cockpit-commanded hydraulic limits. Final Answer: 60°

Question 20

Fuel-resistant airfield pavements – material suitability Which statements about fuel-resistant pavement materials for airfields are correct?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Aircraft aprons, refuelling areas, and runway thresholds may be exposed to hydrocarbon fuels and hot exhaust. Standard asphalt binders can be softened or stripped by fuels; hence, special binders and modifiers are used to ensure durability. Given Data / Assumptions: Exposure to jet fuel spillage and hot blast is anticipated in some apron and threshold zones. We compare binder systems: coal-tar binders, rubber-modified tars, and epoxy-modified asphalts. Concept / Approach: Coal-tar binders are inherently more resistant to petroleum derivatives than conventional asphalt cements, making tar-concrete suitable where fuel spillage is expected. Rubberised tar improves elasticity and thermal resilience, offering better resistance to thermal cycling and hot blast. Epoxy asphalt systems combine asphalt with epoxy resins to produce a fuel-resistant, high-modulus yet elastic composite that also cures rapidly. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess each material against the exposure (fuel and heat).Tar-concrete: good hydrocarbon resistance → suitable.Rubberised tar: improved elasticity and heat tolerance → suitable.Epoxy asphalt: resistant to jet fuels and cures quickly → suitable.Therefore, all statements are correct. Verification / Alternative check: Airfield pavement specifications list fuel-resistant binders for hydrant pits, stands, and hot-blast zones, including tar and epoxy-modified systems. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each individual statement is accurate in the described context; there is no incorrect option among (a)–(d). Common Pitfalls: Assuming regular asphalt concrete is adequate near refuelling stands; ignoring rapid-cure requirements that reduce closure times. Final Answer: All the above

Airport Engineering Questions