> > Worrying about GS service volume seems off-scale > unimportant relative to other issues. For starters, > Stansted has a reversible ILS. The code to handle > reversible ILSs in FG has been broken for years, and > actually got worse recently. > > The code to make it possible to fly at airports with > reversible ILSs has been available for a long time. > >
From a user's point of view, and don't this wrong for I'm not sure of the long term goals, but if success includes attracting users and retaining them then the little details such as this will enhance that aspect more than some other things. Realistic flight performance, including operations within the airport radius are typically high in value to a user. This isn't to take the side of someone complaining about not getting the glideslope at full volume until 7 miles, he should be well on his way with a standard decent rate out of the turn point. I think the 10 mile minimum should work fine, until it gets enhanced to extend to a "trickle out" point, which is the ideal. (And often 20 miles) Is there a published list somewhere of the major issues that the developers & contributors are striving to correct, enhance, add, etc? Thanks, Peter Peter Brown FG "Farmboy"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
