This is how I use it too, but I can definitely see the value in additional info boxes especially when you want to monitor arrival altitude to a waypoint which is further away and not showing in the map in your desired zoom level.
Ramy On Jan 19, 2013, at 8:16 AM, Dan Marotta <dcmaro...@earthlink.net> wrote: > I'm running the latest version and, the way I have mine setup, any > landable field within safe gliding range is highlighted and the arrival > altitude over the field is displayed with the name of the field. This > information is not displayed until I have safe arrival altitude. > > So, if I understand this thread, why do we need additional info boxes? > What difference does the distance make if, given current weather and MC > setting, I can arrive safely at any runway in range? > > > On 1/19/2013 1:02 AM, Robert Hart wrote: >> Well >> >> I didn't expect my original email to generate so much traffic! I have >> been reading all the email but as I'm flying in a comp I really didn't >> have time to contribute until now. >> >> There have been heaps of good ideas. What I'd like to do now is to try >> to restate my initial thoughts in the light of all that has been >> contributed. >> >> The "problem" - XCSoar does not allow navigation to more than one point >> to occur simultaneously. Frequently this ability is useful and on >> occasions (crossing unlandable ground) it is of considerable safety >> importance. Furthermore, selecting another way point to monitor should >> not destroy task information. >> >> There have been a number of solutions offered, but at this point I think >> it's important to make sure that any implemented solution does not >> greatly change the UI (as this will confuse users) nor should the >> solution impose significant recoding from our hardworking, volunteer >> developers. >> >> With this in mind, the solution that seems simplest is to create boxes >> for two additional (non task) nav points. The boxes (and their info) >> could be displayed anywhere, just as the existing boxes and their info >> are currently. I anticipate that I would then set up two additional >> pages per point mimicking my 'cruise' and 'circling' pages to allow me >> to monitor these two additional nav points. This seems to be simpler to >> use (and I hope code) than imposing "modes". >> >> It has occurred to me that having a command that 'drops a point' on to >> the terrain below AND allocates it to one of the two new nav points >> would be useful. Using this command, one could tag a landable point and >> set up monitoring to it very simply as one then proceeds across >> unlandable terrain. >> >> The only other thing that occurs to me is that dropped points should be >> allocate the surface elevation, not the glider's elevation (as occurred >> in the old Cambridge GPS nav "thermal marker")! > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, > MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current > with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft > MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912 > _______________________________________________ > Xcsoar-user mailing list > Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912 _______________________________________________ Xcsoar-user mailing list Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
