Re: The endless influx of low-quality, low-realism, quantity-over-quality aircraft into FGAddon

Just out of curiosity,

do we have data (I suppose by ServerStats) about which ACFT is flown 
(not left on ground) whilst in MP ?
So, ACFT :: (connected on MP) AND (Altitude < ground level)
expressed in time / ACTFT

If we do not already have it, would it not be trivial to have it ?

I suppose devs do connect MP while testing developing only to test MP 
features.

'Normal user" also do not connect MP while 'discovering'

So MP users / by ACFT higher than the ground in time/ACFT would return a 
quite impartial reading of 'accepted/acceptable' ACFT.

Kind regards
Lawrence



On 2026-05-28 14:34, James Turner wrote:
>> On 28 May 2026, at 14:06, James Turner <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> The tags are pretty comprehensive:
>> 
>> 	https://gitlab.com/flightgear/fgmeta-python/-/blob/next/src/flightgear/meta/aircraft_catalogs/catalogTags.py?ref_type=heads
>> 
>> .. but making a nice UI for these is slightly non-trivial. I know 
>> *how* to do it, just needs the time to make it look visually pleasing 
>> (needs a model, a Flow repeater, maybe some colour coding, a tags 
>> model with a popup…)
> 
> Made a ticket capturing the implementation steps:
> 
> 	https://gitlab.com/flightgear/flightgear/-/work_items/3456
> 
> The next six weeks are quite busy for me, so I’ll probably get to this 
> in August. Unless it rains a **lot** in Bordeaux in July :)
> 
> Kind regards,
> James
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel