ludomotico wrote:1.- normal landing. Use power and flaps at your discretion
2.- Idle landing. If you use power 30 seconds before landing, this landing scores 200 points. Use flaps at your discretion.
3.- Idle landing without flaps. If you use power or flaps 30 seconds before landing, this landing scores 200 points.
4.- Obstable landing. There is a rope 50m before the zero line and 2m above the ground. Your approach must be above this rope. If you touch the rope, this landing scores 400 points.
Your final score will be the addition of all your partial scores.
A performance evaluation is another thing that could greatly benefit from simple canvas-based animation showing scores/penalties.
We probably need to add a simple scoring system so that people can implement their own bonus/penalty triggers.
Some of the more common ideas discussed elsewhere include: autopilot usage, exceeding certain limits(.nas), time & speed.
Also, anything that involves airliners will typically be involve W&B (fuel efficiency) - i.e. see all the "economy" discussions we've here regarding fuel efficiency.
If that is something that is to be supported, it would make sense to directly support only aircraft having at least an early-production status, including a configured and working W&B dialog (as per gui.nas).
Regarding post-flight evaluation, this will either involve sampling data points at run-time via timers, or hooking into the history/replay subsystems. Personally, I'd suggest to focus on those aircraft that already come with a working flight recorder configuration. That should limit the number of supported aircraft quite significantly, while also reducing the amount of frustration for users wanting to play with this using incomplete/unfinished aircraft
Basically, I am saying that it will be less work to ensure that mature aircraft use/provide things like 1) checklists, 2) the w&b dialog and 3) the flight recorder system, than working around all those aircraft that are nowhere close to supporting either of these features but still want to support "missions" - especially given that an aircraft-based tutorial/mission system would greatly benefit from these features being properly set up by the aircraft developer in the first place.
Overall, this should also help improve consistency while reducing the chance for disappointment and frustration among new users (keeping in mind that missions are going to appeal particularly to non-contributors, i.e. users looking for gameplay)