Add "Equivalent Still Air Distance" to tech stopped flights

[JumboShrimp]

Tech stopped flights could use the "Equivalent Still Air Distance" in the pop up, to be able to identify the bottlenecks.

Right now, it only shows the flight times, unlike direct flights, that also have this extra information.

Also, on a similar, but slightly different subject.  The new concept of "Distance via airways" is very good, but I was surprised that it was 170nm for a transatlantic transcontinental flight.  That seems quite excessive, that over land, the actual route would take this much more (including approaches to airport).  It might make sense to budget for that much extra fuel, it seems hard to believe that this would happen on an average flight.

[Sami]

but I was surprised that it was 170nm for a transatlantic flight.  That seems quite excessive

Calculation is based on actual data (well not actual air routes but actual flight data and formula used in generic flight planning). Don't have any longhaul logs right here but a great circle route of 1420nm in Europe was planned as 1530nm. 1000nm route planned as 1060nm etc. It's about 5-8% more usually IRL compared to direct distance between the points (with some "sanity cap" and other logic on the added distance for AWS calculations too; can't be 500 nm for 10000nm route).

[JumboShrimp]

Calculation is based on actual data (well not actual air routes but actual flight data and formula used in generic flight planning). Don't have any longhaul logs right here but a great circle route of 1420nm in Europe was planned as 1530nm. 1000nm route planned as 1060nm etc. It's about 5-8% more usually IRL compared to direct distance between the points (with some "sanity cap" and other logic on the added distance for AWS calculations too; can't be 500 nm for 10000nm route).

I actually meant transcontinental (edited) not transatlantic, but it is actually similar.

170nm on a 2127nm (ewr-lax) flight, which is exactly 8%.  170 nm It is a rough equivalent of first flying from EWR to BOS...  I was just thinking that long over-land routes should have low overhead (percentage wise), compared to short, or also compared to LH flights over the ocean, but I guess there is no easy way for the system to distinguish between them....