One thing I've been curious about is what OR assumes for reloads.
When you pick a motor reload, is the weight data purely the reload, or does it include a casing as well? What if you use a larger case and a spacer system? Or use different forward closure types because of your retention system, deployment scheme, etc.? (Granted, the mass delta here may not be much, I don't know) It's far from ideal to have to add additional mass component(s) to the model to deal with a larger case + spacers, as that may not apply to every motor you simulate (since they may be different grain counts). It would also be nice if you could tell OR which cases / spacers you own, 1) to restrict the reloads that appear in the list to the ones you can actually fly, and 2) automatically know that if the only cases I have are a 6G and a 3G with 2 spacers, that when I pick a 4G motor it has to use the 6G + 2 spacers, but if I have a 6GXL and a 4G and the requisite spacers, the 4G reload would go in the 4G case with no spacers. Same would go with when you have to add an adapter to fly a smaller diameter motor than the mount, having it automatically add the appropriate reducer for weight and CG shift when necessary, but not otherwise. Or that while I own a 29mm case, I don't have a 54-to-29mm adapter so I can't fly 29mm motors in my 54mm mount (this one you can basically handle by sliding the minimum motor diameter size in the motor selector at least).
With something that could make a more automatic choice for motors and their supporting hardware like this, what I'd really like is a simple way to "add all" available motors based on criteria like it already offers but also the available cases, as adding each one manually becomes quite tedious in my opinion. A step even farther would be to be able to add and simulate all at once, and perhaps even filter motors by their sim results (I want to stay under mach, I want to find the highest flying motor, I want all motors that go over 5000 feet, all motors that stay within my waiver, the motor that gets closest to 7000 feet, etc). Of course I realize these sims never perfectly match the real world so not all of these things will be exact, but it sure beats the manual entry, more simulations, removal of motors that didn't qualify, that I'm going through right now (lots of clicks in different windows & tabs, and this doesn't even factor in any adapters/spacers I would need to add to make things more precise as that would just be way too painful to have to go back and keep modifying in the design).