Direct removes procedural hold

[Marcel510]

Issue Description

Some STARs have holds built hin for example: EGKK TIMBA4B

    "TIMBA4B": {     
        "icao": "TIMBA4B",  
        "name": "Timba Four Bravo",  
        "entryPoints": {  
            "KUNAV": []  
        },  
        "body": ["KUNAV", ["AMDUT", "A160"], ["KKE64", "S250-"], ["@TIMBA", "A70|S250-"]],  
        "rwy": {  
            "EGKK08R": [],  
            "EGKK26L": []  
        },  
        "draw": [  
            ["KUNAV", "AMDUT"]  
        ]  
    },  

which works perfectly: but as soon as you give the aircraft a direct to the holding fix the holding is omitted:

Steps to reproduce

• https://openscope-dev-pr-860.herokuapp.com/
• issue "dct TIMBA" to an aircraft with a TIMBA4B routing => no holding

[cake-pie]

Analysis:

~Currently~ In 6.10, the exithold method is basically "if currently in a holding pattern, exit it":

https://github.com/openscope/openscope/blob/847bb91801b7865be3769d68ce120a48b2c1a81c/src/assets/scripts/client/aircraft/Pilot/Pilot.js#L532-L542

However, absent an explicit command to cancel holding, exithold is instead implied by various other commands. The intended behavior is:

• stop holding at current waypoint if you are
• do < other command > instead

Here is proceedDirect:

https://github.com/openscope/openscope/blob/847bb91801b7865be3769d68ce120a48b2c1a81c/src/assets/scripts/client/aircraft/Pilot/Pilot.js#L765-L775

L770 and L771 are in wrong order, so dct TIMBA results in:

• proceed direct to TIMBA
• stop holding at current waypoint (= TIMBA)

~Before I PR this -- should I make it a bugfix or hotfix?~

From 6.11 onwards changes in cancel hold code behavior slightly complicates things (see #1333)

[sam-irl]

bugfix imo. obviously defer to someone more experienced but this has been a known issue for a while, it's important but not absolutely critical

[cake-pie]

Well, it's either a hotfix for 6.10.x, or subsumed by #1333 in 6.11 due to changes by #1160.

[felixscheffer]

bugfix for 6.11 (which we ideally release in 6.12)

[erikquinn]

When an aircraft has holding instructions (though in this case, its implied by the STAR rather than being explicitly issued), and they are cleared direct to the holding fix, we would have to reiterate the hold instructions. So the behavior is a pretty standard one. But I can see your point. More thought is needed to see what we should do here... 🤔