I think it should definitely be published as 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 however probably too hard to change GPS's which only provide distance to next WP and don't show dist to threshold.
Yes & yes. A pseudo glideslope would certainly make life safer for the punters. Not at all removing responsibility from captains to take care, as the fork-tailed one is quite right. But, looking at long term statistical accident rates for different approaches, if an approach is easier to interpret and easier to notice errors from, it's going to be safer in terms of lives lost per 1000 approaches.
Interesting how there are some who want Australia's airspace to become even more reliant ... on a GPS based navigation system that Australia neither owns nor controls.
Goodness me Flying Bingi. Who makes & supports the radars that Airservices use? Who makes & supports the airliners that we all fly in? Who makes the back-office IT infrastructure that the entire airspace system relies on? I do think it's a little late for the "if we don't control it then we won't use it" argument.
I'm always sorry to see the legal liability threat being raised. Far too much of that already from CASA. If there is a genuine risk of GPS being shut down, by all means promote it with evidence and robust analysis.