western_JPN

Hi. I found Tel Nof AFB's spots 44 - 96 have "detour" taxi routes for both Takeoff / Landing. Especially spots 85 - 89 have bigger trouble. My report and suggestion is based on "Not to use Runway 15R / 33L as a taxiway, keep it clear for future parallel takeoff / landing runway use". If Runway 15R / 33L is planned as a taxiway (not a functional runway) in the DCS terrain module, I'll change my thought to follow it. Please tell me your plan. RW 18 Takeoff from spots 85 - 89. This case has two different troubles. One is the route drawing big U with crossing the active RW 18. Another is taxing on RW 33L / 18R and only one aircraft can enter the RW 33L / 18R area. The second a/c (taxi-out from spots 85 - 89) has to wait on the end of RW 33L until the first a/c exits the end of RW 15R. A long time waiting occurs about each a/c. The taxi routes to be : RW 18 Takeoff from other spots (44 - 96) have a similar problem crossing RW 18, and "detour U" about spots 44 - 64. My suggestion into simple and shorter --- RW 18 Landing taxi routes are only troubled with spots 85 - 89. They are also use RW 15R / 33L. But not to wait one another, less waiting time. RW 36 Takeoff "detour" taxi routes is also only caused with spots 85 - 89 and RW 15R / 33L. They have to wait the previous a/c exiting the runway. Same to RW 18 Takeoff issue. RW 36 Landing shows the inverted routes of RW 18 Takeoff like --- About Spots 85 - 89 : Other spots 44 - 96 after RW 36 Landing show also inverted from Takeoff RW 18 routes (shown above) --- crossing the active runway and detour "U". Suggested new routes are also the inverted ones of Takeoff RW 18. RW 15L Takeoff has only spots 85 - 89 trouble. Second - Fifth a/c have to wait the clearance of RW 15R / 33L. Same to RW 18 takeoff. If RW 15R / 33L is planned as taxiway, the current route is the shortest and not to change, but occupied decision has to be got rid. To avoid taxing RW 15R / 33L , the route to be : RW 33R has almost no problems about taxi. Its Landing with spots 95 - 99 are allowed to taxi on RW 15R / 33L or not. (Inverted from RW 15L Takeoff.)

After the last Update patch applied time or a new module installed time, once DCS World is executed in Online mode with internet user authorising succeeded. Installed purchase modules can be used in 3 days in Offline mode without internet connection. Then Time Left counter (limit to next internet user auth) is shown in main menu screen. When the 3 days will be past without Online auth and the counter will reach 00:00:00, purchase modules will become unavailable. But until it, they should be available even Offline. If your DCS World doesn't work so ..... something wrong around installing or authorising.

From "Start menu" of your Windows, open "Eagle Dynamics" tree , are there DCS icons about both versions stable (with no remarks) and Open Beta ? You can find two menu items "Uninstall DCS World" and "Uninstall DCS World OpenBeta" there. In executing "Uninstall DCS World" , Only stable DCS World will be uninstalled with Open Beta kept.

Sinai map's Highway traffic (with widely separated 2+2 lanes) looks going here : When there is not a normal road but Highway, the traffic direction is to be : Even railways are inserted in their middle, also to be : The Highways in Las Vegas / Nevada map work properly, I've checked. ED will tell you how to setup traffic directions for those 2+2 lanes' Highway.

The current ob and stable 2.8.7 .42718 brings Syria map "new night lighting" and "destruction models for Aleppo power plant and Lafarge factory" (and right hand traffic in Cyprus etc.) from official changelog. About new specific object destruction, released to the public are only those two. I've tested in my DCS World bombing airport buildings of Beirut and Aleppo. They are not destructed as same as previous DCS versions. The movies and screenshots MAESTR0 posted here maybe a teaser for a future coming update.

Hi, ED forum moderator @BIGNEWY or @NineLine . (I don't know how to forum-system mention to them , sorry) Please move this topic to another Modding section "Static/AI Mods for DCS World" . https://forum.dcs.world/forum/1156-staticai-mods-for-dcs-world/ Thanks !

I'm happy you are interested in my works. Btw, I'm a little bored to build similar style 3d models ... trying different variants like prop liner ? Some months are needed to restart next TTTwJ. Or I'll draw more liveries for DC-9s / ERJs or CAM B747s. Hi. I cannot say Yes or No until I see what will be posted ...

Hi. Not sadjad-vosoul's work in this topic though, seth0s drew Islamic Republic of Iran, Iran Air and Kish Air liveries for A320 in Civil Aircraft Mod. (I'm not sure those files are download available still now.) About my MD-83 and ERJ-145 mods, Iran Airtour , Iran Air , ATAairlines liveries are provided.

Hi, Ugra Media. I've checked current DCS World 2.8.7 .42718 with my Rafic Hariri debug missions. 1. KC-135 takeoff with no wind is not changed (but not so serious , happened rarely) 2. RW 21 becomes not to use for Landing ATC instructs Landing to RW 16 or 17 even with crosswinds. Colliding with buildings is gone. Thanks your works !!

I know that --- to make comfort solution for it, we have to wait ED's core system ATC AI refactoring , though. I report some troubles about Nevatim and suggest my plan. Nevatim AFB have two areas , North = For fighters with two runways 08L/24R 2,600 m and 08R/24L 3,350 m , South = For large transports or tankers with runway 07/25 3,900m. Current DCS can treat only the longest runway 07/25 for all even chosen parking spot is in north area. (Some north spots don't have taxing route to RW 07/25 and aircrafts are made "air falling down" --- but that's not my term.) RW 07 end doesn't have taxiways and aircrafts have to taxi-back the runway with the turn pad. RW 07 landing and RW25 takeoff are not trouble. From / To South area parking spots are also not so troubled even RW 07 takeoff / RW 25 landing. From North area parking spot RW 07 takeoff or To North area parking spot RW 25 takeoff need long runway taxi (taxi-back) distance. A lot of waiting minutes for one airplane takeoff or landing. And only RW 25 landing and North area spots, the turn pad area looks out of ATC's runway occupied decision. When the next approaching aircraft request ATC to land RW 25 at just the time the first landed aircraft is making the turn on the pad, ATC gives the second aircraft landing clearance ..... they will collide on the runway. See the timestamp in the right-bottom. Today's my suggestion, even From / To North area How about using the parallel taxiway like ---

About Normal takeoff procedure, you are right. Takeoff clearance message from the tower (ATC) is given after safety airborne of the predecessor --- and more intervals to avoid wake turbulence in civilian airports. To simulate emergency takeoff procedure of military aircrafts, in other words "Minimum interval takeoff" (MITO), current DCS AI behavior is not bad. KC-135s takeoff in 25 seconds intervals in DCS. IRL, USAF tries and succeeds KC-135s MITO in 15 seconds intervals. In September 2021, Fairchild AFB / 92 ARW completed 20x KC-135s takeoff in 5 minutes. About B-52s in Cold war era, they are told also 15 seconds intervals MITO was done. I think .... no need to change takeoff intervals in DCS, now. If possible to command the ATC switching airport / AFB emergency level in missions --- switching long or short takeoff intervals --- in future reworking / evolving whole of ATC functions, that will be great !

Sde Dov's only 1400 meters runway looks too short for those Jets. In reducing total weights into 75 % or less (not load so many bombs, not carry droptanks, decrease internal fuel amount), A-4 F-4 can take-off there. IAF aircrafts deployed there were small props like Cessna 206 and Beechcraft King Air. By the way, A-4E-C mod looks a bit worse take-off performance than historical, the mod needs longer runway than IRL. I feel A-4E can carry some more bombs or fuel even 1400 m runway. Please ask the mod team about its SFM / AI performance settings (not EFM for players).

I've checked all Tel Nof spawn points in HAS that F-15 can taxi out safely or its tailfin collides with doorway. These spots' spawn point or taxi out line are a bit misaligned to there doorways' center and spawned F-15 cannot taxi out. 08, 09, 12, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22 Other HAS spawn points between 03 - 32 are OK.

Hi, Raisuli and OnReTech. About Tel Nof and F-14 taxing, I think OnReTech has not to do anything. 1 - when those shelters and sun shades are correctly modeled and placed , no need to retouch. F-14 will face the same situation IRL. 2 - The trouble that F-14 wings collide with sun shades will be solved in wings swept-back. When HB will add AI F-14 makes wings swept-back in taxing time after landing , F-14 can enter sun shades without wings colliding. 3 - Users set each parking spot numbers instead of Auto. 4 - Even current Sinai map module / Tel Nof AB + F-14 AI, sun shades can be removed by ME trigger function. My screenshots and sample mission are attached. f14b_telnof_land_STSremoved_sinai_20230731.miz

Wow --- OK. I found. Thanks all. Between GBU-24 Paveway III and Mk20 Rockeye *3. Ah ... May I request its listed place moving down to the previous from single Mk84 loadout like L-CFT ?

In current ob 2.8.7 .42718 , F-15E SE S4+'s R-CFT doesn't carry "Mk84 *2" loadout, even there can carry "Mk84 AIR *2" and "Mk84 AIR TP *2" loadouts. Well, L-CFT can carry all "Mk84 *2", "Mk84 AIR *2" and "Mk84 AIR TP *2" loadouts. Is this a bug ?

Open Beta 2.8.7 .42583 gives us ARA Vienticinco de Mayo carrier operational. I found she has a trouble with 2x or more planes set their starting waypoint as "Takeoff from runway" to her. "Takeoff from runway" to a carrier works the aircraft spawning on catapults. Mayo has only one catapult, once spawn-able aircraft amount with "Takeoff from runway" is one. (USS Nimitz class have 4x catapults and max four aircrafts can spawn once with "Takeoff from runway".) When number of the aircrafts with "Takeoff from runway" waypoint to the carrier is over her number of the catapults , excessed aircrafts don't spawn and wait the catapult become opened. --- expected behavior and Nimitz class work so with 5x or more "Takeoff from runway" aircrafts. On 25 de Mayo, all of "Takeoff from runway" aircrafts spawn once of mission starting time and they are overwrapped on her catapult. They cannot be shot from the catapult (colliding each other ? --- F/A-18C) or soon broken (--- A-4E Skyhawk mod). Some catapult settings for "Takeoff from runway" might be missing ? Sample mission with Mayo + F/A-18Cs in SA map. f18c_25mayoto4x_SA_20230729.miz

Some airports with X layout runways or triangle layout runways are more complex to decide the active runway(s) for takeoff or landing. In Syria map, Beirut and Ramat David have such interesting but headache behavior with what wind is set in the missions.

It might come from some HAS facing directions were mistaken. Reported in this topic: When those HAS direction bug will be fixed, taxing trouble will be also solved. Until it, our players are better not to place jets in wrong direction spots.

More checking ... About Hetzerim, spot 145, 146, 147 look similar wrong direction of HAS. Those three spots should open to the north. About Nevatim, spots 110, 111, 112 are also --- should open to the east. (opposite side of 113-115 HAS are omitted in your plan ? google earth photo looks 3x HAS built there) About Ovda, spots 18, 19, 20 should open to the west, duplicated three 26 should open to the west, duplicated three 30 should open to the north, duplicated three 36 should open to the west, duplicated three 50 should open to the north-east, spots 68, 69, 70 should open to the west, spots 74, 75, 76 should open to the north-east, spots 80, 81, 82 should open to the north-west, spots 86, 87, 88 should open to the north-east, duplicated three 100 should open to the north-east. To players: when we place fighter-jets in both correct HAS and incorrect HAS, they will collide each other and stop taxing. Avoiding to use incorrect direction HAS is safe until fixed.

B-52 (and MAM's C-5 Galaxy) can be placed as "Takeoff from Runway" in Syria map; Incirlik, Akrotiri, Larnaca, Beirut, Damascus and more. And they succeed to take-off from there. Impossible is "Takeoff from Ramp" or "Takeoff from parking hot" as discussed in this topic. Changelog of ob patch 2.8.7 .42583 says: Someone knows which parking spots / which airbases are this ? I feel not so changed in this patch about the feature and B-52 cannot be placed in parking as same as older DCS versions. Is this improvement about C-17 or IL-76 size and not for bigger B-52 (and CAM's A330 / MAM's C-5) ?

Don't you use very old version DCS installer downloaded years ago ? or not ED but Steam variant ? Current DCS 2.8 web installer by ED shows that location dialog.

Ras al Khaimah International airport may provide both runway directions 17/35 (mismatching to IRL and runway texture 16/34 though) for each take-off and landing. There doesn't have terrain or city obstacles not to land to RW35 (34). In DCS; PG terrain module, its RW35 (34) touch down area are blacked with tire dusts. The take-off direction in missions with "Takeoff from Runway" starting waypoint or ATC instruction for spots-parking ACs' take-off request is in both 17/35. They look correct. Only landing ATC instruction is always RW17 even with tailwind. This maybe a bug. I heard it from this topic and comment. My own test missions are attached. su25t_RasAlKhaimah_w350_toland_pg_20230727.miz su25t_RasAlKhaimah_w170_toland_pg_20230727.miz

From ob 2.8.7 .42583 changelog: Added right-hand traffic in Cyprus It looks OK about both ground vehicle units and civil traffic cars. Cyprus' Road signals and sign poles still stand for right lanes. They have to face to left lanes.

In ob patch 2.8.7 .42583 , terrain modules can set both traffic side rules in one map. About SA map, Argentina and Chile's civil traffic run on the right lane, Falklands' civil traffic run on the left lane. They are correct to the real world. But ground vehicle units (placed in mission editor) run opposite sides in all areas in SA map. They run on the left lane in South America and on the right lane in Falklands. In Argentina: In Falklands: