graveyard4DCS

One work-arounds with modern aircraft is to work in true headings instead of magnetic headings. In real life, magnetic headings are only used for instrument departure and landing procedures. In all other instances, true headings are the way to go.

Hi, thanks for your input. I agree with you, searching through the flight performance manual is time consuming, and I bet no one does it on a regular basis. If you fly the Hornet or the Hawg, you might be interested in AMVI's mission planner, it will answer you needs I believe. Personally, I'm used to making rough mental calculations which work quite well for performance (fuel vs time vs speed). And the big advantage of this method is that it remains valid in real time, since there's no dependency on external software when you're in the cockpit. But I agree that it can be useful for finer calculations, when you're within a few hundred pounds in terms of accuracy.

Hi, I’d like to get player's opinion on the current landscape of mission planning tools available for DCS World. The context is serious/realistic pre-mission preparation, with the goal of supporting structured multiplayer operations (up to a large COMAO level). I'm interested to hear from others: What are you currently using in single player, and in your squadron/group? What do you consider must-have features in a modern DCS mission planning suite? Here's a quick overview of the tools I’m aware of, with some notes based on experience: 1. CombatFlite Pros: The only complete standalone planner available today Unique features. E.g.: intervisibility analysis Supports import of .miz files Extensible to new theaters with basic user effort Cons: Development appears to have stalled; no updates in a long time Export of .miz files needs a lot of workarounds Still in my opinion the most complete standalone planner available today. 2. CombinedOps Pros: Web-based and multi-user capable Real-time coordination across participants ACO and ATO generation tools Free Cons: Limited set of mission planning features, not yet matching the depth of CombatFlite for detailed planning tasks Depends on active server hosting Overcrowed view for complex missions You must work from an existing flight in a .miz file 3. FragOrder Pros: Web-based and multi-user capable Real-time coordination across participant Direct editing of DCS .miz files in a web interface Cons: Limited in flexibility and detail of planning You must work from an existing flight in a .miz file 4. DCS Web Planner Pros: Free Cons: Lacks advance mission planning features No collaborative use case Depends on active server hosting You must work from an existing flight in a .miz file Thank you!

If you check my website you'll see that I published it a while ago already. And I'll keep it updated when new airfields and beacons are added.

All three maps with elevation data and xml files with airports and beacons are now available : South Atlantic theater for CombatFlite is now up and ready.

Now available in DCS user files. Enjoy!

Hi, you should start by reading this :

The very high resolution map that is used in DCS F10 view is now available here (free membership) : Enjoy!

Hi, Can we have an update on this bug? 3 years later, it's still the same status: GBU-12 and GBU-10 can be lofted and tossed with the F/A-18C, but GBU-16 is still very long and never gets the LASER spot. Thank you,

If you’ve tried to fly Operation Bakwa Hammer and found yourself wondering how to approach the attack profile, manage fuel, stay on timeline, or navigate the threat environment, I’ve put together a detailed step-by-step breakdown of the full mission planning process. It’s based on a logical structure as it can be used in real-world aviation, adapted to the context of DCS. The write-up goes through all the key planning phases: Feasibility (fuel, timing, weather) Tactical and threat analysis Full 4T study (Task, Target, Threat, Tactics) Route and waypoint design using visual navigation techniques Fuel planning (JOKER, BINGO, push fuel, etc.) Contingency management etc... The goal is to offer a clear and practical framework that helps make complex missions more manageable — particularly when flying alone or with a small element in high-threat environments. It’s not meant to be “the” way to plan, but it should provide a useful reference for anyone who wants to approach their missions with more structure and intent. Enjoy!

Dear Ugra Media Team, First of all, thank you for your continued work on providing new theaters. I’d like to raise a terrain-related issue that affects all maps in DCS (not only yours) and has a critical impact on mission planning and visual navigation: DCS currently displays Tactical Pilotage Charts (TPCs) as the base map layer in the Mission Editor and F10 view—but the actual in-game terrain does not reflect the contents of this chart. This is not a minor discrepancy. Entire features visible on the TPC—towns, roads, airfields, railways, dams, power lines, smokestacks, vertical obstructions—are completely missing from the terrain. This breaks both immersion and function for players who expect the TPC to be an authoritative reference, as it is in real-world aviation. This is the key point: DCS is explicitly showing the TPC as a reference map, which implies that what you see is what you get. But that is not true in practice. Pilots and mission creators plan based on that chart, only to find that key features simply do not exist in-game. We are not concerned if some features exist in-game and aren’t on the TPC chart. The concern is the opposite: if a feature is shown on the TPC, it must exist in-game. Examples of missing TPC features: Towns (even large ones) shown on the chart, but no buildings or textures in-game. Roads and railways that appear on the chart, but do not exist in the terrain mesh. Dams, bridges, smokestacks, or power lines visible on the TPC but entirely absent from the map. These are not minor decorative details—they are tactical elements for low-level visual navigation, mission timing and leg planning, target area identification and IP selection, and obstacle avoidance. What we’re asking: We understand this is not a trivial fix. But we ask for a long-term, map-by-map effort to bring terrain data up to par with the TPC reference layer already used in the Mission Editor and F10 view. Specifically: If a feature is shown on the TPC, include it in the terrain. Start with key navigational aids and obstacles: roads, towns, power lines, railways, airfields, vertical obstructions. This would greatly improve realism, usability, and trust in the mission planning tools provided within DCS. Why this matters: You chose to display the TPC chart as the reference map in both mission planning and live operations (F10). That choice is excellent—but only if the game world matches it. As it stands, the chart becomes misleading, which hurts gameplay and immersion. We’re not asking here for new assets or visual upgrades—we’re asking for basic terrain consistency with the chart DCS already uses. Thank you for your time and consideration! Examples: Old Map - Syria The railway bridge is missing, as well as all the villages to the south. Other example: very large mast/tower missing. New Map - CW Germany No large antenna.

Hi, A first modern VFR ICAO chart for Germany has been released in ED user files. The TPC map used in DCS F10 map will be released shortly! Note that both maps are also available in .mbtiles format for CombatFlite.

Rename to theaters.xml and replace the original file. Please watch the video above to find more answers maybe?

Hello, You'll find attached the syria.xml file with all airfields and beacons for both Syria and Iraq theaters. You can now use CombatFlite on both of them! Enjoy!null syria.xml

After a previous post on runway attacks — “Is (Almost) Everyone Doing It Wrong???” — I thought it was time to look at another area where fundamentals are often misunderstood: formation flying. Yes, it’s fun to fly tight and get the perfect screenshot, but tactical formations aren’t about looking good — they’re about mutual support, survivability, and combat performance. And just like with runway strikes, a lot of DCS players are unintentionally flying in ways that greatly reduce their effectiveness. This post intends to highlight two of the most common mistakes that show up again and again in MP flights and training servers. Tactical 2-Ship Formations: Quick Overview Line Abreast: the default combat geometry. Both aircraft fly side by side, offering full radar separation, 360° visual coverage, and flexibility for offensive or defensive turns. Wedge: wingman is 30–45° back and offset. More maneuverable, better for terrain or fluid situations, but reduces rearward lookout — especially for the wingman. Fighting Wing: tight and offset behind the lead. Works for training, weather, or short strike runs, but has nearly no place in contested airspace. Limits visibility, and reaction time. Common Mistake 1: Flying Too Close Flying tight may look sharp, but in combat it kills effectiveness. The wingman becomes fixated on avoiding the lead, leaving little mental bandwidth for scanning threats or managing weapons. Visual scan collapses. Radar coverage overlaps. Mutual support disappears. Tactical spacing should allow: A break turn toward your six without risk of collision. Enough distance to remain outside minimum range for your own weapons. As a rule: the faster and higher you go, the more spacing you need. 1.5 –2.5 Nm at low level is normal. At altitude or during supersonic cruise, 4–5 Nm may be required. If you're flying that close in combat, you're too close... Common Mistake 2: Flying on the Wrong Side Wingman position is tactical, not cosmetic. You're not just mirroring your lead — you’re scanning a specific part of the sky. The wingman is responsible for a visual and radar sector. Flying on the wrong side creates blind zones and ruins mutual support. Here’s how to choose the correct side: If there's a known threat — fly opposite. If not — position opposite the most significant air traffic. Still nothing? — avoid terrain hazards like antennas or cities. Clean airspace? — fly opposite the sun. That old trick of diving out of the sun still works, especially when nobody’s watching. Want More? This post just scratches the surface. Read the full article to know more!