graveyard4DCS

True, this same technique applies to "short landings", and is similar to the night landing technique when assessing height is difficult. For most aircraft, the main landing gear can sustain the Vz of a standard 3° slope impact without flare (at normal weight).

Overhead Break: Are We (Once Again) Doing it Wrong? After watching the recent MiG-29 landing tutorials, and remembering the debates that followed the earlier F-16 overhead break video, I thought it’s worth revisiting the overhead break (OHB) from a different perspective. The point is not just HOW to fly it, but WHY it was designed that way in the first place. Without that context, it’s easy to miss the purpose of the maneuver and fall into the same recurring mistakes we see in most DCS tutorials. TAC ATTACK - 1977: the "break" arrival has been designed to avoid the kills in the traffic pattern... As with the previous posts Runway Attacks in DCS World: Is (Almost) Everyone Doing It Wrong ??? and Flying Formations in DCS: Are We (Also) Doing It Wrong?, this is not about calling out individuals. We'll just treat visible mistakes as a learning opportunity, that's the basis of any serious debrief. What matters is understanding the tactical logic behind the OHB, and how to translate that into the sim with the right mindset. Below is a short list of the common errors that keep recurring in tutorial videos: Approaching slow, instead of keeping combat speed until the break Flying directly over the runway centerline instead of offsetting to the cold side Gentle 3G (and even 2G sometimes... looking at you, @Wags for the MiG-29 landing tutorial ) breaks that don’t place you properly abeam Eyes glued to the HUD instead of scanning outside Using the “45° cue” regardless of spacing, leading to huge base legs Flat final turns instead of rolling aggressively nose-low Touching down one-third into the runway like a civilian airliner instead of maximizing runway length Dropping the nose immediately on touchdown instead of using aerodynamic braking (unless chute-equipped, or not recommended for the aircraft type) Tutorial vs Reality... But the important is WHY such a difference? Missing the reasons for these errors defeats the whole point of the OHB: recover fast, safely, and tactically. I’ve tried to unpacked all of these points in a single article: combat origins, common mistakes, and practical guidance for executing the OHB properly in DCS. If you want to fly it like a real pylot, give it a read! Combat origins of the "Tactical" or "Battle" Break

Thanks for the links, I already knew this website, it's indeed a very good source for all sorts of maps. Unfortunately, unless I'm missing something, it seems that they don't have T-18D. But still, thanks for taking the time to answer here!

Following the latest DCS theater update, the CombatFlite database has also been updated. H3 Airfields Cluster Overview of current airfields for Iraq theater

Phraseology, ground lasing and medium/high altitude buddy lasing have now been covered. The phraseology details the two possible lasing options: continuous (highly recommended in most cases, and I explain you why) and delayed. The ground-lasing section describes the profiles you’ll see when a JTAC is designating the target, highlights the main risks, and explains why Paveway II/III use modes such as Wide Pulse and Narrow Pulse, as well as the LLPL and SLPL options on the F-15E. Finally, the airborne buddy lasing series reviews the primary profiles: fighting wing, wedge, trail, and two circling methods. It and includes a short "tactical balance" for each profile to help you select the best option for your mission. SLPL and LLPL options on the LASER code for the F-15E Buddy-lasing Phraseology Tactical Balance of the "Fighting Wing" buddy-lasing profile.

The Kandahar Firing Ranges training mission has been updated in user files: added Texas Helo Range for rotary wings; removed High Digit SAM mod, the mission is now mod-free. More details about Tarnak Range here, and Texas Helo Range there (external links).

Hi, Fist of all, thanks for these nice additions to the default map. Is it possible to have an idea of the future locations that will be added? That's in order to avoid duplicating efforts, since as you can see in user files, all the member's static templates try to recreated similar layouts with existing static objects. Also, there' a discrepancy between real name and what what's on the game map for COP Deysie that appears as FOB Daysie in game (it's actually a COP as announced and there's a spelling mistake). Thank you

Taking the Risk Estimate Distances from official docs like the JFIRE is certainly the best way to answer your question. 10% PI and 0,1% PI were the two common thresholds in the past. You'll see that later versions use new references with 0.1% PI standing/prone/prone protected. You'll note also that values changed along time, taking into account newer studies and operational experience. In any case, it will give you realistic values for all types of western weapons effects.

I'll try to find what asset must be replaced and release an update later this month. In the meantime, high digit SAM is a fairly common mod, you can find more here :

Late answer, but better late than never... Low level Paveway II profiles are perfectly possible. They are described on official Paveway datasheets, and you can find practical advice here. However, as noted above auto lase is not recommended due to uncertainties regarding weapon's time of flight. A continuous manual lasing is therefore recommended.

Thank you!

A new training mission is now available in DCS user files, recreating the Tarnak Range located just southeast of Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan. This range was actively used by coalition forces during the OEF/ISAF campaigns for live-fire exercises, mostly ground-to-ground, but also sometimes for close air support (CAS) training and JTAC integration. It also holds historical significance as a former al-Qaeda training site prior to 2001. Additional historical context is available here. The mission features a variety of static and mobile targets, along with MANPADs and AAA systems that can be dynamically activated or deactivated using the F10 radio menu. The implementation of the MOOSE Range script enables detailed scoring for bombing and strafe runs and provides protection from MANPAD hits. A JTAC unit is included to support CAS training. While the range procedures and patterns are fictional, they are inspired by those used in real-world training environments. CombatFlite and Tacview support is also available. This mission is designed primarily for fixed-wing aircraft training. A future update will expand the mission to include the Texas Helo Range, specifically tailored for rotary-wing operations. Important notes: Open this mission as a multiplayer mission in order to be able to use dynamic slots and choose any aircraft at Kandahar, or manually add the aircraft of your choice in DCS Mission Editor. Due to a DCS bug, it is not possible to directly monitor when a player enters a plane. So in a mission with client slots, it is vital that a player first enters as spectator or hits ESC twice and after that jumps into the slot of his aircraft! If that is not done, the script is not started correctly. This can be checked by looking at the radio menus. If the mission was entered correctly, there should be an "On the Range" menu items in the "F10. Other..." menu.

Hello, I'm looking for TPC T-18D. If anyone can share it, I'm interested! Thank you

In one of the earlier missions I shared in DCS User Files, I tried to incorporate elements of the Rules of Engagement (ROE). The goal was to enhance the sense of realism and authenticity in mission design. I’m interested in hearing your perspective: do you think that procedural elements like ROE contribute meaningfully to immersion? Or do they tend to be seen as purely cosmetic, barely read and quickly forgotten? Note: If you're new to the concept of ROE (Rules of Engagement) that was included in this mission, you can start with a first introduction here. If you're already familiar with the concept, then you might be interested in how NATO structures its ROE using a specific numbering system.

Hi all, Several people told me that they struggle to find the target, even if coordinates are correct. Please note that the target coordinates in the mission description are roughly 0.1 Nm away from the actual runway, which is consistent with the TLE V precision indicated in the target description. These coordinates roughly match both the actual runway coordinates in DCS, and the coordinates in the .cf file (CombatFlite) I provided, so it means that it's not a mission design or planning issue. It means that there must be a mission execution issue. One of the direction to check is your INS drift: mission date is 1991, before GPS, therefore you cannot rely on automatic GPS updates to keep your aircraft always on track. A 1 Nm INS drift after 30' - 45' minutes of flight is coherent. Most certainly, the AI aircraft are able to make perfect navigation even with INS drift, hence the difference between you and the AI. My advice is to use visual references for final navigation. Farah airfield is located close to a mountainous area, that will help you a lot to refine your navigation visually. In short final, use finer vertical features, like the small hills close to the airfield, it will also help you find the target even if the INS is 1 Nm off. In particular, I suggest you to read in details the "Mission Planning" posts, this one in particular: it will help you determine which visual references to use. Thank you!

If you are interested by fragmentation envelope, RED and collateral damages, I tried to introduce these concepts here and here. But I agree with you, we need to do some tests to see how DCS replicates all these models, and how far we are from real life data. Until now, I considered DCS parameters "safer" than real life parameters, so sticking to real life procedures ensured safe margins. With the new damage models, we need to reassess whether it's still the case or not.

In real life, a hard deck at 3000' AGL is generally the norm. There are several fragment envelope diagrams in various flight manuals, and 3000' seems to be a safe value for all bombs at sea level. Keep in mind that the fragmentation envelope is shaped by the drag of the fragments, and therefore the higher the target, the larger the danger zone.

Hi @Minsky, ICAO code for Olenya is XLMO. Just a typo I suppose. Thank you!

Hello! I'm looking for the original source of the maps used in the WWII Marianas Islands theater in DCS. If anyone can point me in the right direction... Thank you!

Regarding dive bombing in particular, you'll find all your answers here. The whole series of articles focuses on Paveway II, but since their ballistics is close to dumb bombs, most of it will apply to them as well.

All the profiles described on this official Paveway II datasheet are described in this video. Don't hesitate to ask questions if anything needs to be clarified! For those who are curious, the tacview tracks are available here.

Hi, Airport charts for VFR only airfields in South and East Afghanistan have been released. Enjoy!

Hello, Sorry to bother you but I struggle with the terrain textures as detailed in your documentation. I tried to add custom textures as explained, but they appear under the default textures, and the default textures don't seem to be accessible in any folder. It seems that we can't remove them, unless by unticking the "custom textures" option, but then we get rid of all the textures, both default and new ones. The only solution is to put them in "Real World", but I wanted to use them on DCS terrain... Original textures (West) over new textures (East). Eventually, did you work on integrating geotiff pictures instead of the "tiles" that are fairly difficult to use and generate? Thank you,

Hi, some servers enforce a tome delay on the tacview recording to prevent people form using the real-time tacview for better SA. You have to remain connected by the same delay after end of game to have the full track.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been putting together a full series on how to employ Paveway II laser-guided bombs in DCS World. Even for the "basic" level delivery, I tried to include detailed description of your tasks in the cockpit. And hopefully, you'll discover new ways of dropping your GBUs, giving you more flexibility for various tactical scenarios across a range of real-world inspired delivery profiles. There I covered level, dive, pop-up, toss and loft bombing, with a focus on geometry, timing, arming delays, and how all of this ties into tactical decision-making. The idea is to help you make informed choices in planning and execution, especially in more demanding scenarios like high-threat airspace. Example of "tactical balance" study for one of the profiles. Guess which one... Each article comes with a set of kneeboard pages, built from ballistic tools and in-game testing. You’ll find release distances, time of flight estimates, impact angles, and recommended fuze settings, i.e. all that can actually help you hit the target and survive the pass. Example of geometry study of the dive profile. Even if examples are more centered on my module of predilection, the F/A-18C Hornet, any module carrying Paveway IIs will benefit. You can start here, the full index is in the introduction post (Patreon). From there, you can jump straight into any of the profiles. A usual, I'll appreciate any feedback or questions. And if you're into this kind of detailed weapon employment, there's more on the way!