Rongor

Can you remove the ILS info? Its irrelevant that there is ILS available today. It didn't have ILS until at least 1991 (my charts AIRAC is 19SEP1991) so mentioning it here only confuses the report. Regarding the TACAN, it had been on Ch 88 in 1991, no idea when it had been changed from 28.

Under construction, 1968, It had been completed the next year.

Without many words, can the tower shaft corrected to be a cone all the way up?

The trees are the real problem. What are the trees supposed to do inside the death strip? Assist fugitives when climbing across the wall? Also there was generally no grass. It should be all sand. Border guards wanted to see any kind of traces from people attempting to reach the wall on foot.

I understand that we can't expect a map of this size being entirely handcrafted. I also don't see an issue alike "too few" points of interest being modeled. I totally get that the creation of such an enormous map size will require some shortcuts, and templates might be an acceptable thing. Yet for some reason I struggle to not feeling annoyed by such widespread copy pasting of quite the big templates here. We all value Ugra for their invention of details, of raising the standards for map fidelity and inventing new ideas. Yet this slowly starts to feels like an attempt to use the incredible details on stuff like oil barrels, wall clocks, drawer handles and chairs and monitors in airfield towers, combined harvesters, blue bicycles and hot air balloons to distract us from quite the repetitive use of templates of so far unseen size. Or in other words, at this point I can't follow why it was deemed necessary to create beautifully detailed interiors of factories and power plants (for any other purpose than nice teasing pictures building up hype and the wow effect when visiting these ingame for the first and second time) while the effort would rather have been a better investment for adding some more building archetypes or increased support for the AI or whatever procedure was used to interpret all the data required for map creation. Yes, this is early access and I am already happily contributing hints and advise in this forum, to support Ugra and their product. Yet right now I wish they would have focused on those details responsible for an historically accurate depiction of things which are supposed to make this map a cold war themed map. Adding the Iron curtain and selected models of renown historic landmarks are a good basis. Its sad to see this immersion reduced by dropping ever the same templates of actually big complexes (as beautifully detailed as they may be) across the map. This is a small compilation. There are many more of these out there. Each of them is as big as several city blocks or a little village. While alone they look beautiful in their detail, the copy pasting has gotten out of control.

This location is fiction. The area has been one of the two Berlin Zoos (this being the East Berlin one, "Tierpark Berlin") since 1955. https://www.google.com/maps/@52.5025658,13.5311921,3124m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDQxNi4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Totally! This is currently an issue for most if not all airfields though. Has been reported here already:

has already been reported here Threads can be merged. New report extends the issue to around 8 km out of the immediate port area.

do you know this site? https://www.mil-airfields.de/deutschland/ddr-sowjetische-flugplaetze-gssd.html

I got lucky as a kid on an Open Doors at Berlin-Tempelhof in 1991(?) and a Huey pilot there gifted me a DOD FLIP (Terminal) Low Altitude Europe North Africa and Middle East. (AIRAC 19 SEP 1991). Unfortunately because I was young and stupid I ripped out the Tegel, Tempelhof and Gatow pages to have them right next to me for PC flying but of course these pages got lost over time. How could I have known this little book turn out to be a piece of gold 35 years later. This old data is really hard to find. Thanks for the insight. I guess this gives us hope the issue can be fixed?

This is not accurate for the cold war era. Your 2024 charts don't really help here. There was no Southlane in the 1980s and the Northlane had different dimensions (1000x50m).

Inaccurate for the cold war era, see the chart H4XAPU posted above

So far I checked Sperenberg on channel 28 and Altes Lager on channel 24 and couldn't receive them in my MiG-21. To rule out I did something wrong, can somebody else confirm these two do work?

Also the ILS is wrong at Bückeburg. - ILS frequency 114.80 MHz is outside of the ICAO-ILS frequency roster (108.10-111.95 MHz). Also please see next point below... - Bückeburg didn't have any ILS, both ILS should be removed

The true headings are irrelevant. Since only the magnetic variation is changing over time while plate tectonic drift of continents is very likely not simulated, the true heading will always be the same. Magnetic variation shift would be the only important factor in this matter, so its sufficient to simply observe the shifts in magnetic headings. Evidently the shift in real world magnetic variation along the cold war era up until today is too small here to result in the 10 degree offsets we see at airfields the further west they are on the map. So we can rule out magnetic variation or "wrong" Mission dates being the culprit. These would only result in a few degrees (2° max?) offset. You can check on the magnetic variation lines on the F10 map in aviation display mode as well. The issue we have at hand is that ingame runway headings (which are always published magnetic) deviate by up to more than 10 degrees from the published runway headings, regardless which mission date is set. And this deviation increases with decreasing longitude. The more east you go (Berlin for example) deviation decreases and headings become accurate.

Both of you guys are confusing things and I wish we could have kept all this out of this thread. VOR are VHF Omnidirectional Range radionavigational aids operating in the VHF band (hence the name) between 108 MHz and 117.95 MHz, historically only used west of the Iron curtain. NDB are Non-Directional Beacons operating in the LF and MF bands, between 190 and 1750 kHz. Its an ancient concept, used by east and west alike. NDBs can be used along airfield approach paths, often co-located to Outer and Middle Marker Beacons (which operate on 75 MHz, transmitting vertically upwards within a limited cone. These approaches may also be supported by an ILS but neither the NDBs nor the Outer/Middle markers are in any way part of ILS itself or "ILS beacons", even while they are apparently named like this inside DCS lua files. ILS is an ICAO standard which during cold war times has been widely implemented in the west (globally today) and at 5 airfields only in East Germany (Leipzig, Erfurt, Dresden, Berlin-Schönefeld and Neuhardenberg). ILS is a combination of Localizer (operating between 108.10 and 111.95 MHz within the VOR frequency range) and Glideslope (operating in the 329-335 MHz range) transmitters. Warsaw pact airfields would instead use a RSBN/PRMG combination, which is incompatible to ICAO-ILS. For Warsaw pact airfields, an array of outer/inner beacons is often provided to guide on approach paths laterally from both approach directions of a runway. These are in fact NDBs. While they can be co-located to additional Marker beacons, they must not be confused with these.

This would contradict my list in the first post, which clearly has airfields from both sides of the iron curtain. NDBs work in the LF/MF range. kHz is the standard.

- ILS frequency 109.20 MHz is not compatible with the ICAO-ILS frequency band. Next eligible frequencies would be either 109.15 or 109.30 MHz, also please see next point below - Wiesbaden didn't have any ILS, both should be removed - TACAN facilities are doubled, the eastern one is wrong and should be removed. The western TACAN is at the correct location, marker "WIB" and channel 88 are correct as well - NDB marker "WIB" is incorrect, correct one is "WBD"

Btw. frequencies published by DOD FLIP in 1991 had been RWY07L - 110.10 MHz "RHM" (109.60 MHz in DCS) RWY07R - 111.10 MHz "IRF" (110.80 MHz in DCS) RWY25L - 110.70 MHz "IFM" RWY25L - 109.50 MHz "DLF" 109.60 and 110.80 are indeed incompatible with ICAO-ILS frequency plan. Between 108.10 MHz and 111.95 MHz, only .10, .15, .30, .35, .50, .55, .70, .75, .90, .95, are allowed. Btw. all Frankfurt runway headings in DCS are 9° higher than published... Ugra, please fix the ILS07L and 07R frequencies by changing them to either 109.55 and 110.75 or to 110.10 and 111.10.

I can confirm Wunstorf is turned 9 degrees cw. 1991 FLIP chart says 262.5° for rwy 26 yet F10 map reads 271°. Spangdahlem 1991 FLIP chart reads 226.5° for rwy 23 and F10 map reads 236°, so 10° cw deviaton. Frankfurt rwy headings are 9° higher than published (for that time). Berlin airfields featuring no deviation is a hint that the map of this size struggles to project the converging meridians on a flat map scenery. It seems to be accurate at Berlin's longitude and then slowly turns clockwise the more west we go. Not sure if this can be avoided.

I cannot confirm this for the entire map. It seems wrong for Hannover indeed, yet the runway heading on F10 map is the same you see ingame. I just tested Berlin Tegel and Gatow and the rwy headings are correct. So its not the entire map. Only Hanover (and maybe others we will have to discover). 266° is pretty accurate for both of Berlin-Tegel runways 26L and 26R...

Schwanenwerder is missing. I think this might not qualify as nitpicking because there are islands in Berlin smaller than this one implemented.

A "Northeim" has been placed here, east of Lüchow at N 52°59'03" E 11°14'13" It doesn't seem there has ever been any airfield at this location. Instead Northeim airfield should appear here at N 51°42'28" E 10°01'56"

Ugra did a visually great reproduction of the Schäferberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernmeldeturm_Berlin While Ugra even did care to represent an angular offset between the field antennas on the top and the parabolic antennas at the base, the entire tower now only requires a 56° clockwise increase of its heading to be accurate. The 2 parabolic antennas should be facing the Torfhaus station, west of the Brocken/Harz. Unfortunately this end of this radio link isn't represented yet. The red/white checkered field antennas require the 56° heading increase as well, as they should be faced towards Gartow. The smaller lattice tower next to it with the 2 small parabolic antennas also requires this heading correction. These radio links ensured telephone links and TV signal transfer from West Germany to West Berlin. The GDR's Staatssicherheit put up listening posts along these direct links to monitor the telephone transmissions to West Berlin.

Several east German airfields should have their ILS removed, as these weren't equipped with ICAO-compatible ILS during cold war era (and most of them aren't today) affected: - Haina - Allstedt - Zerbst - Finow - Laage - Garz - Barth