Rongor

Adding a country should be as easy to accomplish (by ED!) as adding a text line into a list and adding a little flag image file. Adding the entire list of global countries which ever existed since the dawn of flight and maybe a dozen fictional ones on top should be achievable by this month's intern during an afternoon at the office, maybe two for preparing the flag images. If its not that simple to do, then the whole implementation is coded unnecessarily complicated in the first place and should have been changed a long time ago. Same for navaids and com frequencies, possibly more stuff I just can't recall right now. Things like these make you wonder why sometimes such trivial items have to rest in ED's backlog for so long.

This is not true . There are numerous popular servers running persistent campaigns involving lost of ground units, necessary to capture and/or defend assets and POIs, these projects would benefit intensely from seriously expanded libraries of vehicles for immersive variation. The current selection of ground units regardless blu/red is very limited and has been for a long time now.

This is correct and nothing Afghanistan specific. Colored names are only visible in the mission editor. In game you have to check the info box. Has been like this forever.

Are you serious? I could be wrong but I don't think ED stands a realistic chance to ever complete any map if we begin to report inaccuracies of 40 ft of elevation across modules encompassing a whole country.

Oh I am totally with you on this. I also wouldn't mind to have fictional TACANs erected for the sake of blufor gameplay. My comment was only meant to clarify the actual situation at HESX. I'd suggest they remove the erroneous VOR/TACAN and maybe instead keep a fictional TACAN in place, while maybe adding the ILS and featuring both in this airfield's info box. In real world the nearest TACAN is MXR at HEAZ (adjacent SW of HECA), which is correctly implemented at channel 110, only the airfield is missing

Regarding Cairo West, the only navaid available there should be ILS on rwy 34L "IPSX" on 111.50 MHz. There is neither a real world VOR nor TACAN at this airfield, so its likely they just have to remove the symbol from the map and VOR and TACAN info will correctly switch to empty.

kinda what I had in mind. I see the usefulness while creating missions. Only they are pretty useless while flying. And also, why not giving these objects FARP capability right away? Mission designers still could decide what to do about them and even if not, players could make use of these locations so much easier by dropping forces and flipping them blue, gaining access to services right away.

in such cases, cycling his weapons will make him lase

Whenever flying helos across Sinai, my immersion suffers intensely when seeing these template towns of what looks like a thousand 5 story office buildings in the middle of fields and orchards. There often aren't even roads connecting these centers let alone inside these areas. It might look okayish from 15000 ft flying fixed wings but visiting these places in a low and slow helo is a horrible experience.

Just visited the site in its current state. If this is the correct location and I think it is, the coming update might add the airport but also adds an incorrect canal and a village which isn't there IRL. Also the illuminated urban area seems much too far in the distant, while it looks ok on the current version:

Since release I am wondering why these heliports are marked that prominently on the F10 map. I could understand their purpose if they would provide any FARP service and therefore would assign blue/red/neutral. Though they don't feature any fuel/ammo stock nor services. Why? Right now the only point of displaying the H symbols across the map seems to be to inform mission designers that there is some heliport object they could include into their mission. Other than that it seems totally unimportant. Same for the SAM-site symbols. Will these heliports at one point after future updates feature services and resources (and allegiance) like a FARP or airfield? Not only would this add game content, also this would eventually give these symbols some meaning. Right now these are only clutter on the map, which isn't of any value (like the SAM sites too).

I think the location is indeed correct, only the Sinai map isn't very accurate. The airport shouldn't feature two runways, there is no diagonal runway in real world. The Sinai map shows too short distance between the north end of that green marked canal and the shore. North of the airport the actual coast of the Mediterranean Sea seems too far in the distant compared to real world. In real world there is no town along that canal, also the canal has another bend.

I'm pretty sure this is not in Central Europe. The few airfields with crossing runways (bottom left corner) we have here all are not close to canals and inland sea (in the background) with urban areas on the other side of the water. Generally inland sea areas are very seldom and they don't feature such airfields nearby.

I think I got this one. HUD heading tape indicates the camera is looking pretty much north. We are overhead Berlin Rudow, looking over to Treptow. We have the Teltowkanal crossing left to right and in a distance the Spree river:

also seems entirely unnecessary

At least there is variety...

There is a convenient fuel control panel in the cockpit for monitoring fuel. The kneeboard is not the tool for this. Maybe you wanna read up how it works on page 78 of the manual... Btw the external tank does feed on ground.

Scanned particularly my DCS drive yesterday after a friend warned me of this sudden issue and my windows couldn't find any issues after scanning 460400 files. Yes, I do have the F-15E, M2K and AV-8 installed. DCS is still on 2.9.5.55300, so the issues might have been imported with the update 55918. My windows defender antivirus is on 1.413.221.0

Since the terrain will likely be included anyway because of the extension of Afghanistan covered by a rectangular map module, will we see places of importance just behind or even a bit further the border? For example: - Termez, Uzbekistan, literally at the border, has an airfield, could be an important base for the DCS C-130J. - Abbottabad, Pakistan, could be the location of an intense counterinsurgency operation, commencing from Bagram and Jalalabad, Afghanistan. - Peshawar, Pakistan, east end of the famous Khyber pass coming from Afghanistan Of course there are so many more possibilities (Kashmir, a tiny bit of China just behind the Afghan Wakhan mountains to include a Chinese airstrip, a connection to the Persian Gulf map, cities of Islamabad and Dushanbe...) but I understand that there has to be some limit (well I pretend to understand, in fact I am unable to) Thanks for considering

Access from the Indian Ocean supported by air2air-refueling would mean so much more possibilities. The Baluchistan region between south Afghanistan and the Ocean wouldn't even require any detailed scenery, terrain only would be just fine. Please don't miss this chance to include the opportunity for long range naval air ops.

I get what you guys are saying. Still I can't mark your comments as solution until its confirmed that the manual needs updating then

Here I close in to a group of red Il-76, commencing at 40 NM distance, down to 1 NM and below. At no point does the L+S interrogation nor the auto interrogation I switched to later manage to IFF any of these contacts. I guess the reason might be that it doesn't IFF to hostile and only clue it will give is that its not friendly... I end up directly behind my L+S tracked Il-76 and while the IFF is still asleep, the NCTR also doesn't ever ID this aircraft in front of me. of course there is proof: no_IFF-no_NCTR.trk

The manual claims I need to press cage/uncage, yet this toggles the Sparrow's loft mode on and off and doesn't affect STT. Only way to enter STT is SCS right. Yet I do have to move the TDC on the desired contact, so the whole process of designating a primary target beforehand seems a bit irrelevant when I can't conveniently put this into STT. I'd also be interested to know how to drop STT quickly as the nws/undesignate doesn't appear to reliably do this.

Just RTBed with a single engine. After shutting down for repair, the ground crew refuses to accept the task because I should shut down my engines. Both are shut down, power levers are both to off. Still ground crew claims I have to shut down before they repair.... The mission has run for about 55 minutes. I guess you don't want the trackfile (53 MB) then?