BarTzi

It's binary if I'm honest. It's either in the map or out of the map. If it's in the map it can't be a satellite texture. It's not the 90's anymore

With the latest addition to the map, northern Israel was added together with more parts of Lebanon and Syria. I'm having a hard time understanding why the only airfield that was added to the north part of Israel is Ramat David, when Megido and Ein Shamer are well within the borders of the map, and appear as bland runway textures. The same goes for every airfield in Syria which is located south of Mezzeh. This is KhalKhalah. It's in the detailed area of the map now. In 2025 I think we should hold map creators to higher standards, and bland satellite textures of runways should never be the norm within the detailed area of any map.

Many areas of the map have labels that are duplicated for no reason. This is the only map where I've seen this happen. Attached screenshots contain some examples. Kiryat Gat: Raanana: Dimona:

The entire implementation of this feature is wrong sadly, so it won't change until they re-write this.

UAE meaning Jordan? Otherwise it makes no sense as the actual UAE is not even close to where the rest of the map is

Yeah, it's not happening.

I thought so too, but it drifts even in light winds.

Hornet 2.0 could potentially be a completely new module, a Rhino.

Absolutely. However, DCS is a game and not all of those things can be simulated. Some, can hardly even be justified to be added to the game. At the moment, the carrier crew has no idea what wind is, so they can't turn into the wind to allow launch and recovery.

I don't disagree with you- but as I said before: if you see a hit via the DL pod, then the target exploded. What your friend should be watching is not the missile, but the target. What he should see is the target "randomly" exploding as you report a hit. The missile path is not synched at all, but the damage is.

Ok so this is during the day, using the overcast and rain 3 preset. As you can see from the track and attached pictures, the ATC thinks it's CASE II. However, looking at the carrier it seems like there's quite a bit of rain and that the visibility is poor. (my game is not modded, but I am using a cockpit livery, which should not matter here). @BIGNEWY clearly rain isn't taken into account here. CASE_II_Instead_of_III.trk

But is it the weather in the map, the weather around the carrier at the time of the call or expected weather around the carrier when the pilot lands? These are all different things.

According to this there's not a chance for CASE II with precipitation, but this is what happens to me when I use any of the light rain weather presets. Are you sure it is taken into account? Weather was changed with time to be more dynamic and rain can come and go. How often does the ATC check for conditions around the carrier?

Thanks Nealius. I think the only time it doesn't mess up the switch from I to III is when the sun sets. I wonder what ED has to say about this. @BIGNEWY Can you shed some light on this, please?

I understand there are real life documents that cover this, but it's not my question. I'm asking about the DCS implementation. I often find myself wondering if the ATC is wrong when it initiates a case II recovery when the conditions near the carrier clearly don't favour the last part of the landing (which is pretty much a case I), especially if the carrier is hard to spot due to rain, light fog or clouds. So my question is - does the ATC take weather into account accurately, other than the clear case of heavy rain (which is clearly case III)? It's worth noting that I have those issues only during the day. It seems like TOD is taken into account correctly, and case III is initiated properly during night time operations.