Recoil16

Just to expand on this, I also just tested the Sharjah ILS rwy 12 multiple times, and the magic number for me is 6, as in 6 kts. With a headwind of 6 kts or more, I am able to use the ILS runway 12 as intended, with 5kts or less, no dice. This is definitely a problem, but not one of the beacons being "non-existant", but merely their activation. In the case of Sharjah it once again comes down to the incredibly frustrating relation between wind (and not only direction but also speed) and the activation of the ILS that has been the cause of all sorts of issues left right and center.

Andersen only has sequenced flashing lights aka. "strobes" installed for runways 06R and 24R, as part of the ALSF-1 approach lighting systems for those runways. Runways 6L and 24L have simpler approach lighting systems without sequenced flashers. And just like in Syria, on the MI map all airport lighting is turned on 24/7. You are probably mistaken when you say you've seen them turn on or off or even change directions. They always flash in sequence towards the runway. All the time. No matter what runway is picked by the AI ATC.

Excuse me but what are you talking about? The "extended centerline" (I assume you mean the approach lighting systems) has nothing to do with showing arrivals and departures.

Note that this appears to be the C-130 from the C-130 mod, not the C-130 included in DCS. Just in case this is not a DCS core issue.

You can use NOAA's Magnetic Field Calculator (https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/calculators/magcalc.shtml) to get a general idea, but to get a relatively precise sense of what the magvar is in DCS, on a given date, at a given location I would plop down an A-10C in the given mission and open the "POSINFO" page on the CDU. That gives you the easiest way to figure out the magvar for a specific usecase imo.

That is not a question we can give you the answer to as the values change depending on the mission date.

Again, the issue in this thread was deemed to be user error by multiple people who watched the tracks provided and who I believe to be competent in the ways of the A-10C to make that judgement. If you have a similar issue that you are positive is a bug, please create a separate thread. If other aircraft types are also affected, please also create threads for the specific issues they face in the other modules' respective sub-forums. Further litigating in this thread isn't productive.

I don't know if you read the thread, but this was deemed to be user error. If you have a similar issue, I would check the procedures used and if you're still confident there is a bug open a separate thread, complete with a short track showing the problem.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here, the helipad was fixed several months back. Can you maybe attach a track showing your problem?

Good question. Can't seem to pinpoint when that remark was added to the A/FD exactly, but it seems to have been quite a while ago, all my older issues of the CS Pacific going back to last year have that remark. The reason Skyvector and others probably haven't updated their info is because nobody is sitting there going through the A/FD and copying info manually. If the FAA's machine-readable database includes the airport, it will just get used. And for whatever reason, the FAA has decided to keep the airport in the database, even though it is supposedly closed for a while now. The last inspection according to the FAA's 5010 form was in 1980! Ultimately, I wouldn't be surprised if they kept it in there so that the few pilots that probably still fly there a couple times a year just because the island needs one or another supply still have info for the airport. The "closed indefinitely" remark might just be there to cover the FAA's behind if something goes wrong, idk. To my knowledge though, almost all traffic going to or from the island is going by boat today. Ultimately the question is really, at an airport with a grass/turf strip and absolutely zero facilities beyond that, what really makes the difference between open and closed?

You are right, some of the trees on the western end extend a little more south than they should be and there should not be trees on the eastern end (though with the mountain I'm not sure it makes that big of a difference). But while Pagan is not abandoned, it certainly isn't in common use. The A/FD lists it as "closed indefinitely". Not that the state of the airfield makes any difference to where the trees are though. Edit: @Bremspropeller was faster on the airfield state

That is correct. This is as a result of the airfield being categorized as closed/inactive. You will notice that the same behavior applies to Northwest Field and Orote Field on Guam. I suppose this categorization is warranted, given that Pagan Airstrip (the field we're talking about here) is listed as "closed indefinitely" in the A/FD. I guess you could ask for this behavior to be changed in terms of the DCS Core, but it isn't really a Marianas issue as it stands.

Why is this in the NTTR subforum?!

Hi, you seem to be referring to the lack of instant action missions. This is an issue separate from the one this thread is about. In the future, consider making a new thread when reporting a new issue. But to the point, there are indeed a number of instant action missions missing. This is a known issue though and will hopefully be solved in due time.

ILS reacting incorrectly to wind is a DCS core problem, not a Marianas one, and is already reported:

That is what is shown on the map in the mission editor, yes. Presumably to avoid clutter from having the localizers for opposite directions overlap on the runway. But actually, the localizer is modeled correctly at the respective end of each runway.

It's not. It is located where it is supposed to be, within about 100ft (which could be better, but definitely isn't "way off"). The only problem with it is that its identifier is currently "OMRK" when it should be "RAV", which is already reported though. See attached screenshot from the ME and compare with the aerodrome chart from the UAE AIP: https://www.gcaa.gov.ae/aip/current/AIRACs/2021-P08/graphics/OMRK-AD-2-21_2020-13.pdf

They did indeed.

It has been.

Thanks for that information. I fail to see though how that is relevant to this discussion?

Look, Flappie looked into it and is putting in a ticket for you all. Airing your frustrations like this isn't gonna help anything.

"Ali" is the name of the NDB, "AL" the ident. Just like the VORTAC with ident "UNZ" is named the "Nimitz" VORTAC. Navaids usually have a name, besides their ident.

There's two "AL" NDBs in Caucasus. One of them is the "Ali" NDB (353 kHz) at N42.096021°, E43.644701° in Georgia. The other one is the "Alushta" NDB (384 kHz) on Crimea at N44.674908°, E34.398325°. You can access a list of all beacons in a map in the mission editor by going to "View > BEACON INFO" at the top. Use the filters to select the types you're looking for.

I think it is totally fair that it is marked as closed. It has no aircraft based. It's marked as closed on the FAA sectional. It's just as closed as Orote Field or Nicosia Intl on Syria. The runway is usable and is being used, yes. And if you really want to set up a FARP like they do at Cope North, nothing stops you from using an invisible FARP. The only thing really missing imho is the small ramp on the northern side. It's not usable as of right now.

Good catch.