TBarina

I've tested again and created a new mission with Spitfire coming from the south and the ability to contact both HighHalden and Headcord. I've tried to call HH first. I've given direction to IAF for runway 11. Message says RW 04 (it doen't exist ad HighHalden, if I'm not wrong). Where is this RW 04 coming from?| Besides, even if the intention was for runway 11 that would be the wrong one since the is wind from 285 at 20 kts). Then I aborted and contacted HeadCord. I was vectored west of the airport to IAF for RW 10. Controller said to expect RW 28 (BTW: not 27, there is no 27 at Headcorn). Theoretically this should be the right one since the wind is coming from 285 (Met.105°). But the IAF where I'm vectored to is at the opposite side and it's not the right IAF for RW 28. I cannot say it is working properly. For me it's messing up things. Not to talk of problems when there is no wind blowing. Please, let us know and take action with ED if you have power to. I'm available for further testing in case of need. TB Spitfire - RTB.miz

Has anyone else encountered the same problem? IMHO it's bug in the INBOUND response that names the opposite runway as the active one (for which, instead, it provides proper IAF).

Hi, https://discord.gg/QXySHjPj is not working (invalid or expired). Is there any other link?

Hi, thanks for your great work on ATC. Instructions explain that is necessary to include files in .miz It is about 35MB size per mission. Would it be possible to install files once in a common directory and use Symbolic Links inside the various .miz file that I would like to create?

I've added some wind from different directions (lastly 10 kts Meteo 276°) and it seems like ATC properly changes the IAF in accordance with wind directions. Theoretically we are vectored to proper IAF. The problem is that when declaring INBOUND to Headcorn ATC reports to expect opposite runway : runway 10 when wind 276° Meteo and 280 when wind from 100°. IMHO it's bug in the INBOUND response that names the opposite runway as the active one (for which it provides proper IAF). Seems like this bug only affects Headcorn airfield (that's what I've discovered so far) BTW: Headcorn is RAF Lashenden as stated here:

+1

Hi, I've setup a mission where 2 P51-D are coming back. Radio available allows to tune to different airport (High Halden, Headcorn and Chailey: channels B, C and D respectively). If I declare INBOUND to Chailey I receive proper heading to final (273 for landing to runway 15). If I decalre INBOUND To HeadCorn it seems that i receive proper heading to final (334 for 15nm) (see picture). But I'd told to expect runway 28. The problem here is that if I'm lost when I reach final IP I turn to M289° and fly to west insted to east. If I declare INBOUD do HighHalden I'm told to expect runway 11 but in low visibility I'm vectored to points that are not properly aligned to final. It seems like airports with two runways are not managed properly. I know that ATC is poor but I would expect to be able to be vectored properly in case of poor visibility. Thanks.null TB P-51D - RTB.miz

I've been able to fix it by upgrading DCS-BIOS to the the lastest version. Now it works flawlessly.

I followed your instructions (BTW: I already knew that because I've already used same procedures for other panels from TekCreations). My device in on COM4. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work even if DCS-BIOS is properily working. Is there anything I can do to fix it? null

The bridge lays on the rails and there is no room for the trains to pass under it! Also banks invade rails track. There abundant free room to move them back a little Is it possible to have it fixed? null

Is it me or the ATC in DCS Normandy 2.0 is not properly heading the player to final? I have tested it in a simple mission asking to High Halden for Vectors to final but it doesn't help me to find the airport. It becomes critical in low visibility conditions. I've tried with "Inbound" also. What am I doing wrong?

After crashing and exiting cockpit....

Same here

I think that Vietnam and Korea would be most awaited as well. I wonder why nobody talks about them

What kind of missions can be flown during this epoch?

Thanks. It's fantastic compared to the plain vanilla DLSS in DCS (is it DLSS 2?) Is there anything we can do to activate Frame Generation as well or RTX4090 is not compatible? I don't find any cue in NVidia Profile Inspector that I set like this:

Yes that is correct. I'm a bit confused. I see DLSSv3 v310.2.1 as well. But that is DLSS v3 and not DLSS v4. Is there any way to use DLSS v4 as of now? Many thanks in advance for any suggestion.

I'll do but I don't know whether mission installed with the map come from ED or Heatblur. Who is responsible for the creation? Certanly putting that missing as first mission for F14 when you try/buy Afghanistan map is bad advertising for the moduel, in my opinion.

I definitely agree with you guys. I have been playing with some Moose .lua scripts to flood Kobuleti and Kandahar with some 100 planes and helicopters using Moose's RAT and RATMANAGER (BTW: Moose is a fantastic library) Actually the 2 maps (Caucasus and Afghanistan) behave in a similar way (and without going below 48fps so far, if I use Moose to put the airport to life). As I suspected the culprit is surely not the terrain but that specific F-14 Instant Action mission: F-14B-Cold Start Afghanistan. I know that 7680x1080 are a lot of pixels to render but using the additional 4th monitor above the central one of the triple screens offers a fantastic perspective when flying and doghfighting. I wouldn't be able to use a single monitor any more and even pure triple screen it's too narrow to enjoy a wide view even with TrackIR Better reduce the number of objects at the airport. If I were looking for fully operational airports, I would be better off looking at XPlane or MsFlightSIm. That IA mission is a pure school exercise to stress the system. Many thanks

Thanks. Are u using VR or 2D 1080 or what? What is you resolution? In the meantime I'm playing with some Moose .lua scripts to flood Kobuleti and Kandahar with some 100 planes and helicopters. Actually the 2 maps behave in a similar way. As I suspected the culprit is probably not the terrain but that specific F-14 Instant Action mission: F-14B-Cold Start Afghanistan

I respect your opinion but it would be nice if you can produce your rig specs, nVidia an DCS settings and mission details or track. I doubt that you can get 70 fps on that specific F14 Instant Action mission when parked at Kandahar. I'm going to uninstall it for now unless someone from ED can explain why I can get 90 fps as soon as airborne and get a low 27 fps on the ground than, IMHO, breaks immersion. Also is strange that i lose 10/15 fps if i turn my head at 3 or 9 o'clock on the parking slot. Dont' know... I'm not convinced. It's a terrain map but, unless I set terrain texture to LOW (which is a nonsense for a new map that I would expect be able to exploit new technologies and run better than maps that exist since a decade) is saturates 23GB RAM in my RTX4090. In any case, after reducing static objects and setting LOW terrain texture, I was able to taxi. Usual problem with ATC (but I've made a reason by now). I wait my wingman to allign at my "side" (lets say so). Full afterburner (forced to do so because Wingman rolls on the tarmac with FULL AB which he shouldn't 'cause F14 doesn't require to do so). I'll get back to what I was satisfactory doing before trying AF map and wait and see if there will be a trial period for Iraq. Cheers

I know. I've already a very optimized settings that guarantees optimal and stable performance in all situations even in the most complex missions of many campaigns. It's only that Cold and Dark F14 instant action mission at Kandahar airport that, according to me, deviates from the normal (513 static objects populate the airport!) Have you ever tried that, by chance? I'll take some time to install Moose an create a lua script to automatically saturate some other airports in Caucasus and check if the behave the same. Thanks a lot. Ciao

Ah, you are right! I didn't realize that. Thanks

Thanks for the suggestion. I've done it but it doesn't help so much. The only way has been to edit the mission and reduce those insane number of static objects. Now I'll take the time to activate Moose and write a lua script to put under stress many other airports in Caucasus by filling all ramps and parking slots so to check if the problem is exacerbated by Afghanistan map or is common to all maps. Ciao

Thanks, I appreciate your answer. Please let me make a puntalization because, maybe, what I wrote could be misunderstood! EA is a good thing. IMHO it is so especially for complex aircrafts and helos: it takes months to be proficient in mastering them and being able to start making practice in EA while you can complete the module can be very satisfactory. Also not having some advanced functionality at the beginning doesn't break immersion at all. I bought many EA aircrafts and I've always been very happy doing that also because you made a great job in the following months (thanks ED for you passion !) As to terrains and their impact on the FPS I'm a little skeptic though. I don't like very much having to tweak DCS settings depending on the mission. I would rather have a decent consistent configuration that can cope with all missions. Also, having maps that offers 27 fps at parking ramp, 35 when approaching runway for landing and 75 or even more when flying at 2.000/3.000 feet is not satisfactory. It breaks immersion a lot. I'd like that you could tackle fps performance at the new maps/airports with the greatest priority. Finally, when I said that "EA allows ED to increase revenues and available funds I meant to say that it is beneficial to all of us because I would like you to have plenty of money to finance the projects. In conclusion, tanks a lot ED for your great products, work and dedication. And long life to Eagle Dynamics.