Minsky

It's a bit more complex than a simple reversion, and has been reported to ED multiple times already. I'll see if a note can be added in one of the next kneeboard updates. Thanks!

> Download <

Reported already:

I get it why more people have voted to leave it as is: a feature is better than no feature. I just hope that Ugra won't take the results as a carte blanche to continue cluttering the map without solving the underlying UI/UX problem. If it is this bad now, imagine how terribble it will become once they add these sixty-ish promised airfields.

You mean make most of the names longer, cluttering the map even further?

It won't be possible to please everyone without making changes to the engine, I'm afraid. DCS already has multiple aerodrome types with different icons: 'large', 'normal', 'closed', etc. Have you asked ED to create another one for helipads? A smaller icon with a smaller title, placed on a layer below aerodromes, so to never overlap them. A cherry on top would be the ability to hide these icons in the ME settings.

No problems, glad I could help!

What can I say? It works for me with a strong enough headwind and no weather mods: This could once again be a mod issue, since even the thick fog in my unmodded mission hasn't forced Incirlik to disregard the wind settings and revert to RWY05.

This seems to be related to the Bandit's Weather Mod you use. I installed it as well (v16) and replicated your weather settings in my otherwise clean and empty mission as follows: Preset: NONE; Base: 7999; Thickness: 16240; Density: 17. This made all aircraft departing RWY05 at Incirlik to bank right immediately after takeoff. Smaller jets were able to survive that maneuver, while larger aircraft tipped the runway and crashed. Without the mod the above weather settings cannot be replicated, as the default thickness and density are capped at 6562 feet and 10, respectively. And with that no bank occurs and all aircraft survive the departure.

I couldn't reproduce it in my test mission, so you'll have to provide a track. What aircraft are we talking about? The Hornet's INS aligned fine for me at both shelters, even without chocks. The aircraft stood stable on the ground the whole time. As for the visual bugs, they have been reported years ago:

It's less about that and more about tankers requiring a major overhaul. Like with our antiquated ATC, it's pointless to add new features to a system that still works only because nobody touches it. Nonetheless, it's a sound request. Hope they'll find a way to implement it. You don't need "tons" of tankers unless: A. It is a sandbox server where random players fly from random locations and run out of gas because of their poor mission planning and execution skills. Unrealistic environment entails unrealistic amount of tankers. B. It is a massive operation, in which case having a substantial tanker fleet is inevitable, regardless of their ability to change speed on demand.

It seems that you've enabled the Dynamic Spawn. You have to limit it to specific aircraft types. This post explains how.

The map is set about ten years earlier, Khost International wasn't there back then. Well, if that knowledge will help them to make runways, taxiways and aprons a closer match to materials used by the soviets, then sure.

It has nothing to do with the soviets, nods, and whatever. The map represents a more or less modern Afghanistan, when runways at both airfields were unpaved. And so they should remain unpaved in DCS. The problem is purely aesthetic: the current "unpavedness" looks hideous and distracting.

Hi, thanks for the update! May I have a tiny request to make this mod OvGME-friendly? It's quite simple: the name of the archive (currently "bandit648_Weather_Mod_v16", ignoring the .zip extension) and the name of the archived folder inside (currently "bandit648 Weather Mod v16") must be identical for the OvGME to recognize it. It's not a pressing issue, of course. Just something to consider for one of the next updates.

Your only option is to put them into the main DCS folder: (DCS)\Mods\terrains\(Map)\kneeboard\ Create the "kneeboard" folder if it's not there.

The QNH is always displayed in the mission briefing and is the same for the whole map (at least with the static weather presets). Here's the basic formula to calculate the QFE. It doesn't account for temperature, but should be good enough for us: QNH – (target elevation in feet / 30) So, if QNH is 1020 mbar and target elevation is 800 feet, QFE at its location will be 1020 – (800 / 30 = 26.6) = 993.4 mbar. I would strongly recommend reading this (part 11, section 1.7 - QFE).

Can't you just calculate it using briefing's QNH and waypoint's altitude? Sure it's not as easy as dialing in precalculated numbers, but saying this makes the module unplayable is a bit of an exaggeration.

While we wait for (another) patch, the Splash Damage script can be used as an interim solution. Just tried it; not perfect, but at least the rockets are no longer completely useless.

While you wait: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3320838/

https://discord.gg/STUmksME https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BcRa_xpCL9Vy-qi5QTlzquiALLpyJsB6/view

Precisely when I reached the rockets employment tutorial By the time the next patch lands, my trial will be long expired. Good job, ED

Most everything including reading the manual?