Minsky

A picture worth thousand words, so here's what I mean by "crude representation": These are Iraq and Pakistan on the PG map. Hundreds of miles beyond the detailed area of that map. Doubt a lot of manual labor went into this. Probably just some leftovers from the data ED acquired for the region. With Afghanistan, I would settle for even less than that.

+1 Should be technically doable, since the length of the expanded map will be about 900 miles. That's only marginally bigger than the South Atlantic. I can totally live with a very, very crude representation of that area. Like, "the western part of the PG map" level crude. A basic shoreline, some water bodies, rudimentary mesh and a generic sand texture will suffice. Doesn't seem too hard to do, won't impact the performance at all, guaranteed to make a couple folks very happy

The title should be "DCS: Afgha" since half of the country is missing. Jokes aside, from the newsletter it's unclear whether the eastern part will be added at some point after the Early Access, or the western half is all we get.

@QuiGon @Mobius_11804 From the first page of this thread:

Here's three out of five: Herzliya - LLHZ.pdf Amman - OJAM.pdf and OJAM_LIDO.pdf Muwaffaq Salti - OJMS_LIDO.pdf

> Download < See the detailed changelog under the spoiler:

Fixed in DCS 2.9.3.51704

That's true for every map in DCS. But with Normandy 2.0 it gets really annoying because: 1. It has the most aerodromes. 2. It constantly gets updated. 3. The frequencies get reshuffled in almost every patch. 4. Ugra reshuffle them on a whim, unaware of troubles it causes to content creators.

Fixed in 2.9.3.51704.

Better late than never: fixed in 2.9.3.51704.

I feel you and I upvote you. Manually re-checking and updating frequencies for eighty aerodromes for my kneeboards every time Ugra's left leg decide to change just one of them (meaning, after every patch) has kinda lost its novelty. And while I believe that asking something from Maestro is akin asking a wall, I just wanted to say that you're not the only one frustrated by this.

He was referring to ATC frequencies, not navaids.

It could be that Liberation is using its own IDs. Check: Liberation\resources\dcs\beacons\falklands.json ...and try airfield14_0, airfield14_1, etc. If that won't work, I would ask the devs directly in their Discord server: https://discord.gg/psKPtksx

1. Page 31 in this download: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3312200/ 2. This mission prints the IDs into the DCS log upon launch: SA_IDs.miz

The mod never worked properly in modern DCS. Merely made the RWR sound a bit different. So I no longer have it, sorry.

In TOO, the missile sees EWRs as unknown emitters, but refuses to home on them once launched. In PB, the old EWR codes no longer works and you cannot fire.

Most EWRs operate in frequency ranges outside of the HARM's detection capabilities. To my knowledge, some of them (IIRC AN/FPS-117) should still be detectable, but it seems that ED decided not to bother with exceptions.

ED removed HARM codes from all EWR radars more than a year ago.

Completely agree. It's puzzling why they replaced them in the first place. If that's an example of the 'synthetic look' polled in another thread, then God help us all

Knowing ED (good quality, poor scope), this seems like a more plausible outcome:

Can confirm both issues. Likely introduced with the "melted mesh" update in November.

> Download < Note to mission makers: By changing a single VHF frequency, Ugra triggered changes to virtually all ATC frequencies across the map in this patch. And since adding the missing ATC to Lympne in parallel would be too convenient for us, expect this to happen again in the upcoming patches.

EDIT: Fixed in DCS 2.9.3.51704 - 22.02.2024 Already reported back in June, but Ugra has been too busy cannibalizing The Channel to actually fix this: