Minsky

If that's true, I think it would be fair that people demanding refund for Sinai will be paid from Ugra's profits.

Ah, so you're not feature-reviewing a 3rd party product, but making sure it doesn't break your own stuff and DCS in general? Well, it kinda makes sense, thanks for clarifying.

This particular update had been tested by ED for several weeks, and no one noticed that something is missing until the proverbial substance hit the fan?

I'm expecting a version of this to be posted by ORT in the coming days: "While adding the new airfields and detailed areas in the southern part of the map, we hit the limit of what the little old DCS engine can handle, so we had to cut off something. And since the Northern Israel is already featured on another map, we thought it's no biggie to remove it from ours."

Sure you're not confusing Kandahar aerodrome (UHF 360.20) and Kandahar Heliport (UHF 300.20) ?

I guess that the ground clutter (grass, shrubs, rocks etc.) is tied to specific terrain types, and to change it one must create a new terrain type. Which would probably require more resources, but otherwise is 100% doable. Here are some desert parts of the Sinai map that look quite close to your request:

05 August 2024 - Afghanistan kneeboards added. - Kola kneeboards: nothing major here, except they broke the remaining ILS at Bodo. > Download <

Most certainly. I'm hoping to add Afghanistan in early August.

Shameless plug, but this could've saved you some time: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3312200/

Maybe someday, but not right now! Hornet's UI, at least to me, seems way easier than Warthog's, so I never felt the need for a HOTAS table. Just the joystick mapping diagram and a few A2A helpers, since I rarely do air combat and keep forgetting even the basics.

If you can run Syria, then you should be more than fine with Sinai, especially in SP. This map can be described as 'Syria Lite': it looks simpler, but runs a bit smoother, and is less RAM-hungry. My specs are somewhat worse than yours, and I was able to comfortably fly Apache over Cairo (hands down the most built-up area in DCS) in pre-DLSS era. Although I would recommend waiting for the ever-coming Massive Sinai Update. Just to make sure they didn't push it too far with all the new stuff. I remember the devs themselves expressed concerns in that regard.

So, regarding that 'the map is so huge our engine can't handle the trip to the ocean' claim. This is the coast of Pakistan, about 250 nautical miles beyond the Afghanistan map boundary. Blurry textures and no mesh at all, but hey. All we need now is some water: the map has no 'global ocean', so that blue stuff is just a sludge texture.

The actual map, of course, spans further than that, especially eastward.

Can you please answer my question above? I believe it's important enough to be included in the FAQ as well.

Also this: Aerodrome Data and Frequencies - Updated 22 May 2024 (digitalcombatsimulator.com) Don't know about what's planned, but I doubt we'll see many more. Simply because there are only a couple of paved aerodromes left within the map's current boundary, and they would've been added by now if the devs were intended to do so. The rest is smaller dirt and grass airfields of various levels of obscurity.

Because a unit can be spotted instantly, sparing you from doing pixel hunting with coordinates.

@BIGNEWY I searched, but couldn't find the answer. Are there any differences, besides cosmetic, between airfields in owned and not owned regions? I mean, if I don't own a region, will I be able to use its airfields just as usual in-game and in ME, or they will have limited functionality?

Can you give us some technical background for these? Are we looking at the updated mesh and textures? Or at the improvements to DCS engine that make everything "pop"? Or at 4fps with an extreme-ultra-mega-ultimate graphics preset? Or maybe at all that combined?

It's Nicosia International Airport. Closed IRL, so yeah, it's unmarked and has no parking spots.

Hey, thanks for the suggestion! Your dispute about this back in the day was quite a read The very lenght of your post means that the concept of "SPI generator" can be hard to grasp, especially by novice players. The term is not commonly known, and only mentioned once (?) in the depths of the DCS manual, so it's easy to overlook. So I suggest we use both: the "proper" one, and the widely-used one for the reference.

Hi, sorry for replying so late. The HOTAS bindings for both modules are a little bit schizophrenic, and manuals (neither ED's nor the -1) cannot be trusted 100% I could reproduce both of your issues, and updated the kneeboards. Feel free to redownload. Please don't hesitate to report if you find more. Thanks!

I just tested both VORs using the C-101, and they seem to work fine. Try starting in the air 20-30 miles away from Bodo. Just in case the Phantom is "filtering out" a very close (<1 nm) station, or in case you forgot to press some obscure button.

*Not yet Love the idea and the looks! I take it that most aerodromes ended up underwater?

I should have put "primary" in quotes. Whille the ATC could apply its own rules to determine runway in use, many parts of DCS, including that info panel, are unaware that aerodromes can have multiple runways. And they pick whatever runway has the aerodrome symbol over it as their "primary". To summarize, there's nothing wrong with the ILS at Punta Arenas. But you can ask the devs to "move" aerodrome symbol to 07-25 to make the ILS info visible in the interface.

Yeah, but it's 12-30 in DCS. You can submit a new report and ask them to change it to 07-25.