Please make rough ground traversable (taxiable) for planes close to FARP

[cfrag]

Currently, most planes can't drive on rough ground ('grass'): once they stop, they remain stuck. Some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon, Su-27) can taxi on grass, but they are the exception, and that is fine.

 

With one exception: Close to a FARP we should be able to taxi on rough ground, as we should assume that the ground was prepared for plane traversal by the field engineers. I'd like to see an option (as radius around the FARP in feet/meters) where planes can taxi on any terrain just like they would on a runway. Mission makers (not the application) must ensure that their placement doesn't make silly things possible (e.g. driving on water, steep inclines/cliffs etc). FARPs should default to 0 radius, to keep with current abilities.  

[cfrag]

To give an example (and maybe even some pictures later):

I have a mission where you are to land on a road as make-shift runway. Next to the road is a FARP, where you taxi off the road, then refuel and rearm and take off again.

 

This is currently only possible in some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon), since, as soon as your plane taxis off the road, most airplanes (e.g. A-10, Viggen) get struck.

 

As an additional parameter for a FARP / Invisible PARP I'd like to see a prepared surface radius (called TARMAC RADIUS in mock-up below) field where we can enter a number (e.g. 2000). In the surrounding circle (here with radius 2000 feet), all planes treat the ground as if it was concrete tarmac -> they can taxi, stop, and taxi over this surface just like over a normal airfield ramp.

 

 

In above example, I can enter a number in "TARMAC RADIUS". Any plane within that radius around the FARP's position can taxi unrestricted (just as on concrete)

 

So that the following setup with a 2000 ft entry in TARMAC RADIUS

 

allows any pilot good enough to land on the road (orange line) can taxi off the road at the invisible FARP, get refueled and rearmed and can continue on their way. Currently, only very few planes can do that, all others get stuck in the grass and can no longer move once they have come to a stand-still 

 

 

Below is a screenshot from a mission I created that works well, but currently only with hornets. I'd love to be able to use the FARP with any plane.

Edited March 8, 2021 by cfrag

[Hiob]

Since you are asking either for a new feature, or for an issue to be resolved in DCS World (depending on the perspective), I feel you are in the wrong sub-forum.

 

I second your suggestion though!

[StevanJ]

39 minutes ago, cfrag said:

To give an example (and maybe even some pictures later):

I have a mission where you are to land on a road as make-shift runway. Next to the road is a FARP, where you taxi off the road, then refuel and rearm and take off again.

 

This is currently only possible in some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon), since, as soon as your plane taxis off the road, most airplanes (e.g. A-10, Viggen) get struck.

 

As an additional parameter for a FARP / Invisible PARP I'd like to see a prepared surface radius (called TARMAC RADIUS in mock-up below) field where we can enter a number (e.g. 2000). In the surrounding circle (here with radius 2000 feet), all planes treat the ground as if it was concrete tarmac -> they can taxi, stop, and taxi over this surface just like over a normal airfield ramp.

 

 

In above example, I can enter a number in "TARMAC RADIUS". Any plane within that radius around the FARP's position can taxi unrestricted (just as on concrete)

 

So that the following setup with a 2000 ft entry in TARMAC RADIUS

 

allows any pilot good enough to land on the road (orange line) can taxi off the road at the invisible FARP, get refueled and rearmed and can continue on their way. Currently, only very few planes can do that, all others get stuck in the grass and can no longer move once they have come to a stand-still 

 

 

Below is a screenshot from a mission I created that works well, but currently only with hornets. I'd love to be able to use the FARP with any plane.

 

So ive just spent some time looking into this in terms of it actually being feasible. And no matter which way i try and find a solution, its just not going to happen.
And its down to risk of damage to engine.
Youre looking at this wrong.
Concrete tiles added maybe, but to taxi on grass would be a massive safety risk to the pilot..

Many years ago (late 90's), i attended a two day airshow at Elvington. There were two harriers flying display. They landed once then took off. The next day, they weren't allowed to land.
Because their engines had sucked up and damaged the runway (genuinely- If you saw elvington, youd understand).

The problem with this set up is that it would never happen.
And there is no proof that is has ever happened (with the exception of lighter prop aircraft, or those specifically designed to land on rougher strips- ie Maybe the c130 at a push).

Even the Swiss- who operate F5's from mountain hangers and extra wide 'Roadstrips', go to extreme precautions just to make sure there is 0 risk of damage to an engine.
They block traffic and clean the highways in preperation.

My understanding from small amounts of research, is that in the event that a fighter accidentaly taxis over grass, the first instant is to power down as the engine would just suck up dirt and debris.

Its a fun idea, but so are UFO interceptions, and as the proof for either of them is near 0, i think were better playing the odds.
Even having a cow near a £50 million FA18, would be a seriously bad idea because of the preference of manure.

I would however like 'concrete tiles' in so that i could create and make farps more easily. But the current system with grass is more than fine.
Im 100% sure no Airforce in the world would allow, any aircraft over £20 million to 'taxi on grass', even a hardened grass runway is a no for sophisticated jet planes..

However, a 'concrete tile' is a very good idea, that would allow us to expand on farps for the occasional 'Highway strip' mission.
Even so, those missions are more rare than unicorn poop.

[cfrag]

My apologies for being unclear - I'm looking for a feature that requires a small bit of suspension of disbelief to broaden mission design possibilities. Please allow me to elaborate:

 

We have some quite unrealistic features in DCS; self-tuning radios, immortality, unlimited ammo, padlocking, labels etc. All are present to accomplish something; some help to simplify complex aspects (auto-start, simple communication), others may allow things that are normally impossible (unlimited fuel or ammo) and leverage the tremendous possibilities of what simulation allows versus reality (labels, active pause). They all require a certain amount of suspension of disbelief. More importantly, though: they all add to the game; they make DCS a better experience.   

 

I liken making planes able to taxi on rough ground near a FARP to one such 'suspension of disbelief' moments. I pretend that the ground is hardened there without actually having the ground visuals changed accordingly. This is similar to having ground power or starter air without actually having the ground crew nor the equipment present. Presently, we have the option of using ground air even though there is no external compressor in sight; we merely pretend it's there and all is well. It adds to the game, as it allows us a better cold-start procedure. We can use catapults on non-supercarrier DCS without a crew; that's completely impossible in reality. Another great simplification that allows what's otherwise impossible.

 

I'm fully aware that in RL few (if any) fighter can operate from grass, sand nor gravel. That's not what I'm asking for. I'm looking for simplified approach to an otherwise difficult feature in missions: make-shift airfields. I'd like to pretend there are fully realized (by field engineers, pioneers and whatnot), hardened surfaces around the FARP, without having to have the actual graphical objects in place (on the ground), just like there is no compressor/generator nor ground crew present when I cold-start my F5 or launch my Tomcat). It's merely a simplification to allow what otherwise can't easily be done in DCS. I know it's not realistic; it still much better than not being able to do this at all. A small price (slightly suspend disbelief while looking at the grass that should be concrete) allows much expanded mission possibilities.

 

[StevanJ]

On 3/8/2021 at 3:56 PM, cfrag said:

My apologies for being unclear - I'm looking for a feature that requires a small bit of suspension of disbelief to broaden mission design possibilities. Please allow me to elaborate:

 

We have some quite unrealistic features in DCS; self-tuning radios, immortality, unlimited ammo, padlocking, labels etc. All are present to accomplish something; some help to simplify complex aspects (auto-start, simple communication), others may allow things that are normally impossible (unlimited fuel or ammo) and leverage the tremendous possibilities of what simulation allows versus reality (labels, active pause). They all require a certain amount of suspension of disbelief. More importantly, though: they all add to the game; they make DCS a better experience.   

 

I liken making planes able to taxi on rough ground near a FARP to one such 'suspension of disbelief' moments. I pretend that the ground is hardened there without actually having the ground visuals changed accordingly. This is similar to having ground power or starter air without actually having the ground crew nor the equipment present. Presently, we have the option of using ground air even though there is no external compressor in sight; we merely pretend it's there and all is well. It adds to the game, as it allows us a better cold-start procedure. We can use catapults on non-supercarrier DCS without a crew; that's completely impossible in reality. Another great simplification that allows what's otherwise impossible.

 

I'm fully aware that in RL few (if any) fighter can operate from grass, sand nor gravel. That's not what I'm asking for. I'm looking for simplified approach to an otherwise difficult feature in missions: make-shift airfields. I'd like to pretend there are fully realized (by field engineers, pioneers and whatnot), hardened surfaces around the FARP, without having to have the actual graphical objects in place (on the ground), just like there is no compressor/generator nor ground crew present when I cold-start my F5 or launch my Tomcat). It's merely a simplification to allow what otherwise can't easily be done in DCS. I know it's not realistic; it still much better than not being able to do this at all. A small price (slightly suspend disbelief while looking at the grass that should be concrete) allows much expanded mission possibilities.

 

Ive looked over the maps, there are plenty of places in every single map (especially Syria, and Persian Gulf), that fill your needs.
Try making the mission youre talking about, floating it on the user files page, and then gauging the feedback through the forum.
If the feedback is good, youll probably gain more leverage in your argument.

 

[Fri13]

On 3/8/2021 at 5:56 PM, cfrag said:

I'm fully aware that in RL few (if any) fighter can operate from grass, sand nor gravel. 

 

Many aircraft can operate from unprepared fields, MiG's and Sukhois and so on. You just taxi over fields and many other surfaces without problems, even take-off and landing is possible in many ways. 

 

This is the common hot topic that airfields should make all crafts stop. 

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, Fri13 said:

 

Many aircraft can operate from unprepared fields, MiG's and Sukhois and so on. You just taxi over fields and many other surfaces without problems, even take-off and landing is possible in many ways. 

 

Thank you for the correction. Unfortunately (for me), in DCS, most planes can't stop on grass and then move again, which currently makes it impossible to create make-shift airfields in a mission - hence my suggestion. Reading up on this specific aircraft capability (thanks for the hint) I've seen that many modern military aircraft can take-off and land on unprepared airfields made from (among other things) dirt, it's even trained regularly in the USA, Finland, Sweden and here where I live (Switzerland). I'd love to re-create this in a mission with other planes than just the Hornet, Falcon and Harrier (who - in DCS - are able to stop and start rolling again on grass).

Edited March 9, 2021 by cfrag

[StevanJ]

14 hours ago, cfrag said:

 

Thank you for the correction. Unfortunately (for me), in DCS, most planes can't stop on grass and then move again, which currently makes it impossible to create make-shift airfields in a mission - hence my suggestion. Reading up on this specific aircraft capability (thanks for the hint) I've seen that many modern military aircraft can take-off and land on unprepared airfields made from (among other things) dirt, it's even trained regularly in the USA, Finland, Sweden and here where I live (Switzerland). I'd love to re-create this in a mission with other planes than just the Hornet, Falcon and Harrier (who - in DCS - are able to stop and start rolling again on grass).

 

Well there you go, all you have to do is share pictures of these planes taking off and landing on unprepared airfields, and we'll have an argument.
However, from my search- every single time a plane 'operates' from anywhere, there is a line of 'preperation', and thats your problem.

A while back an SU27 landed on a road, and actually hit a road sign, despite all the preparation involved (cleaning and blocking off the road);
"The roadway had been prepared for the tactical exercise in advance by removing some road signs and lamp posts in the planned landing area. Police also blocked access to the roadway. Pyrotechnics were also set off to scare birds away from the area to prevent bird-strike."

After the first SU hit the sign, the other SU's waved off, because `if theres a risk to damage' its not worth doing.

While FARPS exist, they are extremely well prepared areas, that come with an huge amount of forward thinking, I seriously doubt any of them would ever allow any jet aircraft to 'taxi on grass'..
 

This is what happens when a harrier actually lands on grass..

[cfrag]

5 minutes ago, StevanJ said:

Well there you go, all you have to do is share pictures of these planes taking off and landing on unprepared airfields, and we'll have an argument.

 

I really don't want an argument about that. I'm not hung up on a plane's ability to taxi on grass, it's what impedes me on the Caucasus map and is merely a symptom. What I'm looking for is a way to add makeshift fixed-wing airfields to a mission. That is my focus. I believe DCS could benefit (in terms of additional missions) from such a feature, without incurring any negative effects. Realism in DCS is a lower-tier concern to me (e.g. I don't mind the existing ability to field-repair a plane in a couple of seconds).

 

DCS allows us to do fun things that are impossible in RL - for example it allows you and I to fly an F/A-18 (a complex, multi-engine jet) without having us successfully complete years of training first. Nor does it force us to attend hours-long pre- and post briefs, study meteo, file flight plans, nor forces us to inspect the plane before and after each flight. We don't need to plan our flights (e.g. fuel consumption, w&b, diversion). I can even fly after imbibing some seriously unhealthy beverages - something you'd never do in RL. It's great that we don't have to do these essential, fundamental tasks nor observe some fundamental rules; it's also completely, utterly unrealistic. AND it's what makes DCS great: this UNrealism. It opens up new avenues to enjoy something that would otherwise be impossible. Completely repair a busted-up Hornet on the tarmac in 170 seconds? Good fun; it adds to the experience for those who want to use it. That is why - to me - realism of feature is not a prime factor. It's important, yes. But when the main premise (me flying an armed-to the teeth supersonic twin-engine jet) is already completely bonkers, I'm not that concerned about a new feature that may add something without taking anything away.

 

Perhaps I'm approaching it from the wrong way, so allow me to turn this slightly around: how would you propose we implement adding a makeshift fixed-wing airfield feature to a mission in Mission Editor? Because that's the question I'm trying to answer.

 

[StevanJ]

3 minutes ago, cfrag said:

how would you propose we implement adding a makeshift fixed-wing airfield feature to a mission in Mission Editor? Because that's the question I'm trying to answer.

We have that, its called the invisible FARP.
Ive just made a mission in Syria, where i take off, land at a Makeshift highway strip, and take off..
It took me two minutes..
Everything you can imagine, landing in the middle of nowhere.. Repair, rearm, refuel.. All in a little southern Syrian Village north of the Iraq border.

Do i want the ability to myself or allow others to taxi straight through grass, onto the runway and full burn into the air? No. Play multiplayer and youll understand.

I think your 'want' to taxi on grass is extrememly far fetched, Im with those that want the grass to 'stop' any aircraft that goes into it..
I would however like a concrete tile, which is where i hope youd go with this, but it appears you arent.

Check this out.. Then when you read more about the possibility of 'aircraft taking off from unprepared strips'

'Soft ground trials at Pensacola in June 1961: the second Freedom Fighter prototype with
larger tires on the main and two-wheels on the front landing gear, later removed. Trials
included landing in 1300 ft/396m on grass and taking off with a maximum load in less
than 2'500 ft/762m. USAF inscription was replaced by "Army" in September 1961 for
additional tests at Pensacola NAS.'

It failed tests and trials, it just wasnt feasible.
Do i want to introduce 'unfeasible ideas into DCS?' -No, because where do we stop? Flyable carpets? Burrito missiles? An anti air boomerang thrown by an insurgent 76 miles away?
Theres a reason, why you arent able to bring proof of concept to the forum, and not to be negative, but its because it just couldnt happen and theres proof it never has.

Thats why the harrier stopped existing. Missiles can now travel further than any airplane. Even during World War 2 bombers werent able to takeoff off from unsuitable airfields, never mind runways.
There is no event realistic, or unrealistic, where an aircraft 'should' takeoff from grass outside World War 2, Watch what happens when a eurofighter 'touches grass' by accident on a prepared runway, and airfield.
Now look at the damage to the grass, if that was a runway, youd now be expected to turn the jet around and take off even though that grass landing area was damaged.
The risk of damaging the aircraft has increased dramatically. The aircraft will now sit on the grass while the 'damage' is repaired, and the £20million jet is now a target that sits and sinks on the grass.

What youre asking for is a 'landing area', and every map has these areas scattered around. You just need to find one, and work with them.
Ill agree that a concrete tile is wanted, an ability 'to land on grass for fun' isnt.. And yet you still have that ability with all the jets that have an afterburner.

Id love another opinion, but unless you can strengthen your opinion, or back up the idea with proof of concept, im against it, But that doesnt mean that everyone else is.
Someone else might think it be a good idea..

[sirrah]

16 hours ago, cfrag said:

 

Thank you for the correction. Unfortunately (for me), in DCS, most planes can't stop on grass and then move again, which currently makes it impossible to create make-shift airfields in a mission - hence my suggestion. Reading up on this specific aircraft capability (thanks for the hint) I've seen that many modern military aircraft can take-off and land on unprepared airfields made from (among other things) dirt, it's even trained regularly in the USA, Finland, Sweden and here where I live (Switzerland). I'd love to re-create this in a mission with other planes than just the Hornet, Falcon and Harrier (who - in DCS - are able to stop and start rolling again on grass).

 

 

By Falcon I assume you mean the F-16 (generally called Viper instead of Fighting Falcon).

 

Why would you want to use the Viper on a dirt/grass strip?

 

The F-16 is definitely not supposed to operate from grass strips. Apart from the fact that the nose gear is not fit for this, think about that big air intake so close to the ground, sniffing up dirt/FOD.

 

From personal experience back when I was working as a mechanic for the RNLAF:

We were once towing an F-16 back to our hangar and our tow-truck driver had to do an evasive action due to oncoming traffic (Vipers on their way to the runway :P)

He miscalculated his action and our F-16 LH main wheel went off the tarmac. As soon as it did, it "sunk" pretty much half a meter into the ground. All this time, I was sitting on the back of the tow truck watching everything unravel. Quite a peculiar sight watching it happen. Took a dozen of officers several hours to figure out how to pull the thing out (eventually giving in to our suggestions to just pull it back out using the MLG towing eyes )

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by sirrah

[cfrag]

Thank you for going through the trouble of testing, @StevanJ. Now, it's not as if I did not try what you kindly tried yourself; as the screenshot I posted before (and the entire premise of my post) shows, an invisible FARP in Caucasus runs into the problem of planes sticking in the grass near the FARP. But I will certainly take your recommendation under advisement - all I need are two or three remote locations in Caucasus where I can set up a FARP and have an A-10 land (I used a road) and taxi off the road onto the FARP. I drew blanks when I tried to find some spots where this does not happen, hence my request. I'd be very, very happy if you can give me a leg up and show me some positions where they are possible. It's all I want

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by cfrag

[cfrag]

1 minute ago, sirrah said:

 

By Falcon I assume you mean the F-16 (generally called Viper instead of Fighting Falcon).

 

Why would you want to use the Viper on a dirt/grass strip?

 

 

I don't - I merely conducted an experiment (purely academic) with the modules I own to see which of these planes can do this on a Caucasus map in DCS. It was to find out what determines if a DCS model can move on grass and if there was any deeper meaning to it on my quest to find a way to create a fixed-wing FARP ("make-shift airfield") usable with the Hog (on the Caucasus map). 

 

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, StevanJ said:

Well there you go, all you have to do is share pictures of these planes taking off and landing on unprepared airfields, and we'll have an argument.
However, from my search- every single time a plane 'operates' from anywhere, there is a line of 'preperation', and thats your problem.

 

That has been done in the past to the nauseam with plenty of videos and evidence for all such operations for various ones like a Su-25, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, MiG-23 etc. But still the opposition makes claims that it is impossible and unrealistic.  

 

Example: https://www.military.com/video/aircraft/jet-fighters/mig-21s-takeoff-land-in-grass-field/4194030810001

 

Doesn't matter because people are angry that someone would roll over a grass areas in airbases and then "doesn't git good" by doing so... What we need is that ATC is gets angry about such behavior and cancel your take-off and require you to taxi back to the parking slot. And you would be denied to fly as you need to explain your behavior etc. 

But when these things happens by doctrine, it shouldn't matter as many of those are made to operate from such conditions in full load. Sure the ground personnel will observe the conditions of the ground so can it be used. Repair or prepare it for operations etc.

 

IIRC in the first gulf war the A-10's were even landing on bases in sand storms when there was 4-5 inches sand, and the A-10's managed to do that fine.

[StevanJ]

6 minutes ago, Fri13 said:

 

That has been done in the past to the nauseam with plenty of videos and evidence for all such operations for various ones like a Su-25, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, MiG-23 etc. But still the opposition makes claims that it is impossible and unrealistic.  

 

Example: https://www.military.com/video/aircraft/jet-fighters/mig-21s-takeoff-land-in-grass-field/4194030810001

 

Doesn't matter because people are angry that someone would roll over a grass areas in airbases and then "doesn't git good" by doing so... What we need is that ATC is gets angry about such behavior and cancel your take-off and require you to taxi back to the parking slot. And you would be denied to fly as you need to explain your behavior etc. 

But when these things happens by doctrine, it shouldn't matter as many of those are made to operate from such conditions in full load. Sure the ground personnel will observe the conditions of the ground so can it be used. Repair or prepare it for operations etc.

 

IIRC in the first gulf war the A-10's were even landing on bases in sand storms when there was 4-5 inches sand, and the A-10's managed to do that fine.

Yeah, ive seen that- Ive also seen this thread from my understanding, @cfrag wants to land his A10C in a grass field, load it up with munitions, and then take off again.
Thats all he wants, his argument, is that he can do it in the F-18, Mig etc.
He wants the 'taxi on grass' scenario extended to the A10..

[cfrag]

14 minutes ago, StevanJ said:

Yeah, ive seen that- Ive also seen this thread from my understanding, @cfrag wants to land his A10C in a grass field, load it up with munitions, and then take off again.
Thats all he wants, his argument, is that he can do it in the F-18, Mig etc.
He wants the 'taxi on grass' scenario extended to the A10..

 

@StevanJ please afford me the courtesy of reading what I wrote to not misrepresent me. 

 

For the record - I want none of what @StevanJ claims I request, nor are the supposed reason anything I wrote.

 

I wrote in the frigging OP:

 

On 3/8/2021 at 1:09 PM, cfrag said:

Currently, most planes can't drive on rough ground ('grass'): once they stop, they remain stuck. Some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon, Su-27) can taxi on grass, but they are the exception, and that is fine.

 

With one exception: Close to a FARP we should be able to taxi on rough ground, as we should assume that the ground was prepared for plane traversal by the field engineers.

 

I want the option for DCS to treat the ground close to a FARP as if it was concrete so I can taxi a Hog on it, for the reasons stated above. My example (with images!) even shows the setup: land on a road, taxi on grass to FARP refueling point. I do not (repeat NOT) want the ability to land the Hog on grass. All I want is TAXI close to a FARP, dammit! 

 

(really annoyed, sorry)

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by cfrag

[Fri13]

11 minutes ago, StevanJ said:

Yeah, ive seen that- Ive also seen this thread from my understanding, @cfrag wants to land his A10C in a grass field, load it up with munitions, and then take off again.
Thats all he wants, his argument, is that he can do it in the F-18, Mig etc.
He wants the 'taxi on grass' scenario extended to the A10..

 

If we would have a realistic terrain, it would be sub-meter by its resolution so we can actually see the bumps and dips all over places that are not prepared for a farming (that makes them smooth and usually relative flat areas, but of course fields get made what can be farmed, and houses are built on areas that are unsuitable for fields.

 

We would as well have weather engine changing the soil properties, so when it starts raining the clay and mold based soil starts to turn to be softer and you sink in to it more easily. While a sand based soil would still support weight but become as well required to be leveled now and then between landings etc. 

When the sand/dirt based field is dry, it still requires leveling and compacting but not so often. 

 

And this means we would as well require a pioneer units that prepares ground for the air operations.

 

But facts still are, even heavier aircraft like AV-8 Harrier or F/A-18C or F-16C would be capable operate from a unprepared bases if required. But you do want to have a some kind pavement (even steel nets etc) to improve the impact withstanding. Preparing the emergency base for such is not modeled in DCS.

 

Harrier: The Vertical Reality (Documentary 1996)

https://youtu.be/PxNtwZRv92k?t=846

https://youtu.be/PxNtwZRv92k?t=929

https://youtu.be/PxNtwZRv92k?t=1415

 

If you are running a base of operations for longer periods, then you have it prepared for it. If you have just a temporal for like 1-2 sorties as a FARP, then you don't need to do it as you just have a one Chinook helicopter land to there and it has everything to rearm and refuel Harrier and take-off. 

 

 

 

[StevanJ]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

 

@StevanJ please afford me the courtesy of reading what I wrote to not misrepresent me. 

 

For the record - I want none of what @StevanJ claims I request, nor are the supposed reason anything I wrote.

 

I wrote in the frigging OP:

 

 

I want the option for DCS to treat the ground close to a FARP as if it was concrete so I can taxi a Hog on it, for the reasons stated above. My example (with images!) even shows the setup: land on a road, taxi on grass to FARP refueling point. I do not (repeat NOT) want the ability to land the Hog on grass. All I want is TAXI close to a FARP, dammit! 

 

(really annoyed, sorry)

 

 

 

Youre title is 'Please make rough ground traversable (taxiable) for planes close to FARP'..

And your opening statement was;

"Currently, most planes can't drive on rough ground ('grass'): once they stop, they remain stuck. Some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon, Su-27) can taxi on grass, but they are the exception, and that is fine.

 

With one exception: Close to a FARP we should be able to taxi on rough ground, as we should assume that the ground was prepared for plane traversal by the field engineers. I'd like to see an option (as radius around the FARP in feet/meters) where planes can taxi on any terrain just like they would on a runway."

SO- When i said;

"He wants the 'taxi on grass' scenario extended to the A10.. "
Was i mistaken?

Are you okay?
 

[cfrag]

Huh. I sometimes forget that trolling still is a thing.

 

My apologies to all.

[StevanJ]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

Huh. I sometimes forget that trolling still is a thing.

 

My apologies to all.

So you were trolling us?!

[YoYo]

On 3/8/2021 at 2:41 PM, cfrag said:

To give an example (and maybe even some pictures later):

I have a mission where you are to land on a road as make-shift runway. Next to the road is a FARP, where you taxi off the road, then refuel and rearm and take off again.

 

This is currently only possible in some planes (e.g. Hornet, Falcon), since, as soon as your plane taxis off the road, most airplanes (e.g. A-10, Viggen) get struck.

 

As an additional parameter for a FARP / Invisible PARP I'd like to see a prepared surface radius (called TARMAC RADIUS in mock-up below) field where we can enter a number (e.g. 2000). In the surrounding circle (here with radius 2000 feet), all planes treat the ground as if it was concrete tarmac -> they can taxi, stop, and taxi over this surface just like over a normal airfield ramp.

 

 

In above example, I can enter a number in "TARMAC RADIUS". Any plane within that radius around the FARP's position can taxi unrestricted (just as on concrete)

 

So that the following setup with a 2000 ft entry in TARMAC RADIUS

 

allows any pilot good enough to land on the road (orange line) can taxi off the road at the invisible FARP, get refueled and rearmed and can continue on their way. Currently, only very few planes can do that, all others get stuck in the grass and can no longer move once they have come to a stand-still 

 

 

Below is a screenshot from a mission I created that works well, but currently only with hornets. I'd love to be able to use the FARP with any plane.

 

+1 good idea (btw. I dont see your screenies).
We need something like (models) hard surface for DCS, even as platform or plates for the ground (visible plus hidden option), this is obvious. It will solve the problem.

[YoYo]

Example idea: