Change request at Bagram Air Base.

[Shadow_039]

As someone who spent some time at Bagram, I would like to make the following request that I feel would add to the realism of operating out of Bagram:

1. I would like to see the removal of the pre-placed static ground equipment on Mike Ramp. It blocks the center taxiway between spots 11 thru 20 and 21 thru 30 and the taxiway behind spots 1 thru 10. It also prohibits the ability to set up aircraft parking locations similar to how many units parked their aircraft while deployed there. Aircraft parked in spots 11 thru 20 would park with the nose towards the east, and spots 21 thru 30 would park with the nose towards the west (See picture of the F-16s parked, satellite image from google maps, and the in-game image of how jets were parked). When parked on spots 1-10, the nose of the aircraft would face west towards the runways.  

2. The Revetment wall on the North side of spot 20 sits in the middle of the taxiway line on the north end of the ramp. Would it be possible to remove or move that wall to the south end of that row to unblock the taxiway and fill in the empty space between the ramp entrance and the parking spot at that end?

3. Add additional parking spots and revetment walls to the east row of Mike Ramp (Spots 21 thru 30).

 

I believe this will enhance realism and the overall experience when building missions out of Bagram, especially for those who have spent time there. I have always looked forward to flying ops out here from the moment the base was teased in the 2023 and Beyond video. I know it would mean the world to some users to be able to set up the ramp like units did in the past. 

Edited June 1 by Shadow_039
correcting typos

[Nealius]

In general removal of all the shelves with boxes and such not only at Bagram (all ramps) but other airfields would be great as well. They're in nonsensical locations that would get blown away by jet blast, or prop and rotor wash.

[Duck21]

17 hours ago, Nealius said:

In general removal of all the shelves with boxes and such not only at Bagram (all ramps) but other airfields would be great as well. They're in nonsensical locations that would get blown away by jet blast, or prop and rotor wash.

I agree basically, clutter should not be placed where it's completely unrealistic. However, SOME material needs to be placed in useful locations, for the simple reason that in DCS no one brings that stuff out dynamically when operating on an airbase. And with zero clutter around parking stands it would then look unrealistically clean and boring. So I'd vote for having a bit of material placed in realistic locations, stuff that an imaginary ground crew would use to service aircraft for the mission. Then remove the rest that serves no purpose or is in an unrealistic location. 

[Shadow_039]

On 3/25/2025 at 11:00 PM, Duck21 said:

I agree basically, clutter should not be placed where it's completely unrealistic. However, SOME material needs to be placed in useful locations, for the simple reason that in DCS no one brings that stuff out dynamically when operating on an airbase. And with zero clutter around parking stands it would then look unrealistically clean and boring. So I'd vote for having a bit of material placed in realistic locations, stuff that an imaginary ground crew would use to service aircraft for the mission. Then remove the rest that serves no purpose or is in an unrealistic location. 

While I understand having some clutter, the M92 ground equipment that was added to the list of placeable static objects provide mission makers the opportunity to put static equipment wherever and however they want to mimic a busy ramp or, for those like myself, to mimic how the ramp was set up while deployed there. Im all for the placement of the Revetment walls and maybe misc ground equipment/ammo trailers preplace in places on the side so that it doesnt interfere with ground movements.

[Nealius]

The objects on the fighter ramp in particular block our ability to taxi back to our origin parking spots after a sortie. They're dropped right in the middle of the taxiway.

[BlackRook]

@Shadow_039 Sorry to resurrect this thread from earlier this year, but I have a few questions since you say that you spent some time there.

1. Is it realistic that aircraft parked on MIKE Ramp used the 21L (eastern) runway as a taxiway to get to the northern/active end of 21R?  I agree that the revetments and block walls are blocking two very important taxiways: ECHO East and LIMA East.

2. It seems to me that the proper taxi pattern when cleared by the tower to cross either runway, would be PAPA Taxiway to JULIET and north to the active end of 21R.
3. Is the military pattern for Bagram generally north of the airfield?  The ILS glideslope critical path is shown in diagrams to be at the south/west end of 03R and the resources that I have found indicate that the 03 approach is the standard.  DCS has aircraft landing from a northern pattern.  I will work with the wind direction to see if this changes AI decisions.

Edited May 24 by BlackRook

[Shadow_039]

On 5/24/2025 at 10:09 PM, BlackRook said:

@Shadow_039 Sorry to resurrect this thread from earlier this year, but I have a few questions since you say that you spent some time there.

1. Is it realistic that aircraft parked on MIKE Ramp used the 21L (eastern) runway as a taxiway to get to the northern/active end of 21R?  I agree that the revetments and block walls are blocking two very important taxiways: ECHO East and LIMA East.

2. It seems to me that the proper taxi pattern when cleared by the tower to cross either runway, would be PAPA Taxiway to JULIET and north to the active end of 21R.
3. Is the military pattern for Bagram generally north of the airfield?  The ILS glideslope critical path is shown in diagrams to be at the south/west end of 03R and the resources that I have found indicate that the 03 approach is the standard.  DCS has aircraft landing from a northern pattern.  I will work with the wind direction to see if this changes AI decisions.

If i'm being honest, I do not remember how they did the crossing to the other side. I do remember seeing them use the taxiway that is centered between M5 and M6. Until I saw the map in DCS I never noticed there being 2 runways. 

The T-walls surrounding the complex Northeast of Mike Ramp are definitely too far out into the taxiway. Any decent satellite image of Bagram would show that. 

As far as which runway was used, I only every recall seeing aircraft use the 03 ends.