stuck on grass

Seems like you are stuck in this thread too.

LOL!

Everyone has to have a hobby...

Serenity Prayer:

ED grant me the serenity

to accept the things I cannot change;

courage to change the things I can;

and wisdom to know the difference.

...

 

 

Vaziani

 

GE

 

This portion of airfield wasn't available in GE in 2008 (This is latest one). Note the dirt taxiways and their composition.

 

Older picture.

 

DCS:

...

Taxiways are way too narrow here and do not tolerate any deviation. GE one are made of hardened soil and have no concrete tiling.

---

 

Just because investigating this sort of stuff can be fun...

Those aren't dirt taxiways. By the time of your imagery, those shelters had fallen into disuse and the concrete had either been torn up or covered over. Best imagery I could find from 1984 indicates concrete taxiways throughout:

By 2002, the top half of that upper portion was no longer being used for aircraft and the concrete was gone:

And by 2007 none of the shelters above the main taxiway were in use for aircraft and the concrete taxiways in that area were also no longer in evidence:

Is Vaziani even in use in RL? There are no aircraft parked anywhere, no vehicle. Other air bases Like Kutaisi have shelters, yet you see several aircraft park in the open, but not in Vaziani.

Is Vaziani even in use in RL? There are no aircraft parked anywhere, no vehicle. Other air bases Like Kutaisi have shelters, yet you see several aircraft park in the open, but not in Vaziani.

I think it's still used from time to time by the Georgian military for exercises, etc but, AFAIK, it is no longer in use as an airbase. A few years ago the US was involved in some joint ground force exercises with the Georgians (Nobel Partner) that took place at Vaziani.

I seen those picture in google map, there is only a few photos. But just seems like and abandon base. No truck, no vehicle. Many concrete slabs seem move, like if i was flooded at some point.

In google maps anyway. Same in Bing maps

Noble Partner, 2016:

If this was on ED's list? and especially just for you of course jackmckay, it would be item number 1576.

 

There are many other areas of DCS the dev's would love to work on, perhaps even this one? there's many you yourself have criticized ED on. This is a business and the show must go on, playing around with things like this would be icing on the cake.

You do not seem to realize, but this topic is related to very many things in the DCS, than taxiing off the runway!

Every ground vehicle has contact to ground.

Every aircraft has a contact to ground at some point.

Every bomb, shell, missile etc has contact to ground at some point.

If a aircraft gets stuck on wheels, to dry hardened ground, then it is simply unrealistic!

Every photo of the passenger airline or such on grass with a deeper tracks is out of context.

If ANY aircraft gets off the runway, it is put through a evaluated check is it operational or not.

In military there are different designs for that in the first place. Soviet/Russian designs are "No problems!" as their territory in the first place is such that you don't have a perfect conditions in war time!

After someone has bombed your runway to holes, you need to be operational in matter of minutes! If there is a clear 4m wide track side of the crates, that is then used to take off and even land, regardless how much rubble or dirt there is near by!

If a aircraft needs to land and there is a common road a head, then that is used! Regardless if surroundings are full of sand, pellets, trash, leaves etc! You just use it!

There is no cleaning crew that comes and spend days to move every tiny pellet or check all possible things around. No, you just use it and get over it in war time!

But when it is about a passenger or other civilian aircraft, you have such a paperwork if there is something wrong or there is a risk that something goes wrong so that aircraft doesn't get permission to take off anywhere for days!

When a simple tiny drone is spotted couple kilometers from the airfield, every single airplane is directed to another airfield! The guilty person is searched with dogs and cats so that pilot who did something wrong is punished with the maximum penalty from endangering everyone!

Now every one attacking the idea of fixing the problem of aircrafts getting stuck on anywhere else than the airfield strip, doesn't even realise that they are thinking that engineers and designers building the airfields doesn't take care or even consider that some might be required to pull over from paved part! Like their skills and knowledge of possible situations are so limited that they leave a swap dumps just inches from the paved taxiroad or strip!

For a reasoning how a aircraft is so heavy and the unpaved area are so soft that every aircraft falls in them as stuck, is such that every single truck in the world would get stuck on a normal sand road with a 40'000kg total weight even when distributed only on six tires, as their weight/surface area ratio is higher than the aircrafts weight/surface area, meaning a truck has more weight per square inch than a aircraft has weight per square inch in contact to ground!

You can either lower the tire PSI to extend the area of weight, or increase number of tires or enlarge them. Aircrafts use the PSI control as you can't add tires or change their size. Trucks use a extra axle to increase amount of tires or as well lower PSI if required.

And we are not talking about friction where suddenly a truck gets stuck as it has none because ice, mud or something. As aircraft thrust power is in its engines, not in the tires.

When a special stripped P-42 variant from Su-27 was on ground with a full afterburners, it required not just its breaks, but a couple heavy weight towing trucks to hold it on ground!

There is no compressed ground that can hold that power even on full combat aircraft to get it moving as long tires are not so deep that they can't get up but gets deeper.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a430864.pdf

Every airfield starts from a prepared ground work. Every single square feet is prepared to withstand a heavy loads on tiny contact areas. Your terrain needs to be totally solid for tens of thousands of high force impacts from any point.

After you have your whole area covered, you build a paved areas on that, to get easier maintenance, easier rolling, easier breaking etc (you can't break as effectively on sand as you can on pavement).

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/faqs/roughness.pdf

Military aircrafts operate from prepared, semi-prepared and unprepared airstrips.

And who ever thinks that a airfield unpaved areas are worse than even semi-prepared, has no idea what the requirements are for the military aircrafts to land in the first place.

No, landing in full combat load with full PSI in tires and full fuel load on unprepared strip after weeks of heavy rain etc.... That is crazy. But so is that even a combat loaded aircraft gets stuck if its wheel gets off the pavement while taxiing like the soil is some kind quicksand that grabs the tire so it can't move anymore!

We are talking here about decades old design flaw in the map technology and game engine. Something that wasn't problem decades ago but was required to be done there so the aircraft crashing on ground doesn't make the body slide otherside of the map but has friction to stop it. The same thing is there locking the tires in place like there is no force on earth that can move the tires horizontally.

And this bug affects as well every ground vehicle, every aircraft crashing or landing off-road etc.

737-200 landing on gravel airfield, fielding a special "gravel kit" by manufacturer for the model to operate on such airstrips.

Operating Empty Weight is 65,300 lb (29,600 kg)

Maximum take-off weight is 128,100 lb (58,100 kg)

So again, how many thinks that airfields every unpaved area is not at least semi-prepared or non-prepared such manner that it is compressed, but really is a sinkhole?

Generally, civil aviation wants to use clean, hard surfaces. Tire pressure is a good indicator how high the tire load is, and how soft the surface may be. Commercial jets have 100 - 220 psi (7 - 15 bar) tire pressure and need a hard surface (concrete or asphalt; gravel operation is really unusual and needs lower tire pressure). Carrier-based aircraft have up to 350 psi (24 bar) tire pressure when operated from the steel deck of a carrier. On the other extreme, some military transports are still jet aircraft but need to land on unprepared surfaces, so their tire pressures go down below 100 psi (the C-17 uses 144 psi normally, but this can be lowered to 120 psi). 125 psi (8.6 bar) is also the regular inflation pressure of the C-130 E landing gear tires, designed for operation from unprepared surfaces.

And some other documents:

https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/AGARD/AGARD-AG-45/AGARD-AG-45.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a279100.pdf

As to the consistence and plasticity of the soil, sllpperlness and stickiness also

are of importance, especially when considering fine-grained soils of small bearing

capacity. Sticky soils can stick to the tires, thus increasing the rolling friction.

Generally slipperiness results from a layer of slippery soil on hard ground; this can

cause difficulties in manoeuvring the airplane on the ground.

On a relatively rigid soil the difference between the rolling drag in motion, p. v and

of Initial motion, y.y, is insignificant. The wheel, having sunk to a certain depth

at touch-down, is rolling on in a track of about the same depth*. It may even

occur that the rolling wheel sinks in less than the stationary wheel. In this

case ^2 may become smaller than fjty

32

On a soft soil the conditions differ, in so far as the stationary wheel, having sunk

into the soil to a certain degree, has found a sort of equilibrium in it. For initial

motion, this equilibrium is disturbed, due to a part of the rear tyre contact surface

being lifted off and, consequently, the total load acts on a smaller area. The tyre

sinks deeper into the ground, and the rolling drag JJ-2 Increases. If the wheels sink

in still deeper, movement is finally Impossible.

So again, how many thinks that the airfields terrain around taxiing is specifically soft soil like a wet farming field in rain?

A. CONCLUSIONS

The calculated results shown in the previous section represent contact

pressures for a standing tire, deflected against a frictionless surface.

Studies of passenger car tires (Reference 4) show that surface friction has

little effect on the pavement pressure developed by a standing or

freely-rolling tire. Centrifugal force stiffening occurs in a rolling tire,

but the effect on pavement pressure is negligible except at extremely high

speeds. The conjecture may be made that pavement pressure of a taxiing

airplane will be essentially the same as the pavement pressure when the plane

is parked, regardless of the nature of the pavement surface

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a279100.pdf

Can't compare a prepared gravel runway to a patch of land where aircraft are not meant to go. So please quit this stupidity already and stay on the taxiways from now on :doh:

The point remains, though, that anyone who does read this thread to form a strong opinion in either way could have easily used that time to learn how to taxi with literally any plane in DCS (as a hyperbole I might say: all of them, one after the other) and avoid this world-changing epicly game-breaking issue ever since.

In fact, scratch that. Lets just start a project to pour concrete all over real-life Georgia so we don't have to worry about things like grass, ground, foundations, weather conditions or our own utter ineptitude to keep a plane on a perfectly good taxiway ever again.

Seriously, I've had a good laugh in disbelief when this was seven pages. On page 13 it just isn't funny anymore.

@Fri13 apparently you haven't read the previous 11 pages and didn't even look at the posted RW photos. You are comparing apples and oranges.

I did read many and I am sorry talking about military aircrafts that are even heavier than a Mig-15.

Aircrafts that are designed to operate from a far more rougher unprepared fields than the Original Post is all about having a aircraft permanently stuck on the ground once you stop there, just next to pavement.

So please, educate all how the engineers designing military airfields and aircrafts are so stupid that every aircraft requires a paved road to park, taxii and TO/LA.

So sorry, you are comparing apples and monkeys.

The point remains, though, that anyone who does read this thread to form a strong opinion in either way could have easily used that time to learn how to taxi with literally any plane in DCS (as a hyperbole I might say: all of them, one after the other) and avoid this world-changing epicly game-breaking issue ever since.

The fact remains that there is a coding/design error (a bug) that requires to be fixed.

And people who argue "learn to taxii correctly" are just with full of hyperboles and missing the fact that there is a problem that requires fixing.

How about people like you to learn that there are flight simulator fans who like to train as well the difficult challenging scenarios, like landing on icy runway with too heavy load or on too short strip too fast etc, so their landing goes just couple meters too long? Now they can't do anything as their aircraft is stuck in "sinkhole" regardless there is nothing!

In fact, scratch that. Lets just start a project to pour concrete all over real-life Georgia so we don't have to worry about things like grass, ground, foundations, weather conditions or our own utter ineptitude to keep a plane on a perfectly good taxiway ever again.

 

Yeah, hyperboles more.... How about next time someone start to talk how a bicycle got stuck on that airfield and there was no force enough to pull it moving?

 

 

Seriously, I've had a good laugh in disbelief when this was seven pages. On page 13 it just isn't funny anymore.

 

It has not been funny in the first place as the DCS terrain and physics modeling is wrong and requires a fix.

 

It just ain't funny anymore how idiotic people think that airfields dry compressed grass areas are sinkholes that sucks the aircraft in so badly that you can't move it anymore by any force. Yet the same aircrafts are designed to operate on far softer terrain, land, take-off as taxiing.

But oh no, that airfield grass area where everyone is taxiing near by is so soft that no one ever thought it would require compression or preparation as NO ONE EVER TAXII OUT ON IT!

 

The fact remains that there is a coding/design error (a bug) that requires to be fixed.

True statement! In FACT, there are dozens, if not hundreds, in DCS overall. Ever look at the crash logs? Can't miss the number of errors listed within them. What you don't see is an error for people who can't stay on taxiways.

And people who argue "learn to taxii correctly" are just with full of hyperboles and missing the fact that there is a problem that requires fixing.

One or two people who want to be a drama queens over something that 99.999% of the community has no issue with is what needs fixing.

If all but two people can do it, the issue is not with the taxiways. PERIOD.

This was funny long ago. Now it's just stupid. A moderator seriously needs to put an end to this thread.

The fact remains that there is a coding/design error (a bug) that requires to be fixed.

And people who argue "learn to taxii correctly" are just with full of hyperboles and missing the fact that there is a problem that requires fixing.

How about people like you to learn that there are flight simulator fans who like to train as well the difficult challenging scenarios, like landing on icy runway with too heavy load or on too short strip too fast etc, so their landing goes just couple meters too long? Now they can't do anything as their aircraft is stuck in "sinkhole" regardless there is nothing!

 

In fact, scratch that. Lets just start a project to pour concrete all over real-life Georgia so we don't have to worry about things like grass, ground, foundations, weather conditions or our own utter ineptitude to keep a plane on a perfectly good taxiway ever again.

 

Yeah, hyperboles more.... How about next time someone start to talk how a bicycle got stuck on that airfield and there was no force enough to pull it moving?

 

 

 

 

It has not been funny in the first place as the DCS terrain and physics modeling is wrong and requires a fix.

 

It just ain't funny anymore how idiotic people think that airfields dry compressed grass areas are sinkholes that sucks the aircraft in so badly that you can't move it anymore by any force. Yet the same aircrafts are designed to operate on far softer terrain, land, take-off as taxiing.

But oh no, that airfield grass area where everyone is taxiing near by is so soft that no one ever thought it would require compression or preparation as NO ONE EVER TAXII OUT ON IT!

 

There are lots of videos and photos to be found on the web about these kind of incidents. With military aircraft, with civilian aircraft.

From my personal experience the lawn areas around the airfields (small airfields in Lower Saxony, Germany) are indeed soft enough and not(!) hard, dried "concrete like", neither is the lawn and meadows around HAJ, nor is it in Duxford, or was it in Berlin Schönefeld during the 90ies, when I visited the ILA, there.

That is the reason pilots try hard to not roll off the runway or taxiways... Simple like that. No bug! A realistic and authentic feature for a region like the Caucasus.

EDIT ...and of course planes, that are designed to start/land from grass fields can do so in DCS. All WW II prop planes and the lighter jets can, depending on the area...

This here that was post way back is enough to know that aircraft get stuck all the time.

I can only speak from my point of view: in Sheppard AFB, Luke AFB, Osan AB, MCAS Iwakuni, Aviano AB, Al Udeid AB, Cold Lake AFB, Holloman AFB, Kunsan AB and Eilson AFB, non had any "ground harden" around taxiways, non that I saw. In Kunsan, many areas are like rice fields.

Not at the airport I work at (one of the largest/busiest commercials in the U.S.)

 

Let's make it really simple math...

 

Equation:

x = aircraft weight

{x =, or > than, we operate}

Pilot (or, taxi crew) short turns, or in icing condition slides off the concrete taxi/ramp, onto the grass or adjoining paved asphalt (yes even the asphalt).

 

Solution:

Lots of overtime for me....

Seen it, done it (the overtime that is..)

 

December, January, February can be some good months $$$....

Aircraft belong on runways and taxiways in DCS, but in some cases it is possible usually by reducing the aircraft's weight.

 

Long story short, don't go on the grass.

You were missing the image to go with that last line BIGNEWY.

.

In meantime I would like admin o change topic title to moderate version like "Difficult taxing in narrow taxiways"

You can change it yourself. Edit your first post and click the "Go Advanced" button. You can then edit the title of your OP in second box at the top.

You can change it yourself. Edit your first post and click the "Go Advanced" button. You can then edit the title of your OP in second box at the top.

Actually, it will appear that you can edit it, but the end result is that the title will not be changed.

how idiotic people think

The idiocy here consists of some unnamed individuals who think this is a problem while 99.999% of DCS pilots never experience it because they stay on the taxiways.

Now, the whole problem can be reduced to the following:

1) There undoubtedly are airports in the world where the taxi and runway shoulders are hard packed and thus able to withstand some pressure for some time.

2) And then there're others where they definitely are not.

3) From which a conclusion: the airports in DCS fall into the latter category and this thread can be nuked.

What you don't see is an error for people who can't stay on taxiways.

What people doesn't get, is that:

1) You are not 100% always possible to stay on taxiways. Even if you totally know you should, and you totally have skills normally do. But in many situations, you will eventually, end up at least with a one tire on the grass.

2) We already have modules (been in development for years, before even NTTR was out) that are designed to operate from semi-prepared and unprepared FOB as dirtstrips. Designed to operate from road bases and all kind other ones. We have now Viggen, Harrier, F-5 and coming is a F/A-18 etc, that all are designed and capable to take-off, taxiing and even land on extremely far more rougher terrain than the airfields taxiways surrounding terrain couple inches of the pavement! And this problem touches even helicopters, and not just that but as well in the ships with all aircrafts that they just slip and move around as the aircraft is locked to the terrain under the ocean, and the ships deck can't be programmed to act as a second layer of terrain because it would mean that you can't roll there!

3) Training, operational procedures, missions etc all include situations where aircraft needs to operate on unpaved terrain. This problem doesn't just be part of sides of taxiways, it is about every possible terrain out there! In reality if you have even a normal dirtroad that has enough space around it (trees, rocks) so the wings can fit there, then that can be used as emergency landing site. But DCS doesn't seem to simulate the wheel physics, just the aircraft speed and then terrain so it generate calculation for rotation for a wheel and changes to controls, instead really having all the tires physics calculated. Why landing on a hard even ground is basically impossible as it just checks "No pavement, high speed, CRASH! CRASH! CRASH!" and its done in simple form.

4) In a fantasy world military aircrafts always operate from a perfectly built paved airstrip without any FOB. The FOB is the real danger for the military aircrafts for landing, taxiing and taking-off, not the terrain for most situations. That's why military aircrafts (like Soviets did) are built with Anti-FOB shields for take-off and landing as they need to operate on extremely rough ground conditions. Russia is largest country in the world and their airforce needs to operate in every single location in that country. They have everything from hottest deserts to coldest mountains, jungles to wide grasslands etc. They haven't built perfectly paved airfields to every possible place, but they have dirt roads, dirt strips, and capability to semi-prepare field quickly, or just operate on unprepared bases if so required.

F-5E II (specs, that is second prototype so likely 500kg lighter) empty weight 9,558 lb (4,349 kg)

Mig-15Bis empty weight 3,681 kg (8,113 lb)

And so nicely it is taxiing on a grass, unprepared strip, just like a normal farming field is at harvesting season (after some months has passed since it has been prepared for seeds).

One or two people who want to be a drama queens over something that 99.999% of the community has no issue with is what needs fixing.

99.999% of the community then ain't want a more realistic military simulator.... Fine if that is your opinion. (Btw, love your hyperbole.... You really belong to "master race" don't you?)

If all but two people can do it, the issue is not with the taxiways. PERIOD.

Who is only talking about taxiways? Who is talking only about turning when coming out?

Let me repeat: I don't have a problem to roll over taxiway as that I learned already in the first place in Lock-On, when it was just laughable stupid design flaw already back then. Very likely a heritance of the Flanker game when the 486 computers processing power to calculate anything else than attitude and speed and couple other functions were already in its limitation. ED talks about how they have written now like what, 11 game engines?, opted for that even when considering a pre-made engines. Yet those who have been flying ED simulators from Flanker to latest one, can spot the heritance of the same designs and same code in many many areas. Like purposely left features or functions off or as is, that would have been easily changed and fixed in rewrite.

This was funny long ago. Now it's just stupid. A moderator seriously needs to put an end to this thread.

This was funny 15 years ago when it still was the case in Lock-On, not have been funny since then. Every single bigger release has raised the hopes that the basic flaws has been fixed, but instead more opted for graphics and other features, like even flowers or grass animations or heat blur for distance when taxiing. Instead features that are changing training and operations in the military requirements.

It is a fact that is well known in military aviation that in first days of the war, every single pre-made airfield and airstrip you have is bombed to un-usable condition if they are couple hundred kilometers from the border. You do not have left a single airfield to use. Why every country has prepared for military operations off from such perfect conditions. That has been taken care in designs of the roads for the civilian use. That is one of the reason why everything from bridges to construction bases and railways are designed so they can be used as well in the war time or denied enemy to use them. Even a light poles for highways that has the designs for long straight parts with widened areas has been designed to be quickly turned down if so required, not just because it saves lives if car hits them or they can be quickly serviced if something happens.

Some countries even designed a totally new kind aircrafts like Harrier by British and now the F-35, not because it needs to be a ship-operated. That's reason why you have carriers with ramps and all. But because in war time you need to be able to land and take-off from any part of the country where ever the service crew can get. Swedish designed the Viggen with a reverse thruster (just like Harrier has as well reverse capability) to slow down for shorter and icy roads and turn around by itself even if it is required for temporal landing by pilot alone to wait an air attack to go over, so manner that pilot alone can land and roll to some deserted dirt road somewhere middle of nowhere!

And when you try to do the same in DCS, you can't as the straight leveled road you are trying to land is marked "Not an airstrip! CRASH! CRASH! CRASH!"

The future maps designs are as well requiring that all kind terrain can be used in their capability to aircraft operations. That is one of the things the weather system needs to change as well. If there is -15C then lakes etc should be frozen that change the ground units operational capability get over. Use the frozen lakes as airstrips even!

But you and your 99.998% others can't seem to understand that this is a lack of a great military capability and functionality, not just a "oh, he couldn't stay on taxiway FLOPS! LOL!" as it is stupid attitude.

You can play a war like it is a peace time, but in a war, military operations and conditions change radically. You can go and fly the air quake and believe that is the real thing how things goes. Spot the ground units from 10km distance as it is the black dot on the flat texture! It is just like a spotting a fly on white wall...

How many years have been going about missing real missile and aircraft functions? Like since from the begin! No one cares... NOT! So you and your 99.998% of narrow minded friends (see, doesn't the hyperbole you use look cool?) are like people would go to those threads and say "Just learn to use cannon, so they did in the Vietnam too!"

There is a bug, there is a lack of military capability because that, and it requires fixing. It ain't at all only about a taxiing, it is about everything else too that comes with that.

Probably reason why it has not been fixed, is that doing so would affect to every other part of the aircraft simulation when it comes about crashing, breaking, and so on. Even if they would just extend the pavement areas code to cover the whole airfield and little outside of it. IT would as well encourage unskilled people to roll over where ever they want regardless the airfield operations, but that is already a problem as how many doesn't do the correct landing or take-off procedures or even doesn't honor the airfield airspace in multiplayer servers. One just does need to go fly in multiplayer for most popular servers and see a lot of mishaps and reckless behavior, regardless how "99.999% of them" can "taxiing perfectly".

So, for now, the solution is to stay off the grass.

If you can't steer a plane on the ground, you shouldn't be flying it on operations anyway.

Clearly the unpaved areas of DCS World simulate very soft ground - as it often exists in the real world. Try imagining there has been a huge deluge in the past 48 hours that has made the ground terribly wet and soft. In Hollywood that is called suspension of disbelief - without it, you'll just tie yourself up in knots over something that has been a part of DCS World for years.

But yeah, we would like to be able to use grass strips - oh wait, we can!

The idiocy here consists of some unnamed individuals who think this is a problem while 99.999% of DCS pilots never experience it because they stay on the taxiways.

The idiocracy is on the side who doesn't understand that it ain't about taxiing and slipping one tire out of pavement and then stop. It is affecting many many other things, and anyways is stupid to even be that unpaved area on airfield is acting like a sinkhole, and then they blame the testers who knowledge the problem that they can't use taxiways.

Now, the whole problem can be reduced to the following:

 

1) There undoubtedly are airports in the world where the taxi and runway shoulders are hard packed and thus able to withstand some pressure for some time.

 

2) And then there're others where they definitely are not.

 

3) From which a conclusion: the airports in DCS fall into the latter category and this thread can be nuked.

Every airfield, airstrip etc can totally withstand a rolling fighter to stop and start rolling at least once. That is the thing, why every argument against "there is no problem, learn to stay on taxiways" is nuked in the first place.

This is not even about landing on such areas with high weight and impact forces. This is about rolling.

Yeah... IMPOSSIBLE!

2) And then there're others where they definitely are not.

 

3) From which a conclusion: the airports in DCS fall into the latter category and this thread can be nuked.

Thread needs closing now :lol:

So, for now, the solution is to stay off the grass.

 

If you can't steer a plane on the ground, you shouldn't be flying it on operations anyway.

Sure, if someone can't street aircraft on the ground, they shouldn't start from the ground but do the air starts.

But those who can street aircraft on the ground, they need to know how to operate in every military condition, from paved airfields, semi-prepared, unprepared, on road based, frozen lakes, grass lands etc.

Clearly the unpaved areas of DCS World simulate very soft ground - as it often exists in the real world.

They don't simulate anything. It is lack of simulation capability from decades ago, and just to encourage players to follow airfield procedures.

In real world airfields areas are all prepared, compressed and designed so every part withstand the airplane positioning if so required. It ain't the protocol to roll there if you don't really need to. But in case of emergencies you need to be able to roll there. And this is denied currently. Just simple lack of coding.

Try imagining there has been a huge deluge in the past 48 hours that has made the ground terribly wet and soft. In Hollywood that is called suspension of disbelief - without it, you'll just tie yourself up in knots over something that has been a part of DCS World for years.

 

But yeah, we would like to be able to use grass strips - oh wait, we can!

Are we able to land on the farmlands on dry season? Are we able to roll around the roads at road base operations? Are we able to land on straight dirt roads or use them as taxiways to paved roads?

No. We don't have capability to do emergency procedures, or military special operations than in very rare cases. Even less we can get the fighter rolling again if it slips out of the pavement on airfield....

As I wrote previously, if we would simulate the weather too that after long heavy rain the terrain would be more sticky, otherwise not. On winter we would get ice but as well possible snow. For a roads it could be thought there are ditches just next to them, but we don't have that modeling as terrain engine can't handle such thing!

But just imagining that airfields unpaved areas are sinkholes, only if you stop, is just stupid. Fixed just by extending the coded area of the pavement to cover larger area! Problem just is that you might not "feel" when your tire drops from the pavement so many would whine about that experience as the aircraft doesn't tilt etc. And if there is a unleveled pavement, aircraft tire might not get over it.

The fact still is, the DCS engine is very limited in its current 1.5.8 and 2.1 versions.

THere is no reasons to expect much in the future, but at least something to be done for the surrounding areas on airfield should be done so you don't get stuck so that you never be able to move from there!

Right now the real fix is, DO NOT STOP. If in any situation you will get one tire out of the pavement, FULL AFTERBURNER to keep you going. If you stop, game over....

And that is silly... Needing a full afterburner to keep you rolling on leveled, compressed ground just inches from pavement!

Actually, it will appear that you can edit it, but the end result is that the title will not be changed.

Ah, so it does. It changes the title of the post, but not the thread.

Any link for this info?

Yeah, above.... NATO documents, studies, research, engineering, construction, aircraft under carriage designs, requirements etc etc...

Then of course if someone doesn't want to read, they can just watch the videos where Mig-21, Mig-15, F-5, Harrier and even far heavier aircrafts land, take-off, roll on the soft grass lands, semi-prepared fields and so on.

But magically by some people minds, the airfields land that has been chosen and constructed all for very large areas, is just full of sinkholes just next to pavement.

When someone construct a airfield, there are all kind groundwork done to whole area because the water and all other elements. Preparations for emergency landings and mishaps.

It ain't just "Hey lads, here is flat large area, lets lay down the asphalt over here in straight line and build couple houses there, we have a own airfield then!"

Thread needs closing now :lol:

He didn't see your sign....