Can't Launch Space Plane

[Gargamel]

8 hours ago, Spricigo said:

Fixed that for you. Because, while I'm also more of a rocket guy, there are quite a few that prefer to play in a "not so rewarding" way 

Good catch!   But yeah, that was my point.   Thanks for the FYP. 

 

[Fraktal]

2 hours ago, steve_v said:

That design you have there could just as easily have tricycle gear and achieve the same AoA without a tailstrike anyway... So long as one isn't completely ham-fisted with the control of course.

The one I posted doesn't tailstrike.

Now if I were to put the rear wheel halfway up the fuselage to be close to the CoM, on the other hand...

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Popestar said:

I did it!  I did it!  I got off the ground!

Congratulations! One small step and so on and so on.

Don't get too discouraged about crashing. It takes a while to get the hang of flying planes, in particular getting back down in one piece takes some work.

Suggestion: practice flying with some of the stock plane designs, or planes you've downloaded from KerbalX. One difficulty with career mode is that it's not all that easy to make a robust plane that's easy to land with early tech-tree parts, in particular the landing gear you're using is quite delicate, much more so than the small retractable landing gear a node or two further down the tech tree. 

Edit: another hint -- if and when I build light early tech-tree planes with the landing gear you're using, I usually make them tail-draggers. Put the main gear just ahead of the centre of mass, and the tail gear at the tail so that the nose points well upward when it's resting on all the gear. That way you're less likely to get tail strikes on the way up, or down.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Guest

[Popestar]

And I once again blew up, but this time as I was landing.  I think I've got the hang of being in flight.  Coming down...totally different story.

Now, I did look at one of the videos, I saw that I should have stayed under 100 m/s.  Which I did...by cutting the engine entirely.  So I coasted in, and I aimed for the grassy field to the west of the KSC so I could land there and just kind of drive back in.  Yeah, that worked about as well as trying to drink water from a cup with no bottom.

I'll get it at some point.  Might just have to come back to this after I get a few more science points and a bit more on the tech tree.

[Serenity]

31 minutes ago, Popestar said:

And I once again blew up, but this time as I was landing.  I think I've got the hang of being in flight.  Coming down...totally different story.

A nice trick is to put the wheels under the Main body and then move them under the wings or wherever you want them.

You can hold shift to move parts even further.

That way gears and landing become a lot more easier, it is a bit cheaty but it helps a lot.

Also using grandparent autostruts(if you unlocked them) in every single part helps.Try to avoid using heavy ones, they are hard to use right.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Boyster

[Hotel26]

3 hours ago, Popestar said:

I should have stayed under 100 m/s

Rather than make your plane stronger (good), improving technique will pay-off the most in the long run.  For aircraft that are tricky to land, it's a good idea to find out how slow a particular airplane will still fly, straight-and-level.  This speed will be somewhere not far above the stall speed.  Rather than attempting to "fly the plane onto the runway" (which will likely result in a bounce and loss of control), reduce speed appropriately and permit a modest sink rate.  Landing an aircraft which has already lost the urge to fly is a much safer proposition.  This is something you will soon get a feel for.

You can estimate the same speed simply by attempting the earliest rotation from the runway on take-off and noting the speed at lift-off.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Hotel26

[steve_v]

16 hours ago, Fraktal said:

Now if I were to put the rear wheel halfway up the fuselage to be close to the CoM

...You would be completely misunderstanding what I said. "Move the main gear closer to the CoM so you can rotate easier" obviously doesn't apply to a taildragger.
A taildragger with the rear wheel not at the rear is, frankly, kinda ridiculous. It's neither a "conventional" taildragger nor a "modern" tricycle layout, and it would include the worst properties of both for no real benefit.

My point was that if you were to convert your design to a tricycle layout (ya know, with the single steerable wheel at the front and the two main gear just behind the CoM), you'd have a craft that sits level on the runway, doesn't try to faceplant under braking, has overall better ground clearance... and needs careful handling to avoid tailstrikes - tailstrikes that would be much easier to avoid if you swapped out that tail connector for the raised one.
That's "careful handling", not "a no-go".

As evidenced by the now multiple reports of successful flights with very minor modifications to the OP's (second) craft, going to a completely different gear layout wasn't required. In fact the only situation I would consider a taildragger to be the optimal solution is where you absolutely need that extra ground clearance for a big propeller up front.

 

10 hours ago, Popestar said:

I did look at one of the videos, I saw that I should have stayed under 100 m/s.

Good advice for a spaceplane (though you can land a lot faster once you get the hang of it), but for a trainer/science gatherer, which is kinda what you're building, I'd try to land as slow as possible.

Controlling your horizontal speed in stock aero is extremely easy as any hard manoeuvring will create vast drag - as will deploying gear or opening cargo bays. Figure out what your stall speed is (by trial and error), then add ~15m/s and use that as a target for sea-level landing.
I suggest a combination of watching the vertical speed part of the altimeter and your shadow on the ground to judge vertical speed, and trying to keep it under 5m/s as you touch down. The lower your vertical speed the less suspension jank and random bouncing you'll need to deal with. Apply brakes only when on the ground, and keep wheel steering locked unless taxiing.

For reference, my early career aircraft can generally land at <60m/s, which also happens to make doing those rough terrain science gathering missions without parachutes viable. If you stall before that, I'd suggest adding more wing.

Edited October 7, 2020 by steve_v