Spaceplane landing is ridiculously difficult

[tseitsei89]

1. As said earlier: Size matters. So pick the right sized landing gear.

2. Disable steering from all wheels.

3. Friction control set to override on all wheels. 0.0 for front wheel and ~3 (you might need to test different values here) for rear wheels.

I have no problem at take off or landing in 1.1.2...

[Alshain]

54 minutes ago, tseitsei89 said:

3. Friction control set to override on all wheels. 0.0 for front wheel and ~3 (you might need to test different values here) for rear wheels.

 

This is an absolutely absurd workaround IMO.  That slider shouldn't even be in the game.  Seriously SQUAD, you gave us a slider to alter the laws of physics... in stock?  What's next?  Stock HyperEdit?

Edited May 21, 2016 by Alshain

[qromodynmc]

1 minute ago, Alshain said:

 

This is an absolutely absurd workaround IMO.  That slider shouldn't even be in the game.  Seriously SQUAD, you gave us a slider to alter the laws of physics... in stock?  What's next?  Stock HyperEdit?

Btw, care to share one of your problematic craft with me? I want to inspect.

[Alshain]

2 minutes ago, qromodynmc said:

Btw, care to share one of your problematic craft with me? I want to inspect.

This is one I uploaded a while back.  I've made so many changes trying to get it to work, I can't even remember which version it was.  Nothing has ever worked anyway.  GoSlash27 got it working by moving the front gear back to the Center of Mass, of course that made it impossible to land without doing a nose dive into the concrete.

[qromodynmc]

1 hour ago, Alshain said:

This is one I uploaded a while back.  I've made so many changes trying to get it to work, I can't even remember which version it was.  Nothing has ever worked anyway.  GoSlash27 got it working by moving the front gear back to the Center of Mass, of course that made it impossible to land without doing a nose dive into the concrete.

I dont know why you used that gear configuration rather than usual tricycle;

With this configuration it flies well enough, tried landing and taking of few times, not a problem if you dont go really fast on ground.

(btw sorry for black cockpit, dunno why but im having this problem for a while )

Edited May 21, 2016 by qromodynmc

[cantab]

2 hours ago, Alshain said:

 

This is an absolutely absurd workaround IMO.  That slider shouldn't even be in the game.  Seriously SQUAD, you gave us a slider to alter the laws of physics... in stock?  What's next?  Stock HyperEdit?

Changing the coefficient of friction isn't altering the laws of physics, it's merely changing the type of rubber and tread on the tyres. But a zero value of it IS unphysical.

Of course, whether the slider actually alters the coefficient of friction is another matter.  doubt the bodged-up wheel physics even HAS that concept correctly implemented.

[ExtremeSquared]

More than using appropriate size gear, I'd say use medium and larger for everything. The small retractable are especially borked in 1.1.2. I have landed small planes with them, but it's been horrible every time.

[tseitsei89]

10 hours ago, Alshain said:

 

This is an absolutely absurd workaround IMO.  That slider shouldn't even be in the game.  Seriously SQUAD, you gave us a slider to alter the laws of physics... in stock?  What's next?  Stock HyperEdit?

That's a solution to problem using only stock. No mods or module manager hassle needed. You can also put slider on 1.0 on front and 3-4 on back wheels if you have problem with 0 friction coefficient.

As to whether this option should be in game or not and if it's realistic or not can be discussed. And yes I agree that wheels work weirdly but this workaround makes them act less weirdly actually so it's good IMO

Edited May 21, 2016 by tseitsei89

[Alshain]

8 hours ago, qromodynmc said:

I dont know why you used that gear configuration rather than usual tricycle;

With this configuration it flies well enough, tried landing and taking of few times, not a problem if you dont go really fast on ground.

(btw sorry for black cockpit, dunno why but im having this problem for a while )

Tricycle is not the 'usual'.  Conventional (or taildragger) is... well the conventional style... it pre-dates the use of tricycle style landing gear.  What you have done is built a new plane entirely.  I want this plane to be a conventional landing gear style, it's not a wrong design, it's broken wheels.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Alshain

[awfulhumanbeing]

Landing gear are garbage in 1.1.

Reduce the mass of the vehicle of replace the gear with bigger ones.

[qromodynmc]

1 hour ago, Alshain said:

Tricycle is not the 'usual'.  Conventional (or taildragger) is... well the conventional style... it pre-dates the use of tricycle style landing gear.  What you have done is built a new plane entirely.  I want this plane to be a conventional landing gear style, it's not a wrong design, it's broken wheels.

Do you know why germans turned this;

into this;

Because it couldn't take off.

Probably broken german landing gears, right? There is a reason why jet producers choose this configuration.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

37 minutes ago, qromodynmc said:

Do you know why germans turned this;

into this;

Because it couldn't take off.

Probably broken german landing gears, right? There is a reason why jet producers choose this configuration.

I dont think thats true. They changed it because the pavement of the runways caught fire with the jet exhaust facing the ground.

Edited May 21, 2016 by MalfunctionM1Ke

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, qromodynmc said:

Probably broken german landing gears, right? There is a reason why jet producers choose this configuration.

Indeed there is: It's not a great idea to point hot exhaust from low-mounted engines at the tarmac. Many runways are asphalt, and asphalt burns rather well.
The The V1 through V4 prototypes all had conventional gear layouts and got off the ground just fine. The redesign was due to excessive runway damage from jet exhaust.

Aside, the early prototypes pretty much had to be taildraggers - they had a conventional jumo engine (with prop) in the nose for reliability reasons.

The landing gear in 1.1.x are bung, especially the small fixed gear. It was all over the bugtracker during prerelease, and the (not particularly successful IMO)"fixes" implemented in 1.1.2 are accepted to be workarounds for Unitys broken wheel implementation.

Edited May 21, 2016 by steve_v

[qromodynmc]

1 hour ago, MalfunctionM1Ke said:

I dont think thats true. They changed it because the pavement of the runways caught fire with the jet exhaust facing the ground.

I never heard that. I cant find original source but here is one from wikipedia;

Quote

The V3 third prototype airframe, with the code PC+UC, became a true jet when it flew on 18 July 1942 in Leipheim near Günzburg, Germany, piloted by Fritz Wendel.^[28] This was almost nine months ahead of the British Gloster Meteor's first flight on 5 March 1943. Its retracting conventional gear, a feature shared with the first four Me 262 V-series airframes, caused its jet exhaust to deflect off the runway, with the wing's turbulence negating the effects of the elevators, and the first takeoff attempt was cut short.^[29]

On the second attempt, Wendel solved the problem by tapping the aircraft's brakes at takeoff speed, lifting the horizontal tail out of the wing's turbulence.^[29] The aforementioned initial four prototypes (V1-V4) were built with the conventional gear configuration. Changing to a tricycle arrangement — a permanently fixed undercarriage on the fifth prototype (V5, code PC+UE), with the definitive fully retractable nosewheel gear on the V6 (with Stammkennzeichen code VI+AA, from a new code block) and subsequent aircraft corrected this problem

 

[Wjolcz]

On 5/20/2016 at 3:29 AM, MadOverlord said:

(and I speak as someone who has a pilot's license in RL).

 

On 5/20/2016 at 3:29 AM, MadOverlord said:

I have touched down on the runway at well under 1m/sec and blown up.

idontbelieveyou.gif

[Xyphos]

I don't bother landing, at all.
I've come to terms that KSP is a game designed with intentional bugs, explosions, and complete failures.
even the connecting joint system is intentionally flaccid like my ex-girlfriend's favorite toy.
You'll never, ever, ever, succeed at anything in KSP.

Having said that, just do what I do; spam radial parachutes all over the planes' body, fly low over the area you wish to land, kill the engines and deploy the chutes. after your landing gears explode and your plane touches down, just recover what's left over and chalk the losses as expenses.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Xyphos

[steve_v]

9 minutes ago, qromodynmc said:

I never heard that. I cant find original source but here is one from wikipedia;

Interesting. TBH I can't recall my original source either, that particular tidbit has been floating around in the back of my head for a long time. It's possible I'm confusing it with another aircraft.
Regardless, that wikipedia article claims turbulence from jet exhaust as the reason... assuming this is true it still has nothing to do with exploding wheels or landing. KSP doesn't model this kind of ground interaction anyway.

11 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

idontbelieveyou.gif

Whatever this is supposed to be, I suspect MadOverlord means vertical velocity... which is entirely believable. I've certainly seen the fixed gear explode suddenly when touching down at <1m/s vertical velocity, in fact I've written them off as too broken for use, as they seem to explode if you look at them funny.

[Wjolcz]

2 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Whatever this is supposed to be, I suspect MadOverlord means vertical velocity... which is entirely believable. I've certainly seen the fixed gear explode suddenly when touching down at <1m/s vertical velocity, in fact I've written them off as too broken for use, as they seem to explode if you look at them funny.

Eh. Seems like a troll thread to me anyway. I have encountered no problems with the landing gear so far.

[Xyphos]

12 minutes ago, steve_v said:

 I've certainly seen the fixed gear explode suddenly when touching down at <1m/s vertical velocity, in fact I've written them off as too broken for use, as they seem to explode if you look at them funny.

I agree, I've seen the fixed landing gear explode upon launching. going from the SPH to the RW, the plane dropped a little and BOOM!

[steve_v]

2 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Eh. Seems like a troll thread to me anyway. I have encountered no problems with the landing gear so far.

I'm not going to get sucked into an argument re. who is trolling here, as that in itself would be troll-feeding. This post is getting dangerously close as it is.

I have a very simple test as to whether landing has become more difficult since 1.1... I take craft that have performed flawlessly since pre-beta, update them for 1.1.2 compatibility, then try to land as I have always done.
Result: Wierd, unrealistic behaviour and unexpected explosions.
Aside from the fact that real gear does not explode violently when overloaded (tires will, but not the whole assembly), and I now check wheel loading before takeoff, there are a whole host of problems with the new wheel physics. AFAICT all stemming from oversimplified collision detection and physics jitter. Firing my aircraft into the air when I hit the bottom of a slope is one, excessive bouncing and inexplicable yaw on landing for a couple more. That Squad had to resort to ugly band-aids like invisible struts and spent so much effort fiddling with suspension makes it pretty obvious that there are fundamental problems with wheels in U5. IME this "fixing" has not solved the problem, to the point where landings are effectively too dangerous to bother with. Takeoff is bad enough, and bizarre things are happening even while taxiing, FFS.

I like building aircraft, and I am trying to get to grips with the changes to landing gear... but too many completely screwey things are happening to say "wheels are fine" - they are clearly not behaving like wheels ought to.

[Alshain]

@qromodynmc

It really doesn't matter what the Germans did, a taildragger plane is a valid design, and the wheels are just broken.  There is no argument to suggest otherwise.  The wheels do not work right. Period, full stop.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Alshain

[Violent Jeb]

+1. After substantial experimentation i daresay the landing gear has become self aware. 9/10 times it doesn't work and you can't even liftoff without spinning or flipping. after making minute adjustments, changing wheel positions, etc, the 10th time you will get off the ground, but can't land without losing a wheel or two, even in near-perfect circumstances.

Then you try again and the plane won't get off the ground.

 

Is there any official word from unity regarding wheels? surely KSP isn't the only game built on unity that uses wheels? what is the typical turnaround on unity updates/patches? is this high priority for unity? is that likely to be where a legitimate fix comes from? so many questions, so little devnotes.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Violent Jeb

[Alshain]

8 minutes ago, Violent Jeb said:

+1. After substantial experimentation i daresay the landing gear has become self aware. 9/10 times it doesn't work and you can't even liftoff without spinning or flipping. after making minute adjustments, changing wheel positions, etc, the 10th time you will get off the ground, but can't land without losing a wheel or two, even in near-perfect circumstances.

Then you try again and the plane won't get off the ground.

 

Is there any official word from unity regarding wheels? surely KSP isn't the only game built on unity that uses wheels? what is the typical turnaround on unity updates/patches? is this high priority for unity? is that likely to be where a legitimate fix comes from? so many questions, so little devnotes.

The Unity 5.4 beta release notes have a lot of mentions of wheel colliders, but TBH it's over my head.

[qromodynmc]

12 hours ago, Alshain said:

@qromodynmc

It really doesn't matter what the Germans did, a taildragger plane is a valid design, and the wheels are just broken.  There is no argument to suggest otherwise.  The wheels do not work right. Period, full stop.

Okay, i agree that especially fixed gears dont work properly but i dont think whole situation is "unplayable" or "totally broken".

Hope squad fix these issues soon.

[Scarecrow]

I have had a look at your craft, and think it's a nice design.  I too had problems landing it though, so I made a few tweaks to the landing gear settings, and find that it is not so twitchy on landing now.  The changes I made are:

Front landing gear:-

• Set friction control to manual and set to 3.0
• Spring strength 2
• Damper strength 1.5
• Brakes 150
• Moved the attachment of the front gear very slightly forward and just a smidge higher up on the fuselage

 

Rear landing gear

• Friction control 4.0
• Spring strength 1
• Damper strength 1
• Disabled steering

 

I also set up the inboard control surfaces as flaps, which can be toggled with an action group key.  I found this made it a lot easier to slow the craft down when on approach to the runway.

 

If you want to download the modified craft, you can here : https://www.dropbox.com/s/cr0a0mify8m4rfx/Finch.craft?dl=0

I used action group key 2 for the flaps.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Scarecrow