Landing gear can't wait for 1.2, needs bandaid.

[cephalo]

I'm going to give that a try regex, it has less fuel than I have on mine which should make it lighter, but mine doesn't land so I gotta try something different.

 

15 minutes ago, qromodynmc said:

Im really having bad times to understand how people cant take off or land with current gears, smaller fixed ones are fishy but even those are not unplayable.

Im really plane guy and i design planes from 1ton to 200 ton, i just dont get all the fuss.

Gimme a design! Screenie will do.

[qromodynmc]

1 minute ago, cephalo said:

I'm going to give that a try regex, it has less fuel than I have on mine which should make it lighter, but mine doesn't land so I gotta try something different.

 

Gimme a design! Screenie will do.

I'd but im out of city for few days, but mark this somewhere, i'll try to send them at 08.06.2016.

[Alshain]

@cephalo It just takes fine tuning on the elevators, your probably either using 100% authority OR you are just coming down on a bad glide slope.  I have plenty of planes of that style that can "land", I use quotes because although they can touchdown, they spin out afterward.  That is the real problem with the wheels, not the stress limits as you describe.  I'll get you some craft files if you like (I have to sort through the ones I've updated already).

Edited June 5, 2016 by Alshain

[Alshain]

Ok, here are a couple.  I have more, but not all of them have their control surfaces set right.  I'm not really playing 1.1 anymore because of the other wheel issues.  They should touch down ok, what happens after that is anybody's guess.  The second one requires KAX.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5trwqzhkvos7hds/T4 Finch.craft?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b4w51uoztad6lex/Wren.craft?dl=0

[gilflo]

I think you can take off and land any aircraft provided you got enough gear to support the weight and the good landing gear settings.

For landing it's a bit difficult to stay on the runway, landing aside is easier. Here is a 478T SSTO supertanker with stock gears, 28 Wheels, no problem to land on the grass but very long run to stop it

even with max brakes on 20 rear wheels (200), 150 on 8 front wheels and 2 drag chutes. Friction is 3.5 on the rear and 2.5 in front. All Spring at 0.6. Vertical landing speed around 5-6 m/s and landing speed 110m/s, no bouncing, but not on runway..every time I tried it looks like the runway is icy! grass is far better!!

This aircraft being very heavy with big inertia, Pilot assistant helps a lot.

 

[The_Rocketeer]

1 hour ago, gilflo said:

*Blah blah* very long run to stop it *snip*

BUT YOU'RE LANDING AT 250 MPH!!!!

[Alshain]

4 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

BUT YOU'RE LANDING AT 250 MPH!!!!

That isn't that odd, the NASA shuttle landed at about 225 MPH.  The Orbiter did take a long time to stop, but relatively speaking, the runway it stopped on was shorter than the one in KSP.

[The_Rocketeer]

31 minutes ago, Alshain said:

That isn't that odd, the NASA shuttle landed at about 225 MPH.  The Orbiter did take a long time to stop, but relatively speaking, the runway it stopped on was shorter than the one in KSP.

Interesting. I did not know this, but I don't have a hard time believing it. However...

It's still pretty odd! Personally, I wouldn't consider the STS Orbiter a suitable analog for normal, powered runway landings for Spaceplanes. For a start, the shuttle was just a horribly inefficient glider, it fell from space and landed completely unpowered! 250mph is insanely fast for almost any Earth-based runway operations (including all other gliders), and there's no need at all to try to land so fast if you build your plane with proper airbrakes and flaps.

Further, I accept that KSP ought to have wheels capable of doing what the Shuttle could do, but I wouldn't take it as a given that any old wheels with any old suspension settings should be so capable.

[Alshain]

4 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

Interesting. I did not know this, but I don't have a hard time believing it. However...

It's still pretty odd! Personally, I wouldn't consider the STS Orbiter a suitable analog for normal, powered runway landings for Spaceplanes. For a start, the shuttle was just a horribly inefficient glider, it fell from space and landed completely unpowered! 250mph is insanely fast for almost any Earth-based runway operations (including all other gliders), and there's no need at all to try to land so fast if you build your plane with proper airbrakes and flaps.

Further, I accept that KSP ought to have wheels capable of doing what the Shuttle could do, but I wouldn't take it as a given that any old wheels with any old suspension settings should be so capable.

Well the issue there is what we have is all we have.  I agree the stock gear makes poor spaceplane gear (It's downright ugly on a shuttle replica), but he is using the largest gear in the game there.

[The_Rocketeer]

2 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Well the issue there is what we have is all we have.  I agree the stock gear makes poor spaceplane gear (It's downright ugly on a shuttle replica), but he is using the largest gear in the game there.

Yes, I think traction is one element of the landing gear problem that really does need some work. Rover-drifting is brilliant (remember how roverwheels used to dig in and flip you over? Not any more!) but from my own experiences I get the feeling that there's no real difference between the basic max/min traction settings for rover wheels and aircraft gears, and that makes no sense. Still, I have great expectations for big improvements Soon^TM.

That said, the point I was trying to make is if you want to stop sooner after landing, trying slowing down before you land!

[gilflo]

I must say that this SSTO is made to land after its refueling tanks are empty and its own tanks are nearly empty and the landing weight should be around 170T, so I should design it with less gears.

all those gears add 15 T more than with Adjustable landing gears. At 170T landing weight,  speed should be around 90m/s, but  less gears means less brakes, so I think same landing run....

Landing speed is also high because there no flaps and slats. A modern liner with no flaps and slats would land at 180-190 kts with no chutes and it wouldn't take 4kms to stop it , so my land speed is not that odd....The brakes are not efficient, that's the point.

[The_Rocketeer]

12 minutes ago, gilflo said:

A modern liner with no flaps and slats would land at 180-190 kts with no chutes and it wouldn't take 4kms to stop it , so my land speed is not that odd....The brakes are not efficient, that's the point.

I suggest u take a ride in an airliner landing at 220 knots (250mph) and see if u think it's 'odd' typical landing speed for a Boeing 747 is only 160mph/140kts/72mps.

Personally I don't think there is an issue with the brakes, I think the issue is (as I've said above) friction between the tyres and the ground. But till there's a fix, the solution is still the same - slow down in the air.

Edited June 6, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[KerikBalm]

Having problems stopping?

Use a drogue chute like the shuttle did...

[gilflo]

1 hour ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I suggest u take a ride in an airliner landing at 220 knots (250mph) and see if u think it's 'odd' typical landing speed for a Boeing 747 is only 160mph/140kts/72mps.

Personally I don't think there is an issue with the brakes, I think the issue is (as I've said above) friction between the tyres and the ground. But till there's a fix, the solution is still the same - slow down in the air.

I said a modern airliner would land at 180 knots if no flaps and slats and i know what i am talking about because my job in real life is to pilot B777 for a major airline.. When you got a total flaps failure the approach speed is around 180-190 kts. With full flaps approach speed is 125-145 kms depending on landing weight.

But you are right about he brakes.

[cantab]

@regex why the funny girders on your first design?

On topic, do any of the cheat menu options make landing gear indestructible? If so, then there's your bandaid.

[icedown]

I had issues with my gear at one point but it was that I had put them a little to far forward and they were on a slight upslope of the cockpit.  This caused to be pointed a little forward and they would explode over a certain speed from stress.

[The_Rocketeer]

6 minutes ago, gilflo said:

I said a modern airliner would land at 180 knots if no flaps and slats and i know what i am talking about because my job in real life is to pilot B777 for a major airline.. When you got a total flaps failure the approach speed is around 180-190 kts. With full flaps approach speed is 125-145 kms depending on landing weight.

I read what u said the first time, but your landing speed in ur pics (as I've pointed out) is about 220 kts - that's pretty special even for your flap-failure scenario.

Also, since you're a pro B777 pilot, why are you building your spaceplanes without all the sorts of extra gubbins that you ought to appreciate is so useful? Flaps? Droops? You ought to be exactly the guy showing us how to use these things!

[gilflo]

16 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I read what u said the first time, but your landing speed in ur pics (as I've pointed out) is about 220 kts - that's pretty special even for your flap-failure scenario.

Also, since you're a pro B777 pilot, why are you building your spaceplanes without all the sorts of extra gubbins that you ought to appreciate is so useful? Flaps? Droops? You ought to be exactly the guy showing us how to use these things!

It's just to complicated! to many pieces and up to 1.0.5 brakes where enough to stop the plane at low landing weight.

My super tanker is a 1.0.5 plane and I just wanted to test those stock gears. I'll have to make a complete re design because there's parts from B9 wings, OPT cargo and engines and MK2 tweakable parts and strangely, every time I use the plane and revert to the SPH, the weight increase ind the B9 wing Parts

I think there's a problem between all these parts and the following mods: Tweakscale, fuel tank plus, modular fuel tanks and InterstellarFuelswitch.....

Edited June 6, 2016 by gilflo

[cephalo]

So I tried something similar to Regex's design, and I'm finally able to fly and land. The big difference between my first plane and this plane is that the new plane doesn't use the Mk1 liquid fuel tank. That seems to be the component that the steerable gear can't contend with, plus I was landing with a full tank. I do believe the landing gear ought to be strong enough for the aircraft parts in the same tree node! Planes do have to land with a full tank sometimes right?

I haven't yet seen the issue of sliding around, at least not to a degree that makes things impossible. I suppose I'll run into that later.

I would still like to see a first tier science plane design that incorporates the Mk1 fuel tank for some longer range, but that can land with a full tank. I couldn't make that happen.

[regex]

4 hours ago, cantab said:

@regex why the funny girders on your first design?

Attach nodes and mass savings.

15 minutes ago, cephalo said:

I would still like to see a first tier science plane design that incorporates the Mk1 fuel tank for some longer range, but that can land with a full tank. I couldn't make that happen.

I've been able to do this but I don't have screenshots of the craft.  The wheels had their tolerances increased after the pre-release which allowed you to take-off and land with a fully-laden Mk 1 tank.  It takes a very gentle touch and flat ground to land the aircraft by keyboard however, and playing with the suspension and wheel traction is mandatory.

[eddiew]

I could live with the fragility... I get that your vertical speed should be 'not much' because 10m/s is the equivalent of a straight drop from 10 metres up, and of course that will break your plane, or at least crumple the landing gear and put you into a belly slide.

What I struggle with is the runway donuts before reaching air speed (even when air speed is a modest 40m/s). It's these that have written off wheels (at least, fixed and 'small landing gear') in 1.1.2 for me, because I don't know what to do to fix them, and my career doesn't have access to anything larger   There are clearly forces at work beyond my comprehension 

[gilflo]

An airliner is calculated for a touch down without flare at 600ft/mn without breaking anything, that means 3m/s with a good margin. But even if you double it won't break but it means 6m/s and if you land that way you're sure to perform a 2H safety check before next flight. 

[cephalo]

51 minutes ago, regex said:

 

I've been able to do this but I don't have screenshots of the craft.  The wheels had their tolerances increased after the pre-release which allowed you to take-off and land with a fully-laden Mk 1 tank.  It takes a very gentle touch and flat ground to land the aircraft by keyboard however, and playing with the suspension and wheel traction is mandatory.

I'm not sure exactly what those tweakables do. So far I haven't had any problems with 'donuts on the runway', but when I've messed with the tweakables to figure out what they do I did see some of that.

[qromodynmc]

On 05.06.2016 at 10:12 PM, cephalo said:

 

Gimme a design! Screenie will do.

Sorry, one day late. ^^

I came back to my home and quickly opened KSP. I never use fixed gears on my planes but for you i tried them on my other planes. Firstly, i dont think other gears broken or problematic but fixed gears are weird, i accept that. They turn to left or right for some reason, sometimes they dont. They are not really reliable in my eyes but they still work, especially if plane is light.

My first two prototypes are simple lightweight planes, one is 3800kg (or pure 3800) very easy to use basic jet.

Second one is using bit weird gear configuration but it is still capable of flying, especially good at low speed thanks to wing configuration.

Third plane is my tanker design, it was 90.000kg but gears werent capable of handling the weight, this is probably main reason of problems, fixed gears dont carry much, because of this they love to explode when landing, pressure is really high if you land more than 5ms vertically. Anyway i dropped weigh to 44 ton, at this weight there was no problem with usual landing and takeoff, but it'd still explode if i land too steep.

Lesson i learned from this experimens, fixed gears are very limited when carrying weight, but if you use many of them, they'll work.

[Jarin]

Edit: Nevermind, missed the last page

Edited June 8, 2016 by Jarin