Inline Landing Legs?

[Loskene]

1 minute ago, Geonovast said:

The issue in this context isn't strictly part clipping, but part clipping of moving parts.  Having pieces magically pass through each other because of clipping is just downright hideous.

 

Ah, true. In those scenarios, usually regarding aircraft, I tend to clip the landing gear just to the point where only the doors are showing on the outside, to at least give some hint of a non-magic-based mechanism inside. I appreciate the cormorant shuttle mod adding a thermal tile texture to the stock landing gear to help with this.

[MaverickSawyer]

I've long avoided clipping landing gear because, iirc, it used to be krakenbait of the first order. Nowadays, it's not so bad, but... I have KRE for my landing gear needs, and I will use either the ITS or the New Shepard gear most of the time... Falcon 9, not so much. It's... finicky to get it to look right.

[Psycho_zs]

I would favor a set of landing legs with horizontal attachment base (as opposed to current vertical attachment base).

BTW, Federation's landing legs.

[Mignear]

How about inline landing wheels so planes can look more aesthetically pleasing without the landing wheels part sticking out of the wing/body of the plane or having to clip the wheel into the plane which leads to the appearance of wheels "magically" appearing out of the body of the plane when you deploy them for landing?

[Fraktal]

Relevant post of mine in another thread:

21 hours ago, Fraktal said:

You know what I think would be darn useful?

Take the existing legs and integrate them into fuel tanks. That is, it externally looks like a regular fuel tank, but has 4 holes on the side the landing legs emerge from, with enough clearance to allow an engine of matching radial size underneath. When retracted, the legs fully retract into the tank.

Pros:

• Lower part count.
• Lower drag than radially-mounted legs.
• Legs won't burn off as easily during reentry.

Cons:

• Slightly lower fuel capacity than the legless tank due to internal space being taken up by the landing legs.
• Drag still higher than the legless tank due to the landing legs' holes causing turbulence.
• Heat resistance lower than the legless tank due to the landing legs' holes being weak points.
• The legs don't extend quite as far to the side as radially-mounted legs, resulting in tall landers more easily tipping over on slopes.
• Landing leg clearance isn't big enough for bigger and more powerful engines, preventing use on high-performance landers (e.g. Tylo, Eve, Kerbin and anywhere with dense enough atmosphere to drop TWR below 1).

[HobbitJack]

Can't figure out how to quote your quote, but that's the gist of what I was going for; integrated landing legs into fuel tanks. However, maybe (cause the is KSP) doors could be added, protecting the legs, thus requiring EC to open? Then the price and mass can be bumped up and hey presto inline landing legs. 

[Plutonium94]

On 11/16/2018 at 4:39 PM, HobbitJack said:

I'll make this short. Landing legs, while useful, stick off the edges of your craft. It could be useful to have some inline landing legs, maybe part of a fuel tank. would be great for landers, the only problem I can CURRENTLY see with this is the placement on the tech tree, and the usage besides reducing a small amount of possible explodey parts. Your thoughts?

New Breaking Ground DLC brings various robotics, new Piston and/or structural piece combos could create such things

[Jimmidii]

You can use engine plates to do this.

Put some structural parts on the extra attachment points, and then attach legs to them.