My plane destroys the runway, how am I supposed to launch it?

[Excrubulent]

So I've got an SSTO plane made with B9. Suffice it to say that to make orbit in a sane amount of time I've needed to fit it with 4 SABRE M's and 8 SABRE S's. It's a beast. I was most of the way through developing it when the 0.25 update hit. Now I've finally gotten around to updating all my mods and I tried to launch it, and the runway doesn't survive. One thing I can do is drive the plane off the edge of the runway, then launch it on the grass, which doesn't make any sense and most the time doesn't work because this thing isn't so good at navigating the runway debris. It's all-wheel-drive but it's not exactly an off-roader.

Is there a way around this? Can we mod the runway to be tougher? Can we just turn off the destructible building feature? I don't think it'll affect my game very much. I'm such a save-scummer that I'd never accept a destroyed building anyway.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Excrubulent

[problemecium]

Space Center > Esc > Settings > Difficulty Options > Indestructible Buildings

[Cerberus738]

You can toggle destructible buildings in the difficulty menu. Otherwise you need to make your plane lighter

You might be able to support it with launch clamps. Pretty sure it's the drop during physics loading that destroys buildings. In the SPH position the plane with the wheels touching the ground and some launch clamps and you might get lucky

[Claw]

Might be worth posting your plane's stats, a picture of it, and maybe a picture of when/how the runway is exploding. The runway was beefed up quite a bit, so it would help if we could see what's happening.

Cheers,

~Claw

[Sean Mirrsen]

What the heck do you need a plane so large it destroys the runway for, anyway?

Does it destroy it just by standing on it, or do its engines burn it off?

If it starts breaking the ground when you pitch up, perhaps the problem is in the launch profile. You could make it so you don't have to pitch up (i.e. by having the nose angled upwards when standing on the runway), that would make the takeoff itself easier as well.

[DrMonte]

I would like to see the plane too. I'm thinking of the way to destroy all the runway at one launch though

Did you think how you will land this thing?

Edited October 16, 2014 by DrMonte

[Heretic391]

Adjust your plane so that it is in a vertical position with stability Enchancers holding it off the runway.

[Excrubulent]

Oh, the difficulty settings are in the Space Center escape menu! Thank you! That makes sense - they should be different for each save file. I was looking in the main settings menu.

Taking a photo now. I need it that big so I can get space stations and landers into orbit without wasting money on staging.

[Excrubulent]

So, may I present the Prince Rupert's Drop. It's named after a physics phenomenon, the fact that it's a dropship (it is actually capable of landing, dropping off a cargo, and returning to orbit without refueling), and my son, Rupert.

Overview, and action groups

Bay lights on. The cargo is for a mission to test the turbofan engines landed on Minmus. Hey, I don't design the missions, I just get paid. Extremely well, in this case.

MOAR SABRES!

MOAR INTAKES!

I use FAR, and procedural wings, and B9, and a bunch of other mods. Those three are the critical ones for this design, though.

I've designed a few like this, I'm getting fairly proficient at it. I also made one with the massive cargo bays, but I haven't unlocked them yet in this playthrough. Also I need to unlock those nuclear generators, as I don't like spending an action group on solar panels.

[DrMonte]

So how does it destroy the Runway?

By exhaust or by mass?

[Superfluous J]

WHile the sheer number of engines on that thing is impressive, it really doesn't look like the kind of thing that should destroy a runway. I hope they tweak that in the future (or a mod does). Simply toggling off the runway and launchpad while keeping all other buildings destructible seems a reasonable way to handle this.

[Excrubulent]

So how does it destroy the Runway?

By exhaust or by mass?

By mass. The runway just detonates as soon as physics turns on.

[Padishar]

Another thing that may help with this issue is installing Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. This includes code that eases the startup of physics to eliminate the sudden jerk that occurs.

[DrMonte]

Your wheels might be not in the same height. Causing part of them to hit ground earlier than the rest.

To be precise from pictures I think the center line is far below the outer lines. Also because of engine mass tail gear might hit the ground earlier causing single point impact. I do not think that gear amortization is incalculated into demolition formula.

Will try some ideas in demolition mission

[Alshain]

Yeah, the destructible runway was not well thought out by Squad. As far as I'm concerned some side feature should not prevent you from playing the game the way you want. My suggestion is to turn off the destructible buildings and leave it off. It's a terrible "feature" anyway.

Your wheels might be not in the same height. Causing part of them to hit ground earlier than the rest.

To be precise from pictures I think the center line is far below the outer lines. Also because of engine mass tail gear might hit the ground earlier causing single point impact. I do not think that gear amortization is incalculated into demolition formula.

Will try some ideas in demolition mission

Another thing that may help with this issue is installing Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. This includes code that eases the startup of physics to eliminate the sudden jerk that occurs.

Neither of these should be required. Planes with different wheel heights are common, and if you have to use a mod to prevent it, it's better to turn off the stupid feature and have a game that just works.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Alshain

[Excrubulent]

Another thing that may help with this issue is installing Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. This includes code that eases the startup of physics to eliminate the sudden jerk that occurs.

Yeah, but I can't see how I'd ever land it, which is kind of the point - to save money. No use having an SSTO that you can't land.

[Excrubulent]

Your wheels might be not in the same height. Causing part of them to hit ground earlier than the rest.

To be precise from pictures I think the center line is far below the outer lines. Also because of engine mass tail gear might hit the ground earlier causing single point impact. I do not think that gear amortization is incalculated into demolition formula.

Will try some ideas in demolition mission

They might not be precisely the same height, but I've used both wheel sizes in B9 to make them level. Eyeballing it in the SPH, I couldn't say which was higher. They certainly look the same height to me. Just a bit of body flex would undo the difference, in my opinion. Besides which, on landing you have to land rear wheels first, so there's just no getting around it.

EDIT, because I didn't see all the replies before my first reply:

Neither of these should be required. Planes with different wheel heights are common, and if you have to use a mod to prevent it, it's better to turn off the stupid feature and have a game that just works.

In fact, just to take off, I've got extra wheels at the back to stop tail strike, and the rearmost landing gear can be raised independently to assist with rotation on takeoff - see action group 2 in my first photo.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Excrubulent

[eataTREE]

How do you get that cool interface for your action groups? I have a notepad and pencil next to the computer for keeping track of which button does what. Is that a B9 feature?

[juanml82]

How do you get that cool interface for your action groups? I have a notepad and pencil next to the computer for keeping track of which button does what. Is that a B9 feature?

It's a B9 part that allows you to write notes within a particular plane. There is a mod that allows you a similar functionality without relaying on B9 or in adding a part here

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55625-0-25-In-game-notes-notepad-checklist-v0-10-26-07-14

[Excrubulent]

It's a B9 part that allows you to write notes within a particular plane. There is a mod that allows you a similar functionality without relaying on B9 or in adding a part here

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55625-0-25-In-game-notes-notepad-checklist-v0-10-26-07-14

Yup, there's also a similar part in the Firespitter pack. I think the only difference is the colour - B9's is blue and Firespitter's is red.

I do sometimes use Firespitter when I need certain wheel shapes & sizes. For instance, I've made fuel tank buggies with the big orange tanks that can drive in & out of the back ramp on this plane. Just tie them down using KAS parts and they're good for suborbital hops to Kerbin City, and whatever else you can think of.

EDIT: While I'm here, my new problem is that the control surfaces on the plane aren't moving. This is new since 0.25, is this a problem with FAR, B9, or what? I'll have to go through and make sure all my mods are updated, but just thought I'd ask. I initially only updated the ones that I was told were incompatible with 0.25.

Edited October 17, 2014 by Excrubulent

[Pecan]

...The runway was beefed up quite a bit, so it would help if we could see what's happening.

When was it beefed up? It's only been destructible since 0.25. Same thing with the launchpad - these things are so much weaker than the actual planes/rockets they can't even handle heavy launches, let alone landings.

[Excrubulent]

EDIT: While I'm here, my new problem is that the control surfaces on the plane aren't moving. This is new since 0.25, is this a problem with FAR, B9, or what? I'll have to go through and make sure all my mods are updated, but just thought I'd ask. I initially only updated the ones that I was told were incompatible with 0.25.

Fixed it - FAR doesn't play nice with the 64-bit Windows version of KSP, which is a bit annoying. I kinda don't like having to skate along the 3.5GB 32-bit RAM limit, with only a few hundred MB to play with.

[Hodo]

Fixed it - FAR doesn't play nice with the 64-bit Windows version of KSP, which is a bit annoying. I kinda don't like having to skate along the 3.5GB 32-bit RAM limit, with only a few hundred MB to play with.

I run B9, FAR, KAS, RT2, Kerbinite, and a slew of other plugins and mods. I dont come near 3.5gb of RAM, but I also run in OpenGL 32bit with Active Texture Management Basic, and I think I max out at 2.3GB. OpenGL makes a world of difference.

[Excrubulent]

I run B9, FAR, KAS, RT2, Kerbinite, and a slew of other plugins and mods. I dont come near 3.5gb of RAM, but I also run in OpenGL 32bit with Active Texture Management Basic, and I think I max out at 2.3GB. OpenGL makes a world of difference.

I'll have to give that a go. I just updated texture management, used the aggressive version, and now I'm down around 2.5GB. It's a much nicer feeling

Also, since people seemed interested in my dropship (I call it that because its rear ramp allows it to drop off cargo at landing sites), here are some more pictures.

On its way to orbit.

Delivered payload, brakes deployed for reentry.

Landed with nearly 50% fuel left. Also, I love this cockpit. RasterPropMod gives the camera displays. It makes landing so easy.

Now for a proper payload. This is the kind of thing I designed it for.

Removing the science & crew module.

I love IVA.

Long-range science mission deployed.

Used a grappling hook to recapture the previous mission. Returning a vessel from the surface of Minmus would be worth some tasty science, however I haven't packed any KAS parts that will allow me to dock with it. That's an issue because it drifts in warp, so I need some more supplies.

Docking the supply ship. RPM's docking cams and MechJeb's Smart ASS make this possible. I don't trust MechJeb's autopilot to dock, though.

I've never docked like this before.

Wow, some of those bay doors wouldn't open again if they had clipping enabled.

[MisterFister]

Fixed it - FAR doesn't play nice with the 64-bit Windows version of KSP, which is a bit annoying.

Not quite correct. ferram4 and other mod authors have specifically disavowed the Win64 build, full stop. As in, when you load Win64, the FAR (or NEAR, or KJR, all of his mods) plugin will detect the game version and actually disable itself. This means that there is categorically no way to use any of his mods in Win64. More than a dozen of the "major" mod authors have followed suit. Win64 0.24.2 was terribad, and 0.25 just made it an entire order of magnitude worse. There are countless mod-related forum threads discussing this.

Wow, some of those bay doors wouldn't open again if they had clipping enabled.

Not quite. Collision mapping is affirmatively disabled on combined craft. Any door, engine fairing, any part can clip other parts on the same vessel with utter impunity, and this has been the case at least since 0.19 AFAIK. Part clipping becomes a HUGE problem, however, when craft separate. Parts from different "vessels" (as the term is used inside the actual savefile) clipping through each other will cause violent explosions. There are four ways this can happen. First, of course, is a generic collision course between objects / craft, either piloted or dead-stick / debris-type collisions. No explanation needed for this type.

Second, is during staging events. If a stage sep would split parts that began clipped, then at the time of stage event activation, the clip-collision would render detected, and there would result in either an explosion, or if the clip threshold were "minor," the craft would be forcibly and violently repelled from each other, often at a momentary 5+ G-load acceleration. This "minor" clipping event is why EVA kerbonauts will sometimes bounce wildly off of the capsule ladders -- it's reacting to a minor-threshold clipping event.

Third, is after manually releasing a docking node. This would result in the same behavior as the second type, above.

And fourth is during RSD (Rapid Spontaneous Disassembly). If your craft is disintegrating for any reason (more likely in FAR-atmospheric flight profiles, due to aerodynamic failure) and previously-clipped parts are then separated, then this would result in similar behavior and collision results as items two and three above.

Edited October 5, 2015 by MisterFister