Misc Sleepy Vessels - Runway landing stabilization

[Majid]

Hey Folks. Recently came back to Orbiter and noticed that I was having a hard time landing smoothly. My vessels keep sliding/skidding/rolling on the runway resulting in loss of vehicle and self esteem.

This little plugin helps with that, somewhat. It stabilizes vessel orientation during braking, helps the brakes out during braking and forces the vessel to landed status if airspeed is less than 1 m/s and full brakes are applied.

Source code is included, hopefully this helps someone out. Always open to suggestions.

Unzip, and activate module to use. All the magic happens when full brakes are applied, otherwise everything else remains the same.

Name inspired by this thread: https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=37518

 

[JMW]

This is interesting, though a bit drastic
I can't get it to compile though.
What version of VS did you use?

Anyone:
I think I may have corrupted map and vector files in Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include.
Is there an easy way to get replacements?.....lease:

 

[jangofett287]

Compiles first time here under VS2017. You do have to copy it into your orbiter folder and select the x86 platform because the x64 configs don't have the additional include/library directories defined.

 

[Majid]

I'm using VS Studio 2015 community edition.

 

[JMW]

OK, installed VS2017 and all works now.
Thanks guys

 

[Marijn]

The sliding/skidding/rolling is caused by the Atmospheric wind effect setting on the Parameters tab on the launch pad. I think this setting does not work properly and should be deactivated at all times.

You made an add-on to correct this?

 

[ADSWNJ]

The sliding/skidding/rolling is caused by the Atmospheric wind effect setting on the Parameters tab on the launch pad. I think this setting does not work properly and should be deactivated at all times.

You made an add-on to correct this?

... and good for you Majid for doing so!! #OrbiterDevs

 

[Majid]

The sliding/skidding/rolling is caused by the Atmospheric wind effect setting on the Parameters tab on the launch pad. I think this setting does not work properly and should be deactivated at all times.

You made an add-on to correct this?

That's untrue. The atmospheric wind effects are turned off by default and I have never turned that setting on, ever in my life.

The sliding/skidding/rolling I talk about is because of Orbiter's terrain simulation and changes to touchdown points. It's a well known problem: https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=37518

This is why I called the module "sleepy vessels".

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I've been seeing this thread as the Restless Landing gear Syndrome (RLS). I've been thinking about scripting a commercial for it.

"Ask your forum about RLS...."

 

[Marijn]

That's untrue. The atmospheric wind effects are turned off by default and I have never turned that setting on, ever in my life.

The sliding/skidding/rolling I talk about is because of Orbiter's terrain simulation and changes to touchdown points. It's a well known problem: https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=37518

This is why I called the module "sleepy vessels".

Ok. Atmospheric wind effects is indeed turned off by default (as it should be). I just checked that. I am somewhat sure that is was turned on by default earlier.

Does Cape Canaveral present the problem your add-on addresses? I never experienced that problem, but I am avoiding other landing locations because of terrain issues.

 

[jacquesmomo]

Hello

It's a good idea !!!:thumbup:

But I tested your module with my Tintin's DC6.
(Here : [ame="https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6876"]The DC-6 of Tintin on the Moon[/ame])

Yes, I can stop the plane more easily, but .... when it is stopped, it starts to slide backway....

But it's better than before, but not ideal.
Anyway thank you for this good idea ...:tiphat:

 

[4throck]

Yes, it's a nice idea for backward compatibility, but needs to work with all vessels.

Can you make it so that it forces the landed state when you are below 1m and speed is below 10m/s ?

 

[Majid]

Ok. Atmospheric wind effects is indeed turned off by default (as is should be). I just checked that. I am somewhat sure that is was turned on by default earlier.

Does Cape Canaveral present the problem your add-on addresses? I never experienced that problem, but I am avoiding other landing locations because of terrain issues.

Unfortunately yes. Attached are playbacks demonstrating it.

 

[Majid]

Hello

It's a good idea !!!:thumbup:

But I tested your module with my Tintin's DC6.
(Here : The DC-6 of Tintin on the Moon)

Yes, I can stop the plane more easily, but .... when it is stopped, it starts to slide backway....

But it's better than before, but not ideal.
Anyway thank you for this good idea ...:tiphat:

Hmm, where did you try to land it? I'll do my own test. It's supposed to force land the vessel once speed is below 1 m/s and flip the status to "landed".

---------- Post added at 09:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 AM ----------

@jacquesmomo - How are you using [ame="https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6876"]The DC-6 of Tintin on the Moon[/ame] ? It relies on spacecraft3 which doesn't work with 2016 I thought?

---------- Post added at 09:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 AM ----------

Yes, it's a nice idea for backward compatibility, but needs to work with all vessels.

Can you make it so that it forces the landed state when you are below 1m and speed is below 10m/s ?

Yea that should be easy to do, making it configurable. But I thought the current defaults are decent? Why does it need to be 10 m/s?

 

[4throck]

10 m/s is a rough figure for a safe landing.
If you go much faster, you would crash, and it would be strange to have a successful landing like that....

SC4 works with Orbiter 2016 (not perfect but works), the main problem being sinking vessels, because the old landing points don't generate a stable rest state.
So forcing a landed state will work, if the add-on has good old style landing points (not all have...).

If you need some testing just PM.

 

[Marijn]

10 m/s is a rough figure for a safe landing.
If you go much faster, you would crash, and it would be strange to have a successful landing like that....

I think they mean less than 10m/s horizontal speed, not vertical. 10m/s vertical speed at touchdown would indeed be a landing you won't walk away from like nothing happenend. I consider anything above 2m/s a failed landing and anything between 1 and 2 m/s a normal landing. Good landings are below 1m/s I would say.

Unfortunately yes. Attached are playbacks demonstrating it.

Perhaps something goes wrong when I replay the files you posted. Because at first I thought the playback speed was doubled or even tripled or something. The plane is smashed to the deck at speeds way beyond the maximums. It's sliding because the landing gear has been broken off! How do you expect to brake without wheels?

I can only assume that something went wrong with the playback. Perhaps you can post a video?

So I still don't understand what problem you are trying to solve. I also read the thread after which I still don't understand what problem is being discussed. There was indeed a problem about not coming to a full stop, even when braking, after a normal landing. But I don't remember ever experiencing a problem like you describe.

---------- Post added at 09:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 PM ----------

Ok. To eliminate the chance that some technical issue is distorting the playback, I uploaded a clip of each playback

scenario. You can tell whether it's normal and conform your own playback of what is shown or that some technical issue is at

play.

I think both clips show an obviously very abnormal attempt of a landing. Both landings are ugly crashes.

The vertical touchdown speeds in both scenario's are just below 5m/s, which is way too high. Horizontal speeds are around 230m/s, which are way too high as well. I also noticed that the plane is full of fuel and therefore very heavy, which is not a normal situation.

In comparison, take a look at one of my best landings caught on video. The much heavier XR5 touches down at 0.84 m/s vertical

speed and around 100m/s horizontal. That looks like a landing. And there are absolutely no sliding/skidding/rolling issues.

DG Landing Test KSC Without Sleepy Vessels 2
Deleted

DG Landing Test KSC With SP
Deleted

XR5 Landing
Deleted

 

[Majid]

Marijn, the playbacks work correctly on your machine and the YT videos look accurate.

The plane is smashed to the deck at speeds way beyond the maximums. It's sliding because the landing gear has been broken off! How do you expect to brake without wheels?

That's not true. The damage and failure simulation option is by default unchecked and I never turn it on, so damage wasn't being modeled in the DG. Even if the option was on, the default DG does not model the gear breaking at high vertical velocity landings. You can test this out by turning on the damage and failure simulation and crashing a DG with the gear down.

High vertical velocity does not cause the behavior seen. Even OrbiterSound didn't play crash sound and I have been doing landings > -5 m/s since Orbiter 2005. Finally, I have attached a playback from Orbiter 2010 landing the same scenario without issue.

 

[Majid]

Here's a playback of DGIV, a vessel that models gear breaking as a result of high velocity impact. Don't forget to lower the gear yourself close to the landing. You'll notice a slow, soft landing (this is fully fueled DGIV, anything not soft will break the landing gear) but the DGIV is unable to stop in time due to the sliding and skidding. The nose doesn't point toward the velocity vector and that seems to diminish braking power. Anyway, it's kind of like ice skating.

 

[Marijn]

Marijn, the playbacks work correctly on your machine and the YT videos look accurate.

So it's what I expected. You were crashing all the time without even realizing it.

I have never launched Orbiter with the damage simulation unchecked. I can't think of a reason why someone would do that. And indeed, there is no damage simulated. That's why the landing gear is still visible in the external view. But that doesn't mean you can come in like a comet and call it a landing!

1 meter a second = 2.237 miles/hour. So your horizontal touchdown speed is 230 * 2.23 = 513 miles an hour. That is, again, way too fast.

You can't deny that our landing techniques look completely different. Yours looks like the playback speed is twice as fast. We now know why: Because you are approaching twice as fast.

I don't need to see anymore playbacks. It's clear to me what's going on. You are ice skating because Orbiter behaves like it should: You're in a crashed state from the moment you smashed it against the runway. I am avoiding the word landing here.

If you cannot be convinced, then explain to me where in my video the problem can be seen which your add-on addresses.

 

[Majid]

I have never launched Orbiter with the damage simulation unchecked. I can't think of a reason why someone would do that. And indeed, there is no damage simulated. That's why the landing gear is still visible in the external view. But that doesn't mean you can come in like a comet and call it a landing!

There is no right way to use Orbiter. I bet a lot of people play with that option unchecked, it is the default setting. Do whatever makes you happy, Marijn.

1 meter a second = 2.237 miles/hour. So your horizontal touchdown speed is 230 * 2.23 = 513 miles an hour. That is, again, way too fast.

Orbiter core doesn't care how fast you land. Damage is not simulated in Orbiter, you have to model it yourself. Also the problem is persistent even when doing slow landings as shown in the DGIV playback.

BTW you missed the DGIV playback right? Where I land a vessel that actually does do damage simulation and still experience the same effects? Kinda defeats your "you are landing too fast" argument. Also check out the Orbiter 2010 playback.

Also there is this thread: https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?p=559841&postcount=1327

If you cannot be convinced, then explain to me where in my video the problem can be seen which your add-on addresses.

You are using 1 of hundreds of vessel. Try using one that hasn't been updated for Orbiter 2016, like
[ame="https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3244"]Mirage2000[/ame]

I have noticed the problem in the XR family as well, although the instability is far less than some other vessels like the stock DG. Finally, Marijn, use of this add-on is not mandatory. I am glad you have shared your opinion. Perhaps now you can offer your expertise onto a different thread :thumbup: