LandingAOA larger planes

[Scud 0]

Has anybody worked out a decent landingAOA for large planes yet.

I have had a look at a couple of other ppl's models and none of them land proper if they land at all.

On my model I have tried lots of diff combo's with no success

Even with the handling set to rediculously loose.

Model is bit bigger than Dakota and smaller then Herc.

[Trenchfeet 0]

i dont think that the landing aoa does much in ofp, well at least i didn't notice anything different

Try adjusting the landing speed, i found that this affects it the most.

But you'll have to play around with the mass in the geo lod as well as the brake distance and flap friction stuff.

Its hard though becuase if your test island doesn't have the runway paths setup it can stuff your addon

[Scud 0]

I do all my testing on Everon and the c130 or the skytrain just keep buzzing round in circles and never really line up proper.

With the braking distance - is that how much/soon the plane slows when/before turning?

[Footmunch 0]

Braking distance is how fast the plane slows down once the

wheels are on the ground. Lower values mean the plane will

stop in a shorter distance.

Getting planes to land is hard. I've often seen the BIS

A-10 go round-and-round. As Trench says, landing speed and

mass are the most important values.

[Scud 0]

Quote[/b] ]Braking distance is how fast the plane slows down once the

wheels are on the ground.

Thats what I use to think but 0 or 300 it doesn't seem to make a difference when pulling up.

If it does it is very fine.

I haven't had too much trouble with the other planes.

This one is about the same weight and lands slower

but has a 29 metre wingspan.

Ai just don,t bank it enough on turns.

Anyway I will keep trying diff settings.

[Unnamed_ 0]

Quote[/b] ]Thats what I use to think but 0 or 300 it doesn't seem to make a difference when pulling up.

If it does it is very fine.

Would this only apply to landings, so the AI knowns when to start taxing?

Quote[/b] ]Getting planes to land is hard. I've often seen the BIS

A-10 go round-and-round. As Trench says, landing speed and

mass are the most important values.

The turning circle causes the problem with the approach path, if it cant turn into its approach path in time, it will keep trying and and failing. The turning circle diameter seems to vary across different addon makers aircraft. For example the Sopwith has a TC of about 300m compared with 650m for BIS's A10 and 2000m for Footmunches F16. Changing the config does have some effect, but most of it seems embedded in the model itself.

I wish I did know everything that influences the TC, it would make my task a lot easier.

[Scud 0]

Quote[/b] ]I wish I did know everything that influences the TC

So do I, mate. So do I

[Unnamed_ 0]

When I get the chance I'm going to try and work through the settings. To see what effect if any, they have

I posted some links at the A & MD forum for a couple of large planes by Hawks. They are not bad at landing with OFP's AI, as long as you line them up reasonable well.

BTW will your addon include any Roadway LOD's?

Cheers

[bn880 5]

Your biggest factors in turning radius are aileronSensitivity, and elevatorSensitivity. Try raising those and see. Landing speed has a lot to do with how the AI will use the controls, try a landingspeed of 100 or so..

[Scud 0]

aileronSensitivity, and elevatorSensitivity only contribute so much,Set on 60 or 99 AI will only bank at 35* to 40*.

A landing speed less then 130 and  my planes will not make it to the tarmac.

Quote[/b] ]Changing the config does have some effect, but most of it seems embedded in the model itself.

After testing with diff settings I reckon thats the case.

Mass distribution within the model.

[Unnamed_ 0]

I started thinking aileronSensitivity, and elevatorSensitivity settings where not even applied to AI aircraft.

Quote[/b] ]A landing speed less then 130 and  my planes will not make it to the tarmac

Landing speed also tells the AI when it can stop worrying about things like flyinheight e.t.c But if you have a heavy aircraft you have to keep the speed up. The BIS Sopwith has a landing speed of 75.

Quote[/b] ]After testing with diff settings I reckon thats the case.

Mass distribution within the model.

It does have a massive effect. I think the turning circle is dictated by lift?

Lift is determined by wing design e.t.c, Weight and thrust. But it would not suprise me if BIS only used weight and thrust for the model, as per the argument "It's not a Flight Simulator".

It should in theory be possible to test for this?

[Scud 0]

Anyway my problem is solved, once I rounded up a few of those kangroos roaming the top paddock it was pretty simple.

As I said its all mass distribution.

Not mass it self. 60,000 or 6000 has bugger all diff.

I can now have AI take off solo and land in 1 circular pattern with no other commands given except "disembark".

Total Length :

72.572 ft

22.120 m

   

Wingspan :

95.636 ft

29.150 m

The mass is distributed as per norm but in a tighter radius to the COG.

[Unnamed_ 0]

Quote[/b] ]Not mass it self. 60,000 or 6000 has bugger all diff.

Yeah I noticed something along those lines, but it must be used for something?

Quote[/b] ]The mass is distributed as per norm but in a tighter radius to the COG.

I started checking what addons I could to see how the mass is distributed. When you say as per norm, do you mean applying it uniformly or giving things like the engines more mass? I'm trying to get Hawks C5 Galaxy to behave in a reasonable way.

Cheers

[Scud 0]

Well the norm to me is to distribute the mass as it would be on the real aircraft.

What I did with the 'bou' was used the same geometry but distributed the mass as if it where a smaller model.

the nose, tail and outer wings have no mass.

Effectively now it is a 10m aircraft with a 9m wingspan.

[Footmunch 0]

The mass is used for things like inertia and how fast the

plane picks up speed in a dive.

Another way to make a plane feel heavy is to play around

with the nosedown coefficient - the higher the number, the

more back-stick you have to apply during a turn.

[Scud 0]

back to the landingAOA

I find this is mainly helpful in adjusting the point of touch down.

By adjusting the angle you can drop the planes back, fwd or right on the threshold.

[Unnamed_ 0]

Does mass apply to landing gear resilience, to? The reason I ask is that, the F18 by H&P seems to have delicate landing gear compared to all the other planes I've played with. I have not seen any settings for landing gear armour?

@Scud

Thanks for that, I've finally got the AI C5 Galaxy to stop crashing into just about everything. Although I think I will have to add some mass to the nose section. The front is rising so much on landing, its back is scraping the floor.

Quote[/b] ]By adjusting the angle you can drop the planes back, fwd or right on the threshold.

Thats a suprise, I thought it would have been relative to the fixed end point on the runway, not on the approach path itself.

So it has no effect on the pitch of the aircraft when landing, just its approach path?

Cheers

[Scud 0]

I don't know the in and outs of the landing aoa ...

all I know is I can adjust the touch down point of the aircraft.

ie: the F100 orig touched down about 50m short of the strip and i fixed it only by adjusting the AOA.

Quote[/b] ] fixed end point on the runway

once again I am not sure but I would have a guess and say it is related to the ILS settings on the runway.

[Unnamed_ 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't know the in and outs of the landing aoa ...

all I know is I can adjust the touch down point of the aircraft.

I was just suprised BIS did it that way, I thought the usual approach angle for military and civ aircraft is around 3 to 4 degrees from the threshold, thats why I assumed AoA was for something else. Saved me a load of head scratching, god knows how long it would have taken me to figure out what it was really doing.

[Scud 0]

Just a brief test at Everon Airfield using Hawker Typhoon

AOA 10*1.5/180

lands 50m short of threshold.

AOA 3*1.5/180

lands 70m over the threshold.

So with this model I will be look at around AOA 5*1.5/180 or AOA 6*1.5/180.(If I don't alter mass etc to much).

Also the 1.5 section and the /180 section also have an effect but I haven't looked into that much as yet.

[Unnamed_ 0]

I took a look at the BIS configs, they have 3*3.14/180=0.052 or 3*(Pi/180). It looks like a conversion of degrees to radians, so a three degree approach path is pretty damn close to the 6*1.5/180 you mentioned.

But again I thought this would apply to the angle the aircraft approaches the runway, not where on the runway it lands.

It's almost as though BIS have a fixed point beyond the runway, that stays the same regardless of the aircrafts max speed and mass ?

[Scud 0]

Yeah you are probably right

[Scud 0]

But how do the user made strips work if it doesn't relate to the ILS settings.

[Unnamed_ 0]

I guess it's offset from the Runway and Taxi ways defined in the cpp, but guess is about all can do.

My version takes a point on the threshhold and projects a path about 3 to 4 degrees out to a suitable point. So the plane should always hit the same spot on the runway, the AoA just dictates how steep the approach will be.

[Scud 0]

Quote[/b] ]Does mass apply to landing gear resilience, to?

Sorry I missed this bit in earlier post Unnamed_ but try this should help

armorWheels=10;

well you shouldn't need it that high maybe 5 or bit less

depends on how hard the plane slaps down.

The last time I flew into Penang the pilot needed an

armorWheels=50;! Civy airlines -geez put your life in someone elses hands.