Comically wonky auto landing with a Mandalay. Is this supposed to be funny, FDev..?
- Thread starter Moirai
- Start date
Then either they've fixed it since I turned off auto launch some months ago, or there is a difference in our cutters!
Mine used to just faceplant against the wall near the slot without actually finding its way through.
Mine usually finds its way through eventually, although it has on at least one occasion blown itself up.
Mine would just smash its own shield down if I left it long enough, so I disabled auto launch and take it out manually now.
I do think autopilot features should actually... work... it's been broken for actual years now.
Both ships also have (premium paid for) unusual agility. Maybe this is throwing the code off?
Very insightful. All this silliness does appear to be connected with agility.
Putting the G5 Dirty/Drag thrusters off the Mandy on the T8 caused a slow down in the alignment roll and increased the offset roll angle on landing, where previously it landed perfectly.
Putting the G5 Clean/Thermal thrusters off the T8 on the Mandy slightly speeded up the alignment roll, reduced the offset roll angle on landing, and avoided the wing tip collision.
Variations on a theme, by swapping thruster modules and adjusting either ship's manoeuvrability, fell in line with these results, either improving or reducing correct alignment with the FC's landing pad.
Obviously then, with a ship that is already very agile, there is a limit to how much alignment improvement can be made by changing thruster modules. Conversely, a low manoeuvrability ship is limited in how badly it can misalign itself on landing by doing the same.
In which case, I refer the honourable company to my previous comment. Please fix this....
Last edited:
So when both ships are available in game for credits only, FD will make the ships less agile?Both ships also have (premium paid for) unusual agility. Maybe this is throwing the code off?
Until the CR versions land it's still a quantum possibility.
Can confirm the same, but do believe that problem more with AD Computer itself, than with particular ship. I was engineering iCourier recently:
About the same with CmkV, but ADC is messing with roll rate for some reason.
My Mandalay has eng. 4D Thrusters, for some reason that is not a problem for ADC.
- no problem with stock 3E Thrusters
- no problem with stock 3A Thrusters
- installed 3A Enhanced Performance, got ~2 of 5 times bumped by ADC
- returned from prof. Palin 3A EP Dirty/Drag drives, got bumped ~4 of 5 times.
- if only 2 pips on engines before ADC then bumping no more than 1 of 7-10 times.
About the same with CmkV, but ADC is messing with roll rate for some reason.
My Mandalay has eng. 4D Thrusters, for some reason that is not a problem for ADC.
Last edited:
Yes, the ADC appears to be overwhelmed by the ships becoming unexpectedly agile, e.g. with D/D drives. Maybe this means the code has some now-outdated hard-coded values... who knows.
It goes in just fine (not to be taken out of context), but going out…
Well, let’s just say, I either have auto launch on the Cutter off or carefully watch what it’s doing. It takes as little as a Hauler entering or leaving the slot just before you to make the computer get totally confused and try to phase through the wall like you’re in a different state of existence that would allow it to pass through a solid object seamlessly.
Never had this issue with a medium ship. Although right now, I think the only medium ship that I have a docking computer on is the T8 when in cargo configuration or evacuating from less-hostile Thargoid environments. (Even if the latter is currently absent)
I bug reported this weeks ago but the report 'expired' because it wasn't "confirmed in the allocated time frame" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
It happens with ANY ship landing at outposts or on carriers, that have to spin a 180 to face the correct way. To replicate it, approach the landing pad manually in the same manner the autopilot would i.e. from above, aim nose down directly facing the pad, BUT make sure the top of your ship is facing the rear of the pad. Then let autodock ... it's the position on approach that causes problems. If you approach in the same manner but the top of your ship is facing the front of the pad as you dive down to the pad, then let autodock take over, it lands just fine.
Yet another reason why I keep finding myself back on console's Legacy...
It happens with ANY ship landing at outposts or on carriers, that have to spin a 180 to face the correct way. To replicate it, approach the landing pad manually in the same manner the autopilot would i.e. from above, aim nose down directly facing the pad, BUT make sure the top of your ship is facing the rear of the pad. Then let autodock ... it's the position on approach that causes problems. If you approach in the same manner but the top of your ship is facing the front of the pad as you dive down to the pad, then let autodock take over, it lands just fine.
Yet another reason why I keep finding myself back on console's Legacy...
DC have had an issue for many years the cutter more so ( i use it a lot ) . It's one of those things that Fdev have never really fixed it and we have always just accepted it as one of those elite things
The Issue Tracker is astonishingly awful in many ways.
Even on legacy the cutter has issues going through the mail slot not every time but often enough to be annoying. It generally is too high for the mail slot .
It's was made that way so that we wouldn't report all the bugs so the managers can pat themselves on the back .
Last edited:
Certainly stopped me from bothering.
Nothing wrong with landing upside down on a planet:- https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/the-silly-ships-expedition.315562/post-5236534 though this one was an entirely manual occurrence to fit with the theme of the expedition...So it hasn't tried landing upside down on a planet yet? Well, that's encouraging.
Seriously, it's good to know that some of the landings for the Mandy work...
The docking computer has had issues pretty much since Frontier released it, that it still does (it crashed an Imperial Courier of mine into the toast rack while I was doing the Christmas gift deliveries last week) saddens me but doesn't surprise me.
It's probably the worst misfeature I've ever seen in a bug tracker. I guess the idea must have been to help automate cleaning out old bugs that might not exist in current releases, but in practice, very few projects in the world are actually that good about fixing old bugs, so it mostly just buries (effectively deletes) information that people spent their precious time collecting and reporting.
It's one of many reasons I've found Frontier's bug tracker to be so astonishingly bad that I seldom waste my time with it any more.
You took the words right out of my mouth.
I would be surprised if the people who made it were the same people who made Elite Dangerous.
Last edited:
...or there is a difference in our cutters!
That´s why so many mailslots feel like new after the first 10 cm.