On a G=0.85 planet where I'm constructing a T3 Planetary Port, the landing pads occasionally - about 35% of the time - slam my ship into the ground when using auto docking. It's usually just a bad shield ding (often > 50% ) but once resulted in 5% hull damage. I use auto-dock because all the approach and landing maneuvers needed for big projects like the T3 PP don't do good things to my hand handling the HOTAS stick, very twisty-turny very many times, incipient CTS. Also auto-dock is better at it lol, if I line up a simple approach. Anyone else experiencing these mishaps? Has it been bug-reported (if that is still possible these days)?
Planetary construction site landing pads are rough (auto-dock)
- Thread starter ChipStar65
- Start date
There appear to be hundreds of "auto dock doesn't work well with the T-9/Cutter" reports sitting in Expired, along with a few more recent ones talking about orbital construction sites specifically. https://issues.frontierstore.net/issue-detail/73477 is the only Confirmed one and is talking about getting stuck on the furniture near the pad at orbital sites - despite its age, it hasn't moved to Acknowledged.
I can't find one specifically mentioning surface construction sites in the main report though there might be one using unusual keywords somewhere.
I can't find one specifically mentioning surface construction sites in the main report though there might be one using unusual keywords somewhere.
They've shown a willingness to visibly mess with the backend during the recent period. I'm not sure what's changed but it certainly feels like there's been a change in the last week. I had a stable approach process and now the auto dock has started wigging out and trying to become one with random solid objects instead of docking. I assume they're testing changes to let it work with the panther clipper due to the timing of the announcement of the release date and suddenly my cutter can't handle 100m in a straight line to the pad.
I learned about that orbital site issue the hard way but not catastrophically, just a bruised shield. It led to my not using auto until I've lined up an easy, fail-safe approach. Never had a problem with overly aggressive landings on those orbital sites, megaships, or my carrier, nor on the settlements I put down before the T3. Maybe it's specific to this construction site but that raises new issues as to why. I guess as long as it doesn't blow me up I can live with it.
Having built 4 constructions on a 2.85G planet using a shieldless cutter, I can't really agree with your assessment of autodock's capabilities.
What did bother me was that every time I hit "undock" the ship would immediately land again (due to having its gear down and the high gravity), take a small amount of unavoidable hull damage and start the timer for blocking the landing pad which would result in a fine if I didn't manually spool up the engines quick enough to get out of the way.
What did bother me was that every time I hit "undock" the ship would immediately land again (due to having its gear down and the high gravity), take a small amount of unavoidable hull damage and start the timer for blocking the landing pad which would result in a fine if I didn't manually spool up the engines quick enough to get out of the way.
I did not and cannot say that the gravity was a factor, just part of the circumstances. All my other planetary projects were fractional gravity and the landings were fine, but so far it's just correlation, not necessarily causation.
You do know you can turn off auto-launch in the Modules panel, right? Manual lift-off seems a saner way to go given your experience.
I never had auto-launch turned on.
When you are docked on a pad you can't manually start the engines. You have to undock which is meant to automatically start them and hover. Instead the ship was immediately doing a manual landing without docking permission, triggering the pad-blocking countdown.
Last edited:
I guess I'm not clear on your initial comment - were you using auto-dock on the high-G planets? If so, then auto-launch had to be enabled (unless manually turned off) as the same module enables both auto-dock and -launch. If not, then why the comment? Doesn't seem relevant to my query about auto-dock landings.
Auto launch was turned off. Auto dock was turned on, because just you try landing an unshielded cutter on a 2.85G planet without it.
The ship rarely took damage when landing with autodock, even being unshielded. It always took damage instantly when undocking, because the hit box of the landing pads is wrong - that's why the ship lands again the moment it undocks.
It's really not a surprise, the hitboxes are also way off on the orbital platforms, to the point where you can successfully dock by flying underneath the pads rather than on top of them.
You are using the Standard Docking Computer, right? I forgot that one does not enable auto-launch. Consider getting the Advanced module and using auto-launch, which immediately retracts the landing gear and (I assume) uses the proper vertical thrust to leave the pad in a timely fashion to avoid loitering. Once a ways above the pad any forward thrust will turn the auto-launch off and give back full manual control. Can't say how well this will work under high-G conditions, but maybe worth a trial.
I'm using the advanced docking computer with auto-launch TURNED OFF. How many times do I have to state this for it to be accepted?
The ship lands immediately (and takes damage) after undocking regardless of whether it's enabled or not, it's impossible for the gear to be retracted quick enough to prevent it.
You did not say which module you were using. How did you turn off auto-launch but not auto-dock -- they are enabled by the same module. When I suggested turning off auto-launch, you stated you never had auto-launch turned on, but with the advanced module it's on whenever auto-dock is enabled.
Next time I encounter a landable high-G planet I'll give this a go. Long time ago, long prior to Odyssey or Trailblazer, I had a delivery mission to a ~4G planet and yeah, it was a beast of a manual landing, but I don't recall the launch being anything but a very slow ascent and forever to break mass lock. That was with a much lower-mass ship than a clipper, though.
On another note, are there benefits to colonising a planet with gravity that high?
Next time I encounter a landable high-G planet I'll give this a go. Long time ago, long prior to Odyssey or Trailblazer, I had a delivery mission to a ~4G planet and yeah, it was a beast of a manual landing, but I don't recall the launch being anything but a very slow ascent and forever to break mass lock. That was with a much lower-mass ship than a clipper, though.
On another note, are there benefits to colonising a planet with gravity that high?
Cool. Never used that particular switch before. Thanks, could be useful some day. o7
The algorithm for cutter autodock to T1 surface port Decima has definitely changed in the last 48 hours.
I have landed at this exact same port over 50 times while building a Coriolis in the same system. Absolutely no problems until starting yesterday the autodock is pathetically bad. Even when I manually lightly bump the ship on the pad and then zero thrust to engage autodock it boosts me away often out of the 7.5 km range. I tried many things, autodock at this port is now useless.
I have noticed changes in docking algorithms in the past. It is evident that Frontier slips in algorithm changes on-the-fly.
I have landed at this exact same port over 50 times while building a Coriolis in the same system. Absolutely no problems until starting yesterday the autodock is pathetically bad. Even when I manually lightly bump the ship on the pad and then zero thrust to engage autodock it boosts me away often out of the 7.5 km range. I tried many things, autodock at this port is now useless.
I have noticed changes in docking algorithms in the past. It is evident that Frontier slips in algorithm changes on-the-fly.
The autolaunch feature is problematic inside the asteroid base as well. There is a support beam right above one of the large landing pads, even medium ships sometimes auto launch right into it. I don't know if the same support beam is there in the ice asteroid base, I don't have one of those yet.
Eh, Autolaunch and -dock has issues in a lot of stations.
Not sure if Extraction or Refinery, but it sometimes crashes you into certain buildings, especially the ones that point into the flight path. Had that happen quite a few times. Not too often luckily, but often enough to not trust the docking comp wihout always keeping an eye on it.
In regards to the orbital construction site:
I usually boost above the central spire with the Cutter. This seems to help, to have it approach from above.
I also always run shields and lose a few percent because it slams me into the pads, both for orbit and ground. But because I have shields, I think it is a non-issue (that is why I have them to be honest).
Last edited:
Refinery, pretty sure. Pad 45 [M] has a building in the recently(ish) added refinery interior which autodock crashes right into on arrival and remains stuck on. May also run into it on departure but not to the extent of getting stuck.
Bit of an oops either putting it into the existing flight paths, or not checking if adjusted ones account for said new structures.
Asteroid bases… I’ve not had that issue yet, but have had asteroids almost entirely blocking the entrance/exit just far enough out to be considered “outside”, but not to avoid trespass warnings. Made it away without a fine though, thanks to manual intervention.
RE: Hard landings at my planetary constructions site: I've found that if I give auto-dock the reins much earlier than I was, the landings are much more consistently perfect. I used to pilot into a fairly low-altitude position just above the pad before turning the landing over to A-D to finish up more neatly than I can. By staying at higher altitude and just doing a simple alignment with the pad, coming to zero pitch and zero velocity, auto-dock handles the landings much more consistently, even when executing a 180-spiral to pad level.