Bob: "Alright, it looks like we need to open the cargo bay to lower the front landing gear." Bill: _pushes cargo bay door button_ Bob: "...You remember that Jeb was back there, right?" Jeb: _crashes into motherplane wing_ Bill: "I do now!"
Planes HAVE landed on larger aircraft; They used to land biplanes on zeppelins via hooks. The biplane would fly up and slide a hook into a loop on the bottom of the zeppelin, and would then be retracted. I know it seemed ridiculous when they did it in Crimson Skies, but they really did do this.
I learned something interesting the other day. It's possible for a plane's controls to be designed so that the pilot's controls move small flaps, and then the airflow over the small flaps moves (or assists in moving) the full-size control surfaces. A lack of power assistance doesn't necessarily mean unassisted controls. :)
I just finished my unique 'satellites for every planet' mission.With 1 launch only.That was epic and took my rounded 39 hour to make it possible.And here i am,and feeling humiliated.Man you are like god.
Fun fact: I don't know about landing, but planes have been launched from other planes during the 30's and probably earlier. The Russian Zveno project utilised a Tupolev TB-1 or TB-3 heavy bomber, to carry small fighter and recon planes suspended under it's wings like the Polikarpov I-16 and the Tupolev I-4. If the heavy, lumbering bomber got attacked en route to the target, it could deploy its small, nimble fighters so they could defend it.
This reminds me of the passenger airliner that had its front wheel twisted sideways. They had no idea how to fix it, so the pilot basically did a really long wheelie. It went pretty much just like yours did, although it took twice as long and the wheel caught on fire.
WW1 fighters were let off and landed on Zeppelins i.e. hooked themselves up under one. TB3 Soviet bomber had 4 (yes, really) Soviet fighter-bombers on its wings. They DID combat mission versus Ploesti in Romania in 1941.
Ah the old 'Bedouin Wedding Feast' flight plan. Sheep inside a camel, goat inside the sheep, chicken inside the goat, fish inside the chicken, and eggs into fish.
Actually, large aircraft that do not use hydraulically actuated primary control surfaces (aileron, rudder and elevator), usually use servo tabs to move the control surfaces. Tabs are much smaller, and therefore require less forceful inputs, as compared to moving the entire control surface. Tabs can also be used to trim a control surface to a fixed deflection. Try searching for "Secondary Control Surfaces". Oh and, Great video!
Gerry Anderson did a TV series named "UFO" that was really cheezy and I lived for it in the 70's. In the series, there was a lunar shuttle ( that looked kind of like a fish ) that was launched integrally to a huge transport plane, then at altitude, they decoupled, and the transport went back to earth while the shuttle went to the moon. Upon return, the transport would rendezvous with the shuttle, they would couple and the transport would land with the shuttle. The series also had a submarine that had a fighter jet/rocket attached to the front of it. When the UFO's would approach, the submarine would point nose up, and the rocket fighter would jet off the front, out of the water and chase the intruder. Interesting in the early 70s. but watching today its pretty silly.
Back in 1930s USA actually comissioned two flying aircraft carriers. USS Akron and USS Macon, were a pair of airships, capable of carrying up to 5 biplane fighters.
Id looooove for you to do a series with Ferram Aerospace Scott. Maybe going through some of the intricacies of aircraft design with the use of flaps, slats and spoilers, controlled stalls and what not.
Not only do the B747-400 and the A380 have the ability to transport extra engines on the wings, but there have been plans for a B747 aircraft carrier. The top deck would hold pilots, lower deck would store aircraft, and the cargo hold would act as a launch and retrieval bay
The X15 jets were launched from B24s (early space program development). Of course it's nothing impressive but these kind of facts make you shine in society
Fly a plane inside a plane, then fly that plane inside a rocket, then land the rocket on the moon, let the planes fly around on the moon, fly the small plane back into the big one and park it inside the rocket, and go back to kerbin. Complex, stupid, and impossible. 3 weeks and nobody notices how stupid this is. Surprising
A Rock. 8 months and I notice instead of the moon it should be the sun because there's a rumor that there's air in the Suns atmosphere in ksp so the planes could fly
Large aircraft that don't have hydraulic assistance, and even many that do, have "balance tabs" on their control surfaces that make them much easier to operate.
It depends on what you mean by 'aircraft', there are some videos on youtube of people landing inside a plane using wing suits. Also nice landing, any landing you can walk away from is a good one.
In WWII the Russians had an _operational_ parasite plane system that they used for several missions. It was a Tupolev (SB-8?) bomber with two single-seat fighter-bombers uner each wing, two biplanes on top of each wing, and one on top of the fuselage. The parasite planes were equipped for dive-bombing and that was the point of the exercise: you got the range of a big bomber with the precision of a dive-bomber. After they'd dropped their bombs, the parasites could then fight off other aircraft. They didn't re-dock with the mother ship, but flew home alongside it. In the 1930s, the USN airships Akron and Marcon carried small Curtiss Sparrowhawk biplane fighters and both launched and recovered them successfully using a hook and trapese system. In the 1950s, there was a project by McDonnell to produce a fighter caleld the Goblin that could fold up and stow in the bomb bay of a B-36 bomber, and which would launch and recover using a similar hook and trapese system. It never went into production since flight testing proved that the turbulance around the bomber was too violent for the fighter to safely approach it. What did go into limited use however was a system called FICON in which an RF-84 Thunderflash tactical recce aircraft attached to each wingtip of a B-36 using a probe & cone system (a bit like flight refuelling) and then throttled back, saving fuel so that it could be deployed to take photographs much further from it's base than would otherwise be possible. The system was discontinued when flight refuelling was widely adopted. A FICON-like system was revived recently when NASA Dryden did some flight testing with an F-106 fitted with a nose probe that docked with a cable extended behind a transport aircraft. The combination took off tethered and the fighter then shut it's engine down and was towed like a glider. It then successfully restarted it's engine, disconnected, and landed. The idea was to prove the tow concept for a possible space-launch system in which a rocket-powered spaceplane would be towed up to altitude and then released to continue it's way on to space.
Do this: make a extendable long arm with a docking port that extends out from a cargo hold of a plane, proceed to dock with the arm, fold in the wings, retract the docking arm and close the cargo hold.
No, they don't have hydraulics because its all servo controlled and fly by wire. Even the aircraft my father helped design back in the 60s had signals sent down stainless steel microwave conduits. Hydraulics? Thats WWII technology! The control surfaces could be powered any way at all,dependant on the proximity of a power source.
You know you could have deployed the front gear by opening the front cargo bay. The game would have registered as the bay open and so the gear would deploy. That's happened to me plenty of times. Surprised you didn't know that.. or maybe you "let it happen" just to have a more fun/spectacular ending to this flight. :)
I had the same problem with the front landing gear in my space shuttle's orbiter. I adapted the cargo bay to the payload didn't try a landing test and during real landing I couldn't deploy it. I attempted an emergency landing and I lost the orbiter's vacuum engine due to a very steep descend with a very high angle of attack but the payload and crew were unharmed so i called it a succes.
Now a days certain aircraft can transport Abrams, which weighs about 30-40 tonnes across the ocean and into Iraq, which I think is as close to having an aircraft into another aircraft we'll ever get.
"Cannot deploy while stowed" absolutely killed me when I was trying to land my SSTOs... until I realized that you can solve the issue by unchecking the "Deploy Shielded" button that comes up when you right-click on the gear.
The idea of droping a support plane from a bomber was used from germany back in WW2 where in the belly of a bomber was atahced a rocked plane called messerschmit 163 but it was rare to see
me: Mr. Scott Manley, are you insane?! scott: ayerodai-namics are a funneh set of rüles that affect plaines and... me: ... scott? scott: WIHNGS AAR INCREH-DIBLE!
The Gremlin Project during the Cold War managed to hook I think 1 out of the 2 tiny Gremlin jets on a B-29 bomber. The project was never completed but they did test it.
you could have opened the front cargo bay to make the game let you deploy the landing gear but if doing so you should also make sure the plane inside doesn't fly away. as soon as the gear is deployed you can close it again.
This reminds me of the video "microwaving a microwave microwaving a toaster toasting an iPhone playing a video of a microwave microwaving a microwave microwaving a toaster toasting toast"
I had the exact same landing gear problem with a Laythe plane I built! It's because the front landing gear is attached to a cargo bay: you just need to open that cargo bay in the air then deploy your gear and it'll work.
In a few tests I've done, unfortunately that doesn't work. :( It seems to be based on the proximity of the landing gear to the cargo bay, no matter what it's attached to. So you can attach, say, wing parts to the lower sides, then attach the gear where it's far enough away from the cargo bay, not clipping into it, and you shouldn't have a problem (though your plane might look funny). I hope this helps!
heres a challenge: Land a plane onto a carrier, but from the point of view of the carrier. Easy mode: carrier is a larger plane. Hard mode: carrier is a boat with a flight deck.
@ScottManley, I would like to inform you that a really cool space game will be coming onto steam on the 16th, Microsoft Allegiance. I would greatly appreciate it if you took a look at it. It took the small community of only about 30 or 40 several years to get it to steam, and they want their game to succeed. I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
Plane, inside plane, landing inside a plane, and landing that.
You'll become a God if you do that
Ben Kim landing a plane inside a spinig pane while entering kerbin atmosphere
Überboos - Nice but...
We've overused that joke now, ok?👍🏻
Docking like interstellar
He is already a Kerbal Space Program god.
PLANECEPTION!
"Cannot deploy while stowed"? What kind of error message is that? That's like saying "cannot open while closed!"
While stowed in the cargo bay. It's bizarre, I know.
"Cannot activate while deactivated!"
"Cannot begin while ended!"
"Cannot Scott while Manley'd!"
Bob: "Alright, it looks like we need to open the cargo bay to lower the front landing gear."
Bill: _pushes cargo bay door button_
Bob: "...You remember that Jeb was back there, right?"
Jeb: _crashes into motherplane wing_
Bill: "I do now!"
Cannot safe while fly.
Cannot deploy (landing gear) while stowed (in cargo bay). The solution: open the cargo bay, then deploy the gear.
"I'm going to land this next to the runway because...I think the runway has too many dangers."
KSP flight in a nutshell.
This needs to be done with a set of flying Matroska dolls.
^ this
snoballuk it's Matryoshka
That would be amazing
The famous Matryoshka approach
A Matryoshka is a doll, a Matroska is a sailor's uniform! ;-)
Use caution when retrieving your cargo as it may have shifted during landing
Planes HAVE landed on larger aircraft; They used to land biplanes on zeppelins via hooks. The biplane would fly up and slide a hook into a loop on the bottom of the zeppelin, and would then be retracted.
I know it seemed ridiculous when they did it in Crimson Skies, but they really did do this.
Millitron that's insane.
spoilers: indiana jones flew one of these planes off of a zeppelin in the last crusade
Or just the planes called "parasite fighters" in general.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_aircraft
Also: Indiana Jones
3:30 watch the whole video before trying to be a smartass next time...
4:47 when landing in a grass field is safer than on the runway.
AKA when the grass and small rocks in it are not included.
I'm looking at the small one sitting on the big one: "That's just a bit too wide to fit in there."
Yup.
That’s just a bit too wide to fit in there. Thats what she said
OH MY GAWD He's de- oh wait, there he is! 😂😂😂😂
Probably a common exclamation at KSC...
@6:15 xD
I laughed so hard when this happened.
Yo dawg, I heard you liked planes. So we landed a plane inside a plane and then landed that plane!
Damn, beat me to it.
I learned something interesting the other day. It's possible for a plane's controls to be designed so that the pilot's controls move small flaps, and then the airflow over the small flaps moves (or assists in moving) the full-size control surfaces. A lack of power assistance doesn't necessarily mean unassisted controls. :)
I really appreciate how non-clickbait the title of this video is. Thank you.
I just finished my unique 'satellites for every planet' mission.With 1 launch only.That was epic and took my rounded 39 hour to make it possible.And here i am,and feeling humiliated.Man you are like god.
This is the kind of quality content i subscribed for.
Next up, assembling a re-useable rocket mid-air, launching it, landing it back, and then repeating.
4:51 "I think the runway just has too many dangers"
Why engineers don't make good pilots, ladies and gentlemen...
The ground next to the runway is perfectly smooth but the runway has a misaligned polygon that can mess up lots of stuff
You dawg, I heard you like landings...
"We'll deal with the slowing down when I reach the surface."
Ah, like when you fall and hit the ground.
one of the best yt video titles ever, makes me thumb up even before playing it:) Great Scott
Fun fact:
I don't know about landing, but planes have been launched from other planes during the 30's and probably earlier. The Russian Zveno project utilised a Tupolev TB-1 or TB-3 heavy bomber, to carry small fighter and recon planes suspended under it's wings like the Polikarpov I-16 and the Tupolev I-4.
If the heavy, lumbering bomber got attacked en route to the target, it could deploy its small, nimble fighters so they could defend it.
This reminds me of the passenger airliner that had its front wheel twisted sideways. They had no idea how to fix it, so the pilot basically did a really long wheelie. It went pretty much just like yours did, although it took twice as long and the wheel caught on fire.
WW1 fighters were let off and landed on Zeppelins i.e. hooked themselves up under one.
TB3 Soviet bomber had 4 (yes, really) Soviet fighter-bombers on its wings. They DID combat mission versus Ploesti in Romania in 1941.
Ah the old 'Bedouin Wedding Feast' flight plan. Sheep inside a camel, goat inside the sheep, chicken inside the goat, fish inside the chicken, and eggs into fish.
that must've been like trying to dock 2 massive spacecraft whilst falling down towards the planet WHILST avoiding Anti-aircraft-guns
I had the landing gear message before, fixed it by enabling "Deploy Shielded"
My uncle is working on the Gremlins DARPA program that deploys drones from a C130 and later, the drones automatically land on the same C130 mid-air.
Actually, large aircraft that do not use hydraulically actuated primary control surfaces (aileron, rudder and elevator), usually use servo tabs to move the control surfaces. Tabs are much smaller, and therefore require less forceful inputs, as compared to moving the entire control surface. Tabs can also be used to trim a control surface to a fixed deflection. Try searching for "Secondary Control Surfaces".
Oh and, Great video!
1960s: We're going to have flying cars in the future!
Today: Landing a Plane Inside Another Plane Then Landing That Plane
Gerry Anderson did a TV series named "UFO" that was really cheezy and I lived for it in the 70's. In the series, there was a lunar shuttle ( that looked kind of like a fish ) that was launched integrally to a huge transport plane, then at altitude, they decoupled, and the transport went back to earth while the shuttle went to the moon. Upon return, the transport would rendezvous with the shuttle, they would couple and the transport would land with the shuttle. The series also had a submarine that had a fighter jet/rocket attached to the front of it. When the UFO's would approach, the submarine would point nose up, and the rocket fighter would jet off the front, out of the water and chase the intruder. Interesting in the early 70s. but watching today its pretty silly.
Back in 1930s USA actually comissioned two flying aircraft carriers. USS Akron and USS Macon, were a pair of airships, capable of carrying up to 5 biplane fighters.
Id looooove for you to do a series with Ferram Aerospace Scott. Maybe going through some of the intricacies of aircraft design with the use of flaps, slats and spoilers, controlled stalls and what not.
Not only do the B747-400 and the A380 have the ability to transport extra engines on the wings, but there have been plans for a B747 aircraft carrier.
The top deck would hold pilots, lower deck would store aircraft, and the cargo hold would act as a launch and retrieval bay
The Goblin was a small fighter designed to be stuck under a bomber to be a long range escort. The plane COULD redock, but it didn't tend to end well
The X15 jets were launched from B24s (early space program development).
Of course it's nothing impressive but these kind of facts make you shine in society
I always wished flying planes in KSP wasn't so twitchy and felt more, well, like flying a plane.
if the weasley spin up time gives you greif, use about 3 junos. lower weight, identical or higher thrust
Some planes carry tiny fighter planes on them, like a version of the B-36 Peacemaker and the Goblin fighter.
Fly a plane inside a plane, then fly that plane inside a rocket, then land the rocket on the moon, let the planes fly around on the moon, fly the small plane back into the big one and park it inside the rocket, and go back to kerbin. Complex, stupid, and impossible.
3 weeks and nobody notices how stupid this is. Surprising
A Rock. 8 months and I notice instead of the moon it should be the sun because there's a rumor that there's air in the Suns atmosphere in ksp so the planes could fly
add a strstolancher to the rocket and it's better
Large aircraft that don't have hydraulic assistance, and even many that do, have "balance tabs" on their control surfaces that make them much easier to operate.
The russians did some cool things pre-war. they used TB3's to launch small fighters.
they also used a TB3 to launch their experimental glider tank.
Congratulations on having one of the most kerbal landings.
It depends on what you mean by 'aircraft', there are some videos on youtube of people landing inside a plane using wing suits.
Also nice landing, any landing you can walk away from is a good one.
"The runway offers too many dangers." :D
Actually soviets have done that thing with "planes on bomber" in 1930s (and even in WWII): Zveno, Zveno-SPB, Aviamatka.
I had this same gear failure recently. You have to toggle the "deploy shielded" box, and then it'll deploy correctly
In WWII the Russians had an _operational_ parasite plane system that they used for several missions. It was a Tupolev (SB-8?) bomber with two single-seat fighter-bombers uner each wing, two biplanes on top of each wing, and one on top of the fuselage. The parasite planes were equipped for dive-bombing and that was the point of the exercise: you got the range of a big bomber with the precision of a dive-bomber. After they'd dropped their bombs, the parasites could then fight off other aircraft. They didn't re-dock with the mother ship, but flew home alongside it.
In the 1930s, the USN airships Akron and Marcon carried small Curtiss Sparrowhawk biplane fighters and both launched and recovered them successfully using a hook and trapese system. In the 1950s, there was a project by McDonnell to produce a fighter caleld the Goblin that could fold up and stow in the bomb bay of a B-36 bomber, and which would launch and recover using a similar hook and trapese system. It never went into production since flight testing proved that the turbulance around the bomber was too violent for the fighter to safely approach it. What did go into limited use however was a system called FICON in which an RF-84 Thunderflash tactical recce aircraft attached to each wingtip of a B-36 using a probe & cone system (a bit like flight refuelling) and then throttled back, saving fuel so that it could be deployed to take photographs much further from it's base than would otherwise be possible. The system was discontinued when flight refuelling was widely adopted.
A FICON-like system was revived recently when NASA Dryden did some flight testing with an F-106 fitted with a nose probe that docked with a cable extended behind a transport aircraft. The combination took off tethered and the fighter then shut it's engine down and was towed like a glider. It then successfully restarted it's engine, disconnected, and landed. The idea was to prove the tow concept for a possible space-launch system in which a rocket-powered spaceplane would be towed up to altitude and then released to continue it's way on to space.
I'm amazed at how easily you managed to land that thing...
4:04 "Music from Sully begins playing" 😂 😂 😂 😂
Do this: make a extendable long arm with a docking port that extends out from a cargo hold of a plane, proceed to dock with the arm, fold in the wings, retract the docking arm and close the cargo hold.
that was bloody brilliant... belly landing after air pickup...
No, they don't have hydraulics because its all servo controlled and fly by wire. Even the aircraft my father helped design back in the 60s had signals sent down stainless steel microwave conduits. Hydraulics? Thats WWII technology! The control surfaces could be powered any way at all,dependant on the proximity of a power source.
Feels a bit like Bob Ross streaming an aviation video game.
Sounds like just another day at the office for Scot
You have the best intro line in the world; 'Ello Scott Manley here
You know you could have deployed the front gear by opening the front cargo bay. The game would have registered as the bay open and so the gear would deploy. That's happened to me plenty of times. Surprised you didn't know that.. or maybe you "let it happen" just to have a more fun/spectacular ending to this flight. :)
I had the same problem with the front landing gear in my space shuttle's orbiter. I adapted the cargo bay to the payload didn't try a landing test and during real landing I couldn't deploy it. I attempted an emergency landing and I lost the orbiter's vacuum engine due to a very steep descend with a very high angle of attack but the payload and crew were unharmed so i called it a succes.
This reminds me of the Minis on the bus level of the PS1 Italian Job Game... ah sweet nostalgia :D
When Scott gets bored, things get silly.
Now you've gotta land a reentering capsule in a plane and then land that plane.
I'll land a plane in your plane, then you land that plane in my plane, and we'll just keep doing that back and forth, with the same plane. Forever.
Now a days certain aircraft can transport Abrams, which weighs about 30-40 tonnes across the ocean and into Iraq, which I think is as close to having an aircraft into another aircraft we'll ever get.
"Cannot deploy while stowed" absolutely killed me when I was trying to land my SSTOs... until I realized that you can solve the issue by unchecking the "Deploy Shielded" button that comes up when you right-click on the gear.
The idea of droping a support plane from a bomber was used from germany back in WW2 where in the belly of a bomber was atahced a rocked plane called messerschmit 163 but it was rare to see
me: Mr. Scott Manley, are you insane?!
scott: ayerodai-namics are a funneh set of rüles that affect plaines and...
me: ... scott?
scott: WIHNGS AAR INCREH-DIBLE!
The Gremlin Project during the Cold War managed to hook I think 1 out of the 2 tiny Gremlin jets on a B-29 bomber. The project was never completed but they did test it.
Planes have landed in planes before. The B-36 had a F-81 or something that would be used to escort it and it could go inside of the b-36
you could have opened the front cargo bay to make the game let you deploy the landing gear but if doing so you should also make sure the plane inside doesn't fly away. as soon as the gear is deployed you can close it again.
Land on all wheels and it’s a good landing. Land with only 2 wheels and you’re a hero.
You can try "Deploy Shilded" when the gears don't want to deploy
most entertaining video ive seen from you in a long time keep it up!
That was seriously impressive!
Enabling "Deploy Shielded" fixes this bug.
put some decouplers between the fuselage and wings so you can ditch them to fit inside, or just scale down the wings.
Land vertically a spacerocket in another spacerocket while in the atomosphere and then land the bigger spacerocket in the land, spacex ception
This reminds me of the video "microwaving a microwave microwaving a toaster toasting an iPhone playing a video of a microwave microwaving a microwave microwaving a toaster toasting toast"
Your outro music is really cool played at 0.75x speed.
hans try 0.5x
Put it on 1.25x and remix it with some nice kickdrums and wobble base ;D
what kind of voodoo were you doing to discover this
Ah, this would have been easier by making it a target and then changing the speed relative to target - much easier to get the correct speed!
Planes have been landed on planes in WWII, Russia had small dive-bombing biplanes attached beneath and on the wings of the Tu-4 and Tu-5 bombers
great piloting skills! I would of crashed that so many times.
While it's true that the Guppy aircraft do not have hydraulic assistance they do have gearboxes that are kinda like a rack and pinion system.
Next, have a Kerbal dive from orbit into a plane and then land that plane in a rocket with a cargo bay.
I had the exact same landing gear problem with a Laythe plane I built! It's because the front landing gear is attached to a cargo bay: you just need to open that cargo bay in the air then deploy your gear and it'll work.
Would putting the gear on another part that's itself attached to the cargo bay work?
In a few tests I've done, unfortunately that doesn't work. :( It seems to be based on the proximity of the landing gear to the cargo bay, no matter what it's attached to.
So you can attach, say, wing parts to the lower sides, then attach the gear where it's far enough away from the cargo bay, not clipping into it, and you shouldn't have a problem (though your plane might look funny). I hope this helps!
Cannot deploy when stowed occurs when a part is placed "inside" a cargo bay. Open the cargo bay it's attached to, and then it'll deploy.
now we need a plane that lands inside a plane that then lands inside a plane that lands
I don't think you could land in another plane because the cargo hold would create a low pressure zone where the landing plane's engines wouldn't work.
Ever hear of the goblin? It was a usaf plan for a parasite fighter to be carried inside a b52 bomb bay, and released when needed.
Scott you can bypass that error message by disabling "deploy shielded".
”Launching a biplane from a flying boat”
Nice save at the end there.
The Guppy is called "Beluga" in German because its fuselage reminds of an actual beluga
If it only had 10 feet more width, an C-5 Galaxy would be able to carry at least 2 Harriers.
Trevor Philips: are you challenging me
heres a challenge: Land a plane onto a carrier, but from the point of view of the carrier. Easy mode: carrier is a larger plane. Hard mode: carrier is a boat with a flight deck.
Dude, this was awesome!
@ScottManley, I would like to inform you that a really cool space game will be coming onto steam on the 16th, Microsoft Allegiance. I would greatly appreciate it if you took a look at it. It took the small community of only about 30 or 40 several years to get it to steam, and they want their game to succeed. I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
If your front gear is stuck try to keep the nose up as long as possible, use speedbrake asap after landing. If the game supports it: trim the nose up.
Nicely done!
If you open the cargo bay door that the landing gear is attached to, the gear will extend. Then close the cargo bay.
you created alot of turbulence to fight with by having those engines so close to the tail.
Ah, I remember the mid-air docking antics.