Missing to220 footprint


Why isnt there a to220-3 tabdown footprint with a drain tab pad?

It is available for to262 and to247 and a few others but not to220


KiCad is Open Source and volunteer driven. It appears that no user has created and uploaded a KLC Footprint for that specific part.

If you create your own Footprint, and it is KLC, then you can submit your design to help improve KiCad.


Its just a very common package.


The change in the libraries from V4 to V5 KLC has possibly created a few gaps in otherwise common packages.


The footprints you want are in Package_TO_SOT_THT.pretty for V5


Anyway I agree with the first answer given by Sprig


Did they really omit some packages while transitioning?



Forward progress to KiCad V6!


Yes, those not compliant with KLC quality standards. A few.


Seemed like a regression.

Polyline tool certainly can use improvements but that’s probably being reworked in v6 not even in v5.1 which is probably going to be a maintenance revision.


Maybe the sub-standard footprints should have been moved to a special directory to give volunteers an easy target to fix them, rather than discarding them.


Only a handful of footprints did not make the cut when going from version 4 to version 5. Most of the footprints that where omitted lived in already deprecated libs.

It is far more likely that the footprint you are looking for has been renamed and (or) put into a different lib.

They are still there. In the old repos. So if you find something missing and really can not find it in the new lib setup then you can take it from the original repo and update it to the new standards.

To go into more detail: We only did not transmit things where we could not determine what the particular footprint was meant to be used for. So if the footprint name was very bad, the description was not really detailed enough and the datasheet was missing. On the footprint side we really looked hard to find a place for everything that existed in the old libs. (I even asked here on the forum for help identifying some of the footprints)

On the symbol side we had a bit less resources. There we put some libs into the legacy directory. These are the ones that might contain useful symbols but we had not had the time to get them to our minimum standards (These minimum standards are lower than KLC.)