Jump to content

[1.12.*] Deadly Reentry v7.9.0 The Barbie Edition, Aug 5th, 2021

Starwaster

By Starwaster
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted

Okay, testing turns out that the heat shields on almost all all B9 parts are on the wrong side of the fuselage / wing!

@PART[B9_Cockpit_S2_Body_Crew_6m]{
	@maxTemp = 1500
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, 0, -1 // underside of fuselage
		reflective = 0.25 // 25% of heat is ignored at correct angle
	}
}

Testing revealed that those parts did best when flying upside down (with the visual heat shield facing upwards and away from the shockwave), indicating that the heat shield is on the wrong side.

It should look more like this:

@PART[B9_Cockpit_S2_Body_Crew_6m]
{
	@maxTemp = 1500
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, 0, 1 // underside of fuselage
		reflective = 0.25 // 25% of heat is ignored at correct angle
	}
}

Am I missing something? This should be included in the next DRE release! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted

Actually, is the MK1 pod supposed to be suitable for re-entry with 

shockwaveExponent = 1.12

aka RSS re-entry? I just had my first re-entry with only the pod and almost burned up! I already was on a very shallow trajectory (70km-40km on Stock Kerbin) and the heatshield just couldn't keep up. Should I go even shallower?

I am using the config from the OP (RO_DRE.cfg) but it doesn't mention the MK1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted (edited)
Three_Pounds: heh. Whoops. Add a new @PART[mk1pod] {} block to the file and copy-paste the shield section from here (highlighted)

Thanks a lot! Trying it out now. Hopefully it won't roast the next Kerbal. It was some 20 Kelvin away from incinerating. :D

EDIT: slapped a :Final at the back, just to make sure.

Edited by Three_Pounds
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted

and don't forget to name it *.cfg. My browsers saves it as *.cfg.txt for some stupid reason.

I just figured out a lot of things about "faking the 8km re-entry", so I'll help you if you want to. You'll probably want to add this to at the bottom of your said config:

@PART[mk1pod]:Final{
    @MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
    {
        @direction = 0, -1, 0
        @reflective = 0.05
        @ablative = AblativeShielding
        @loss
        {
            @key,0 = 650 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 2000 160 0 0
            @key,2 = 5000 200 0 0
        }
        @dissipation
        {
            @key,0 = 300 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 800 480 0 0
        }
    }
}

If you use mods like B9 and SP+, you probably have to edit their configs to make the heat shielding sufficient as well. Otherwise, you'll just burn up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted

There is a minor flaw that can be quite confusing in the RO_DRE.cfg linked in the OP.

[COLOR=#000000]+PART[1.25_Heatshield]:Final[/COLOR]{
	!MODULE[TweakScale]
	{
	}
	@name = Heatshield-15M
	@author = Bobcat,NK
	!mesh = DELETE
	MODEL
	{
		model = DeadlyReentry/Parts/deadlyReentry_1.25Heatshield/model
		scale = 1.5, 1.5, 1.5
	}
	@scale = 1.5
	@rescaleFactor = 1.0
	@node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.06196643, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.01, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@title = Heatshield (1m)
	@mass = 0.06
	@crashTolerance = 8
	@breakingForce = 250
	@breakingTorque = 250
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{
		@reflective = 0.08
		@loss
		{
			@key,0 = 650 0 0 0
			@key,1 = 2000 180 0 0
			@key,2 = 6000 225 0 0
		}
		@dissipation
		{
			@key,0 = 300 0 0 0
			@key,1 = 800 530 0 0
		}
	}
	@MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
	{
		@ejectionForce = 20
	}
	@RESOURCE[AblativeShielding]
	{
		@amount = 375
		@maxAmount = 375
	}
}

This is the definition for the 1.5 meter heat shield, but it's called "Heatshield (1m)." The line should look like this:

@title = Heatshield (1.5m)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TronX33

TronX33

Posted
Posted

The Engineer: by opening the cfg and changing them, or writing an MM patch. What changes do you want to make?

Well, I want to make them work. So do I just add more of the resource ablativeshielding and add to it's max temperature to make them work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Master Tao

Master Tao

Posted
Posted
Well, I want to make them work. So do I just add more of the resource ablativeshielding and add to it's max temperature to make them work?

Increasing AblativeShielding will simulate increasing the thickness (and mass) of the shield and max temperature will change the temperature at which the part explodes.

Are the parts not working at all or not working well enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TronX33

TronX33

Posted
Posted
Increasing AblativeShielding will simulate increasing the thickness (and mass) of the shield and max temperature will change the temperature at which the part explodes.

Are the parts not working at all or not working well enough?

I'm only asking because the OP says that simulating 8 km/ sec reentry on stock kerbin would require heat shields built for RSS, and I assumed that those heat shields, not being built for RSS, would not sufficiently protect my capsule

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Master Tao

Master Tao

Posted
Posted
I'm only asking because the OP says that simulating 8 km/ sec reentry on stock kerbin would require heat shields built for RSS, and I assumed that those heat shields, not being built for RSS, would not sufficiently protect my capsule

So yes, your two ideas (especially increasing the AblativeShielding) should work for an appropriate reentry profile.

I'm afraid I don't know exactly how much to increase AblativeShielding, but you could compare the stock and RO shield configs for guidance. That'll be hard since they're all different sizes. Or you could just fry some Kerbals in the name of SCIENCE! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
So yes, your two ideas (especially increasing the AblativeShielding) should work for an appropriate reentry profile.

I'm afraid I don't know exactly how much to increase AblativeShielding, but you could compare the stock and RO shield configs for guidance. That'll be hard since they're all different sizes. Or you could just fry some Kerbals in the name of SCIENCE! :wink:

It's not just an issue of increasing the resource quantity. I've even tweaked parts for RSS without touching quantity and they were ok. (or possibly they had more than they needed before RSS was installed)

The important bit (or other important bit) is loss and dissipation curves.

Specifically the final key / values are increased for loss and dissipation.

pre-RSS


        loss
        { // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
            key = 650 0 0 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
            key = 1000 320 0 0 // peak ablation at 1000 degrees C
            key = 3000 400 0 0 // max ablation at 3000 degrees C
        }
        dissipation
        { // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
                key = 300 0 0 0 // begin dissipating at 300 degrees C
                key = 500 90 0 0 // maximum dissipation at 500 degrees C
        }

with RSS (RO_RSS file)


        @reflective = 0.08
        @loss
        {
            @key,0 = 650 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 2000 480 0 0
            @key,2 = 6000 600 0 0
        }
        @dissipation
        {
            @key,0 = 300 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 800 170 0 0
        }

So, loss had its mid and last keys changed. First value is key (shockwave temperature) so it hits that point at 2000 degrees and loses 50% more material each second. Final key is 6000 degrees, which is closer to the typical max thermal value of 7000-ish

Dissipation is how much heat the part will radiate back because of its own temperature. Again up nearly 50% on both key and value (key = part temperature, value = radiation value)

(none of which will help much during a Jovian reentry for a probe when FAR is installed. FAR calculates the value based on gas giant physics but DREC still assumes stock atmospheric density values so the probe doesn't shed velocity as fast as stock while still suffering stock heating. Oops!)

Edited by Starwaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dzikakulka

dzikakulka

Posted
Posted

Okay, so while it is a great mod for realism without too many changes, I have a problem balancing it out.

But first question - how do I insert fractions in debug menu? Nothing seem to work, I'm stuck with config editing atm and it's a long wait every ksp boot. I can only delete what's already there ("1" is always left) and then insert integers.

And a quick question to fellow players - did someone came up with reasonable values of all these tweakables so non-shielded stuff is burnt up quickly but shielded is not? All my struggle pretty much comes to one problem - either my test craft (aerospike-tank-mk1pod, 2.2km/s kerbin reentry at ~60 degrees) is immediately evaporised or there is only one part burnt up max. If I decouple before reentry, leaving only pod with parachute it also either blows up after brief moment or goes 100% safe burning out like 30 of 250 shielding.

While I have almost no knowledge about real reentries, I think it souldn't be like that.

Is there any way to make reentries more brutal on un-shielded parts AND shields? So far I couldn't get my pod destroyed because shields depleted. It's always blowing up or going safe with using 10% of the shield.

Or can someone point me to some post or source file or anything that will explain a little that debug menu and inner works of plugin? What's shockwave shown in degrees in debug, shockwave tresholds etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Okay, so while it is a great mod for realism without too many changes, I have a problem balancing it out.

But first question - how do I insert fractions in debug menu? Nothing seem to work, I'm stuck with config editing atm and it's a long wait every ksp boot. I can only delete what's already there ("1" is always left) and then insert integers.

And a quick question to fellow players - did someone came up with reasonable values of all these tweakables so non-shielded stuff is burnt up quickly but shielded is not? All my struggle pretty much comes to one problem - either my test craft (aerospike-tank-mk1pod, 2.2km/s kerbin reentry at ~60 degrees) is immediately evaporised or there is only one part burnt up max. If I decouple before reentry, leaving only pod with parachute it also either blows up after brief moment or goes 100% safe burning out like 30 of 250 shielding.

While I have almost no knowledge about real reentries, I think it souldn't be like that.

Is there any way to make reentries more brutal on un-shielded parts AND shields? So far I couldn't get my pod destroyed because shields depleted. It's always blowing up or going safe with using 10% of the shield.

Or can someone point me to some post or source file or anything that will explain a little that debug menu and inner works of plugin? What's shockwave shown in degrees in debug, shockwave tresholds etc.

The problem you describe with the debug menu is an issue with the Unity GUI. You have to insert your decimal in front of a number after typing that number. If a 0 is displayed then you can't type the decimal at all. If you want 0.5 you have to type it as 5 then put the cursor in front of the 5 and type the decimal.

From a coding perspective, there is another way of doing it, which is to treat that field as a string, then parse the string and then assign the result to your variable. If you don't understand coding then just accept that it's a problem with Unity's GUI implementation and not the fault of the people who coded or maintain or otherwise contribute to DREC. It can't be fixed from this end but it could be worked around and it's kind of hacky so maybe that's why nobody's bothered doing it. I contribute little code snippets from time to time so maybe one day I'll write something up myself and do a pull request but there's never anything less constructive I could be doing and from a player perspective, it can be worked around as I described.

As for the other, there's that word again; difficulty and balance.

Here's the thing. DREC is not supposed to make things harder. It's supposed to punish you for poor reentry procedures or forgetting to put a heat shield on.

If you put your heat shield on (or the part has it like the Mk1pod) and you did your reentry vector PROPERLY then you will live and you will find that pretty easy to do.

If you messed your reentry vector up then your Kerbals will die screaming and you'll find that easy to do also :)

So if you lived and your part didn't burn up to ashes and your Kerbals walked away, congratulations, you did it right.

If you didn't do it right then they died and that's that. It's ok if the shield didn't deplete completely. Even RL heat shields still have some ablator left. I'm sure the engineers made sure there was more than they thought they would need.

To to sum up, with regards to your statement that it shouldn't be like that, yes it should. It's supposed to be like that. It's right and proper that it is like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dzikakulka

dzikakulka

Posted
Posted

Thanks Starwaster, I can insert decimals now!

Hm, if it is like it should be now... I'll make damn sure it will be as I want instead. Just kidding but really, with 1.12 mult and exp my rockets burn up on ~80% terminal velocity ascent. I'll have to mess with numbers anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Thanks Starwaster, I can insert decimals now!

Hm, if it is like it should be now... I'll make damn sure it will be as I want instead. Just kidding but really, with 1.12 mult and exp my rockets burn up on ~80% terminal velocity ascent. I'll have to mess with numbers anyways.

Of course! It's your sandbox. Even if I say 'that's how it's supposed to be' doesn't mean you need to accept it.

Though if you're burning up on ascent then your ascent is probably too shallow or your TWR is too high. Are you also using FAR? Or any other mod that affects drag? (which really is just two besides FAR)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePounds

ThreePounds

Posted
Posted

I usually go for TWR of no more than 1.6. I usually find myself throttling down even as the fuel gets depleted. It not only makes launches with shockwaveexponent = 1.12 possible but also gives you a pretty good launch profile with F.A.R. if you start your grav turn really early. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dzikakulka

dzikakulka

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I possibly overshoot twr, wasn't building small stuff for a long time. But having to be careful on ascent is a pretty sweet addition.

And if anyone is interested, I got closer to my vision by lowering density exp to ~0.5 and temperature exp to 1. It makes you burn much higher up and for longer time but with slightly lower temps to compensate.

From what I've guessed "shockwave" scale and damage caused by it is more linked to G-force or something, not real temperature despite showing celcius.

Thanks again, guys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...