BmB

or better yet, have the chute model visibly fly off and burn, that should clear it up

My specific complaint would be that the temperature from my tests seems to be calculated as the maximum of the ambient and your airspeed in m/s. Meaning if the ambient is about 300K and you're going 310 m/s it will be 310K, and if you're going 298 m/s it will be 300K. Rather than taking into account any kind of friction effects, or shock compression. The ambient temperature itself seems to be reasonable, it drops off nicely with altitude and varies at sea level with latitude. Also, is the pressure not exposed directly as a value? I can't be sure but isn't there a science part that gives this value? And also, by setting the aerodynamicheatproductionfactor to 0, you should be able to get the "raw" ambient temperature, and use that as basis for calculations instead.

Have you fiddled with how the air temperature is calculated in the first place for v7? The default 1.0 model isn't very good.

If you are on steam, go into the properties of the game, and select the "last stable" in beta participation, it will revert to 0.90. This will also break your saves.

I just want drag and lift values that are slightly more reasonable, and re-entry heating that actually matters. I feel like all of this stuff is terribly overcomplicating something that ought to be fairly simple for gameplays sake. The fact that deadly re-entry is still being worked on shows that something is quite amiss with the standard heating model. I don't really have the drive to spend hours on each setting, I really just want to play the game. Also I found a real gem, apparantly the "tempext" is equal to some calculated value for the atmosphere, which is fine in itself, hovering at about 30 degrees C at the KSC. But then is equal in kelvin to the airspeed in m/s when that value is greater than the ambient temperature. I have never heard of a direct conversion from m/s to kelvin like that before. Surely the "external temperature" as such should be calculated by the ambient*compression + friction? Not math.max(ambient, m/s*aeroheating). Also the developers should consider hungarian notation as these types of values are prime candidates for it. Prefixes could denote the units used, as well as the type of value that it is, which would shorten things like "Exponent" considerably. For example a K_ or a W_ prefix for kelvin or watts. Or an Ex_ or Coeff_ for those types of values.

I've been tweaking the numbers somewhat, greatly assisted by the debug menu which prevents you from having to restart every time. And while the Aero numbers are now fairly clear to me, the thermal numbers are also fairly opaque. Considering that the complete absence of re-entry heating is a key problem with 1.0.2, this is not good. aeroFXStartThermalFX = 2 aeroFXFullThermalFX = 3.5 aeroFXExponent = 3 Start and full is pretty obvious, it's a range between no aeroFX and full aeroFX. Is aeroFX purely the visual effect or does it affect heating? What is the unit? Is it mach number? Is it a multiplier of a hidden value? If so, what is that value? What is the exponent and what does it do? thermalMaxIntegrationWarp = 100 I can't even guess. I assume it's related to timewarping. Maybe it's the timewarp factor where something will happen. What will happen? Nobody knows. solarLuminosityAtHome = 1360 solarInsolationAtHome = 0.15 Presumably this is some multiplier of solar power at 1 AU from Kerbol. Does it affect the visual brightness? Does it enable any kind of solar heating? Or is it just the amount of power generated by solar panels? What is the "Insolation"? Is it supposed to be insUlation? What does it insulate from? Is it related to heat? What is the unit of luminosity, is it lux? Candela? How does it relate to the power output or heating? convectionDensityExponent = 1 convectionVelocityExponent = 3 convectionFactorSplashed = 300 fullConvectionAreaMin = 0.2 machConvectionStart = 2 machConvectionEnd = 4 machConvectionExponent = 3 newtonianConvectionFactorBase = 2 newtonianConvectionFactorTotal = 3 convectionFactor = 40 Everything convection related. Testing with the debug seems to reveal that convection is heat loss to an atmosphere. The factor is easy enough, just a multiplier for how fast convection occurs. The splashed factor is also pretty straightforward, same for how fast heat is lost to water. But density and velocity exponents? What is that even? fullConvectionAreaMin? Is it the minimum area a part can lose heat from regardless of its actual area? What is the unit? Is it m^2? Mach convection start-end, mach numbers? Almost has to be. Does it mean heat is lost faster to flying fast? Would make sense. Or does it mean all convection happens at a greater rate, including atmospheric heating? By how much is it increased? Is that what the exponent means??? Or is it another hidden value? What is newtonian convection? Excuse my ignorance. What is the difference between the base and the total? Overall this part is a big mystery to any would be tweakers. spaceTemperature = 4 fullToCrossSectionLerpStart = 0.8 fullToCrossSectionLerpEnd = 1.5 partEmissivityExponent = 4 radiationFactor = 1 NewtonianVelocityExponent = 1.5 conductionFactor = 10 internalHeatProductionFactor = 0.03 aerodynamicHeatProductionFactor = 1 standardSpecificHeatCapacity = 800 Everything we missed. Again the factors are fairly easy. Conduction seem to be transfer between parts, presumably a multiplier of a part-specific value. Space temperature also would seem to be self explanatory, being the kelvin-value for how low the temperature of a given part can get? Seems utterly pointless to simulate a 4 degree difference but each to their own. But what is a specific heat capacity? Is it in kelvins? With every other temperature in the game being measured this way it would make sense. What is a newtonian velocity? Why is part emissivity an exponent? What number specifically is it an exponent of? What is the cross section lerp? Is it related to the new cube system? Overall there's not a lot of useful information here, and with most of these values hidden from the debug menu meaningful testing is terribly slowed down by restarting the game every time. Far too tedious to bother with. It's all well and good that these numbers are exposed for advanced players to customize their game, but with no means to understand what most of the values do it's also fairly meaningless to have exposed them in the first place. Undocumented features do not exist.

Adding additional parts is pretty easy.

Let's adress the real problem here. Lack of flexibility in the existing parts. If you have to jerry-rig parts to look like something else of course they won't be very functional. The better solution is to have the tools to actually create the thing you want in a way the game can understand.

Most of the values apply to planes. The only value that applies to capsules is the cubemodifier, and the default seem fine there. Maybe the body lift but I can't imagine a situation where that kicks in. If you prefer the 1.0.2 capsule speed you should use the 1.0.2 cubemodifier of 0.1 For reference, this is the result of an unshielded entry starting at ~1500 m/s using my settings. Seems reasonable to me. I think if it was slowed down it would be too easy to enter without a shield

The dragmultiplier does not apply to parts, the cubes override it. It only applies to certain things like chutes and kerbals. At the very least the effect on parts is so small as to be pointless to consider. You also cannot edit the kerbal aerodynamics. 8.0 drag = immortal kerbals. In that case, it is preferable to edit every other part than to edit something that cannot be edited. But you don't need to.

Yes that is exactly what I was testing with. The body lift seems to only come into play at extreme turns. It does seem that those parts have wing lift also, which is not affected by the body lift value of course. Also on further testing the 0.032 liftdrag value seems to be exactly right to match the speeds I was getting in 1.0 after all. Lucky guess! 0.036 can work for a bit more of a conservative choice also.

You could re-enter anything safely in 1.0 using airbrakes. Wayyy overpowered. I did re-enter a spaceplane in 1.0 without too. Trick is to come in shallow and use the wings to brake high before you hit the bulk of the atmosphere, it takes a while of skimming the atmosphere at 45 degrees angle of attack but you come down safely with almost no plasma. Not quite realistic but in the absence of shuttle-like heatshielding for spaceplanes it's better than nothing.

I have been fiddling with the values myself a bit after being dissatisfied with 1.0.2. #1 change to make: DragMultiplier - this is way too high by default. They increased it by almost 50% for 1.0.2 even. A high DragMultiplier makes it impossible for Kerbals to die from falling. Since Kerbals' aerodynamics cannot be modified this should be the baseline value. I find that 4.5 is sensible value, there is a small chance for a Kerbal to bounce but overall most impacts with the ground will be certain death, without the terminal velocity being overly fast either. It is a good compromise value. As a bonus this also causes parachutes to behave much more realistically, gradually opening rather than coming to a stop. Having an opening altitude of at least 700-1000m is advisable, and the deployment feels satisfying. Downside: default opening value is always too low. The default cubemultiplier of 0.06 seems fine, for regular parts this seems to override the dragmultiplier, causing most rockets to fly as you'd expect even with the above dramatic change. AngularDragMultiplier should probably be lowered a bit, 2.0 seems a bit stiff. 1.6 feels more natural to how a plane should roll. #2 change to make: LiftMultiplier - With the default value I feel like I can take off anything on a dime. Again this was upped in 1.0.2 causing the soupy feel. I find that instead a dramatic lowering to 0.023 feels reasonably good for most of the airplanes I built. I have no math to back up what this value should be for certain wings, but I also doubt the lift values were balanced that carefully to begin with. Realism is for someone else to deal with. At this level you need to get some speed before the plane will take off on its own, but not too much. LiftDragMultiplier I set to 0.032, a little higher than the lift. I have no idea what it should be, there's probably some ratio of lift to drag that is common for wings that you could use here but I do not know it. Maybe this is too low or maybe my jet is more aerodynamic than I thought. It seems that you can get up to some ludicrous speeds with this. If in doubt, leave at default. Though the 1.0.2. value almost slows you to a stop even with fast aircraft. BodyLiftMultiplier seems like it works best when matched with DragMultiplier, 4.5 again. It's gentler than the default but will still flip an unstable rocket even against reaction wheels all the same. Seems to have virtually no effect on airplanes no matter how high you crank it. I also recommend setting the convection values back to 1.0 levels and using the ablator heatshield fix, so that re-entry damage is actually possible again. Final values look like this: dragMultiplier = 4.5 dragCubeMultiplier = 0.06 angularDragMultiplier = 1.6 liftMultiplier = 0.023 liftDragMultiplier = 0.032 bodyLiftMultiplier = 4.5

What are the "key" values? The numbers seem random, some pointers as to what each one does would be nice.

Update: Alright, I seem to have figured it out. I was poking around in my save file to see if I could see anything suspicious like HighSpeedSteel. I found a scenario section "CustomWaypoints". This seems to be added by the Inflight Waypoints aka Waypoint Manager mod. I could swear I had a clean install but I seem to have messed something up doing that, my bad. Anyway, installing the mod did indeed break my other save as well. So it is mod related after all. Going by what HighSpeedSteel found I'm guessing that the 1.0.1 update caused something to mess up with non-standard sections in the savefile. It also seems that having at least one save file without the offending sections and loading those clears up the issue for that session. In conclusion. Here are the REPRO STEPS: - Start a new game on a clean install of KSP. - Quit and install Waypoint Manager. - Resume the game and go to either the VAB or the SPH. It is possible that other mods cause the same issue by adding their custom section to the savefile as well.

Did a g-force of 3 ever kill anyone?

Update: After deleting the new career save the bug reappeared, creating another career save made the bug go away again. So it does seem to be save related after all, but one save is affecting the other somehow.

Press F10 to disable the bars that cause the leak.

Very colourful OP, very nice sounds. But how to use it? I don't see a version compatible with 1.0 anywhere. The information and files aren't there. I also am not keen on any "low-tech" mods that replace stock files. Hooking and differential loading was invented for a reason.

Configuration is kinda pointless when there is no description of the parameters. So R is the radius of the thing. Ok, what is the unit? Is it meters? Default setting is Kerbin so shouldn't the radius be 300k to get the 600k diameter? Why is it 6 million? Rl is the "limit". What does that mean? How is that different from height? It also makes no sense to give a "height" as a radius. The half-values are much better, they have an explicit unit and are actual heights above the surface. What does "beta" mean? Absorption? Scattering? What is the unit? Is it wavelengths? The value tweaks the colour somehow, but how? What is "G"? Is reflectance a percentage? Setting these values according to what I think it might be is clearly getting me the wrong results. It's a beautiful shader but at least take 5 minutes to write a readme or something with a usable guide for this stuff. Undocumented features don't exist.

Considering how little there is to go on, anything helps I'm sure.

It is not a corrupt save, as after the issue self-resolved I was able to load up my save and continue with my old ships as normal. It also did not respond to new saves before that day.

Ok, another update. Even though previously starting new career mode games did not resolve the issue, starting one today did. I also re-verified the files and got 2 hits. Did everyone here having this problem use Steam? Consider that it may have been a glitch in the Steam download system. However this is just speculation and I will report back if it re-appears.

They glow for me, you just have to fly them for quite a while at max throttle.

The "gold tint" is the reflection of the sun, seems like they forgot to include it in her suit shader.