Starwaster

The max temp only controls when the part explodes from overheating. If it's set to 500 then the part will explode when it exceeds 500C. It doesn't affect whether they will or won't heat up. DRE overrides what is in the part's configs when it hits the main menu. If the part exceeds ridiculousMaxTemp then it has its temperature cut in half. if the temperature still exceeds ridiculousMaxTemp then it has its maxTemp set to ridiculousMaxTemp. All that happens after configs are already processed. You can't have the settings at both Default and Alternate Heating Model. It's a selection between the 5 buttons available. Make sure that it Alternate Heating Model is actually clicked then close the menu. You might also want to delete custom.cfg if you made any changes to the in-game menus. No, it does not behave realistically with regards to aircraft when the AHM is enabled. It's somewhat more realistic regarding reentry speed high altitude vehicles because it uses a formula from the FAA site where heat flux was determined empirically. (for certain values of 'more realistic' ) To be honest, the effect on lower altitude low-supersonic aircraft was unintended but it's something I (as a modder and tech support agent) can live with because the overheating of aircraft never contributed to a proper game experience for players. It only ever produced support requests, as did rockets overheating in the mid-stages of their launches. (that too is greatly reduced by the beta's new model). I don't recall seeing any issues with Imgur albums and spoilers. I'm pretty sure they work. I tried just now with your album using BZs9d and it did not work, but the IMGUR tag didnt work with BZs9d anyway. So that's not really a valid IMGUR album tag.... apparently?

EAS is useless in this regard. I had to go do the conversions to figure out how fast you were really going. (stock surface speed indicator is fine; that's pretty much what DRE uses) Aerodynamic heating is mainly caused by air being compressed ahead of the vehicle and is a supersonic phenomenon (which correlation you noted above) The shockwave temperature in kelvins is equal to your velocity in m/s. It's not really unusual that your plane was heating up as much as it was. You were going even faster than the SR71 Blackbird btw That said, DRE probably isn't as forgiving of supersonic planes as it should be. You might want to try the beta and be sure to use the Alternate Heating Model setting (technically it's a new difficulty button but it's not meant to be more or less difficult than the default setting. It's just an alternate means of determining heating). It's a lot more forgiving of supersonic planes to the point that they barely heat up at all.

Yes, very disconcerting. I lose sleep at night worrying that my Utility tab is going to depopulate overnight and Squad will decide to get rid of it in the next update. The collapse of western civilization could be next!

If it's not too bad you can solder them back on. Or retrace them in solder

Re: RCC 1500 is just the temp that it was expected to withstand during a shuttle's reentry. Its upper limit would have been higher than that. (you wouldn't select a material which can just barely withstand that temp) I forget what the actual max is but it was pretty high.... at which point it would sublimate. Edit: at least 3550, but texts seem to differ as to whether it melts or sublimes.... Edit #2: which actually doesn't really matter....

Scattered throughout the thread. Not consolidated in one place.

The ones from Interstellar won't work with RF unless they are lowering the actual part temperature and keeping near or below the boiling point of whatever it propellant you're trying to keep from boiling off.

Hard mode is a little hotter overall and the heating starts earlier. (higher up in the atmosphere). Alternate and RSS use the same model but Alternate increases incoming heat 8x and starts the heating higher up in the atmosphere than RSS does. RSS should work for 6.4x but might the ablation metric tweaked if you feel that you have too much left at the end of a reentry. (it will burn off less than a standard RSS reentry)

Long term storage of cryogenic propellants. Example: Nuclear propulsion stage travelling to Mars. Using hydrogen as the propellant, the tank will completely boil off before you reach Mars. (given that RF has alternate propellants, a better choice might be ammonia or even methane...)

So, could I use this to make a contract where the player has to fly to a space station and pick up a palette of Kerbal Space Program Issue Regulation Black Form Binders Request Form Forms?

Raptor's stock alike engine pack for RF has an example of how to do such an engine (known as LANTR or sometimes, trimodal because it has three functional modes: NTR, LOX Augmented NTR (your 'afterburner', LANTR) and power generation)

Don't go there. Don't put words in my mouth. You know .... .... that that is NOT what I said and NOT what I meant. He used the word silly. You said it wasn't. I just said you and he had differing opinions of what constituted silly. If by that you mean edit the existing files, I suggest you don't. Make a Module Manager config that does the work for you or you'll end up having to re-edit files the next time RF updates. You'll want one section that removes from the resources files and one that removes the resources from the tank definition files. Finally you'll need one that removes (in bulk) from all ModuleEngineConfig sections. It's a good bit of work. It's up to you as to whether you think it's worth it.

That just means that you and he have differing definitions of what constitutes 'silly'. For myself, it's your sandbox, do as you like in it.

Actually, the last bit of code I submitted fixes the Jupiter temperatureCurve problem too. What I gave Carlo a link to was the compiled code for that Apparently Squad has altitudeMultiplier or atmoshpereTemperatureMultiplier (typo deliberate) set to varying values for different bodies (0 for Pol and something substantially higher than 1 for Jool) I don't think it was like that pre-KSP 0.90 or we would have caught it before now. I know I've done Jupiter aerobraking after we first put the temperature curves in. So, short story is that the fix was to set both those fields to 1 if we have a valid temperatureCurve in.

I've experimented with it and it's probably possible, but the Ascent Guidance does just fine for me. Orbit Altitude = 420 Inclination = 28.609 (for the default launch pad I think, but you can put whatever you need here) Limit to Terminal Velocity = off Limit Acceleration = (usually) Off (sometimes I'll set this to 36-42 but if you keep a starting TWR of ~1.6 you're ok) Limit Throttle = Off Limit angle of attack = 5 (sometimes I go as high as 15 which is ok if it's set that way from the start. Don't suddenly change it halfway through flight or you'll flip the stack) Ascent Path Editor turn start altitude = 0.25 km turn end Altitude = 70 km Final flight path angle = 8 Turn shape = 40

No, I've been playing around with a probe over Jupiter myself and I've been as far as 450 km. (testing Deadly Reentry and Stock Drag Fix) Plus I've been involved enough with RSS coding and configs that I know it's not doing anything like that. (though I have toyed with the idea of introducing pressure extremes to Deadly Reentry.... and may yet do so if it survives KSP 1.0)

I like putting my turn end altitude at around 70 since the atmosphere is already so thing by that point. With a final angle of 8 degrees. (though that last can vary by launcher and its TWR at that point) I've been happy with the results of that so far.

Does it have the greatest enthusiasm for the mission?

I don't know? I don't think there's a hard limit at 500km.... (there probably should be one somewhere until we can have realistic gas giants... but I don't think there is one) Or do you mean an actual physical wall somewhere?

Any time changes are made to an engine's maxTemp, its heat output should be reduced as well. DRE supports setting an absolute maximum temperature and if any engines have their maxTemp reduced as a result of that setting then their heat output is also automatically scaled back. Originally that was done entirely by the plugin itself, but I noticed timing issues with Real Fuels engines where configurable engines were overriding DRE changes so I moved that functionality into a MM config that sets all engines at 1250 and then scales the heat output for all RF engine configurations. (those changes happen before the game actually runs so they can't get overridden) Yes, the default is going to stay as is. Some individual parts might be adjusted in the future but I have no plans to do so at this time.

I would say no higher than the melting point of the materials involved. For aluminum for example, 660C. Steel melts at 1370. If you REALLY want to get realistic, it should be lower than that because not everything on the part would be aluminum or steel. And although aluminum doesn't melt until 660, it starts to deform even lower than that. So you would really want to put it at the point where that part fails due to the various components overheating. I think RO sets everything to 600.... somewhere around there. Or was it 800. I actually looked at it today but my brain is turning to tapioca.... (mmm tapioca pudding...)

You can't compare Venus and Jupiter. 'Jupiter' as represented in the game does not have an atmosphere deep enough to encounter the full pressure that Jupiter in real life possesses. You can't go deep enough in the game because in the game, Jupiter has a solid surface. In real life, it has no surface that has ever been detected. It probably has a solid core down there somewhere, and yes, if you could get that deep then yes, its pressure would be greater than Venus. We can't properly model that in the game because the camera becomes uncontrollable with a properly scaled Jupiter (to represent a 'core') and a properly scaled atmosphere. (I know, because I've tried and things got unplayable). Edit: On the subject of Venus, at its surface it is 90 bars in pressure. That's 140 km deep. With Jupiter's atmosphere the probe we dropped in there went approx 1,146 km deep and the last pressure it measured was 24 bars. That said, the representation of Jupiter's atmosphere and temperature data is accurate when measured from the top of the atmosphere (taking into account that it was arbitrarily capped when the pressure got too low to matter) to as deep as we can make it before hitting the 'surface' of the planet. <DELETED SUGGESTION THAT IT MIGHT BE DEADLY REENTRY BECAUSE I AM @#$&%^ stupid and forgot that I submitted a fix for a very similar problem a month ago> Edit: #2 I got distracted by some elements of the conversation and I forgot the part where you originally said there was 900 ambient and then the second part where you said that was before you edited anythingI got distracted by some elements of the conversation and I forgot the part where you originally said there was 900 ambient and then the second part where you said that was before you edited anything. I'm looking at things closer here but there's nothing in the temperature curve that should cause ambient that high.... Carlo, try this https://www.dropbox.com/s/ydnvp1fz6h9fsf9/RealSolarSystem.dll?dl=1 Download that and replace the existing RealSolarSystem.dll There's a multiplier in KSP's code that is increases the temperature after it has been retrieved from the temperature curves. (I submitted a fix that was zeroing out temperatures on airless bodies and it seems to fix an opposite but related issue with Jupiter and who knows what other planets...) Ignore anything I said about Deadly Reentry before editing this, if you saw it.

The text can keep changing even if the loading process has hung. Check your output_log.txt (or player.log if Linux/Mac) If you're not sure how to read the log then post it here for someone to look at.

There are several FAR configs; which one are you using? (last I kept up with this, Ayana's was the go-to for FAR compatibility. And don't use more than one) Also, SAS has always had problems with FAR because FAR replaces all stock control and lifting surfaces with its own. KSP's SAS code can't know how to use those, it only knows how to use its stock surfaces.

Real Heat was never completed. Those are probably just there for future use. Considerable research and attention were given to Jupiter's atmosphere. You're better off going with the values in the pressureCurve instead of making up your own. IRL, Jupiter's atmosphere hits 1 bar 1,000 kilometers deep. (in RSS, the top of the atmosphere cuts off a little early and that's by design) Your problems that you're experiencing are because you're putting strange data into the files. It's no wonder your probes are exploding.