Starwaster

Like it. I like the idea that there's these little green guys and they need my help with their space program. I don't view myself as playing the game as a Kerbal so much as I'm some human that got involved with them and their planet and I'm helping them explore their star system.

We don't have real axial tilt at all. It's simulated by careful manipulation of the planet's orbital inclination. But in actuality each planet has no axial tilt.

You should use a heat shield. I suggest the inflatable for maximum braking. oh oops I misunderstood.

Perhaps you downloaded and used a config I posted a long time ago which added fuel to wings. (never listen to anyone who tells you it can't be done!)

It's pretty sad that people can't offer feedback or report bugs without it getting under other people's skin. There was really nothing in Numerobis post that warranted that kind of hostility, Sarbian.

Nope, haven't touched it. Probably SHOULD if it's that high... or are their suits supposed to be made of asbestos or something? How recent is your information though? Maybe it changed in 0.25 I think I'll take Felix Kerman up to high altitude and drop him and see what happens....

Well they're probably 70% LiquidFuel instead of water and they build everything out of corbomite so it makes sense. But seriously, how fast were you going? And have you made any configuration changes? (If you have a custom.cfg file in your DeadlyReentry folder, please post the contents of it) Edit: I'm also thinking that I should try to find out what the maxTemp of a Kerbal is but you'd still have to be going very fast to raise their temperature above ambient...

Oh and I suppose you think you're entitled to us not taking it the wrong way? Typical.

There's no hard limitation, but there are practicality issues that can arise from putting RCS onto a single part where you'd ordinarily be using multiple parts. The issue is that that part may fire ALL jets in some situations where your craft has other RCS jets. There is a possible workaround that to my knowledge has never been tried. The workaround involves breaking up the RCS transforms into groups where the transforms are uniquely named. For instance starboardRCS, portRCS, etc. Then, in the part's config file you would have multiple ModuleRCS, one for each uniquely named cluster. Inside each ModuleRCS block you would then set thrusterTransformName to the name of the transform corresponding to one of the clusters. In theory that should let it work properly in all situations even with other RCS parts. But again, it hasn't been tested.

No, I don't think anybody ever figured out what his problem was and you're only the second person I've ever seen report something like that.

Wait, where did you get that cockpit-less nose??? Also, on the subject of the PEBCAK:

Depends on the spaceplane... if it's particularly massive then its ballistic coefficient is going to be a lot higher. Or was it lower? I always forget... anyway, point is that if it's got a lot of mass then its inertia might be overcoming its drag. I have landed space planes using nothing more than the standard 25% reflection that their heat shields had; no ablative. Landed the smaller KSO the same way. Then the KSO25 came out and suddenly I was extremely challenged to come up with a non-ablative config that could protect it. Which, bottom line, is the heart of the problem. Spaceplane parts are protected with a scheme that mimics the Space Shuttle's tile system which was non ablative and it works fine for small planes. So the answer is I don't have an easy answer right now. Let me know what parts and some craft files to test with because I haven't made many space planes lately. (and, no, it's not steak sauce . Let's just say it does not substantially contribute to game play so much as it contributes to immersion....)

I've been working on such a file, but it's going to be a (configurable) non-issue as of the next update. If a particular property (can be set separately per difficulty) is set then shields can't (shouldn't) reach their max temp. (watch me be proven wrong) This is definitely one of those things that RO may want to do a MM patch for. So the only real thing I'll need to address in an RSS patch is how much more shield is ablated (if any). I'm about to run a bunch of practice runs WITHOUT the RSS / RO patch to see how it holds up and whether or not I should change how much ablates. Also, there's going to be a minor extra surprise in the next update. I wonder if anyone will notice it. (no fair peeking at the code Nathan! See if you can find it in the game )

I think he left part of his instruction out. That's a Module Manager patch, you're probably meant to create a file with an extension of .cfg; could be named just about anything. (somefile.cfg). Edit the cfg file you created and paste his code into it.

RCS units that are destroyed in flight seem to result in nullref errors in the RCS balancer later: KWrcsQuad Exploded!! - blast awesomeness: 0.5 (Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/d63dfc6385190b60/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 49) [KWrcsQuad]: Deactivated (Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/d63dfc6385190b60/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 49) MechJeb module MechJebModuleRCSBalancer threw an exception in OnUpdate: System.NullReferenceException: at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.ParticleEmitter:set_maxSize (single) at FXGroup.SetPower (Single pwr) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at FXGroup.set_Power (Single value) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at MuMech.MechJebModuleRCSBalancer.OnUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at MuMech.MechJebCore.Update () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 (Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/d63dfc6385190b60/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 49) 1 explosions created. Shortly after, the world went black, gone, vanished, navball disappears, void, anguish, etc. Could be total coincidence, not sure. <---- (could also be an issue in Deadly Reentry which also threw some errors, though they were pretty benign, but I'll be looking at that as well since DRE is my responsibility now and the error was linked to new code)

Interesting idea and certainly technically possible. There's still the issue of damage to deal with. One requirement is that KSP needs to have exposed a means to arbitrarily set damage for a given set of structures, and a way to retrieve current damage as well. I haven't checked but I find it hard to believe that the first doesn't exist. The second.... probably but not necessarily.

I don't think I said I hit a max of 3g, only that I throttled back a bit when I was low to middle atmosphere. That's why I said 'at that point'. I was also trying to keep my example launch close to the sort of launcher that the guy was talking about that he was trying to replicate which does thottle back at points in its flight. I admit I'm not as familiar with the Thor but it doesn't sound like a good comparison as the launcher in question. Should I try to replicate one? I wasn't aware it was a fight...

Then maybe RO needs special attention in the form of its own DRE config, but I don't use RO myself these days so I'm not sure where it needs help. But without RO, and the current set of configs I'm running with? Golden.

You can also press alt+D+R and increase the ParachuteMultiplier. Add 0.05 to it at a time until it meets your needs.

Newer versions will do that, yes. (anything newer than Snow Leopard I think but take that with a grain of salt) Older versions will happily obliterate whatever folder you thought would be merged. Problem with that? You were holding your computer wrong.

I notice you haven't posted a log file. My guess is that an error is being thrown somewhere and it's happening at a point before MJ is calculating that engine's thrust for that info window. But it's impossible to know because nobody will post a log file. Solution: Stop proselytizing!

Throttle back in the upper atmosphere would be my suggestion at this point. All of the rockets you cited should have throttleable engines... If not (early Falcon?) then shut an engine down, unless it's a 1 part engine cluster.... Just out of curiosity though, what parts are failing and at what temperatures? It's been months since I used any part of RO other than the heat shield configs so I don't really know what it does to max temp or even if it touches it at all. Edit: I just ran a test flight with a rocket starting at 1.53 TWR ASL and. I did throttle back a bit approaching 28km (max acceleration at that point was 28m/s throttled back to 24m/s) until I passed 35km. However, I'm running a test version where max temp is capped at 700C. For you the cap is 2500 which is why I asked about specific components and failure temperatures and question whether or not RO might be adjusting those temps. Also, touching back on what Nathan said a few posts back, (sorry Nathan) but I think that assessment is both overly severe and overly simplified. Yes it's true that the stock heating model leaves something to be desired there are a variety of issues beyond whether or not stock KSP or DRE are modeling heat properly. I don't believe the specific issues being discussed are due to DRE inflicting too much heat on SRFirefox's rockets. I think he's getting a reasonable amount of heat but receiving it to rocket parts that IRL are protected against aerodynamic heating. As an example, look at the shuttle external tank's 'insulation'. Sure, it protects the propellant contents against excessive heating when the shuttle was on the launch pad, but it also protected against aerodynamic heating where it had to withstand temperatures up to 2200F (just over 1000C). Without that protection, would the tank have been able survive a launch? I don't know, but we don't even really take things like that into account when talking about problems like this. It's not just a matter of whether or not DRE is putting out too much heat or too little, it's also a matter of how much those parts should really be able to withstand. And so far, discussions on that point have been limited to looking at melting or failure temperatures of of the materials and not taking into account the measures put into effect IRL to protect rocket components made out of those materials.

Yes yes, but here's another two things: SRFirefox should still be on a density exponent of 0.85 I've been launching flight after flight for the past week with mostly density exponent 0.8 and maxTemp of 700. He should be fine...

I'm assuming Real Solar System here or there wouldn't be much point in using RO? Stock RSS config or something else? (6.4x, 10x Kerbol, etc) Also, any changes made to DRE configuration: If you have a custom.cfg file in your Deadly Reentry folder, please paste the contents of it here.

Just because I used caps does not mean I am not calm. They were for emphasis and nothing more. I wanted there to be absolutely NO (see? emphasis. Understand the difference now?) misunderstanding that DREC (acronym... so. caps.) is in anyway affecting aerodynamics. It is absolutely, positively, unequivocally and in every way impossible for it to do so.