About planned re-entry heating:

[SecondGuessing]

I didn't say it doesn't add difficulty. You're interpreting what I said to your convinience. I said you have to set your re-entry correctly wich takes a bit of training to understand the mechanics and that it doesn't increase the mission time as much as you described it. What is the point in a space program semi-simulator if one of the most important feature is ignored in the base game ?!

Which, like I said in my first post, simply means it's adding a tedium aspect. If all you have to do in order to survive the re-entry is equip and heat shield, drop your periapsis to 40k and then angle your ship the right way then what have you really added to the game? Because that's all you have to do for deadly re-entry.

The point about the re-entry without heatshield is just theorical, I've never seen anyone do this but I know it's possible by setting your re-entry correctly but it should need to be a pretty damn good player. As stated earlier, there's absolutly no challenge in the whole re-entry and you totally could end your flight once you have a re-entry trajectory because nothing will happen unless you do something stupid or you did something stupid in your rocket building.

And if using the same re-entry profile every time saves your ship (and it would have to, given the current atmosphere modelling of KSP) then there's still no added challenge. Re-entry might be challenging and interesting if Kerbin had weather systems that you would have to navigate, but given a static atmosphere I fail to see how it does anything other than add another thing to get bored of (in the same way launches become boring after your 100th).

I hope you understand the difference between MJ-esque feature which are more like a gadget and re-entry heating which is something happening naturally and will add a bit more challenge in a part of the mission where there's none.

I understand the difference, but I fail to understand why one is railed at by people and the other is praised, despite the fact both are equally as realistic.

[Moon Goddess]

What on Earth is a 'true' gamer?

See this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[CalculusWarrior]

I suppose what we're all missing here is that reentry heating is simply a way to add more explosions to the game! What's more kerbal than that?

[TheDarkStar]

I understand the difference, but I fail to understand why one is railed at by people and the other is praised, despite the fact both are equally as realistic.

One takes away from some of the features of the game (MJ does all or most of the piloting for you), while the other adds a feature (reentry makes you have to be careful about how you reenter).

[PakledHostage]

Which, like I said in my first post, simply means it's adding a tedium aspect. If all you have to do in order to survive the re-entry is equip and heat shield, drop your periapsis to 40k and then angle your ship the right way then what have you really added to the game? Because that's all you have to do for deadly re-entry.

And what if all you have to do in order to survive launch is equip your spacecraft with MOAR boosters, point your ship in the right direction and raise your periapsis above 70 km? The point is that getting to orbit is one of the central challenges of the game. There is currently no challenge to returning from orbit, even though (much like with reaching orbit) there is such a challenge in real life.

Depending on how re-entry is eventually implemented, there could be more to it than just setting your periapsis at 40 km and waiting for the pretty "flames" to subside. For example, here's a plot of the re-entry corridor for my old re-entry heat mod:

Notice that the survivable corridor was a function of re-entry interface angle and speed, not just periapsis altitude? Even re-entering from hyperbolic trajectories was possible using that mod, you just had to be precise in setting up your approach.

Unfortunately, I had to retire that mod because the game's current visual effects aren't consistent with the real-world physics that the mod was based on; there would have been too many complaints about the inconsistencies if I'd left it up.

Fortunately, r4m0n filled the void with his deadly re-entry mod, but hopefully the game's visual effects will be improved along with the physical effects when re-entry is finally implemented. It will add meaningful challenge to the game.

[Phawks]

I really don't see why there's so much controversy around reentry heating. It's a basic, necessary factor for all space-related operations. Why don't we have rock-solid joints between all the parts in a craft? Why do we have to add struts and prevent catastrophic structural failures? In both of these cases, it's because physics are accurately simulated in KSP to add that extra level of complexity to make the act of successfully designing, constructing, and launching a spacecraft that much more rewarding. Atmospheric heating is no different. It serves a legitimate, realistic function and provides for a more rewarding experience in testing the durability of a spacecraft.

Besides, there will be a significant margin for error in such a feature; if there's something KSP does well for novices, it's the amount of forgiveness it gives to errors. In real life, if there's any significant vibration or wobble in a craft during ascent, that craft breaks apart in its own slipstream. I can do triple backflips at ten thousand meters and 275 m/s airspeed with six SRBs all lit and still continue to orbit afterward. I can't see KSP killing your kerbals in an aerobrake around Jool because one of your SRBs nicked the heatshield during separation on ascent. I do see KSP killing your kerbals if you throw a tomato underneath your seat and try to hit a five kilometer perigee at 36 km/s.

This game may be complex, it may be difficult, it may be challenging, but it is definitely forgiving of errors and provides significant satisfaction after surviving the tests and trials of extraplanetary operations.

[EleSigma]

I really don't see why there's so much controversy around reentry heating.

There isn't really a big controversy, it's just a few people that don't want re-entry for some reason. The devs have said they're going to add it, so that's that until they say other-wise, that's what I like about this dev team, they try their best not to stray from their original plan of the game.

But I think you're right too. I'm pretty sure the devs have said in the past that re-entry wouldn't be like hitting a brick wall, you would have to be trying to re-enter at insane speeds and crazy angling for it to eat through your heat-shield and fry your ship.

[lucidLemon]

There isn't really a big controversy, it's just a few people that don't want re-entry for some reason. The devs have said they're going to add it, so that's that until they say other-wise, that's what I like about this dev team, they try their best not to stray from their original plan of the game.

But I think you're right too. I'm pretty sure the devs have said in the past that re-entry wouldn't be like hitting a brick wall, you would have to be trying to re-enter at insane speeds and crazy angling for it to eat through your heat-shield and fry your ship.

They've also specifically mentioned reentry not requiring a heatshield part. They know it's a bad idea to turn KSP into a game that requires slapping heatshields onto everything in order to do anything.

[Phawks]

They've also specifically mentioned reentry not requiring a heatshield part. They know it's a bad idea to turn KSP into a game that requires slapping heatshields onto everything in order to do anything.

I can see this becoming a PartModule issue. Parts will have basic heat tolerances as they have, and possibly an integrated heatshield as defined by a PartModule. This would make the most sense given the presence of spaceplane parts with cosmetic texturing for heatshields. It would also have a vectoring definition to tie into the algorithm that currently governs plasma trail creation/orientation. I'm curious as to when exactly we'll see this further development, given that it was partially done but cut to cosmetics for the 0.19 release. I partially expected it in 0.20, but given the Krakensnackin' Squad got on the server and development planning fronts, it doesn't surprise me that this was a smaller update in terms of obvious content. I'd like to hear exactly what progress (if any) they've made since the dev postings around the time of 0.19.

[UNSC]

I never liked the, "Make it toggle able" argument. Games should be at least to some degree consistent.

[Qumefox]

I never liked the, "Make it toggle able" argument. Games should be at least to some degree consistent.

Well some people refuse to play games unless they have god mode, etc type of play that removes all challenge and has zero repercussions. KSP's playerbase has it's fair share of these people, as evidenced by this thread.

Personally I don't give a crap if these people want to easy mode their way through everything they do. That's their prerogative. However I don't really like it when they start demanding that a rather technical game, which KSP is, start getting dumbed down just for them, at the expense of what everyone else wants.

One of the things I love about KSP is that unlike most other games, it's NOT designed for the lowest common denominator like pretty much everything else. Squad has a specific vision for how KSP should end up, and so far, i'm proud of them for sticking with it and making a game i'll play for a looooooong time.. instead of just caving and dumbing down the game to appeal to the hordes of 'flavor of the month' gamers out there to get as many short term sales as possible, at the expense of actually having a product any body actually wants to play for long, which is how most publishers operate.

[MR4Y]

I can see this becoming a PartModule issue. Parts will have basic heat tolerances as they have, and possibly an integrated heatshield as defined by a PartModule. This would make the most sense given the presence of spaceplane parts with cosmetic texturing for heatshields. It would also have a vectoring definition to tie into the algorithm that currently governs plasma trail creation/orientation. I'm curious as to when exactly we'll see this further development, given that it was partially done but cut to cosmetics for the 0.19 release. I partially expected it in 0.20, but given the Krakensnackin' Squad got on the server and development planning fronts, it doesn't surprise me that this was a smaller update in terms of obvious content. I'd like to hear exactly what progress (if any) they've made since the dev postings around the time of 0.19.

And considering the limited part count and features of KSP at the present moment, I don't think this will be implemented any time soon or even in 0.20.1. But, since SQUAD sometimes do things...Maybe it can appear on the next version, handicaping gameplay due to parts not being ready for it yet.

[bsalis]

Personally I don't think it's needed. Would not be surprised if they drop it. If they do it, then it will be in the aero rewrite.

People seems to be talking about Kerbin re entry. However Jool/Eve/Duna is where you get much higher forces. How this will be balanced I am not sure.

[destroyer2012]

If you don't like re-entry then just end flight once your ships get close to kerbin.

Right now it is way too easy to land on planets that have an atmosphere. All you do is aerobrake at some ridiculous speed and then have the atmosphere slow you down until you can deploy parachutes. All re-entry will do is make it more challenging to land on planets with atmospheres, which are the more interesting planets anyway, so why shouldn't it be more challenging to land on them?

In addition, the standard trajectory to Jool involves aerocapture in Jool's atmosphere which, combined with Jool's large SOI make trips to Jool require essentially the same rockets as one would use to get to Duna. Don't you think it should be harder to travel to such an interesting, rewarding destination?

[CalculusWarrior]

Reentering the atmosphere is not what I'm worried about, I'm just worried what aerobraking around Jool will do to my fragile interplanetary craft with its volatile nuclear engines. I wonder if we should do a half aerobraking maneuver, and then engineer in extra delta-v to finish the burn? Or maybe there will be massive heat shields to put on front of our rockets?

[Phawks]

Reentering the atmosphere is not what I'm worried about, I'm just worried what aerobraking around Jool will do to my fragile interplanetary craft with its volatile nuclear engines. I wonder if we should do a half aerobraking maneuver, and then engineer in extra delta-v to finish the burn? Or maybe there will be massive heat shields to put on front of our rockets?

I remember a mothership-type addon craft for Orbiter that had a deployable heatshield designed solely for aerocapture. It was essentially a giant, mechanized, beefed-up space blanket that came out and wrapped the craft in a cocoon to protect it. I can't remember the name of it for the life of me. I haven't played Orbiter in at least two years.

[samstarman5]

Reentering the atmosphere is not what I'm worried about, I'm just worried what aerobraking around Jool will do to my fragile interplanetary craft with its volatile nuclear engines. I wonder if we should do a half aerobraking maneuver, and then engineer in extra delta-v to finish the burn? Or maybe there will be massive heat shields to put on front of our rockets?

If you have ever seen the movie 2010, then the answer lies there. If you haven't, then you would do yourself a service to watch it. If you think Squad is going to implement re-entry heat without providing parts to deal with it then you are both not paying attention and not thinking highly of Squad's creativity. There is already at least one heat shield part made to test for weight and stability factor. It just waits to be released to us when it becomes relevant, along with other styles of parts to provide for entry and aerobraking/aerocapture.

Frankly, I look forward to seeing what non-heat shield parts including command and habitation modules can be used in place of heat shields in order to bring Derp Kerman back to Kerbin. The fireworks show is sure to be amazing and exciting.

[Phawks]

Frankly, I look forward to seeing what non-heat shield parts including command and habitation modules can be used in place of heat shields in order to bring Derp Kerman back to Kerbin. The fireworks show is sure to be amazing and exciting.

Fabric heat shield woven with primer cord and firecrackers.

*Puts on sunglasses*

*Grabs marshmallows*

[Scotius]

I'm a bit apprehensive about re-entry heat myself. Not because i don't want a challenge - i'm more afraid i will have to completely change the philosophy my crafts are built around. They tend to be overengineered, with redundant systems and many droppable tanks so i can drop dead weight on the fly. I guess it's time to start separating my ships into two categories: deep space, non-aerodynamic and rather fragile and aerodynamic, sturdier but less effective ones.

[karolus10]

Reentry heat will be less challenging than in real life because of smaller orbital speeds, so it's nothing to worry about .

[Vostok]

I thought about decal heat shields. You know, how flags have been made so you can import textures onto your craft? Why can players not soon add a 'black tiled' decal to the bottom of their ships in order to save on parts and look cooler? It would work nicer for spaceplanes, too, as there wouldn't be large awkward areas to cover with a premade heat shield.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

I thought about decal heat shields. You know, how flags have been made so you can import textures onto your craft? Why can players not soon add a 'black tiled' decal to the bottom of their ships in order to save on parts and look cooler? It would work nicer for spaceplanes, too, as there wouldn't be large awkward areas to cover with a premade heat shield.

I like this idea!

[rodion_herrera]

I thought about decal heat shields. You know, how flags have been made so you can import textures onto your craft? Why can players not soon add a 'black tiled' decal to the bottom of their ships in order to save on parts and look cooler? It would work nicer for spaceplanes, too, as there wouldn't be large awkward areas to cover with a premade heat shield.

Yes. I'm really fascinated by the X-20 DynaSoar and I wanted to make a KSP version. Then while I was building it, it seemed to lack the aura of the X-20 due to the fact that it isn't all black (the entire skin of the X-20 has ablative coating). So I really like this idea of decals for exterior of spacecraft parts--would make black X-20's or underbellies of some spaceplanes look more "logical".

[karolus10]

Idea of covering surfaces with heat-shield tiles (but more like painting/coating them rather than placing single tiles to save on part count ) is quite good concept, especially that not all parts need heat shield applied on them or they need tiles in different places depending from application.

Also 2in1 fairings/areo shell with integrated heat-shield would be not bad idea to use

As well like inflatable heat-shields, that could contain in case with similar size like large (2.5m) RCS tank shield that will expand to 3-4x larger diameter.

Even larger inflatable heat-shield could be useful for areo-breaking larger (and longer) ships like ones used for crewed missions to gas giants.

Edited May 26, 2013 by karolus10

[Szkeptik]

I hope it won't screw up aerobraking maneuvers. The most fuel efficient way to get to my Laythe base. Brake around Jool, brake around Laythe.