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

[jenden]

I'm having a problem with sudden command pod explosion on what should be (as far as I can tell) a rather safe aerobreaking maneuver. I've got a small vessel coming transferring from Mun to Kerbin with a Kerbin PE of 53k. In my past experience it seems like this shouldn't be an issue (whether it's useful as an aerobreak or not is questionable, but it illustrates my issue well), but now on my way in at 63k altitude my command pod suddenly starts heating up at a rate of multiple hundreds of degrees per second and immediately explodes due to heat. Similar 40k reentry from LKO with a heat shield and around the 50-60km mark the pod just goes boom. In both cases I don't get any atmospheric heat effects before the explosion.

Removing DRE seems to restore sane stock behavior, so I'm guessing its not another mod causing the issue in isolation (though it could always be a conflict somewhere).

I read somewhere that removing the Physics.cfg file helps fix some things, so I tried that. This actually gave me the exact opposite behavior. I could come in with an extremely sharp reentry and see no heat increase on any parts. Using steam to verify files I get the original (pre-delete) Physics.cfg file back.

Potentially useful information:

Linux 64bit install

Physics.cfg that causes immediate explosion (file that came with distribution)

Physics.cfg that doesn't seem to heat up anything (generated if I delete the above file)

My GameData folder (for mod list)

Player.log

[Starwaster]

I'm having a problem with sudden command pod explosion on what should be (as far as I can tell) a rather safe aerobreaking maneuver. I've got a small vessel coming transferring from Mun to Kerbin with a Kerbin PE of 53k. In my past experience it seems like this shouldn't be an issue (whether it's useful as an aerobreak or not is questionable, but it illustrates my issue well), but now on my way in at 63k altitude my command pod suddenly starts heating up at a rate of multiple hundreds of degrees per second and immediately explodes due to heat. Similar 40k reentry from LKO with a heat shield and around the 50-60km mark the pod just goes boom. In both cases I don't get any atmospheric heat effects before the explosion.

Removing DRE seems to restore sane stock behavior, so I'm guessing its not another mod causing the issue in isolation (though it could always be a conflict somewhere).

I read somewhere that removing the Physics.cfg file helps fix some things, so I tried that. This actually gave me the exact opposite behavior. I could come in with an extremely sharp reentry and see no heat increase on any parts. Using steam to verify files I get the original (pre-delete) Physics.cfg file back.

Potentially useful information:

Linux 64bit install

Physics.cfg that causes immediate explosion (file that came with distribution)

Physics.cfg that doesn't seem to heat up anything (generated if I delete the above file)

My GameData folder (for mod list)

Player.log

Do not delete your physics.cfg file, especially not ever. If you see other people suggest this in other threads, smack them and correct them.

As to lack of reentry FX, I don't know, unless you've edited the DeadlyReentry.cfg file. I get reentry FX very shortly after the capsule hits atmo.

FAR is another mod that affects physics so try updating to the latest dev version. Keep in mind that the Mk1-2 has no shield itself beyond what you added to the bottom, so make sure that shield is between you and reentry. You can get away with a pitch of no more than 14deg (if you go for a lifting reentry for example). More than that and the pod risks being exposed.

[Jovzin]

Can somebody help me with adding shield to the part ?

I am trying to add ablative shield to one part of a Shuttle.

In cfg I have this :

MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		ablativeResource = AblativeShielding
		lossExp = -6000
		lossConst = 5
		pyrolysisLossFactor = 120
		reentryConductivity = 0.01
		ablationTempThresh = 500
		depletedMaxTemp = 1200
	}

	RESOURCE
	{
		name = AblativeShielding
		amount = 1000
		maxAmount = 1000
	}

And in the game that part has no ablative shield

What am I doing wrong ?

Edited August 22, 2015 by Jovzin

[Starwaster]

Can somebody help me with adding shield to the part ?

I am trying to add ablative shield to one part of a Shuttle.

In cfg I have this :

MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleHeatShield
        ablativeResource = AblativeShielding
        lossExp = -6000
        lossConst = 5
        pyrolysisLossFactor = 120
        reentryConductivity = 0.01
        ablationTempThresh = 500
        depletedMaxTemp = 1200
    }

    RESOURCE
    {
        name = AblativeShielding
        amount = 1000
        maxAmount = 1000
    }

And in the game that part has no ablative shield

What am I doing wrong ?

Instead of ablative shielding I'd suggest either doing it the way the stock game does it and increase thermal mass (using thermalMassModifier) combined with high emissiveConstant or do it the way Deadly Reentry does it with very low skin thermal mass + high emissive + low skin-internal conduction. (the DRE way emphasizes a very shallow shuttle style reentry that is punishing on reentries that are too steep)

Either method avoids adding extra mass which is unnecessary in a space plane.

However, if you still do want to do it as an ablative shield, I don't see anything wrong in your syntax above. That should be adding a shield and resource. So there's something else wrong in the config and I'd need to see the entire config to know what.

Are you adding it to the actual part's config file or via Module Manager patch? If MM then make sure that you specified the correct name.

[jenden]

Ok, I guess DRE is just more deadly than I remember. Last time I was playing (around the 1.0 release) I seem to remember that even with DRE I could have a re-usable lander that cycle between LKO and Mun/Minmus. I would aerobreak in the upper Kerbin atmosphere (I think I was using ~50km or so at the time) then circularize to 100km or so after shedding some velocity. Hitting the atmosphere pointing directly retrograde usually concentrated the heat on the engine which had a sufficiently high max temp to handle it. The engine is still handling the heat OK, but as mentioned above the crew capsule is heating up and exploding before I hit 60km.

With this kind of setup a heat shield isn't going to make much sense since I still want the engine after slowing down a bit. Is there a better/more correct method of doing this kind of aerobreak? The deepest I've managed to get in anything without a heat shield is about 65KM, which wasn't enough to shed a useful amount of velocity.

I tried removing FAR entirely to make sure that wasn't conflicting, but no change in behavior.

[Starwaster]

Ok, I guess DRE is just more deadly than I remember. Last time I was playing (around the 1.0 release) I seem to remember that even with DRE I could have a re-usable lander that cycle between LKO and Mun/Minmus. I would aerobreak in the upper Kerbin atmosphere (I think I was using ~50km or so at the time) then circularize to 100km or so after shedding some velocity. Hitting the atmosphere pointing directly retrograde usually concentrated the heat on the engine which had a sufficiently high max temp to handle it. The engine is still handling the heat OK, but as mentioned above the crew capsule is heating up and exploding before I hit 60km.

With this kind of setup a heat shield isn't going to make much sense since I still want the engine after slowing down a bit. Is there a better/more correct method of doing this kind of aerobreak? The deepest I've managed to get in anything without a heat shield is about 65KM, which wasn't enough to shed a useful amount of velocity.

I tried removing FAR entirely to make sure that wasn't conflicting, but no change in behavior.

Ok, what sounds strange here is that you shouldn't be getting convection heating on the capsule itself unless it's exposed. Are you able to keep the entire ship between it and the shockwave? And it's still getting heating?

[Jovzin]

Instead of ablative shielding I'd suggest either doing it the way the stock game does it and increase thermal mass (using thermalMassModifier) combined with high emissiveConstant or do it the way Deadly Reentry does it with very low skin thermal mass + high emissive + low skin-internal conduction. (the DRE way emphasizes a very shallow shuttle style reentry that is punishing on reentries that are too steep)

Either method avoids adding extra mass which is unnecessary in a space plane.

However, if you still do want to do it as an ablative shield, I don't see anything wrong in your syntax above. That should be adding a shield and resource. So there's something else wrong in the config and I'd need to see the entire config to know what.

Are you adding it to the actual part's config file or via Module Manager patch? If MM then make sure that you specified the correct name.

Thank you very much for help.

It is working now I put the code a bit higher in the chain of MODULES and RESOURCES and now it is wokring.

But I want to ask you one more question. Is it possible to turn off the black texture we get when the shield is nearly empty ? Cuase right now after reentry nearly the whole shuttle is black

Wings turned black, cargo bay turned black, nose and cockpit turned black

Thank you

[jenden]

Ok, what sounds strange here is that you shouldn't be getting convection heating on the capsule itself unless it's exposed. Are you able to keep the entire ship between it and the shockwave? And it's still getting heating?

I believe so. Its a fairly basic 1.25m stick with parachute and MK1 capsule on top, some universal storage wedges, fuel tank, landing gear and engine. The one thing that I'm starting to get suspicious of is that I've got some non-physical parts attached to the capsule, including a (retracted) antenna. I'm not sure how physicsless parts interact with reentry heating... looking at the thermals they aren't heating up themselves, but if the parent part (the capsule in this case) is inheriting the expanded profile then that might explain things.

[jenden]

On second thought that shouldn't be the issue. The exact same vessel with the fuel tank (and everything attached to it) replaced with a heat shield worked OK. I'd assume that if the antenna or other parts sticking out caused a problem they would cause the same problem with just a heat shield underneath.

[Starwaster]

On second thought that shouldn't be the issue. The exact same vessel with the fuel tank (and everything attached to it) replaced with a heat shield worked OK. I'd assume that if the antenna or other parts sticking out caused a problem they would cause the same problem with just a heat shield underneath.

The context menu for each part will tell you how much convection heating a part is taking. (both the total amount of energy in joules and the maximum heating rate in watts)

Right click each part immediately after hitting atmosphere and see what the different parts are taking. (if the heat is coming from somewhere other than convection heating then you'll need to enable the thermal debugging using alt-F12 for the stock thermal data)

Edit: And about non-physical parts: Those receive reentry heating the same as anything else in the same manner as anything else. That's stock behavior. (the only time non-physical parts didn't receive reentry heating was in the early days of DRE)

Edited August 23, 2015 by Starwaster

[Gryphon]

On second thought that shouldn't be the issue. The exact same vessel with the fuel tank (and everything attached to it) replaced with a heat shield worked OK. I'd assume that if the antenna or other parts sticking out caused a problem they would cause the same problem with just a heat shield underneath.

Have you compared behavior with a stock tank and engine?

[jenden]

There was an update to the stock bug fix mod that mentioned fixing a heating issue, and it looks like that might have fixed things for me. I haven't had a chance to do much testing, but a very simple test of putting something into a very deep descent showed promising results (pod didn't explode until after engine and fuel tank).

[BlackSoldierB]

My space station is generation a lot of exceptions.

[EXC 20:14:25.583] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	DeadlyReentry.ModuleHeatShield.FixedUpdate ()
[EXC 20:14:25.583] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	DeadlyReentry.ModuleHeatShield.FixedUpdate ()

The .craft is located here.

Is there something i can do to fix this?

I tried to remove every ModuleHeatShield in my save, but it didn't work.

Edit: Found something. When removing the Life Boats from USI it won't happen anymore.

Edited August 28, 2015 by BlackSoldierB

[NathanKell]

The new ModuleHeatShield module doesn't expect old-style configs and will throw. Starwaster, would it be possible to have the module recognize an old/outdated config and either set defaults or disable itself?

[BlackSoldierB]

The new ModuleHeatShield module doesn't expect old-style configs and will throw. Starwaster, would it be possible to have the module recognize an old/outdated config and either set defaults or disable itself?

But if i would create an new ship with the USI Life boat, this error won't happen again?

[NathanKell]

? I'm talking about if there are part configs that were designed for pre-7.x DeadlyReentry.

[Starwaster]

The new ModuleHeatShield module doesn't expect old-style configs and will throw. Starwaster, would it be possible to have the module recognize an old/outdated config and either set defaults or disable itself?

It's probably just missing the resource assignment. That will cause NRE spam. That should be easy enough to patch over. Can do it in the MM configs too. (which actually I thought that I was....)

[BlackSoldierB]

I deleted/renamed the DRE.cfg from the UmbraSpaceIndustries/SrvPack folder. This fixes the exceptions.

[Starwaster]

I deleted/renamed the DRE.cfg from the UmbraSpaceIndustries/SrvPack folder. This fixes the exceptions.

That's probably bad for the functionality of the part. I would avoid trying a reentry in that pod

Edit:

Try downloading this file and copying it over your existing DeadlyReentry.cfg file

Then reinstate the DRE.cfg file you deleted from USI and see if you get the NRE or if it comes back and let me know here please.

(just right click link and 'save as')

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Starwaster/DeadlyReentry/Dev/DeadlyReentry/DeadlyReentry.cfg

Edited August 29, 2015 by Starwaster

[xXIndestructibleEVAXx]

Starwaster, I think I might of found a bug.

If I use this with persistent rotation, there is no G damage added to kerbals. I tested with and without PR, and without it, it worked fine, but with it, I could get more than 16 G's without even the warning.

[Starwaster]

Starwaster, I think I might of found a bug.

If I use this with persistent rotation, there is no G damage added to kerbals. I tested with and without PR, and without it, it worked fine, but with it, I could get more than 16 G's without even the warning.

You know the routine.

Need logs (output_log.txt for Windows. player.log for Mac/Linux).

Need ModuleManager.ConfigCache file

No ksp.log file

And how long were those 16 G's sustained for?

[Svm420]

Starwaster, I think I might of found a bug.

If I use this with persistent rotation, there is no G damage added to kerbals. I tested with and without PR, and without it, it worked fine, but with it, I could get more than 16 G's without even the warning.

So that's why I never saw any G issues . Thanks for finding that.

[Trolllception]

That's probably bad for the functionality of the part. I would avoid trying a reentry in that pod

Edit:

Try downloading this file and copying it over your existing DeadlyReentry.cfg file

Then reinstate the DRE.cfg file you deleted from USI and see if you get the NRE or if it comes back and let me know here please.

(just right click link and 'save as')

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Starwaster/DeadlyReentry/Dev/DeadlyReentry/DeadlyReentry.cfg

I gave this CFG file a shot for my persistent save and I am no longer receiving NRE's on my giant space stations. Thank you!! The thought of rebuilding everything wasn't ideal. And I am guessing this is just a strange coincidence but my space station is now able to transmit science data once again.

[xXIndestructibleEVAXx]

You know the routine.

Need logs (output_log.txt for Windows. player.log for Mac/Linux).

Need ModuleManager.ConfigCache file

No ksp.log file

And how long were those 16 G's sustained for?

Um, how should I post these logs? I know where they are, i just don't know how.

EDIT: Also, I'm beginning to doubt myself now. I only pulled 16 G's for a few moments, and after more testing, it appears that kerbals are very resilient to G force.

Edited August 29, 2015 by xXIndestructibleEVAXx

[Starwaster]

And I am guessing this is just a strange coincidence but my space station is now able to transmit science data once again.

Or not. An error in one place can stop code from executing that would have normally executed after the module that threw the exception. FixedUpdate() runs on everything that implements that method in its code. (for all MonoBehaviour objects that is)

The science transmission code likely is found in FixedUpdate and probably got interrupted.

Um, how should I post these logs? I know where they are, i just don't know how.

EDIT: Also, I'm beginning to doubt myself now. I only pulled 16 G's for a few moments, and after more testing, it appears that kerbals are very resilient to G force.

Dropbox is a good place to put them. Create an account at dropbox.com and (this part is optional but advisable) download the client for your computer and install it. A Dropbox folder will be created on your computer that syncs with your Dropbox account. Anything you drop in that folder will be copied to your Dropbox and any other computers that sync with it. Right click the file and click share and it will copy a link to your clipboard which you can then paste here. Very useful for sharing med-largish files whether they be logs or mod files. I use it all the time to share configs that I create for people. I've also hosted very small mods on it.

To further test out the G force issue, try downloading this and copying it into your DeadlyReentry folder.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Starwaster/DeadlyReentry/Dev/DeadlyReentry/DefaultSettings.cfg

Then edit it and change crewGMin to 0

If all goes according to plan, your Kerbals will know pain, they will know fear and then they will die.

(Don't forget to change crewGMin back to 5 when you're done testing!!!)

Edit: BTW, even on the default setting, dropping them from straight up 150km or so is a good way to trigger the warning. (in KSP 1.0.4 esp with DRE, it's also a good way to incinerate the capsule so may not be a valid test of G Force damage)