Jump to content

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

Starwaster

By Starwaster
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Aknar

Aknar

Posted
Posted (edited)
SpaceX is planning on using the high heat tolerance of their engines as a heat shield for their reusable Falcon's, so it's entirely realistic.

Any main engine isn't made for that purpose with ablative shielding everywhere, that example doesn't convince me it isn't a cheat... :/

Having a value that cools down the engines does represent it rather realistically I guess. Since engines resist even better now to overheating, that path could be part of the solution since you can lower heat tolerance and allow the engine to be damaged and then do the repairs in space if needed or it would blow up on reentry... For that, the challenge of the mod must be increased as overheating of the engines don't occur on reentry and part overheat is nice but their heat tolerance should be lowered as well so they overheat faster, thus increasing difficulty.

It seems strange that g force is more of a problem than plasma, and even g force is set too low (at least on launch). People play this mod for added difficulty and realism, I love to have a bit of a challenge :)

Edited by Aknar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NathanKell

NathanKell

Posted
Posted
Any main engine isn't made for that purpose with ablative shielding everywhere, that example doesn't convince me it isn't a cheat... :/

Having a value that cools down the engines does represent it rather realistically I guess. Since engines resist even better now to overheating, that path could be part of the solution since you can lower heat tolerance and allow the engine to be damaged and then do the repairs in space if needed or it would blow up on reentry... For that, the challenge of the mod must be increased as overheating of the engines don't occur on reentry and part overheat is nice but their heat tolerance should be lowered as well so they overheat faster, thus increasing difficulty.

It seems strange that g force is more of a problem than plasma, and even g force is set too low (at least on launch). People play this mod for added difficulty and realism, I love to have a bit of a challenge :)

This is because, as has been stated many times on this thread, Kerbin is a pipsqueak of a planet, only a third the size of the Moon. If you want challenging reentry, I suggest you use the custom settings (and heatshields) FlowerChild made for Better Than Starting Manned.

Or just move up to Real Solar System and reenter Earth's atmosphere. :)

======

Regarding B9: Haven't experienced any problems there, but I don't use B9 much. Anyone else get this? Logs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FenrirWolf

FenrirWolf

Posted
Posted
Does anybody NOT have exploding RAPIERs with Deadly Re-entry? I tried halving the Heat Production, and it still exploded, but later. I guess I can try quartering it.

Edit: Update. Quartering the heatProduction did the trick. No more explody on take off. Though this is the first time I've tried putting together a space plane (mostly done rockets), so I may be screwing things up royally.

Haha, my RAPIERs are exploding too. Suppose I should give this fix a shot until the next update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cadde

Cadde

Posted
Posted

Would it be possible to create an area around a heat shield where it expands backwards at an angle?

I really don't know how to explain it well but a shape like <<< rather than === where objects inside that cone are protected by the heat shield.

What i am looking to do here is attach parachutes to the side of my fuel tanks, i have a heat shield facing "backwards" and on that i have placed a decoupler. The decoupler holds the payload that i want to deliver to space and the remaining fuel tank (and probe) are set to return to Kerbin, where due to the length of the thing it needs parachutes at the center of gravity because otherwise it tips over and slams the ground too hard.

At the correct angle, the parachutes seem to make it just fine, it's like threading a needle and i have managed to get both parachutes through intact but that requires a lot of aerobraking an further more, i don't even need a heat shield at that point...

In other situations i can always angle the craft in such a way that the parachutes are protected but not on all sides obviously. I would very much prefer having the parachutes on opposite sides of the craft and just having a cone of "safety" around the craft, extending backwards.

Like those shots of bullets shown a bunch of pages back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fred9001

Fred9001

Posted
Posted (edited)
FYI, per that thread it was because FlyingRaptorJesus was using a non-updated-for-23 plugin.

Fred9001: It's called "Heatshield for the Mk1-2 pod"

Theres nothing like that in my structural tab...atleast i got the 2.5m decoupler for it ^^

edit: typo

Edited by Fred9001
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taki117

Taki117

Posted
Posted (edited)

Question: Is there any way to make the inflatable heat shield deflate?

Never mind, I figured it out, if you make the following changes it will work.

From:


MODULE
{
    name = ModuleAnimateGeneric
    animationName = heatshield
    startEventGUIName = Inflate
    isOneShot = True
    staged = true
}

To:


MODULE
{
    name = ModuleAnimateGeneric
    animationName = heatshield
    startEventGUIName = Inflate
    endEventGUIName = Deflate
    isOneShot = False
    staged = true
}

I like the idea of being able to use it more than once.

Edited by Taki117
Did some digging
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babalas

Babalas

Posted
Posted
Stack-attachable inflatable heat shields with decouplers. They're not radial, but they're prtty damn close to what I think you want.

EDIT: Post number 300. THIS IS SPAAAAARTAAAAAAA!

Haha, my RAPIERs are exploding too. Suppose I should give this fix a shot until the next update.

Quartered the heat production and RAPIERs still go kaboom at ~21k up. Though it says it is due to excessive G forces so I'm not sure it is ultimately heat related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlowerChild

FlowerChild

Posted
Posted (edited)
Quartered the heat production and RAPIERs still go kaboom at ~21k up. Though it says it is due to excessive G forces so I'm not sure it is ultimately heat related.

Nathan: just in case you hadn't already figured this out, I suspect the above is due to the hardcoded search for ModuleEngines within the DR code which then special cases how the mod handles them. I ran into a similar problem with some custom BTSM engines I had created (custom in that I had created a child class off of ModuleEngines for them) where they were overheating extremely rapidly and then exploding with a G-force message due to them not being found by that code. The exploding would also occur at odd times when the heat meter hadn't even filled up on them. It also occurs to me that maybe said code is only setup to handle 1 engine module per part or something, which might be why it's not handling the 2nd one appropriately in this case.

Anyways, not entirely certain if that applies to the RAPIER as well, but the above description sounded eerily familiar to me, so I just thought I'd throw that your way in case it saves you some searching.

Edited by FlowerChild
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlowerChild

FlowerChild

Posted
Posted
Oooh, crap, forgot about this. Sorry. I'll fix this now.

FlowerChild, thanks for the headsup! That'll narrow it down. :)

EDIT: What's your class name? I'll add it while I'm adding.

Oh no worries man, I worked around it in my own code, which is why I only brought this up when the above post reminded me of what happened there. What I was doing was creating a sub-class of ModuleEngine that added in thrust corrector code ala Arctures or KIDS for the FAR integrated version I was working on. When I figured out what was causing the above problem, I just created a part module separate from the engine one to do the same thing, so it all worked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rkman

rkman

Posted
Posted
g-tolerance multiplier...sqrt(6 * impact tolerance)... you really needn't worry until, oh, 12-15Gs.

Isn't it true that g-tolerance of mechanical parts is typically much higher (up to a few orders of magnitude) than g-tolerance of living creatures?

12-15Gs for a short time seems survivable, meaning that one could lose Kerbals to g-forces due to the pod being crushed instead of the Kerbals being crushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...