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

[GavinZac]

Ohh I see thanks. But what cfg is this line in?

 string mainDeployState = (string)rCType.GetField("deploymentState").GetValue(realChute);
                string secDeployState = (string)rCType.GetField("secDepState").GetValue(realChute);

Also... my other inquiries about adding a heatshield to Bobcat's Orion. Or adding heatsheilds in general without adding a heatsheild part. For instance it says for the stock 1 man pods its built in... I don't use stock. I need every capsule that has a modeled heatshield to function as such. If they don't already. Forgive my ignorance.

It's not a config, it's 'real' C# code, part of the plugin. You can use the fixed DLL file he linked to, or wait for Nathan to fix it tomorrow night.

[Starwaster]

This fix allows the deployed chute to get heated very fast even the chute pack itself is behind the heat-shield. This will disallow players to use parachute during re-entry, if you do, the chute will get heated very fast and might explode several seconds after.

Actually, more than that. It prevents 280 megabyte+ output_log.txt files

I couldn't figure out why my spaceplane was getting more and more sluggish approaching the runway and then my entire computer nearly ground to a halt. Then the whole thing sort of froze above the water (approaching shoreline) and I could hear but not see the kersplash! as my plane slammed into the water at about 120m/s because I couldn't take steps to slow it down. Had to alt-F4 and when I tried to open output_log.txt, Notepad++ complained that it couldn't open files that big

Starwaster, thanks so much! I'll post an official v4.4 tomorrow night (I hope) but until then I encourage you all to use Starwaster's fix.

You're welcome!

I just downloaded Deadly Reentry for the first time and ive had RealChutes ( just updated it ). So what is this fix for? Is is crucial? ( if so, what cfg is that line in? I cant find it in DR or RealChute )

And what brings me here... now sorry if this is a dead horse im beating, but how do I add heatshield functionality to pods? If I have too.. for instance BobCat's Orion pod.. the built in heatshieid on that is just a texture so it will not function, yes? How do I tweak that?

Not sure if the Orion has a shield or not...

If it does not, this will add it: (if you have ModuleManager)

This is for stock, not RSS. If you're using RSS, let me know...

@PART[Orion_Pod]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		ablative = AblativeShielding
		loss
		{
			key = 650 0
			key = 1000 64
			key = 3000 80
		}
		dissipation
		{
				key = 300 0
				key = 500 180
		}
	}
}

Edited March 6, 2014 by Starwaster

[HoneyFox]

Actually, more than that. It prevents 280 megabyte+ output_log.txt files

I couldn't figure out why my spaceplane was getting more and more sluggish approaching the runway and then my entire computer nearly ground to a halt. Then the whole thing sort of froze above the water (approaching shoreline) and I could hear but not see the kersplash! as my plane slammed into the water at about 120m/s because I couldn't take steps to slow it down. Had to alt-F4 and when I tried to open output_log.txt, Notepad++ complained that it couldn't open files that big

You're welcome!

Not sure if the Orion has a shield or not...

If it does not, this will add it: (if you have ModuleManager)

This is for stock, not RSS. If you're using RSS, let me know...

@PART[Orion_Pod]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		ablative = AblativeShielding
		loss
		{
			key = 650 0
			key = 1000 64
			key = 3000 80
		}
		dissipation
		{
				key = 300 0
				key = 500 180
		}
	}
}

Yes, lots of exceptions were thrown and it spams the I/O quite a lot.

[Motokid600]

Starwaster that is perfect thanks so much.

[DasBananenbrot]

Thanks for the fix Starwaster

[Starwaster]

Yes, lots of exceptions were thrown and it spams the I/O quite a lot.

Many Kerbals... Died to bring us this information.

[frisch]

This may have already been posted in the 100+ pages here, but can double heat shields be used? Will the first burn away and leave the second (for interplanetary real-scale reentries).

[AbeS]

Yup, it can be done. Looks ugly though I would, for aesthetics, use for example: Pod -> Shield -> UP Decoupler -> Shield -> UP Decoupler

[Mulbin]

For some reason I don't have the UP25 decoupler... I have the other 4 in game but that one is missing. I've tried changing it to start tech but its just not showing up in game. Is this a known bug?

EDIT - Never mind! It was the Vet-tech mod overriding and putting it somewhere silly on the tree.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Mulbin

[blackheart612]

Speaking of Aesthetics...

[pet1100]

I have a question.

With the KKII surpluse Cockpit one Solid fuel booster (the small one) and the Mk16 parachute. I can't seem to land without blowing it all up and lossing my kerbal.

max attitude 5km

I loss my booster when the parachute unfold.

speed at crash down lesser then 10 m/s

I use the BTSM mod. But I do not know if it conflict with each other.

So how do I avoid lossing a kerbal?

[Starwaster]

I have a question.

With the KKII surpluse Cockpit one Solid fuel booster (the small one) and the Mk16 parachute. I can't seem to land without blowing it all up and lossing my kerbal.

max attitude 5km

I loss my booster when the parachute unfold.

speed at crash down lesser then 10 m/s

I use the BTSM mod. But I do not know if it conflict with each other.

So how do I avoid lossing a kerbal?

What's a KKII cockpit? Is it lacking heat shielding? Wait... you're making it down to the planet surface and you're at less than 10m/s so... this really doesn't sound like a Deadly Reentry mod problem.... need more information or maybe you need to post in a different thread....

Edited March 7, 2014 by Starwaster

[Tery215]

so I was wondering

how do I make this work w/ FAR?

to be specific, I want re-entries to be as difficult if not less difficult than w/o FAR

Scott Manley said in the comments section something about configuring DR to make it undeadly, but don't know how much

[Starwaster]

so I was wondering

how do I make this work w/ FAR?

to be specific, I want re-entries to be as difficult if not less difficult than w/o FAR

Scott Manley said in the comments section something about configuring DR to make it undeadly, but don't know how much

Uhm there's really not anything to do to make it work with FAR. If your parts in general work with FAR then you're good to go.

The only thing I can think of is that when you're reentering, your orientation may provide more or less lift. More lift means less g-force stress on your crew and ship. It also means more heat though IIRC, it should mean less because you're not plowing directly into the superheated shockwave. But in DREC it means marginally more heat because the heatshield reflects less heat the more you deviate from oriented directly into your velocity vector.

But what the heck do any of us know really, we're all just armchair astronauts.... Just try to keep your capsule oriented so it's travelling backwards with its bottom pointed in the direction you're going and you'll slow down faster and your shield will reflect more heat. If your g-force meter starts climbing too quickly then tilt the nose up a bit.

[undercoveryankee]

so I was wondering

how do I make this work w/ FAR?

to be specific, I want re-entries to be as difficult if not less difficult than w/o FAR

Scott Manley said in the comments section something about configuring DR to make it undeadly, but don't know how much

Some designs have lower drag with FAR than in stock, so they go deeper into the atmosphere at higher speeds from the same entry angle and end up using more heat shield. So Manley backed off some of the settings to give himself more flexibility.

With FAR and stock DRE settings, I can do Minmus returns with the built-in heat shield on the stock single-seat capsule, and with one 2.5m heat shield on a three-seat capsule. If you try it with stock DRE settings and you find that you can't land a design you want to be able to land, edit GameData/DeadlyReentry/DeadlyReentry.cfg and reduce "heatMultiplier" to taste.

[SeventhArchitect]

Oh mah gad. You know, I thought this would be a cool mod, but it doesn't really work properly whenever your ship reorients itself, mid-reentry, putting the heat shield opposite the incoming fiery death. Seriously. I made a ship while using this mod, deorbited it, and then the first that happens is that right there. Figuring it was an error on my part (hah), I put the heat shield on the otherside, got the same damn results....

The good news is that after I quit this mod, I haven't lost a kerbal since. Because every time one dies, or gets stranded, I reverse the game back to before it's launched.

[taniwha]

SeventhArchitect: The mod is working as designed. It is the aerodynamics (or lack thereof) of your ship that is causing it to flip.

[TerLoki]

Enjoying this mod so far, adds another neat element and challenge to spacecraft design. Of course it means my KSO program is pretty much grounded, since my first try at landing after installing DRE resulted in a rather spectacular chain of explosions. Not that I could bring it down without parachutes and splashdown in the first place... .

[Drew Kerman]

has there been any discussion regarding the radial chutes exploding during re-entry? It happened to me when I placed them high atop a Mk1 capsule - I monitored their temperature and they got overheated to 1000+C while batteries lower along the side never topped 270C and the capsule itself only hit like 405C. In fact by the time the re-entry heat effect started the radials were already upwards of 600C! I saw the same thing happen to Scott Manley in his Interstellar Quest videos. At first I thought this was something to do with incompatibility between DREC and the RealChute radials I was using, until I realized Manley was using the stock radials. Nose cone chute works fine atop the Mk1 capsule, and I did successfully use radials but I did so by placing them on the flat top of an 2.5m AIES probe body - kinda kills the point of radials if you need to stick them on top of things for them to survive re-entry...

[Starwaster]

has there been any discussion regarding the radial chutes exploding during re-entry? It happened to me when I placed them high atop a Mk1 capsule - I monitored their temperature and they got overheated to 1000+C while batteries lower along the side never topped 270C and the capsule itself only hit like 405C. In fact by the time the re-entry heat effect started the radials were already upwards of 600C! I saw the same thing happen to Scott Manley in his Interstellar Quest videos. At first I thought this was something to do with incompatibility between DREC and the RealChute radials I was using, until I realized Manley was using the stock radials. Nose cone chute works fine atop the Mk1 capsule, and I did successfully use radials but I did so by placing them on the flat top of an 2.5m AIES probe body - kinda kills the point of radials if you need to stick them on top of things for them to survive re-entry...

I'm not experiencing what you are. My radials don't explode if something is between them and the shockwave. It might be time to start posting pictures of your craft and evaluating your design.

[Camacha]

Oh mah gad. You know, I thought this would be a cool mod, but it doesn't really work properly whenever your ship reorients itself, mid-reentry, putting the heat shield opposite the incoming fiery death. Seriously. I made a ship while using this mod, deorbited it, and then the first that happens is that right there. Figuring it was an error on my part (hah), I put the heat shield on the otherside, got the same damn results....

It is really your design messing up re-entry and not the mod. With some practice you can build shapes that enter reliably (and in a very stable manner - sometimes almost too stable) and with the shield in the desired direction. An approximation of a drop shape often works like a charm - be it a pod or a cone made out of other parts. If that fails for some reason - having an oddly shaped vehicle for example - you might want to experiment with adding aerodynamic surfaces like fins to the back. The added drag at the back should pull your craft straight.

I do also use FAR, but that only increases predictability. If you vessel is shaped the wrong way, you will see the aerodynamic forces overcome ASAS and other controls when the air gets thicker, spelling doom for the occupants.

The mod was exactly intended to add these kinds of challenges to KSP Sure, it is a little harder, but also more fun.

[Drew Kerman]

Here is the capsule as configured for re-entry. Capsule re-entered hatch-up on like a 35 degree angle, so the radials were to either side as the capsule dropped through the atmosphere. (nose was reserved for an escape tower, hence no nose cone chute)

Here are the two examples I saw while watching Scott Manley KISQ:

I've had similar results as well with trying to return a science module - it's hard to see in this image but the radials are above the Goo Containers attached to the Science Jr. Heat shield is under the nose cone - so nothing was directly blocking the radials from heat but I was hoping they'd be high enough up. Both burned right off just like Scott's:

Again my main concern here, and the reason I think this is an issue, is the extreme temperature discrepancy. It's not like the parts that survived had a higher heat tolerance. No, every other part on the capsule didn't even come close to overheating. Even the nose cone chute never exceeds around 300C

Edited March 9, 2014 by Gaiiden

[Starwaster]

http://www.blade-edge.com/images/forums/ksp/KerbinIII.jpg

Here is the capsule as configured for re-entry. Capsule re-entered hatch-up on like a 35 degree angle, so the radials were to either side as the capsule dropped through the atmosphere. (nose was reserved for an escape tower, hence no nose cone chute)

Here are the two examples I saw while watching Scott Manley KISQ:

I've had similar results as well with trying to return a science module - it's hard to see in this image but the radials are above the Goo Containers attached to the Science Jr. Heat shield is under the nose cone - so nothing was directly blocking the radials from heat but I was hoping they'd be high enough up. Both burned right off just like Scott's:

http://www.blade-edge.com/images/forums/ksp/4ItZq.jpg

Again my main concern here, and the reason I think this is an issue, is the extreme temperature discrepancy. It's not like the parts that survived had a higher heat tolerance. No, every other part on the capsule didn't even come close to overheating. Even the nose cone chute never exceeds around 300C

I'll examine it in detail when I can sit at my computer but I want to address something you said right now. For EVERY single part, for it to survive thermal effects one of two things must be true, no exceptions. Either the part has to have heat shielding built into it. Or another part must be directly between it and the direction of travel, in which case it is treated as 'shielded' and will be exempt from heating as long as the part shielding it survives. Just being mounted on a heat shielded craft is not sufficient. That is how it should be.

[Drew Kerman]

I'll examine it in detail when I can sit at my computer but I want to address something you said right now. For EVERY single part, for it to survive thermal effects one of two things must be true, no exceptions. Either the part has to have heat shielding built into it. Or another part must be directly between it and the direction of travel, in which case it is treated as 'shielded' and will be exempt from heating as long as the part shielding it survives. Just being mounted on a heat shielded craft is not sufficient. That is how it should be.

I completely understand and agree, which is why I am confused about my radials going kablooie Anyways, thanks for looking into it

[Starwaster]

I completely understand and agree, which is why I am confused about my radials going kablooie Anyways, thanks for looking into it

Here's some other information about what happens behind the scenes with the plugin: When your craft is in atmo and travelling fast enough in dense enough atmosphere to have a shockwave heating it up above ambient it is first checked to see if it is shielded. The isShielded function takes the direction of travel as its sole parameter. It checks first to see if the part is a stock parachute and is in any state of deployment. If both of those are true it is automatically unshielded and subject to thermal effects. It is then checked to see if it is a RealChute parachute and in any state of deployment. As above, if deployed it is unshielded. (IMO, a better solution might be to simulate chute failure by putting it in CUT state, assuming that's possible, which it might not be)

If it's not any kind of deployed chute then a ray is cast from the part's transform (the part of it that designates its origin) in the direction of travel. If the ray hits something in its path then the part the part is treated as shielded.

Since we're talking about undeployed chutes (they are undeployed right?) then that means the chutes are failing the raycast test. The ray is striking nothing in its path so the chutes are unshielded. Being higher up the cone shaped capsule would definitely decrease the likelihood of hitting any part of the cone. And it also depends on exactly where the transform of the part is. If it's closer to the attachment side of the part then that increases the chance that the ray hits the capsule. If it's further away, closer to the end that's sticking out, then that increases the chance of a miss. I specify the capsule here because there's really nothing else it might hit.

You might increase the odds of survival if you don't orient the capsule at an angle. The chute part's direction of travel would then be much more likely to strike either the capsule, or maybe the battery below, depending on where its transform is. (hypothetically, it could be so close to the capsule that when attached, the chute's origin is inside the capsule, in which case it might hit nothing at all. Hypothetically)

BTW if you are using the latest version of RealChutes then you want the very latest version of DeadlyReentry. I'm not sure Nathan's dropbox is updated yet with it, so here's a link to my dropbox. Source is on Github. (see front page)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/e86pz9cv8i65o2l/DeadlyReentry.zip