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

[DaMichel]

Hi everyone. This is sort of a bug report about crafts burning up when using HyperEdit to teleport from the launchpad to orbit. Here is what i posted in the HyperEdit thread before:

In my 6.4x rescale install, anything i try to teleport into orbit explodes due to burnup. Of course my install includes DRE and many other mods. The issue is 100% always reproducible. I think that teleporting from orbit to orbit works fine so i suspect DRE is mistaking the teleport for actual flight.

000_Toolbar

KerbalAlarmClock

ProceduralDynamics

64k

KerbalEngineer

ProceduralFairings

ActiveTextureManagement

KerbalFlightData

ProceduralParts

AJE

KerbalFlightIndicators

RCSBuildAid

B9_Aerospace

KerbalJointReinforcement

RealFuels

BoulderCo

Kerbaltek

RealSolarSystem

CrossFeedEnabler

KineTechAnimation

ResGen

DeadlyReentry

Klockheed_Martian

SelectRoot

EditorExtensions

landing_gears.cfg

SH_mods

EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements

MagicSmokeIndustries

SmokeScreen

FerramAerospaceResearch

ModuleManager.2.5.1.dll

Squad

Firespitter

ModuleRCSFX

toolbar-settings.dat

FShangarExtender

MP_Nazari

TriggerTech

HullCameraVDS

NASAmission

TweakScale

JSI

PlanetShine

Virgin Kalactic

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r55fnx8ng249qhp/output_log.txt?dl=0

A minor issue: the graphical editor won't allow me to set the Pe low enough to simulate an atmospheric entry. The slider ends at an altitude that is higher than the height of the atmosphere (on Kerbin / Eve).

What works is, once in orbit, i can teleport into an orbit which is within the atmosphere using the simple edit mode.

F3 says that parts burned up. Now i found that there are no problems when DRE is removed for testing. Moreover as a workaround i can Alt+d+r and set the shockwave multiplier temporarily to zero. But it would be nice if it worked out of the box.

[Starwaster]

I would think, though I could certainly be wrong, most people have created parts with maxTemp values comparable to those in stock. With that in mind shouldn't the values for maxTempScale and ridiculousMaxTemp be designed to produce desired reduction results when applied to stock value ranges instead of being designed with values that have already been reduced once?

The ridiculousMaxTemp cap was set with what I thought was a good max cap that nothing should go above. It's a subject that's come up before with the previous cap as having been judged to be too high. But the intent wasn't to set that capbased on parts that were being adjusted elsewhere. Those parts were just caught in the crossfire and that will be dealt with.

@Starwaster having tested the beta thoroughly I went back to the stable version due to the heat transfer mechanic in place along with the lowered max temperatures for everything. The maximum temps I can understand to a point (melting point of aluminum @ 660C being the primary structural component of hull bodies) however the heat transfer is really really off. I was getting fuselages and couplers overheating and exploding long before the engine began to overheat. Nothing showing in output_log error-wise. As well any and all AJE engines from 1.6.6 (Haven't tested 1.6.7 with 6.3.1 beta) generate far too much heat at any throttle setting causing near instant connected part failures due to overheating at any altitude.

I can understand some of the aggressive heat transfer however without having that heat propagate to other parts there will always be a weak link at the connection point at the engine itself. As well having rocket engines overheat at 1000 celcius makes no sense (tested with multiple KW Rocketry engines primarily the 2.5 through 5 meter lifters; lower and upper stage). Other relevant mods are FAR, RealFuels, Stockalike config and 6.4x Kerbin w/ RSS class heatshields and NathanKell's MM patch specific to 6.4x Kerbin for the heatshields.

My only issues are:

1) Rocket motors transferring heat to other parts as quickly as they are (as my interpretation of the heat generation was always that the heat was at the bell not at the thrust plate)

2) Having AJE engines not being able to run at military thrust let alone afterburner at any altitude

3) Not having heat propagate to other parts apart from the connection between the engine and whatever it first connects .

If the last issue can be resolved the first two will fix themselves as heat will transfer properly instead of soaking in one part and causing catastrophic failures on every launch.

The actual cap is 1250, not 660. Though depending on the part it could have been dropped lower than 1250 because of the config file issue that Persig mentions.

As far as heat transfer between parts goes however, that hasn't been altered at all in the beta with heat shields being the sole exception. (heatConductivity reduced to ~8% of previous value)

All heat transfer between parts is handled by stock KSP so the only way your parts are exploding from the engines conducting heat into them is if they were already being heated up to levels that became lethal because said parts got capped at or below that level.

It would be helpful to know specifically what parts, what temperatures, altitude and speed.

Edit to include DeMichel's post

Hi everyone. This is sort of a bug report about crafts burning up when using HyperEdit to teleport from the launchpad to orbit. Here is what i posted in the HyperEdit thread before:

F3 says that parts burned up. Now i found that there are no problems when DRE is removed for testing. Moreover as a workaround i can Alt+d+r and set the shockwave multiplier temporarily to zero. But it would be nice if it worked out of the box.

I'll look at it but I'm already thinking that I'm going to have to defer on coding up a workaround to Hyperedit teleports.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Starwaster

[Pirsig]

The ridiculousMaxTemp cap was set with what I thought was a good max cap that nothing should go above. It's a subject that's come up before with the previous cap as having been judged to be too high. But the intent wasn't to set that capbased on parts that were being adjusted elsewhere. Those parts were just caught in the crossfire and that will be dealt with.

So if I understand correctly, you're intending to indeed get rid of those @maxTemp changes for non heatshielded parts then, yes? And then all changing of maxTemp for non heathshielded parts will be handled by the automated checker in the .dll? Sorry, I just feel like we might be slightly miscommunicating to each other on both sides here and want to make sure.

[Starwaster]

So if I understand correctly, you're intending to indeed get rid of those @maxTemp changes for non heatshielded parts then, yes? And then all changing of maxTemp for non heathshielded parts will be handled by the automated checker in the .dll? Sorry, I just feel like we might be slightly miscommunicating to each other on both sides here and want to make sure.

If you're asking for a specific course of action, I haven't decided yet and am not going to commit to one other than to say that I will be going through the entire list of parts in those files and deciding if any need specific handling, which is why they are in that file in the first place.

Each part on a case by case basis. If any need further adjusting then they'll be adjusted instead of being removed. There's a lot of parts in there and I'm not going to blanket delete them from the file.

[Pirsig]

If you're asking for a specific course of action, I haven't decided yet and am not going to commit to one other than to say that I will be going through the entire list of parts in those files and deciding if any need specific handling, which is why they are in that file in the first place.

Each part on a case by case basis. If any need further adjusting then they'll be adjusted instead of being removed. There's a lot of parts in there and I'm not going to blanket delete them from the file.

Yeah, I kind of was trying to figure out what your plan going forward was. I think I get where you're coming from now. Thanks for the clarification

[Shad0wCatcher]

@Starwaster Off the top of my head (I'm at work and can't check right now) AJE's F-15 / F-16 analogue combined with either B9's Mk2 short bicoupler or Mk1 5 meter fuselage. Those do reach max temp of 1250 on the runway with any throttle setting over 58-ish% (2 ticks below military power). Same with nli2work's in-line turbojet engine at some throttle below 66% (below military power) (I believe it's from the retrofuture planes pack). This is at any altitude and below mach 1 to just into transonic region mach 1.11-ish as that's as far as I can get before things go kerflooey or become stoichiometric with regards to throttle position to speed without getting stupid with altitude (again 6.4x Kerbol system so climbing to 15-30 kilometers using AJE can take a while using a nominal climb profile).

It's weird though as using the current stable version there is VERY little heat transfer to other parts. Same plane setup between beta and stable results in the following: 1) Stable results in engine heating to 1800-1900 degrees celcius while its connected part maintains temperatures of 300-600 degrees celcius. 2) Beta results in the engine heating to 800-900 degrees while the connected part explodes.

Anecdotal I know; but it's somewhat difficult to explain as truly there is much more heat transfer going on with the beta compared to stable. Not sure if an operator is reversed somewhere or what. I'd happily dig into the code to look for it if I had a clue what to look for and/or had any ability to read C## code.

On the other hand the heat clamping mechanic is working wonderfully. In stable the heat shields can kick up to 800-1200 degrees celcius while barely ablating in the upper atmosphere (50-60k). With the beta the heat is clamping to 300-350 degrees celcius and ablating much more material more quickly as well as shedding speed at higher altitudes.

Testing with the Maverick V (KW's standard 2.5 meter lifter) with the beta cannot reach full throttle before overheating and exploding at around 1000 degrees celcius (using mechjeb to prevent overheats results in anywhere from 85%-75% throttle versus normal. (This does coincide with a max temperature reduction as nominally it runs at around 1400-1500 degrees C; just odd that it's clamping to under 1000 degrees C).

Also to an extent I can understand some of the overheat effects for the jet engines as they do seem to run really hot as stated in my first post. Example being the F-15 / F-16 analogue in AJE running at over 2000 degrees celcius at military thrust without afterburner at 10 kilometers altitude.

Hmm. Just thought of something. I won't be able to test until 7:30-ish PM my time (it's 3:30 PM now) and won't be able to report results until tomorrow around 7AM my time. It might be Interstellar's Sabre Heating module causing undue heating as I just remembered all my tested designs did not include intake precoolers. What's odd though is that in a situation where I'd expect a compressor overheat situation (CR2 Ramjet from TVPP @ 180 kN built on the most simple design I can think of that has no precooler attached to the shock cone intake. Thing runs at mach 4.5 at sea level without overheating in the stable build).

Far as altitudes and speeds are concerned. These are all at sea level. Leaving the launch pad with the Maverick V causes an overheat before 1kM of altitude and 150 m/s. Temperatures of jet engines are on the runway at 30-80 m/s.

[ZAJC3W]

There is a compatibility issue with KAS(kerbal attachment system)

item removed from containers end up suspended mid-air instead of kerbal's back. 100% it happens only when DeadlyReentry is installed.

[Starwaster]

@Starwaster Off the top of my head (I'm at work and can't check right now) AJE's F-15 / F-16 analogue combined with either B9's Mk2 short bicoupler or Mk1 5 meter fuselage. Those do reach max temp of 1250 on the runway with any throttle setting over 58-ish% (2 ticks below military power). Same with nli2work's in-line turbojet engine at some throttle below 66% (below military power) (I believe it's from the retrofuture planes pack). This is at any altitude and below mach 1 to just into transonic region mach 1.11-ish as that's as far as I can get before things go kerflooey or become stoichiometric with regards to throttle position to speed without getting stupid with altitude (again 6.4x Kerbol system so climbing to 15-30 kilometers using AJE can take a while using a nominal climb profile).

It's weird though as using the current stable version there is VERY little heat transfer to other parts. Same plane setup between beta and stable results in the following: 1) Stable results in engine heating to 1800-1900 degrees celcius while its connected part maintains temperatures of 300-600 degrees celcius. 2) Beta results in the engine heating to 800-900 degrees while the connected part explodes.

Anecdotal I know; but it's somewhat difficult to explain as truly there is much more heat transfer going on with the beta compared to stable. Not sure if an operator is reversed somewhere or what. I'd happily dig into the code to look for it if I had a clue what to look for and/or had any ability to read C## code.

You would find a snipe hunt to be more productive.

I'll install AJE myself and take a look at the problem.

Testing with the Maverick V (KW's standard 2.5 meter lifter) with the beta cannot reach full throttle before overheating and exploding at around 1000 degrees celcius (using mechjeb to prevent overheats results in anywhere from 85%-75% throttle versus normal. (This does coincide with a max temperature reduction as nominally it runs at around 1400-1500 degrees C; just odd that it's clamping to under 1000 degrees C).

DRE doesn't just scale down max temp for engines, it also scales down their heat production by a like amount. However it occurs to me however that Real Fuels has its own set of heat production values as part of its engine configs. DRE isn't touching Real Fuels configs at all.

There is a compatibility issue with KAS(kerbal attachment system)

item removed from containers end up suspended mid-air instead of kerbal's back. 100% it happens only when DeadlyReentry is installed.

I think that's the same thing that someone else already reported. It's fixed in the next version I push out.

[NathanKell]

Starwaster: the problem is that AJE sets *all* engines it's on to maxTemp 3600, and then produces enough temperature to cook them if you're supposed to overheat. Ask camlost to change it to, say, tt4 (convert F to C), or something sane like 1800.

[J.Random]

Well, I switched back to 6.2.1. I don't know enough fizziks to effectively playtest the new version, tuning its settings, the only thing I know is that my almost stock spaceplanes are way too flammable in it (default settings which I expected to be the same as 6.2.1 defaults). Especially SPP bicoupler - explodes all the time. Hope it will become playable again.

[Starwaster]

Starwaster: the problem is that AJE sets *all* engines it's on to maxTemp 3600, and then produces enough temperature to cook them if you're supposed to overheat. Ask camlost to change it to, say, tt4 (convert F to C), or something sane like 1800.

Is he likely to be amenable to such a change? And, wait a second... is that value of 3600 supposed to represent Fahrenheit to AJE, in a universe where the scale is emphatically Celsius? Please tell me that's not the case

Edit: Let me clarify that last bit. What I'm asking is if numbers that are meant to be in Fahrenheit are actually creeping into the game unconverted.

something something, plane exploded, something something can't beta something something no mod list no logs don't tell Starwaster what engines were on the bicoupler something something?

Hope it will become playable again.

I got nothing.

Edited November 25, 2014 by Starwaster

[Shad0wCatcher]

If that's the case with AJE then that'd handily explain the problem with those jets. Still doesn't answer the inline jet from either Karbonite or Retrofuture (Not sure which; it's nli2work's model; can't remember which pack it came from; but it is kerosene fueled) or the KW lower atmosphere lifters overheating as quickly as they are. I did test last night a bit (911 dispatcher with a rather busy day; couldn't do much testing when I got home). I was only able to test the Inline jet (too tired to test further after this one) from either Karbonite / Retrofuture; military power; 10kM altitude to ~26 kM altitude. Mach 0.76 to Mach 4.71 (Got bored after a couple minutes of stable flight and caused a flat-spin / structural failure because ha-ha and !!SCIENCE!! [testing ejection module at low altitudes]).

Stable Version:

Temperature at 10kM / mach 0.76 (Running @ military power 66% throttle) 626 degrees C @ engine; 284 degrees C @ B9 short bi-coupler. Stock Ram-Air intakes x2; stock radial engine body (has the KSP Interstellar precooler module). @ Mach 4.71 (full throttle) @ ~23 kM altitude (6.4x Kerbin again) Engines are close to overheat at 22-23 kM altitude @ a surface speed of 1500-ish m/s. Producing 123-125 kN thrust each. Dramatic thrust loss occurs at greater altitudes than this (23 kN @ 26 kM altitude per engine; heating drops sharply also due to airflow losses).

EDIT: Just read your corrected quote of the other poster Starwaster. That's....hilariously appropriate. I can get you log files with another round of testing along with a full mod list at some point here. I don't remember when I come back in (Part mods mainly; my previous post had relevant plugin mods apart from the late remembrance of KSP:Interstellar) but it may or may not be after Thanksgiving. I'll try to do the same thing I did above with more data points and a couple more engines. It's difficult though as really my only options are KSP:Interstellar's nuclear jets, Karbonite/Retrofuture inline jet, and the rest of everything is converted to AJE (all the B9 jets, squad's jets and TVPP jets)

Test vehicle was identical between tests.

Beta Version:

Temperature at 10kM / mach 0.71 (2 ticks below 66% throttle setting) 600 C @ engine 1150 C @ bicoupler. Any more throttle and the bicoupler explodes. I didn't have enough time to test at greater altitudes (it would have taken forever with the 0.74 TWR that that throttle setting had me at and I was seriously overtired. This isn't a job that's friendly to unpreparedness).

Edited November 25, 2014 by Shad0wCatcher

[Starwaster]

Well I'd bet donuts to dollars that he's using AJE too. I installed it to examine the problem first hand and those engines put out way too much heat to other parts.

(Edit: Clarification. They produce too much heat, which invariably ends up being conducted to other parts as part of stock physics)

There is definitely NOT more heat moving between parts in the beta of DRE however. The problem there is two fold being a combination of some parts having lower maxTemp (and therefore less tolerance to overheating) and in heat shielded parts, they have lowered conductivity so they can't shed excess heat to other parts as efficiently. (the exact opposite problem in fact). If the parts you attached the engines to had heat shields on them then the problem definitely gets worse.

Nathan mentioned something that looks worth exploring but I'd rather implement something on my on than to bother AJE's developer about it. (especially given that DRE gets the blame for any part that explodes over in the AJE forum)

Edit #2: I could use some AJE craft to test with. Preferably with stock parts. I have B9 installed but it's the older version....

Edited November 25, 2014 by Starwaster

[Shad0wCatcher]

That definitely would explain the heat soaking and overheating then. KW Engines always ran a bit hot (toeing the line of maximum heat tolerance for steel when full throttle but wasn't reflected in the config [maxtemp 1700]). The lowered temperatures would definitely explain them overheating then. All the Spaceplane parts (both stock and B9) have MM patches from 64k (the continuation of 6.4x Kerbin) to add reflective heat shields to them to account for the Mach 18 re-entry (about half the actual earth). Shame about folks not doing their research regarding AJE and mod interactions. Thanks a ton for all you've done by the way.

[Starwaster]

Ugh, I see why Nathan said to go through camlost. Looks like quite a bit of this is hard coded. Config patches aren't going to save me this time. I'm not going to go get into it with another modder right now about how or why they took their mod in the direction they did. Path of least resistance will have to be that the default conductivity for heat shielded parts doesn't change and then add the necessary config changes to specific heat shields that should insulate.

non AJE engines like rocket engines are a separate issue and will be dealt with separately.

BTW, has anyone trying the beta version been looking to their Jebadiahs at all?

[JeffreyCor]

Well, I switched back to 6.2.1. I don't know enough fizziks to effectively playtest the new version, tuning its settings, the only thing I know is that my almost stock spaceplanes are way too flammable in it (default settings which I expected to be the same as 6.2.1 defaults). Especially SPP bicoupler - explodes all the time. Hope it will become playable again.

I thought it was something I was doing wrong. Same problem, things that worked perfectly before are now burning up and found nothing in any documentation to explain why.

[Jarin]

I thought it was something I was doing wrong. Same problem, things that worked perfectly before are now burning up and found nothing in any documentation to explain why.

I've got mostly-stock planes burning up on descent from sub-orbital hops (poke head up to 50km for science), so it's not just you. They're not even touching 2000m/s.

[Shad0wCatcher]

The Jebediahs? If it's about the kerbal I use texture replacer w/ KSPRC so all my kerbals are changed anyway.

[Namolis]

I couldn't be bothered to dig through 287 pages

My problem is that the heat shields are overheating and exploding - way before they use up their ablative shielding, even if they face the right way and the parts behind them are not overheating. Is this normal/expected? What's the remedy? I'm using RSS, FAR and a bunch of other (hopefully irrelevant) mods, but *not* realism overhaul (memory issues).

[Starman4308]

I couldn't be bothered to dig through 287 pages

My problem is that the heat shields are overheating and exploding - way before they use up their ablative shielding, even if they face the right way and the parts behind them are not overheating. Is this normal/expected? What's the remedy? I'm using RSS, FAR and a bunch of other (hopefully irrelevant) mods, but *not* realism overhaul (memory issues).

DRE is balanced for stock, which has much lower reentry velocities. The solution is literally in the first post.

[NathanKell]

I couldn't be bothered to respond, sorry.

(but you might try reading the OP, though, it covers this.)

Starwaster: camlost is probably amenable. IIRC I fixed it in my fork, and camlost has ported over most stuff from my fork. My suggestion is that AJE use TT4 (burner temp, IIRC), converted to C, for its part.maxTemp, but if camlost wants the easy solution then just use a flat 1800, like other engines. It's a one line change.

[J.Random]

I got nothing.

The point being, to give you relevant bug report, player (in this case, me) needs to understand the rules. For me the rule of thumb was always "look at the Q". It's the dynamic pressure which matters, right? In beta it seems that it doesn't matter. If anything, I see temperature going up while Q decreases (with constant thrust). I don't use AJE. DRE and FAR are the only mods which change game aero rules.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Log showed that first things to explode were B9 intakes (1500 degrees limit), then bicoupler (1250 degrees). I especially like the part where engines run at ~250 degrees while bicoupler gets up to 1000.

Same goes for reentry: I see that shield already started ablating, and yet there is no "DON'T DEPLOY CHUTES IF YOU WANT TO LIVE" warning. Then in the lower atmosphere shield isn't ablating, everything seems to be cool, and yet it's unsafe to deploy chutes until I'm slower than 300m/s.

So, there you go. It's the same nothing you've got in my previous post, only with screenshot of exploded craft in it.

It's counterintuitive, I don't know what to report and what is intended behavior.

Also, I know, it's a lot to ask, but for debug/tests it would be nice to have visual clues, like FAR AeroViz: part tinting when it closes to its temperature limit.

[Jarin]

I couldn't be bothered to dig through 287 pages

My problem is that the heat shields are overheating and exploding - way before they use up their ablative shielding, even if they face the right way and the parts behind them are not overheating. Is this normal/expected? What's the remedy? I'm using RSS, FAR and a bunch of other (hopefully irrelevant) mods, but *not* realism overhaul (memory issues).

DRE is balanced for stock, which has much lower reentry velocities. The solution is literally in the first post.

Just to clarify this, it's RSS that's the issue. DR should work with FAR just like stock. Check the bottom of the first post FAQ spoiler.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Jarin

[Starwaster]

The point being, to give you relevant bug report, player (in this case, me) needs to understand the rules. For me the rule of thumb was always "look at the Q". It's the dynamic pressure which matters, right? In beta it seems that it doesn't matter. If anything, I see temperature going up while Q decreases (with constant thrust). I don't use AJE. DRE and FAR are the only mods which change game aero rules.

http://imgur.com/a/KILBH

Log showed that first things to explode were B9 intakes (1500 degrees limit), then bicoupler (1250 degrees). I especially like the part where engines run at ~250 degrees while bicoupler gets up to 1000.

Same goes for reentry: I see that shield already started ablating, and yet there is no "DON'T DEPLOY CHUTES IF YOU WANT TO LIVE" warning. Then in the lower atmosphere shield isn't ablating, everything seems to be cool, and yet it's unsafe to deploy chutes until I'm slower than 300m/s.

So, there you go. It's the same nothing you've got in my previous post, only with screenshot of exploded craft in it.

It's counterintuitive, I don't know what to report and what is intended behavior.

Also, I know, it's a lot to ask, but for debug/tests it would be nice to have visual clues, like FAR AeroViz: part tinting when it closes to its temperature limit.

That picture is actually quite helpful, but unfortunately a bit too late because I already know what the issue is. Heating there of that part is entirely from the engines behind it.

Dynamic pressure is totally irrelevant because that part is shielded from the airstream by the parts in front of it. That said, an SR71's maximum skin temperature is reached at Mach 3.2 at close to the altitudes you're seeing there. Think about that...

At any rate, you have two engines feeding heat into the bicoupler, which being a spaceplane part has heat shielding. One change I made is that heat shields now lower heat conductivity so that the parts they are attached to don't get roasted. So it couldn't get rid of the heat as fast as it was coming in. So the next version (sometime tonight) is going to see the default conductivity changed back to the stock value for Part.heatConductivity (which is 0.12). That should also take care of the AJE issue where AJE engines are roasting anything they're attached to.

Also, chute failure is based on speed and air density. (really shockwave temperature and density, but shockwave temperature is based directly from velocity so... speed and density)

If you don't see the warning then it's safe to deploy. That message is displayed by the same code that checks for and generates chute failure.

Just to clarify this, it's RSS that's the issue. DR should work with FAR just like stock. Check the bottom of the first post FAQ spoiler.

Well, more precisely, it's the higher velocities that are the issue. If you could somehow get up to those velocities in stock KSP then you'd see that kind of heating easily. One of the goals of the next version is for that to be less of an issue on the grounds that the heat shield temperature should never go above (or even quite reach) the vaporization point of the ablator. (not even if the shockwave temperature is 3x higher).

[J.Random]

That said, an SR71's maximum skin temperature is reached at Mach 3.2 at close to the altitudes you're seeing there. Think about that...

But Earth and Kerbin have different scale heights with the same surface pressure. To get the same air density as at 25km altitude at Kerbin, SR-71 would have to fly as high as... 42km at Earth, I guess?

Also, chute failure is based on speed and air density. (really shockwave temperature and density, but shockwave temperature is based directly from velocity so... speed and density)

If you don't see the warning then it's safe to deploy. That message is displayed by the same code that checks for and generates chute failure.

Speed and density? Sounds like dynamic pressure to me. I guess I'll have to look into the code.

Sorry for stupid questions. I think I understand less and less as I try to relearn how to fly with DRE.