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

[Starwaster]

On 1/10/2016 at 9:39 AM, rumtreiber said:

Why does deadly reentry ship its own heat shields and decouplers? When Should I use the stock components and when the ones added by DRE?

Also the heat shields and decouplers only attach if I rotate them. This doesn't look correct but could be intentional of course.

Deadly Reentry and its associated parts and resources pre-date KSP's inclusion of reentry heating and heat shield parts. It retains those parts and resources in order to maintain compatibility with older save games.

Gryphon's reply is probably what you need re: attachment issues though I'm not sure I understand the reference to having to 'rotate' them...

[NathanKell]

Also because they're purty.

[CatastrophicFailure]

Been out of the loop for a while, lost all my subs with the forum upgrade.  Last I saw, DRE didn't "do" anything any longer, other than add GForce damage. Is it back to doing stuff again? The OP is a bit ambiguous. 

[Starwaster]

1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Been out of the loop for a while, lost all my subs with the forum upgrade.  Last I saw, DRE didn't "do" anything any longer, other than add GForce damage. Is it back to doing stuff again? The OP is a bit ambiguous. 

• It balances max temps of various parts (both skin + internal)
• If things get too hot they can catch fire
• It has an in-game picture of the sexiest cat who ever lived. (mostly to make up for the fact that I still didn't fix the menu)
• (also extends the stock heat shield to enhance its lack of protectiveness after ablator has  depleted, but honestly, after the previous info item, what's the point of further listing features?)

Edited January 22, 2016 by Starwaster

[StarStryder]

I'm having real issues with a sub-orbital re-entry g-force.  I launch, fly a gravity turn up to about 150km and then let it arc down.  Atmo entry happens at about 6km/s.  By the time I get to 4km/s the g-force meter is pegged and at about 3km/s my pilot dies.  At around 2.8km/s the g-force starts to drop.  

So I'm not far from a survivable re-entry but nothing I've tried will let me level out the descent any.  I switch to the Mk1 capsule to use it's descent mode to move the CoM but seems to make no different to the capsule attitude at all.  I've tried having the RCS turned on to push the nose down but the aero forces are too strong for it.

Am I doing something wrong here or is sub-orbital re-entry just not possible?

[kcs123]

Your arc path must be much wider. Try with lower apoasis, ~100 km with same craft so you fall down at larger distance from launch site.

[StarStryder]

ah ok. I wanted to clear the atmosphere, hence the 150km. 

I try a lower AP and if that works then I'll bump up the dV to try to make the 150km work.

 

Thanks

[Matuchkin]

Is this the holy mod that will remove the unrealistic reentry effects on launch?

[mikegarrison]

2 hours ago, StarStryder said:

ah ok. I wanted to clear the atmosphere, hence the 150km. 

I try a lower AP and if that works then I'll bump up the dV to try to make the 150km work.

 

Thanks

Um ... You are talking about Real Solar System size, right? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the reply you just got was based on that assumption.

[StarStryder]

lol, oops I didn't mention that did I.

 

Yes, I'm using the whole RO suite.

[Starwaster]

7 hours ago, StarStryder said:

lol, oops I didn't mention that did I.

 

Yes, I'm using the whole RO suite.

I've been watching this; I'm not seeing a lot about how steep or how shallow your reentry is. Maybe a screenshot would help figuring out your trajectory.

hint: excessive G-forces indicates too steep a reentry. You want shallow so that you get as much braking done as possible in the upper atmosphere rather than in the lower atmosphere. A lifting reentry would also help with the G-forces.

The diagram below is a good example of what I mean except that most reentry capsules are blunt body but can still fly lifting reentries if they have an offset center of mass. Right clicking on your capsule might show you an option to do that. I know that RO used to have that option; I'm not sure if that's still the case.

(Edit: In space, right click the capsule. Look for 'turn descent mode on' - that will alter center of mass)

Edited February 15, 2016 by Starwaster

[Paul_Sawyer]

Hello.
Is it normal, that leeward thrusters here get heated faster than windward ones? (In case it's necessary - I have latest DRE installed along with FAR 15.5.6)

[Beetlecat]

On 2/15/2016 at 4:13 PM, Matuchkin said:

Is this the holy mod that will remove the unrealistic reentry effects on launch?

Unrealistic? We only call them "reentry" effects because that's the only time in real life we typically see them. Our KSP designs often overspeed like heck and we can get light shows out the cockpit windows a few seconds after launch.

[Starwaster]

4 hours ago, Paul_Sawyer said:

Hello.
Is it normal, that leeward thrusters here get heated faster than windward ones? (In case it's necessary - I have latest DRE installed along with FAR 15.5.6)

Use the debug menu to enable thermal data in the context menu. Then, when that part overheats, right click it and take a screenshot. Let me see that so I know where all incoming heat is sourced from. 

[Matuchkin]

6 hours ago, Beetlecat said:

Unrealistic? We only call them "reentry" effects because that's the only time in real life we typically see them. Our KSP designs often overspeed like heck and we can get light shows out the cockpit windows a few seconds after launch.

I use RO. My ksp designs have TWRs of 1.07-1.20 maximum. I'm asking if this mod will prevent light shows on realistic launches.

[Beetlecat]

31 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

I use RO. My ksp designs have TWRs of 1.07-1.20 maximum. I'm asking if this mod will prevent light shows on realistic launches.

Ah, I guess that's entirely up to a RO-based config of this or some other mod. I have yet to play on a larger-scaled mod set--though I can only imagine the awesome sight of achieving Kerbin/Earth orbit and having the horizon stretch on for days...

[Paul_Sawyer]

@Starwaster
Here:
Pulling the nose up

Spoiler

Then going straight prograde

Spoiler

And here is the data for those thrusters on the wings pointing forward - their coolness doesn't seem right to me as well.

Spoiler

 

[Starwaster]

7 hours ago, Paul_Sawyer said:

@Starwaster
Here:
Pulling the nose up

  Hide contents

Then going straight prograde

  Hide contents

And here is the data for those thrusters on the wings pointing forward - their coolness doesn't seem right to me as well.

  Hide contents

 

Well, that's creating more questions than it answers. What I see there is that for whatever reason, the ports mounted on the top of the craft are not being occluded even when you have a high angle of attack. The ones on the belly are being occluded. It might be something to do with the port itself but it's a stock issue that I don't see a solution to at this time. (KSP says whether the parts are occluded or not) It could be an issue with the linear ports being sunk so far into the part they get attached to. Something like 50% of them are buried in the part. Maybe that's why KSP is confused as to whether they are occluded or not. The dorsally mounted ports must be protruding below the occlusion zone created by the fuselage with the ventral ones being far enough in that they're occluded. 

It should be easy enough to test that by using the placement tools in the VAB to pull the ports a little away from the surface.

One thing of note here is that most of your heating of those ports is actually coming from conduction, not convection. That's because the space plane parts have high skin-skin conduction. That's by design and is ok unless the ports actually explode. The convection is adding just enough to push the temperature of one part over the other.  Personal testing hasn't shown it to be a problem and I haven't seen complaints about RCS ports exploding here in a long time.

[Paul_Sawyer]

3 hours ago, Starwaster said:

Well, that's creating more questions than it answers. What I see there is that for whatever reason, the ports mounted on the top of the craft are not being occluded even when you have a high angle of attack. The ones on the belly are being occluded. It might be something to do with the port itself but it's a stock issue that I don't see a solution to at this time. (KSP says whether the parts are occluded or not) It could be an issue with the linear ports being sunk so far into the part they get attached to. Something like 50% of them are buried in the part. Maybe that's why KSP is confused as to whether they are occluded or not. The dorsally mounted ports must be protruding below the occlusion zone created by the fuselage with the ventral ones being far enough in that they're occluded. 

It should be easy enough to test that by using the placement tools in the VAB to pull the ports a little away from the surface.

One thing of note here is that most of your heating of those ports is actually coming from conduction, not convection. That's because the space plane parts have high skin-skin conduction. That's by design and is ok unless the ports actually explode. The convection is adding just enough to push the temperature of one part over the other.  Personal testing hasn't shown it to be a problem and I haven't seen complaints about RCS ports exploding here in a long time.

Well, I did some testing on clean install, and here's what I've got:
  In clean stock the numbers in context menu are almost identical for top and bottom ports with bottom ones being just slightly higher.

Spoiler

   With DRE alone the picture is mostly the same.
   With FAR alone something strange starts to happen to the last parameter - SkinToInt Flux. Also not shown in the picture, but later on the temperature of the top ports - both skin and internal - start to grow faster than that of the bottom ports.

Spoiler

  And DRE+FAR is where the show begins and the ports on both sides start to glow, catch fire and explode - I've posted pictures already.
  Also the sunk level is not the case - I pulled the ports almost entirely out of the parent part and that didn't change anything.

So if summarize, it looks like the origin of the problem lies somewhere within FAR and gets exaggerated by Deadly Reentry, but I'm not that good at debugging and can be wrong. Should I post logs, so you can have a look at it?

And by the way it is strange, that you haven't got any complaints about RCS ports exploding, because, at list on my side, the conjuction DRE+FAR makes those linear thrusters extremely sensitive to heating, and they do explode quiet often. I was thinking at first, that it was made this way deliberately, so that reentry process gets even more interesting, but turns out without FAR they all survive reentry just fine.
 

[Starwaster]

@Paul_Sawyer

I'm more concerned with why parts on the top of your plane are showing evidence of being exposed to reentry heating. See skin temp? If it's not exposed and the body of the plane is between it and the supersonic shockwave then it will say 'all skin' instead of 'exposed skin'. DRE doesn't control whether you DO get heating. Only what happens when you do.  If FA hat happens when If FAR is mak

Edit: It occurs to me that the max temps of a lot of parts didn't  bumped up when burning damage went back in. A lot of them ought bumped up by ~18% or so. Though that doesn't really address the roto cause of the FAR problem

 

 

Edited February 21, 2016 by Starwaster

[mark7]

I dont know why but some of the parts from different mods always have a max internal temperature of 1523℃, no matter how I change the max temperature, is this normal?

[Starwaster]

5 hours ago, mark7 said:

I dont know why but some of the parts from different mods always have a max internal temperature of 1523℃, no matter how I change the max temperature, is this normal?

Deadly Reentry overrides the maxTemp / skinMaxTemp of many parts. If you need a part to have a higher maxTemp (because it's made of iridium or tungsten or rhodium or unobtanium bullshihtzu-ium) then add the following:

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleAeroReentry
	leaveTemp = True
}

In fact, you can even just add leaveTemp in the actual PART node and DRE will detect that and add the necessary MODULE

[mark7]

Ok, thanks!

[Baleine]

Okay, I think I'm a noob with DRE, that can be assumed as a fact. However, I'd like to understand what happens to my reentry vessel. It's a simple craft that you may see like this :

Docking port Jr - MK1 pod with 2 radial real chutes without ablative material - Crew cabin - heatshield

I'm using FAR.

 

When I dive a bit steep (42km reentry from mun, going approx. 3200m/s in atmosphere), the Mk1 pod explodes without giving any warning, but everything else fare very well, including the docking port and the chute parts. And if I have the slightest deviation from retrograde, the pod explodes even when I'm very high in the atmosphere, and that's the only part failing.

As I stated, let's assume I'm completely newb to DRE. I still can't understand why it's the middle part who fails first. What's aggravating (can we say "more aggravating" ?), is that the crew cabin still go it's way, seemingly hardly noticing the heat going around.

 

Would anyone be so kind to explain what is the problem with what I'm doing, and who the hell stored C4 on my Mk1 pod ? That'd be very helpful.

[Starwaster]

@Baleine

When you specified 'without ablative material', I assume you mean you removed that from the Mk1 Pod and added a separate shield? To the bottom of the crew cabin?

Can you post a picture of that so I have a better idea of the configuration? Both in the VAB from a good angle and during reentry...

(the smaller parts surviving isn't terribly unusual; remember lots of the Columbia's individual parts survived after it broke up; your surviving parts probably had slowed enough and the chute / docking parts had enough drag to keep slowing it at a faster rate than heating could keep up with)

P.S. The C4 is a value added service. You're welcome!

Edited February 25, 2016 by Starwaster