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

[ThreePounds]

Okay, testing turns out that the heat shields on almost all all B9 parts are on the wrong side of the fuselage / wing!

@PART[B9_Cockpit_S2_Body_Crew_6m]{
	@maxTemp = 1500
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, 0, -1 // underside of fuselage
		reflective = 0.25 // 25% of heat is ignored at correct angle
	}
}

Testing revealed that those parts did best when flying upside down (with the visual heat shield facing upwards and away from the shockwave), indicating that the heat shield is on the wrong side.

It should look more like this:

@PART[B9_Cockpit_S2_Body_Crew_6m]
{
	@maxTemp = 1500
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleHeatShield
		direction = 0, 0, 1 // underside of fuselage
		reflective = 0.25 // 25% of heat is ignored at correct angle
	}
}

Am I missing something? This should be included in the next DRE release!

[andrehsu]

Is there a config for a shockwaveExponent of 1.12 without modifying the size of the heatshields?

[ThreePounds]

Actually, is the MK1 pod supposed to be suitable for re-entry with

shockwaveExponent = 1.12

aka RSS re-entry? I just had my first re-entry with only the pod and almost burned up! I already was on a very shallow trajectory (70km-40km on Stock Kerbin) and the heatshield just couldn't keep up. Should I go even shallower?

I am using the config from the OP (RO_DRE.cfg) but it doesn't mention the MK1.

[NathanKell]

andrehsu: the file linked in the OP does not change sizes.

Three_Pounds: heh. Whoops. Add a new @PART[mk1pod] {} block to the file and copy-paste the shield section from here (highlighted)

I'll check out the B9 stuff, thanks.

[ThreePounds]

Three_Pounds: heh. Whoops. Add a new @PART[mk1pod] {} block to the file and copy-paste the shield section from here (highlighted)

Thanks a lot! Trying it out now. Hopefully it won't roast the next Kerbal. It was some 20 Kelvin away from incinerating.

EDIT: slapped a :Final at the back, just to make sure.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Three_Pounds

[TronX33]

That file for faking 8 km reentry is a pile of text, and I don't know how to create cfgs. Any help?

[Master Tao]

The Engineer,

That is the cfg. Right-click on the link and save it to your Deadly Reentry folder.

[ThreePounds]

and don't forget to name it *.cfg. My browsers saves it as *.cfg.txt for some stupid reason.

I just figured out a lot of things about "faking the 8km re-entry", so I'll help you if you want to. You'll probably want to add this to at the bottom of your said config:

@PART[mk1pod]:Final{
    @MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
    {
        @direction = 0, -1, 0
        @reflective = 0.05
        @ablative = AblativeShielding
        @loss
        {
            @key,0 = 650 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 2000 160 0 0
            @key,2 = 5000 200 0 0
        }
        @dissipation
        {
            @key,0 = 300 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 800 480 0 0
        }
    }
}

If you use mods like B9 and SP+, you probably have to edit their configs to make the heat shielding sufficient as well. Otherwise, you'll just burn up.

[GigaG]

Can a Lander-Can Mk1 survive a high-velocity Kerbin re-entry with a 1.25m heat shield?

[Taki117]

Can a Lander-Can Mk1 survive a high-velocity Kerbin re-entry with a 1.25m heat shield?

I don't see why not. As long as it's not going fast enough to overheat the heat shield.

[andrehsu]

andrehsu: the file linked in the OP does not change sizes.

The mk 1-2 heatshield is now 4m in diameter, and the 2.5m heatshield no longer fits nicely under the mk1-2 pod like it did before.

[TronX33]

How would I change the cfgs for the sdhi heatshield and klockheed mations special parts inflatable heatshields? And does that single cfg fix the regular heatshields to RSS standards?

[NathanKell]

andrehsu: I will fix that, then.

The Engineer: by opening the cfg and changing them, or writing an MM patch. What changes do you want to make?

[ThreePounds]

There is a minor flaw that can be quite confusing in the RO_DRE.cfg linked in the OP.

[COLOR=#000000]+PART[1.25_Heatshield]:Final[/COLOR]{
	!MODULE[TweakScale]
	{
	}
	@name = Heatshield-15M
	@author = Bobcat,NK
	!mesh = DELETE
	MODEL
	{
		model = DeadlyReentry/Parts/deadlyReentry_1.25Heatshield/model
		scale = 1.5, 1.5, 1.5
	}
	@scale = 1.5
	@rescaleFactor = 1.0
	@node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.06196643, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.01, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@title = Heatshield (1m)
	@mass = 0.06
	@crashTolerance = 8
	@breakingForce = 250
	@breakingTorque = 250
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{
		@reflective = 0.08
		@loss
		{
			@key,0 = 650 0 0 0
			@key,1 = 2000 180 0 0
			@key,2 = 6000 225 0 0
		}
		@dissipation
		{
			@key,0 = 300 0 0 0
			@key,1 = 800 530 0 0
		}
	}
	@MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
	{
		@ejectionForce = 20
	}
	@RESOURCE[AblativeShielding]
	{
		@amount = 375
		@maxAmount = 375
	}
}

This is the definition for the 1.5 meter heat shield, but it's called "Heatshield (1m)." The line should look like this:

@title = Heatshield (1.5m)

[TronX33]

The Engineer: by opening the cfg and changing them, or writing an MM patch. What changes do you want to make?

Well, I want to make them work. So do I just add more of the resource ablativeshielding and add to it's max temperature to make them work?

[Master Tao]

Well, I want to make them work. So do I just add more of the resource ablativeshielding and add to it's max temperature to make them work?

Increasing AblativeShielding will simulate increasing the thickness (and mass) of the shield and max temperature will change the temperature at which the part explodes.

Are the parts not working at all or not working well enough?

[TronX33]

Increasing AblativeShielding will simulate increasing the thickness (and mass) of the shield and max temperature will change the temperature at which the part explodes.

Are the parts not working at all or not working well enough?

I'm only asking because the OP says that simulating 8 km/ sec reentry on stock kerbin would require heat shields built for RSS, and I assumed that those heat shields, not being built for RSS, would not sufficiently protect my capsule

[Master Tao]

I'm only asking because the OP says that simulating 8 km/ sec reentry on stock kerbin would require heat shields built for RSS, and I assumed that those heat shields, not being built for RSS, would not sufficiently protect my capsule

So yes, your two ideas (especially increasing the AblativeShielding) should work for an appropriate reentry profile.

I'm afraid I don't know exactly how much to increase AblativeShielding, but you could compare the stock and RO shield configs for guidance. That'll be hard since they're all different sizes. Or you could just fry some Kerbals in the name of SCIENCE!

[Starwaster]

So yes, your two ideas (especially increasing the AblativeShielding) should work for an appropriate reentry profile.

I'm afraid I don't know exactly how much to increase AblativeShielding, but you could compare the stock and RO shield configs for guidance. That'll be hard since they're all different sizes. Or you could just fry some Kerbals in the name of SCIENCE!

It's not just an issue of increasing the resource quantity. I've even tweaked parts for RSS without touching quantity and they were ok. (or possibly they had more than they needed before RSS was installed)

The important bit (or other important bit) is loss and dissipation curves.

Specifically the final key / values are increased for loss and dissipation.

pre-RSS

        loss
        { // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
            key = 650 0 0 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
            key = 1000 320 0 0 // peak ablation at 1000 degrees C
            key = 3000 400 0 0 // max ablation at 3000 degrees C
        }
        dissipation
        { // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
                key = 300 0 0 0 // begin dissipating at 300 degrees C
                key = 500 90 0 0 // maximum dissipation at 500 degrees C
        }

with RSS (RO_RSS file)

        @reflective = 0.08
        @loss
        {
            @key,0 = 650 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 2000 480 0 0
            @key,2 = 6000 600 0 0
        }
        @dissipation
        {
            @key,0 = 300 0 0 0
            @key,1 = 800 170 0 0
        }

So, loss had its mid and last keys changed. First value is key (shockwave temperature) so it hits that point at 2000 degrees and loses 50% more material each second. Final key is 6000 degrees, which is closer to the typical max thermal value of 7000-ish

Dissipation is how much heat the part will radiate back because of its own temperature. Again up nearly 50% on both key and value (key = part temperature, value = radiation value)

(none of which will help much during a Jovian reentry for a probe when FAR is installed. FAR calculates the value based on gas giant physics but DREC still assumes stock atmospheric density values so the probe doesn't shed velocity as fast as stock while still suffering stock heating. Oops!)

Edited August 6, 2014 by Starwaster

[dzikakulka]

Okay, so while it is a great mod for realism without too many changes, I have a problem balancing it out.

But first question - how do I insert fractions in debug menu? Nothing seem to work, I'm stuck with config editing atm and it's a long wait every ksp boot. I can only delete what's already there ("1" is always left) and then insert integers.

And a quick question to fellow players - did someone came up with reasonable values of all these tweakables so non-shielded stuff is burnt up quickly but shielded is not? All my struggle pretty much comes to one problem - either my test craft (aerospike-tank-mk1pod, 2.2km/s kerbin reentry at ~60 degrees) is immediately evaporised or there is only one part burnt up max. If I decouple before reentry, leaving only pod with parachute it also either blows up after brief moment or goes 100% safe burning out like 30 of 250 shielding.

While I have almost no knowledge about real reentries, I think it souldn't be like that.

Is there any way to make reentries more brutal on un-shielded parts AND shields? So far I couldn't get my pod destroyed because shields depleted. It's always blowing up or going safe with using 10% of the shield.

Or can someone point me to some post or source file or anything that will explain a little that debug menu and inner works of plugin? What's shockwave shown in degrees in debug, shockwave tresholds etc.

[Starwaster]

Okay, so while it is a great mod for realism without too many changes, I have a problem balancing it out.

But first question - how do I insert fractions in debug menu? Nothing seem to work, I'm stuck with config editing atm and it's a long wait every ksp boot. I can only delete what's already there ("1" is always left) and then insert integers.

And a quick question to fellow players - did someone came up with reasonable values of all these tweakables so non-shielded stuff is burnt up quickly but shielded is not? All my struggle pretty much comes to one problem - either my test craft (aerospike-tank-mk1pod, 2.2km/s kerbin reentry at ~60 degrees) is immediately evaporised or there is only one part burnt up max. If I decouple before reentry, leaving only pod with parachute it also either blows up after brief moment or goes 100% safe burning out like 30 of 250 shielding.

While I have almost no knowledge about real reentries, I think it souldn't be like that.

Is there any way to make reentries more brutal on un-shielded parts AND shields? So far I couldn't get my pod destroyed because shields depleted. It's always blowing up or going safe with using 10% of the shield.

Or can someone point me to some post or source file or anything that will explain a little that debug menu and inner works of plugin? What's shockwave shown in degrees in debug, shockwave tresholds etc.

The problem you describe with the debug menu is an issue with the Unity GUI. You have to insert your decimal in front of a number after typing that number. If a 0 is displayed then you can't type the decimal at all. If you want 0.5 you have to type it as 5 then put the cursor in front of the 5 and type the decimal.

From a coding perspective, there is another way of doing it, which is to treat that field as a string, then parse the string and then assign the result to your variable. If you don't understand coding then just accept that it's a problem with Unity's GUI implementation and not the fault of the people who coded or maintain or otherwise contribute to DREC. It can't be fixed from this end but it could be worked around and it's kind of hacky so maybe that's why nobody's bothered doing it. I contribute little code snippets from time to time so maybe one day I'll write something up myself and do a pull request but there's never anything less constructive I could be doing and from a player perspective, it can be worked around as I described.

As for the other, there's that word again; difficulty and balance.

Here's the thing. DREC is not supposed to make things harder. It's supposed to punish you for poor reentry procedures or forgetting to put a heat shield on.

If you put your heat shield on (or the part has it like the Mk1pod) and you did your reentry vector PROPERLY then you will live and you will find that pretty easy to do.

If you messed your reentry vector up then your Kerbals will die screaming and you'll find that easy to do also

So if you lived and your part didn't burn up to ashes and your Kerbals walked away, congratulations, you did it right.

If you didn't do it right then they died and that's that. It's ok if the shield didn't deplete completely. Even RL heat shields still have some ablator left. I'm sure the engineers made sure there was more than they thought they would need.

To to sum up, with regards to your statement that it shouldn't be like that, yes it should. It's supposed to be like that. It's right and proper that it is like that.

[dzikakulka]

Thanks Starwaster, I can insert decimals now!

Hm, if it is like it should be now... I'll make damn sure it will be as I want instead. Just kidding but really, with 1.12 mult and exp my rockets burn up on ~80% terminal velocity ascent. I'll have to mess with numbers anyways.

[Starwaster]

Thanks Starwaster, I can insert decimals now!

Hm, if it is like it should be now... I'll make damn sure it will be as I want instead. Just kidding but really, with 1.12 mult and exp my rockets burn up on ~80% terminal velocity ascent. I'll have to mess with numbers anyways.

Of course! It's your sandbox. Even if I say 'that's how it's supposed to be' doesn't mean you need to accept it.

Though if you're burning up on ascent then your ascent is probably too shallow or your TWR is too high. Are you also using FAR? Or any other mod that affects drag? (which really is just two besides FAR)

[ThreePounds]

I usually go for TWR of no more than 1.6. I usually find myself throttling down even as the fuel gets depleted. It not only makes launches with shockwaveexponent = 1.12 possible but also gives you a pretty good launch profile with F.A.R. if you start your grav turn really early.

[dzikakulka]

Yeah, I possibly overshoot twr, wasn't building small stuff for a long time. But having to be careful on ascent is a pretty sweet addition.

And if anyone is interested, I got closer to my vision by lowering density exp to ~0.5 and temperature exp to 1. It makes you burn much higher up and for longer time but with slightly lower temps to compensate.

From what I've guessed "shockwave" scale and damage caused by it is more linked to G-force or something, not real temperature despite showing celcius.

Thanks again, guys!