Sesambrot

Actually quite excited about the upcoming update! My only concern being; "How the hell am I going to get these huge HX parts into orbit with FAR installed?!"

Question: What does that rule-adjustment mean for add-ons like ModStats? Frankly I've been waiting for this rule, because I don't want any data to be sent unless I say I want to send that data and I don't want to be required to jump through hoops in order to prevent it. The problem in this particular case being, that it tends to be included in a couple of mods now and it's opt-out by default. The argument could and has been made that only the IP and the mods you use don't qualify as personally identifiable data, so am I right to assume that under the new rules nothing will have to change?

Yeah, I should've actually taken a closer look at the code right away, it's a distinction for those who have/don't have it installed. If I'm reading it right only one of those codeblocks actually does anything depending on whether you do or don't have it, so leave it as is, especially if it works anyway! And thanks for fixing it!

Does it require Tweakable Everything?

You know, I'm no coder either, but just to be safe anyone wanting to take a shot at this, here's the whole thing: https://github.com/e-dog/ProceduralFairings/blob/master/Source/FairingDecoupler.cs And just to add some context; the original creator is refusing to fix it because Squad didn't implement procedural cost generation... Make of that what you will, but for someone who knows what he's doing this is probably rather simple. And just so everybody is aware of what exactly you're dealing with here: The mod in question: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/39512-0-24-Procedural-Fairings-3-06-%28July-20%29 It's liscence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

Well, the vessel used only stock parachutes, but I was wondering if RealChutes may be causing it considering it does mess with the stock-chutes as well. Then again I've never had that issue before, so I figured I'd mention it, might very well be RealChutes though I guess...

Same here actually, seems to work as intended now on 64bit. The only problem I keep running into now, is that when I "revert to launch", I get "[Exception]NullReferenceExceptions: Object reference not set to an instance of an object" for all the radial chutes on the vessel, which also breaks them. It can be avoided by reverting to the VAB instead and then simply launching again. Loading a save-file with a vessel at the launchpad has the same effect on it's radial chutes, which I guess isn't surprising.

Could somebody at least acknowledge that the issues I'm having aren't imaginary? Even using your math, 3 chutes should be more than enough to land the damn thing safely, but even 6 don't... What's going on, am I the only one having those issues? EDIT: For that matter, does it work with RealChute or not? The OP ain't exactly clear on that....

Come to think of it, could FAR be the problem? EDIT: Nope just tested it, same results...

That was quick, just tested it, haven't had any issues yet, but the calculation is still off... See, here's the thing I was talking about: Floating down at 4.5m/s, and safely landed at KSC, but DebRefund still thinks it's going to crash. I've noticed the config-file you included in the new download, any suggestion on what values would be in line with the results seen above?

Not only are they harsh, they are also completely off. Tested it earlier: 1x Decoupler 1x FL-T200 1x FL-T400 1x LV-T30 3x Mk2-R Radial Mount Parachute If you watch it, it sails down at 4m/s with fully deployed chutes and lands fully intact, but if you don't watch it DebRefund tells you it crashed and couldn't be recovered. Something seems off with the drag-calculations... EDIT: Another test... Yeah, pretty sure this isn't working properly... Are you taking into account that empty fueltanks/boosters weigh only about 10-15% of their initial mass? Minus the chutes, that thing that 6 chutes supposedly couldn't keep from crashing wieghs only 1.625t, at that being not even twice as heavy as the six chutes attached to it..........

sry, double post... not used to posts having to be "approved"....