From the bottom up, here is the spacecraft I've been experimenting with in the sandbox mode. Took a couple of cues from Scott Manley's tutorials.
LV-T30 engine
FL-T100 fuel tank
Second FL-T100 fuel tank
Third FL-T100 fuel tank
MK1 command pod
Mk16 parachute
(appropriately staged engine and parachute, using SAS)
With this configuration and some experimentation with throttle and angle of ascent, I can achieve altitudes of up to 70 km straight up, but at those altitudes I'm still losing the spacecraft due to "chute destroyed by aero forces and heat" on descent. Even angling the ascent direction thirty or so degrees off of vertical did not help.
So on a hunch, I added a component to the stack.
LV-T30 engine
FL-T100 fuel tank
Second FL-T100 fuel tank
Third FL-T100 fuel tank
TD-12 decoupler
MK1 command pod
Mk16 parachute
(also appropriately staged, engine, decoupler, parachute, using SAS)
The parachute is now more than capable of surviving even vertical descents from 70 km, since I dump all that excess weight before deploying it.
In real life, a parachute can only function properly if it is not overloaded. The information in the program itself and the KSP wiki are a bit lacking on the technical specifications of the chute and the mass it is rated to carry. For that matter, there's no mass figures on any of the other components. A google search didn't turn up much more.
I guess my question is: In KSP, are things like trying to figure the load on the chute just guesswork, or can we really apply rocket science to it?