stupid_chris

Update 1.4.5 for KSP 1.3.1 has been released! Changelog: November 30th 2017 v1.4.5 -Compatibility for KSP 1.3.1 -Fixed issue with editor window -Implemented increments for in flight window sliders -Solution-wise code cleanup/optimizations Sorry for the delay again! Enjoy folks!

Sorry guys. I'm currently working 40h/wk to make both ends meet on top of a full time 5 course uni schedule. I'll push an update when I get the time, probably this week or the next one. Thanks for your patience everyone

First one is surprisingly hard to implement. If I just time it, the craft might actually be stable. This could produce a lot of weirdness. Adding a buffer time is definitely not a good solution. It's important to note that the chutes already uses the parts speed, not the crafts speed. Where I'm going is that there's no ideal solution to this problem. It's going to do wonky things no matter how that's set up, this is a limitation of having simulated parachutes and not emergent behaviour which would require cloth physics... and I'm not touching this in Unity. I recommend you try to land your crafts in a stable position. For the second, the indicator is not a truth teller. It's a helping tool to give you a gross idea of what might or might not work. My personal rule of thumb is to not deploy any main chute above 5km up and above 250m/s, and a drogue above 8km and above 330m/s Nope, it's either a stack (double deployed chute) or combo (main/drogue).

@felcas Starwaster pretty much hit the nail on the head. There is no such "safety indicator" in real life. This is the extra step I took for everyone to help them gage when they could or should open their chutes. If you don't know around what altitude you'll be able to open them, then just do it manually.

You are right, it's purely aesthetic.

For the nth time, contracts are not my ball. I can only tell stock that theses parts can be used for contracts, the contract text is absolutely not my doing. And most settings are fairly straightforward and self explanatory.

What has just been said above is true. An extra category is added for parachutes only.

Heya all! Compatibility update for 1.3. A few things are still weird on the code side but it works fine, so it'll do for now while RC2 is in dev. Changelog: June 1st 2017 v1.4.4 -RealChute 1.3 compatibility update -Recompiled and fixed missing parameters -Updated to CompatibilityChecker 6 -Fixed custom filters not showing in the editor -Fixed settings button appearing in flight Enjoy!

I should be able to able to recompile tonight

nay, tis I, the frenchiest fry. @AmpsterMan love me

Oh damn I skimmed right over this in the midst of finals madness. Done now. And yes, it does make a lot of sense to drop FAR density calcs if Stock actually has aero that doesn't throw matches at a gas station for giggles. On another brighter note, last final is in a few hours. Good things may come soon to those who are patient enough

Looks like it could be reduced to simply grabbing the method with Single and the signature since only one exists now.

If you don't plan to actually maintain it, don't make a new thread for it.

Awesome, good to know, I might recompile and rerelease it myself at some point

I don't plan to do it in any relatively close future. On the bright side, the license is open.

I do, though it's on hold like a lot of my projects right now, for personal reasons.

No. It's really really really far from being that simple for this one, and will require a lot of new code that would remove entirely the old craft checker and replace it with a brand new one, because this system is stupid and the devs messed it up if they intended it to be moddable.

I am following the thread, and I have seen every reply in here. I've however chosen to ignore them. Also, you forgot to add a license and it is needs to comply with the in place CC-BY-SA license.

Guys. It's parts. No update needed. Just enjoy the mod.

For the first part what is happening is what /should/ happen. The parachute is really small. I won't buff it for fun. Second part, contracts aren't generated by RealChute.

That's why there is a a video AND a FAQ in the OP.

... and then people wonder why I'm distancing myself from KSP. This is a pretty sad attitude. Anyway, OP updated, and download now on SpaceDock as well. Enjoy!

Hi everyone! Just a short message to let you guys know that none other than @Starwaster will be making the compatibility updates for RealChute until RealChute2 is ready. Thank you all and see you around

Hello people! Time for a little announcement. As most of you might have noticed, I have been rather inactive from here in the past few months. There are multiple reasons for that. First off, let's just say that RealLife™ got in the way. Work and personal time took most of my summer. As a matter of fact, I did not touch anything prog related for the whole summer, and instead tried to focus on enjoying my vacation. Now that college is back on, I'm starting to dabble back into my projects. The other reason of my inactivity here is that other projects, notably a completely new game I'm working on with friends, are starting to take up large amounts of my time. For this reason, I have decided to press the brake a bit on RealChute matters. I'm not abandoning this completely, but given that modding is a very high expanse and very low return activity, and that on all fronts, I definitely do not have as much time to accord to this. Therefore, I am looking for a maintainer for RealChute. I'm talking here about someone that would manage the current 1.x versions of RealChute to keep them working, compatible, and on level with KSP's progress. The reason for this, is that updating RealChute constantly to the core game while working on RealChute2 is highly counterproductive, and prevents me to correctly focus on new stuff. Please PM me if you desire to help. I already do have quite a handful of names in mind, but I also want to see who will come forward on their own, as I'm not willing to pass this on to just anyone. Thank you, and see you all around. Chris

yes, the extractor does need both. and thanks, appreciate the attribution