stupid_chris Posted April 12, 2015 Author Share Posted April 12, 2015 What I was reporting was that the button doesn't work. I was getting around this on 2014 builds by copying the chute with the correct settings as necessary, which worked... sufficiently. In any case, I've done some fresh testing.One chute:Applies - Yes | Applies to all - N/A | Copies chute - N/A | In game - PassedSymmetric chutes:Applies - Yes | Applies to all - Yes | Copies chute - N/A | In game - Indeterminate. Looks like most settings are correctly saved now, but certain ones like # spare chutes are not. This looks to have improved since 2014 builds.One chute, copied as symmetric:Applies - Yes | Applies to all - N/A | Copies chute - Yes, in editor | In game - Failed, only base chuteI can't reproduce that and no one has reported such a bug since 1.2.2, and that was last summer. I can't help you with only that information. Strip other mods and reproduce that then send me logs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiraiyah Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I know, you said that 64 bit support will be dropped but right now, i just installed linux and want to play .90 64 in it and it seems it's lot more stable than the windows version, and i may stick to this version for few updates to come, so, can i beg for a 64 version at least for .90 with the announcement that the usage and it's risks are up to the user and there will be no support for it? if not, is there a way for me to just compile it for 64 myself? (never done it for ksp so a little help would be appreciated) or does this mod works on linux 64 version? because op post says it's not supporting windows 64 how about linux? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnanimousCoward Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I can't reproduce that and no one has reported such a bug since 1.2.2, and that was last summer. I can't help you with only that information. Strip other mods and reproduce that then send me logs.I've had the same problem sometimes (also on Linux 64-bit). Haven’t reported it, as I found a simple workaround. For me, sometimes (but not always) clicking “apply to all symmetry counterparts†appears not to work (at least, RCS Build Aid shows a fair amount of torque). But if I click to remove the part, then attach it again, then “Apply to all symmetry counterparts†usually works. Occasionally it doesn’t work then either, but removing and reattaching it one more time usually does the trick.I run such a huge modlist that trying to track down every problem ain’t worth it for me, especially if I can get around it simply. If you want, I can do a stripped-down test install to see if I can reproduce it in a very basic setup.- - - Updated - - -I know, you said that 64 bit support will be dropped but right now, i just installed linux and want to play .90 64 in it and it seems it's lot more stable than the windows version, and i may stick to this version for few updates to come, so, can i beg for a 64 version at least for .90 with the announcement that the usage and it's risks are up to the user and there will be no support for it? if not, is there a way for me to just compile it for 64 myself? (never done it for ksp so a little help would be appreciated) or does this mod works on linux 64 version? because op post says it's not supporting windows 64 how about linux?Windows 64-bit isn’t supported. Linux 64-bit is supported, as far as I know, as it’s a lot more stable than the borked Windows 64-bit version. The OP states that Windows 64-bit isn’t supported. For me at least, Linux 64-bit is much more stable than Windows 32-bit ever was... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzyrndm Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I know, you said that 64 bit support will be dropped but right now, i just installed linux and want to play .90 64 in it and it seems it's lot more stable than the windows version, and i may stick to this version for few updates to come, so, can i beg for a 64 version at least for .90 with the announcement that the usage and it's risks are up to the user and there will be no support for it? if not, is there a way for me to just compile it for 64 myself? (never done it for ksp so a little help would be appreciated) or does this mod works on linux 64 version? because op post says it's not supporting windows 64 how about linux?It's only on windows the KSP 64 bit .exe gets locked out, linux is fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiraiyah Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 15, 2015 Author Share Posted April 15, 2015 I've had the same problem sometimes (also on Linux 64-bit). Haven’t reported it, as I found a simple workaround. For me, sometimes (but not always) clicking “apply to all symmetry counterparts†appears not to work (at least, RCS Build Aid shows a fair amount of torque). But if I click to remove the part, then attach it again, then “Apply to all symmetry counterparts†usually works. Occasionally it doesn’t work then either, but removing and reattaching it one more time usually does the trick.I run such a huge modlist that trying to track down every problem ain’t worth it for me, especially if I can get around it simply. If you want, I can do a stripped-down test install to see if I can reproduce it in a very basic setup.Unpredictible/changing behaviour heavily sounds like a bad interaction between mods. So yes, unless you can reproduce that predictibely on an install that only has RealChute, and given I can't get this to happen here, I'm gonna have to assume this isn't on my end of the rope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnanimousCoward Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Unpredictible/changing behaviour heavily sounds like a bad interaction between mods. So yes, unless you can reproduce that predictibely on an install that only has RealChute, and given I can't get this to happen here, I'm gonna have to assume this isn't on my end of the rope.Fair enough, I completely understand. I figured it was probably some dodgy mod interaction. Like I said, it doesn't really bother me anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 18, 2015 Author Share Posted April 18, 2015 In other news, I reworked the deployment curve for the next RealChute version Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futrtrubl Posted April 18, 2015 Share Posted April 18, 2015 Was that to make the rate of change continuous through pre-deployment and deployment, or to reduce max gs, or to match reality? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtedastro Posted April 18, 2015 Share Posted April 18, 2015 To allow more time for the enjoyment of watching the chutes while consuming bacon.....Just a guess...Looks great SC.... I am looking forward to all of the new 'goodies'.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 19, 2015 Author Share Posted April 19, 2015 Was that to make the rate of change continuous through pre-deployment and deployment, or to reduce max gs, or to match reality?All three answers are correct. My past way of proceeding was to make the area change exponantially over time. This would give it plenty of time to react, but the beginning was too "smoot", and the ending a little too rough to my liking. Not only that, but after predeployment, deployment would start again with a rate of change of nearly nothing at first. Therefore I changed it to match a little more reality: instead now the diameter increases linearly. And given the area isgiven by , this causes a quadratic rate of change for the area, which is generally smoother and less rough on the vessel. Given the diameter is already at a given value when deployment starts, this makes the predeployment and deployment curve line up nearly perfectly (it isn't exactly, but the large the difference between predeployment and deployment is in terms of area, the better it will line up. For example the image above is a predeployed area of 2.8m of diameter and 11.3m fully deployed).Overall this should make it much smoother and more realistic on the vessels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeybadga Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 When I customize the main chute and it tells me that the craft is too heavy, how do I balance several chutes together so I don't have either overkill or too little chutes on the vessel? For example if I have one stack chute and a symetrical set of 2-4 radial chutes, when I do apply settings for all of them with the default deployment speed of 6m/s, I end up with an overkill setting.Also, what is the secondary chute setting? Is it only relevant for combo chutes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 20, 2015 Author Share Posted April 20, 2015 When I customize the main chute and it tells me that the craft is too heavy, how do I balance several chutes together so I don't have either overkill or too little chutes on the vessel? For example if I have one stack chute and a symetrical set of 2-4 radial chutes, when I do apply settings for all of them with the default deployment speed of 6m/s, I end up with an overkill setting.Also, what is the secondary chute setting? Is it only relevant for combo chutes?To start with, if you are receiving this warning, make sure that the vessel in the editor is only what is going to land. If you have your launcher and all the rest of the vessel attached to this, RealChute assumes you *also* wants to land that. If what you're actually trying to land really is too heavy for a single chute, you need to tell RealChute how many chutes you'll be using. In the part of the window that says "calculations", where you input the landing speed, there is a field that says "parachutes used". Set this to the number of parachutes you'll be using to land that craft. So for example for what you said, if you had a stack chute and four radials, you'd put in 6. One for each radial, and two for both chutes on the stack chute. The secondary chute setting is for parachute that have a second chute on the part. There's virtually no limit to how many chutes you can have on one part. The editor window separates them so you can edit them separately, and the second chute appears after the "secondary chute" demarkation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeybadga Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Great! Thanks a lot for the clarification. I'm getting the idea. I was already making sure that when configuring the chutes, only the module that I wanted to land was in the editor.So, when I set the total number of chutes to 6 in the settings of all the different chutes, does it take into account that the max diameter of a stack chute is not the same as a radial one? Just asking because what I'm thinking in my simple mind is that the system might assume that I'm using 3 of those big stack chutes instead of one stack and four little radials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 Great! Thanks a lot for the clarification. I'm getting the idea. I was already making sure that when configuring the chutes, only the module that I wanted to land was in the editor.So, when I set the total number of chutes to 6 in the settings of all the different chutes, does it take into account that the max diameter of a stack chute is not the same as a radial one? Just asking because what I'm thinking in my simple mind is that the system might assume that I'm using 3 of those big stack chutes instead of one stack and four little radials.Are you confusing terms here? The stack chute is not the cone chute (the pointy one). The stack chute is the inline chute you can, well, stack things on top of. Once this is cleared, I also need to point out that the maximum diameter is not set by the part, it's set by the parachute canopy itself. Single chutes have a 70m maximu diameter, while triple ones have a 121m maximum diameter (it's the exact equivalent of three 70m chutes). The stack chute has two single chutes, so they have the same maximum diameter as the radials. If you meant the cone chute which has a triple chute, then no it will not account for it's different max diameter as it's trying to split the charge evenly. But then again, for complex situations like this, it might get easier to calculate this yourself and then use the manual editor to plug in parachute diameters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeybadga Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Once this is cleared, I also need to point out that the maximum diameter is not set by the part, it's set by the parachute canopy itself.That's what I was not aware of. Thanks again for the clarification.I don't think that I'm confusing terms, I know the difference between stack, radial and cone chutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legochamp75 Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Awesome mod, I love it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frisch Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Suddenly only "bacon" is available. ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzyrndm Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 You have the wrong version (thats the April fools joke). Make sure you download 1.3.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupid_chris Posted April 23, 2015 Author Share Posted April 23, 2015 Suddenly only "bacon" is available. ????Why would you want anything other than Bacon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtedastro Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Ah, I thought i could smell the 'thought' of bacon......Oh the sweet, sweet mysterious bacon...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireFaced Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I'm having an issue where KSP hangs on loading "RealChute/Parts/radial_chute/RC_radial". I've tried reinstalling RealChute, but it still hangs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowgan Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I'm having an issue where KSP hangs on loading "RealChute/Parts/radial_chute/RC_radial". I've tried reinstalling RealChute, but it still hangs.Logs, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireFaced Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Logs, please.So, I installed BD armory, and saw your post. I installed RealChute, and this time it worked. I will come back to the thread if it does it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireFaced Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Logs, please.And of course I posted too soon. It got to loading the file and is hanging. I guess that's from reading the log too early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.