StarkRG

Is kerbal poo considered waste or waste water? It's definitely got a lot of water in it (to the point that on extended space missions you'd want to recover most of the water before using it for fertilizer), but I think it's generally considered solid waste. I'm almost certain ISS doesn't dump anything overboard so all the poo would have to return in one of the non-reusable vehicles like the Cygnus. In this case somewhere around 75% of the food becomes waste (assuming the kerbals don't gain or lose weight, the remainder is used as energy which eventually becomes heat, which might be a nice tie-in to KSP Interstellar), add the packaging and you're probably pushing 90%. Or perhaps kerbals don't have separate urinary and intestinal tracts and just have a cloaca like a bird, reptile, or monotreme (this would also suggest kerbals lay and hatch from eggs).

It's possible that the Mod itself could be freely available but the app could be paid. IANAL, nor have I studied the mod licensing arrangement so take this with a grain of NaCl. Also: Cannot wait for the android version! I would really like to be able to get mod data to/from the app, specifically FAR (air density, terminal velocity), MechJeb/Engineer (all the nifty data goodies, and possibly a few MechJeb workings such as the maneuver planner and Smart ASS), and Remote Tech (Mission Control connectivity as well as the ability to change dish targets and activate/deactivate antennas and dishes, the control computer would be helpful too, though I generally use MechJeb for this).

Yes, that's exactly what I'm suggesting. It would also be nice to be able to change the primary name when selecting it to launch (so I can launch several identical satellites with different names without having to zoom inside my fairing to change the name which is difficult when the craft wobbles even slightly).

I'm using the same mods, except for Station Science, along with several others and it's working fine for me. MJ is working fine too. What I'd really like to see is a directional target option so I can set a dish to always point away from the planet. This would allow two major improvements. One is that it means I can tell a dish to always point away from the planet which therefore always connects to whatever comsat is more or less directly overhead. I realize omnidirectional antennas do this but I have my comsat network set up at 4875km meaning the small antenna won't reach and I haven't yet researched the longer antenna. (The reason I have the network set so high is because I'm using a mod which provides small, low-powered dishes with very narrow angles) The other thing this option would allow is building something akin to the deep space network, ground-based dishes strategically placed around the globe allowing a 360 degree view of the Kerbolar system. If you include another modification allowing landed craft to network with mission control as if by hard-wire (perhaps make it a part which only works while stationary on the surface). I like to avoid using the "Active Craft" target as it seems a little too cheaty, and besides, if you have something pointed in your general direction but there's a moon in the way, a relay sat can pick up the transmission and bounce it around the obstacle. At first I was going to ask for a set of directional targets based on the orbit (pro-/retro-grade, etc.), but currently I can only think of a use for the +radial direction, as stated above. In fact, since +radial would differ depending on how eccentric your orbit was, a "point away from currently orbited body" option would be best. (Plus you would end up with range cones sweeping across the Kerbolar system, akin to a lighthouse, and that would be damned cool)

I realize we can change the name in flight but it would be nice for detached probes to already have names different from the parent spacecraft. Example: I want to be able to create a spacecraft named "Cassini", and have a probe detach called "Huygens". Currently the detached probes simply copy the name of the parent spacecraft with "probe" tacked on to the end (as if they're sort of glorified debris, which I guess is essentially how the game views them). This is only marginally useful since often you'll have more than one probe and they'll all end up with the same name and a lander or rover shouldn't be called "probes". I would suggest that the mechanic to implement this would be to have a name attached to each pod/probe core with defaults based on the parent spacecraft's name (similar to how it works currently). This would also allow the probes to have sequential names such as Parent Spacecraft Probe 1 and Parent Spacecraft Probe 2 (if you wanted to be really fancy you could try to detect what kind of vehicle it is, if it has wheels it's a rover, if it has landing legs it's a lander, if it's neither of those but it's crewed it's a shuttle or something). The names should be editable within the VAB/SPH as well as being able to change them in flight. Presumably you'd have to have some way of figuring out which pod or probe core gets the roll of the parent spacecraft, and thus the primary name, when it isn't the root component (when it is the root the choice is obvious). Two reasonable choices are the pod/core which is highest (the downside being forward-placed probes would now be the parent) or the pod/core which is placed first (the downside being aft-placed rovers become the parent. Another option, though more fiddly and probably not worth doing, would be to provide a hierarchy of precedence (crew capsules take precedence over non-crewed probes, for example). But, of course, these defaults can be overridden by the user specifying which pod gets which name. A second suggestion to this would be to enable a parent spacecraft to have one name at launch and, after separation, each individual probe gets a different name. For example you could launch a spacecraft called "Cassini/Huygens" and then have "Huygens detach" and do its thing while "Cassini" goes off and does another. In other words they have one name while combined and different ones when separated.

Presumably the reason this is considered "robotics" is because it's included in the Magic Smoke Industries/Infernal Robotics mod. Unless you're suggesting a kerbal has to get out and manually operate the part it is robotic. The robotic arm on the Space Shuttle and ISS are still robotic arms despite the fact that they require a human to operate them. A non-autonomous robot is still a robot.

The "snap" is 15 degrees, the shift-rotate is 5 (you can get more snap and symmetry options with the Editor Extensions mod. I don't think it's any more hidden than any of the other key bindings. That'd be like saying that the different camera modes or quicksave are hidden. They're not hidden, there just isn't a built-in key reference so you have to pull out your phone or tablet to look them up.

It does sound an awful lot like the functionality included in Infernal Robotics, though it has been a while since I played around with it. They have rotator parts that do exactly what you're talking about here.