Spricigo

Probably SAS overcorrection. Because misalignment in RCS thrusters, the command for translation cause unintended rotation (and vice versa) SAS try to use RCS to maintain orientation but that causes more unintended movement that SAS struggle to control. You can avoid that by setting your RCS thrusters to not answer to rotation commands on the right click menu(need advanced tweakables ebabled on settings) Another possibility is that your craft is flexing and SAS is trying to follow your control point (pod/probe/port) while it wobble around. In that case you need either a more rigidly craft or less powerful reaction wheels/RCS thrusters. More reaction wheels gives more torque, more RCS thrusters gives more thrust (that can generate more torque). It may be necessary to maneuvering a big ship with reasonable velocity but usually make the issues mentioned above worse. For more specific advice relative to your craft we will need more info about it. A few images(worth more than words) of the craft is the ideal. In any case a lot changed from version 0.90 and your craft may benefit from an update.

That's a different thing and I'm perfectly fine with it. As I'm ok with the idea of alternative solar systems, including randomly generated in a per save basis. What I consider a bad idea is to not have the same default solar system. How those are created don't matter, but once made into the stock system any change need to be very carefully considered.

Well I have some idea what would make it more interesting for me. Unfortunately 1) It Is just ideas and I may be wrong 2) no idea if it will be interesting for anyone else.

They don't need, but IMHO it's a good thing they have. Random planets from a mod can be interesting but i have a big no for random stocks planets.

Maybe, but i really don't care that much to make an 'uproar'. And I thing the devs should also consider the opinions of the silent majority, not only the vocal minorities.

Visual pollution of the tracking station? More lifeless rocks to not visit (like Dres)? That said, if celestial bodies were to be added to the game. And if the devs wanted my opinion in particular about it: 1. A moon in retrograde orbit around its parent. 2. A tiny comet, in a highly elliptical and long orbit. I'd be grateful for a mod that add only one retrograde moon at no more than three comets. Not something the lack ot is 'ruining my gameplay' just that 'would be cool'

I think it is already a 'popular' idea that basically ask for the ability to make modded parts. Something make me consider already in game. The idea of making it an in-game thing is somewhat original. But I really don't see it as a benefit. Also, I'm very skeptical about the idea of including [things mods do] in the core game. It turns something completely optional (just don't download the damm thing if you don't want it) into something I have to deal with in some way.

Instead of cutscenes (annoying videos interrupting the game) how about unlockable extras (the same videos accessible in a convenient [extras] menu after you fulfill the requirements) Because I really don't care as long as I can ignore it conveniently. (Also I find the statue idea way cooler than cutscenes)

I''m not sure that value is correct, maybe like 85%, making/testing stuff 10% drinking coffee and 5% laughing with our suggestions? Now seriously: what you said is also one of the reason why its often more probable to a feature be provided by mods. Mods can be restricted to a few aspects of the game while counting with the game developers to have done enough to ensure a solid base to build upon. Also it can be focused in the needs /desires of a small part of the player that will install the mod instead of the whole playerbase

Like in real life. But in KSP we usually don't devote large amounts of computational power for those calculations. We can't really expect a nicely placed screw when we drive it with a hammer.

didn't find a reason either...but also didn't find a (good enough) reason to have it. Occam votes no.

Touché! Odd thing is that I build a considerable infrastructure (bases, station, reusable landers, reusable transfer vehicles) for other uses. Still, I suppose that is part of the issue for others.

Recruit?! I think you mean rescue. There is some mods to add that kind of stuff(cities/bases/building), some even to make those locations functional in some way. The performance hit is considerable (reason why I don't want it in the stock game)

I suppose that was a change to the description to avoid confusion since, as others explained, pods receive SAS from the pilot (IIRC in sandbox astronauts effectively have all specialization at lvl5). Unless the last time you played was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far way. KSP used to be very different in ancient times.

That is not a "solution", that is making the logistical nighmare uptoeleven worse. Also "Been there, done that". We* appreciate that people have ways to deal with the issue and we considered adopting or own contingencies. Nonetheless or frustration remains because we didn't find reliable ways to: 1) filter out undesirable mission parameters. 2) avoid an excessive complicated infrastructure just for tourism. 3) keep the commitment of contracts (number and time) to tourism manageable. I'd be perfectly fine if those more convenient mission offered considerable lower rewards. (Before someone argues the mess is a 'balance' thing) *assuming other people have the same perception and experience.

But seem you mised the same happens with astronaut skills. In career kerbals gain experience and levels to unlock skils. In sandbox you have access to all skills and astronauts are all max level. People reading those question will generally answer It with career in mind. That's because 1) many questions originate from difficulties with the limitations present in carrer (part count, ship sizes, technology, astronaut level,...) 2) many questions originate from difficulties with contract 3) people that reply play carrer and are used to that perpective. 4) what works for carrer usually also works for sandbox. Sometimes we may be taken by surprise by a limitation of sandbox (e.g. R&D building closed) that requires a different approach (loonking online for technology and parts description) PS: I guess the game tell us about the difference in that little window that we close without reading just before opening VAB/SPH/Mission Control or in the Create Game window. I suppose I read it years ago when I started my first game. By now is assimilated knowledge I don't need to check whete it comes from.

which means that everything one can unlock on carrer/science you already have by default.

But you probably had seen some with PE/AP that close and inclination just 180° wrong.

^This. As for the sattelites you can jut build it and use [Cheats] [set orbit] in debug menu to put then in place. Or just disable comnet,

as you can see there are lot of options to know the deltaV and/or when to launch. In any case, using the cheat test menu can make the avaluation of the craft a lot more easier.

No you don't need it if you can still avoid overheating and crashing. Its even inadvisable in some sense, given the chance that this 'improvement' end up causing trouble in the launch/orbit. That said, being able to keep high AoA is very useful to avoid overheating and crashing In part motivated by this thread, in part because it was in my to do list for a awhile I decide to design something similar. If you want some ideas take a look at Oroshi and Selene.

Due to lack of experience a few mistakes are expected but nothing serious. Looking at your design it don't seem to be capable to hold high AoA for much long. Changing the Swivel for a terrier and rearranging the fuel tanks can help to have a CoM that 1) don't shift and 2 ) is not so far behind. Alternatively a more controllable plane can dive faster into the low atmosphere before building up much heat and then assume a high AoA to slowdown. Finally, notice that for what you are doing you don't need a good plane, just a mediocre glider. In fact, a 'better' plane may have worse performance for the task at hand.

The limited control when out of signal can as easily be used as an argument against the idea. Personally I'd like to have the ability to auto-execute planned maneuvers added to high level pilots. It could as well be provided for high tech probecore or a new part. I don't see that happening in stock and the autopilot mods available are all way more complex (complete?)

If it is returning with important science from somewhere yuo may instead send a astronaut in EVA to collect the science.

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/KerbNet