Gargamel

Yes, I believe it was.

If you're making more than a couple of them, then yeah, but the setup process for CNC results in a completed item anyways, so if all you can find is a skilled guy with a manual lathe, you'll be set too. Might even be quicker.

But does that include the mass of the bottle and cap? And coke isn't exactly the same density as water, so if a 1 liter bottle is exactly 1 liter of Coke, it won't be the same mass as 1 liter of water. Which is about 2 pounds. Ha!

Somebody has been to Philmont! I watched a crew from Japan de-pack and line up their packs in a row at one base, one of the kids must have had something tasty open in his pack, because a swarm of minibears just descended and tore the upper compartment of his pack to shreds.

I often have the opposite problem, crew is autoloaded by some mod, and I forget to remove them. Not paying attention on the pad, and launching a couple kerbals to Duna on a mission that was a simple station expansion module. Not enough LS to make it to minmus, let alone Duna. Time to go get them.

I think, then, you are asking for it to be attached to two parts at once, which you can't do. The physics calculates the stresses through the parent parts all the way up to the root part. So if the engine is a child of the fuselage, it will only flex if the fuselage flexes, regardless of where it is located. To have it flex with the wing, but have the mass attached to the fuselage, breaks physics in real life and in the game. The wing flexes based on the load being applied to it, and the engine is part of that load. But now we are asking for the game to compute stresses in multiple directions, and they converge again on the fuselage part, this would probably lead to some serious kraken attacks, unless the entire physics engine is re-written for this tool. Perhaps, a better tool to have in this case, would be a "snap to part" tool. I can select the engine, and then select the fuselage, and it would align the engine with the fuselage, while keeping it attached to the wing. You can then use the offset tool to line it up on the wing correctly. This would also help with those situations where you get hard to fix off set thrusts, because one part early on was skewed a bit. This is why it is usually considered the best practice to build a wing with one segment attached to the fuselage, and the rest of the wing off that one segment. Then the entire wing can be handled as an individual item, or for large wings a few pieces. But, you're absolutely correct about the rest of the parts. Switching out the main part on a service module or what not is a total pain, having to remove a dozen little items, and then replace them. So maybe a replace part tool, where you can pick the part, then pick one off the VAB/SPH list to replace it with, and the editor does it's best to re-attach everything where it was before. So the identical tank, just with another fuel type, should go back together very easily. But when you realize you need that tank that is just a bit bigger, you may have to play with the parts a bit after swapping out. So instead of a single "Change Parent" tool, maybe two separate tools would fit both your needs nicely?

Not an idiot at all, very interesting idea, but I have some issues. First off, I think this just might break physics in the game. The game calculates stresses from one part to the next, and if you have disrupted the sequence of the tree, the physics will get calculated differently. This may result in high drags, or even just the game crashing outright. I think there are lot of major hurdles to having the game accept a restructured part tree. Then I can just grab the next part in line, and set it aside. I can do this for any parts coming from the part in question. I can then replace the part, and then put stuff back on. But if the stuff doesn't line up right, I can just use the offset tool. Now If I re-parent the parts after it, and the new part is not the identical size and shape, then I still have to remove them all and re-attach. Plus, again, the physics calculations might be all wonky. So either way, if it looks wonky after replacing the part, I still have to re-attach and re-align everything anyways, but the as is way doesn't risk physics problems. I forget the shortcut (might even be a mod), but there is already a way to go past the limits of the stock offset tool. That will allow you to do just that. Place your engine on the fuselage as desired, and then offset and rotate to the desired location. Using this method, you could theoretically build a vessel with a root part, and only one level of parts off of it, which is pretty much what you are suggesting.

Oh, yeah, I completely misunderstood the question being asked. So we're talking about either stage recovery mods or split-timeline mods then. Still something we'll never see in stock, but they modding community has you pretty well covered. And you cold still use one of the programming language mods in conjunction with a split-timeline mod to actually have your boosters be completely automated.

This is what I was envisioning when I made my first comment. It should be stock alike, so a simple LS, single resource over time, with a waste product, and simple ways to handle both. Nothing complicated, just another element to consider when planning missions.

I believe, and I'm paraphrasing here, he said, "Oh that's awesome, but we need to kill it with fire."

We'll probably never see this is stock, but KPRC, KOS, and I believe MJ (among others) are all programmable to do exactly what you are asking.

My other laptop still has .21 and .24 (ish... I don't remember) running on them.

And this why I love this.... nobody is sure whether I'm serious or not....

You should read the thread. There's a couple of them actually. Scott even throws his two cents in.

Which is basically a form of propeller, a ducted fan.

Either way, I wasn't forgetting, as I don't recall it. LOL. But yeah, It's not that I'm anti-hawking here, I'm not, I just think there are better ways to create memorials within the game rather than Cameo's. The Ground stations, easter eggs, etc. That was my real point, and I distracted myself on another tangent.

Well, there is this mod....

No, cause I hadn't heard of that one....

So did a lot of other people, countless others. Why no memorials for them? Heck, I'd say Feynman and Sagan would deserve a cameo role before Hawking. Hawking was a genius, who did some amazing work in the world of physics, but not more than any other physicist who also has ground breaking work. What made him famous was his disease, and his ability to both continue to work and even survive. He was a great physicist, but no greater than any other great physicist.

I would find it hard to disagree with anybody who ranks squirrels high on the cuteness scale, but they are ingenious determined acrobatic monstrosities that will not let any engineer defeat them. But here's what I like to do with squirrels. I'll find a couple as they are collecting and burying their nuts for the winter. When they aren't looking, I go and replace the nuts with a grilled cheese sandwich. Then, in the spring, when they go to dig up the nuts, I make sure I have a camera ready to capture the look of total shock and surprise on their fuzzy little faces as they dig up my sandwich. So worth the effort.

Geometrically, I guess your definition is still good. Out of curiosity, why? And I have no idea if there is a mod.

A lot of those would be spiders sent out over the net by the search engines. The spiders just jump from link to link to see what they can find and report back to HQ.

There really isn't. Squirrels are determined little suckers.

They should have just hit Ctrl-X... reset that trim.

Well, according to google, the Centroid is basically the COM.... Are you looking for the Center of mass? I know there are other uses of the word, but mainly in geometry. With our ships being pretty complex shapes for this discussion, I don't think finding the centroid of a vessel would be easy, or really useful. If you are looking for COM, theres buttons on the bottoom of the editor screen that enable them already...... But I don't think this is what you want, is it?