pincushionman

Truly aerobatic craft have the neutral center of lift (or whatever it actually is in real life) as far forward as you can get it without losing control (some planes like the F-16 are actually longitudinally unstable for this exact purpose). Ideally, use a single fuel tank centered as close to the center of mass as you can get it so it won't vary through the flight, and nail that CoL marker right on top of it, too. Then give yourself loads of pitch authority. But Snark is right - a picture is worth a thousand words.

The RoveMate is a big pain in the butt when it comes to that. I feel your pain.

I don't recall ever seeing that warning before. Also, what do you mean by "navball is polar"? Unfortunately we can't help much unless you post a few pics so we can see what problem you're having. Make sure you include a closeup on the core(s) you're using and a shot of when you go to the launchpad so we can see the navball symptoms. You say you're not using MechJeb, but are you using any other mods? Oh, and welcome to the forums! You'll be glad you came.

Why? Just to admire them? The ability to build and modify your ships is an integral part of the game.

Just throwing this into the ring - it's also on GOG and…Amazon, I think? The real answer might be whether it's on discount any of these places when you intend to buy, if you care about that. It's totally worth full price.

You're not going to be using transfer orbits of any kind in interstellar travel. While the forces underlying the system are the same, the galactic environment is far different from a star system. One is a collection of small discrete point sources of mass dominated by a large central body. The other is a more or less continuous distribution of mass (in the large scale) from the center to far beyond the visible edge. As a result, stars don't "orbit" the galactic center in clearly-defined Keplerian ellipses, and the speeds of individual stars don't vary very much, especially between bodies that are close together. Instead, you end up with families of stars coursing through space at pretty much the same velocity (speed and direction). Plus, any "small" differences wll be dwarfed by the enormous speeds you'd need to attain to make these journeys in any kind of "reasonable" time frame, or even to escape from your first star.

Hedgehogs FTW! …seriously, though, I haven't had one of those, or a rabbit, in years. I've got a dog and a cat.

From what I understand, the temperature reduction (throughout the engine, not just the incoming air) allows increased RPM and works for both piston and jets. But on turbojets and low-bypass-ratio turbofans, you also increase the mass flow rate, which is a key variable in the thrust equation.

Water injection has been used in the past to increase jet engine thrust. A good example is getting early BUFFs off the ground. But there are serious drawbacks in weight and efficiency for doing it.

Threads like this have been locked before...but Vanamonde has obviously seen it and he hasn't locked this one yet ('less somebody spoofin' his account)...so I guess I don't know what to think. However, I certainly can't identify any regular users as male or female. 'Course, I ain't been lookin', neither.

@Slabgizor117, if I insulted your intelligence in my post, I apologize for that. It wasn't my intent to do so. But hear me out on this. I don't know you from Adam. I don't know if you have any experience with firearms, or how much exposure you might have had with them at home. How smart you are doesn't matter; A great many gun injuries are accidents (I'd say most, probably, but I wasn't able to tell from the information I could easily find, so let's just stick with "many"). Accidents aren't caused by dumb people; they're caused by people who make mistakes. Smart people are as prone to this as anybody else. I'm not so naive to believe that if you misuse a firearm, it's a sure sign that somebody is going to be injured or killed. Lots of different things get misused every day and nobody gets hurt because of it. But by not misusing something, you eliminate, as much as you can, any risk of accident-due-to-misuse. In the United States - where I am posting from (I don't know where you are) - there is controversy about guns. Whether your position is for or against, somebody is going to take issue with it. Especially if said position implies, rightly or wrongly, a lack of respect for safety. "Plays with" does this, to the general public. This forum is not dedicated to gun enthusiasts or experts. Now, that last part's the real rub here. We may not be dedicated to guns here, but our pages and threads are viewable by the public. We even show up in Google results. That means anybody and their mother could accidentally stumble on this thread - including kids who may not know better. Vanishlingly unlikely, but I know I would be heartbroken if it turns out some kid stumbled on our conversation here, saw smart people talking about playing with guns like it was no big thing, got the wrong idea, and somebody ended up getting hurt because nobody took the time to stress the seriousness of this. The posts above between Camcha and GoSlash27 is kinda similar - we don't want to be giving out bogus legal advice either. The [dadmode] I inserted isn't entirely a joke - the thought of my sons finding bad information on the internet and then doing something totally stupid because they didn't check up on it first frankly scares the pants off of me. I really am concerned about anyone - you, me, random joe on his web broser - getting the wrong idea about this simply because of how the conversation went. So again, I'm sorry for any insult implied by my post. But I hope you can understand were I'm coming from, and why I posted what I did. We cool now?

It does, very much. All your navball stuff will be 180 degrees out of whack, and you can't point relative to a maneuver marker you can't see.

Hell yes.

Yup. Where do you think we got it from? Hint: a great many of the rather odd terms thrown about here (such as "lawn dart" and "lithobrake") came here because many users brought the jargon from the real-world fields with them.

I personally just window 1600x900 on my 1080p monitor. I actually don't mind that it isn't maximized.

That will also be uncomfortable in the left hand. Speaking as a Precision 2 user here. Here's the other thing, though - does RCS even DO throttleable thrust? Or is it all-or-nothing you control by applying discrete bursts? If it's the latter you gain nothing by using an analog axis.

I'd recommend: Right hand- Logitech, rotation controls. This would be consistent with normal flight controls. Left hand- 2-axis stick with the trigger and big thumb button. The problem is how unintuitive this might be. You really want left-right and up-down to be on the axes, and you could get away with fore-aft on the thumb-trigger; but with the stick sitting normally on the desk your brain might have some trouble with it. Notice how the translation control in Nibb31's pics is just…different? There's a reason for that. If you're up for it, you may want to consider building a mount to hold the stick base sideways (so the stick points toward you), disassembling the handle, and modifying it so you grab it like that translation control. If you're careful, you could do it without having to mess with the wiring in the stick. Do you have a picture of the 2-axis stick?

We need more multicoupler options anyway, really.

Are you a user? Do you make ships and press "save"? If yes to both these questions, then you have a user-made .craft file. This does sound like a silly question. Or was this just trolling?

I was afraid you were going to say that. [dadmode]Guns are tools, not toys. "Playing" with them can promote bad habits about gun safety. Bad habits can lead to accidents, and when guns are involved, accidents can be a whole lot worse than bloody noses and broken arms.[/dadmode] Now, you shouldn't assume I don't think guns can't be fun. Quite the opposite, in fact. Recreational shooting is, after all, a thing. But the guns are always dangerous and need to be treated with respect.

I suspect the console manufacturers demanded such a system. If they have a system compatible of interfacing with the different console achievement systems, it should be little effort to extend to Steam or GOG.

A licensed gunsmith. I know you said you don't intend to restore it, but simply cutting the bolt free may be enough to make it dangerously functional, so you need to take any work you do on it very seriously. Local gun club members might know, but they'd probably point you to a gun shop anyway, so why complicate things? A gunsmith's job is building, maintaining, and restoring these things, and it won't cost anything to just show it to them. They would also be in a position to know what steps need to be taken to properly de-mil the piece, such as welding a rod down the barrel and painting the muzzle orange.

If it's been de-mil'd and you want it restored, you need a proper gunsmith to ensure it's safe. It would be unwise to assume that "the bolt is welded to the receiver" is the ONLY thing wrong with it.

Ah, you're assuming (KSP) struts are like (real-world) rods! I believe it is a mistake to do so, and struts are an abstraction with a single scalar breaking strength. Has anyone done any investigation to determine whether this is the case? After all, it's reccommended to use struts to connect and stiffen multi-panel wings (coplanar with the panels), and axial connections would be worse than useless for that task.

Why is there a poll here?