If you happen to have already bought it already . Nothing like a full scale simulation of the Milky Way to solve all your star mapping problems!
If you are looking for the closest approximation to what we know of our galaxy, without access to a professional cosmologist's database and (probably difficult to use) tools, Elite: Dangerous is probably your game.
If you can handle procedurally generated stars whose approximation to reality is less than sure, then I suggest Space Engine. It's programmed by a Russian guy, he does a bang up job! Also you can customize it to your liking, so you can get it to produce the setting for you, and tweak it to your hearts content!
Note that I say "approximation to reality is less than sure," but it's probably pretty good within a certain range of our Solar system. I really don't know what factors he takes into account to generate stars. He does use real star catalogs too, so there's that.
You may be running into Apple's hidden file/folder methods, they're worse than Microsoft for power users in a lot of ways, since they don't give you options most of the time.
Anywho, if you're trying to use Finder to get there, open a Finder window and press [Cmd]+[Shift]+G and it pops up a dialog asking where to go. That's where you enter: /[Username]/Library/Application Support/CDE/
Alternatively you can use the Unix shortcut for your profile: ~/Library/Application Support/CDE/
~ means your user profile and ~/Library/ is the user's hidden settings folder, which has no unhide option anywhere in macOS. The keyboard shortcut is from the Go menu ("Go to Folder..."), so it is still accessible by clicks
Yes, I noticed your LANTR post, it's a cool concept to be sure. I was a little more focused on just throttling propellant and heat flux to achieve different modes of operation, rather than extra plumbing with chemical reactions. It's simpler, though I'm not sure how well they compare to each other in the end.
Low Pressure Nuclear Thermal Rockets are easily designed in CDE, perhaps the best realistic option for high-ISP interplanetary thrusters—you can get over 10 km/s with a dissociating design!
What's missing is a way to use low throttle settings with a high-thrust, high-pressure capable design. Obviously in-combat situations basically require high thrust at all times, however during strategic maneuvers being able to outlast an enemy is extremely valuable. This may also have a knock on effect for resistojets if similar codepaths could be used, though that may be more trouble than it's worth. The biggest challenge may be the complication in module design interface, as you have to design the thruster/reactor to handle both the high pressures and the high temperatures involved, though not at the same time.
As it stands, I will see if I can do unrealistic mass reduction for LPNTRs and put those alongside similar high thrust NTRs, to simulate shifting gears as the vernacular loves.
What are qswitched's views on nuclear multi-mode engines? VASIMR seems to be the most commonly known thruster of this kind for some reason, but an NTR can make much better use of the trade-off between mass flow and exhaust velocity.
Sorry to drop in so late in the discussion. I have some remarks to make:
-LDRs don't have to run on liquids. They can use tiny solid ball bearings to reach 3000K+ temperatures.
-Emissivity of the materials is not a big issue. Paint the exterior of the balls black or dip the liquids in a graphite solution, like ink. So go ahead and use those refractory materials!
-The major advantage of LDRs and the secret to their efficiency is their surface area. Tiny particles held in a sheet have dozens, thousands or more times the exposed surface area of a solid plane of equal cross-section. This also translates into much lower mass per square meter.
-LDRs can work perfectly well under acceleration. One solution for liquid droplet radiators is to spray the coolant droplets inside a transparent bag. Stray droplets splash against the bag's walls to be collected at the bottom. Solid particle radiators are even easier to manage: just hold them inside a 'net'.
-Heat pumps are a bad idea. Their energy cost is proportional to the temperature difference between the cold and hot side divided by the cold side. If I want to pump my 1000K heat into a 2000K coolant, I'll need 1 Watt of energy per watt moved. That extra watt needs another helping of waste heat to be provided, so my 8x radiator temperature advantage ((2000/1000)^4) quickly falls. With a 20% efficient reactor, producing an extra watt of energy costs 4 watts of waste heat. Moving 4 watts costs another 4 watts in the heat pumps and so on... If we have a 1MWe reactor operating at 20% efficiency and an outlet temperature of 1000K, and we want to use a heat pump to radiate at 2000K, then the heat pump will consume 800kW, leaving only 200kW of useful output. 8/5 means you're only getting a 60% radiator mass improvement, which might be wiped out by your new 800kW heat pump mass. This is with a 100% efficient heat pump. If it is not perfect, then even less electrical power will be left over. Truly terrible.
Wow, the bag and net ideas are interesting! I knew LDRs can overcome some maneuvering with various mechanical designs, however I wonder what amount of re-absorption a bag or net will have at the appropriate temperatures & wavelengths. Magnetic control, I am suspicious of any claims, since the mass and power required for anything fun with magnets usually outstrips its usefulness.
Agreed on the heat pumps. They may still be helpful for some low temperature things anyway, so I vote for their addition if qswitched ever has the time for it!