Micro thrusters

This could be used for stabilization, but it would probably be simplified into 4-5 single thrusters put into this configuration.

It can be used for all three purposes - stabilization, orientation, and maneuvering. And for small or tiny "probe" type grids, it can also be used as the main propulsion unit. This would also reduce the number of parts needed to build small grids.

The use of separate thrusters, as is currently common in SE, is unrealistic—thrusters located outside the axis and center of mass in reality create tilting moments that try to spin the structure. (There is also a separate discussion on this issue.)

The force gyroscopes used by players in SE for stabilization and orientation are "miraculous." They are about a thousand times more powerful and a hundred times lighter than in reality and do not suffer from the typical problems of gyroscopic control - saturation, locking...

Such a thrusters unit could replace some of the gyroscopes.

As far as I know, the decision to have all thrusters apply at the center of mass was made to allow for more freedom in ship-building. Otherwise you would have to make all ships symetrical and/or re-balance the thrust every time you make a change or add cargo. It being unrealistic is simply better for gameplay.

You could obviously make the micro-thrusters act like gyroscopes but I think it would be redundant and if fully realistic (with distance from center of mass affecting performance, etc.), it would again limit the freedom of ship design.

Some things just work because they are simple.

I don't ask for realistic behavior of moments of force, not even as a joke. :-)

I have a pretty good idea of how complex and challenging it would be to properly tune the performance of the orientation and stabilization system's engines.

Not to mention how the center of mass of many ships changes during operation. My mining ship usually carries cargo that is three times its empty weight. And there are builders with even greater range. Maintaining stability and maneuverability with such weight changes is almost beyond human capabilities—it requires automation to adjust the characteristics and performance of the propulsion system.

So thank for simplifying things...

I wrote what I wrote so that players would realize how far some things in the game are from reality.

It's actually quite similar to flying and airplanes... Only few players realize that enormous forces are generated by the wings and aerodynamic rudders of aircraft. Without exaggerating too much, it can be said that without aerodynamics, a single-engine aircraft would need at least two additional engines for lift and two for directional control.

I would like to ad that most of these micro thrusters uses nitrogen or hydrazine. So maybe use oxygen?

And I would not make 5 thrusters into one block as they are pretty easy to make yourself, especially with 0detailing blocks. Having just the single micro-thruster offers more flexibility.

Nitrogen is inert, so the nozzle would operate on "cold gas," which means very little thrust (Isp ~70-80sec). A nozzle for oxygen or compressed air would work similarly—again, only "cold gas" and low thrust. (air Isp ~75sec)

Cold gas nozzles perform best when using hydrogen (Isp ~270-280sec) and helium (Isp ~160-165sec). This is due to the very high speed of sound in these gases..

Hydrazine N2H2 and its derivatives are catalytically decomposed and heated in the "combustion chamber" – it is therefore a true rocket engine. Hydrazine belongs to monoergols – single-component rocket fuels. (Isp ~200-230sec)

Hydrogen peroxide nozzles would work in a similar way - catalytic decomposition and heating. Although hydrogen peroxide jets are somewhere between compressed gas – "cold gas nozzle" and "real rocket engines" – the temperature of the water vapor and oxygen produced in the nozzle reaches 300-600°C. (Isp ~140-165sec)