Jump to content

HvP

Members
  • Posts

    645
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Answers

  1. HvP's post in Why does this rocket have no delta-v? was marked as the answer   
    Hello @SkyLimit and welcome to KSP and the forums.
    The reason you have no delta-v in that craft is because you're using the wrong fuel type for your engine. Most rocket engines, like the Spark, require a "Rocket Fuel" tank that carries liquid fuel and oxidizer - not mono-propellant fuel. RCS engines and thrusters use the mono-propellant in the type of RCS tank that you used on your craft. Mono-propellant cannot power standard rocket engines.
    There are four different fuel tanks in the game, which you can learn about in the wiki HERE.
    Liquid fuel only tanks carry jet fuel for planes and also power the nuclear LV-N "Nerv".
    Rocket fuel tanks carry the fuel and oxidizer mixture that powers standard rocket engines. They also power a special type of RCS thruster called "vernor" engines which are more powerful than the standard RCS thrusters.
    RCS tanks carry mono-propellant for RCS thrusters and the "Puff" mono-propellant engine.
    Xenon tanks will only work with the "Dawn" electric ion engine.
    Technically, solid rocket motors come pre-packed with their own solid rocket fuel already, so there is no separate tank for them.
    When you right-click the engine or fuel tank in the parts list the information panel will have text that identifies the type of fuel that it needs/provides.
  2. HvP's post in No DeltaV, while I most definitely still have a full tank. was marked as the answer   
    I'm not sure this works on console, but on PC you can go over to the staging column and click the plus sign "+" next to the icons to add an empty new stage to the column. You can then drag this new empty stage to the top of the column and it will usually trick the game into recalculating the stages and show the delta-v numbers again.
    In very few instances multiple new empty stages need to be added. This is very much a problem when the engine thrust plates and nuclear engines are used, at least for me.
  3. HvP's post in Tracking target out of Map view? was marked as the answer   
    Hello @RockBenn and welcome to the KSP forums.
    Usually this problem is caused by the F4 toggle, but you said you already tested that and it doesn't help. It might be a bug in the training mission alone.
    Can you see if the target square shows up during regular game-play? Probably the easiest place to check is to see if the reticle shows up for separated boosters that drop away from you after launch. Be sure to press the F4 toggle if they still don't show in a regular game, just in case.
    Sometimes though the camera view while in orbit makes it difficult to scan the whole sky around you because of the narrow field of view. You may simply not be looking in the right direction. I find it helps to zoom out the camera so that you can see more of the sky as you look around.
  4. HvP's post in Delta V readout bug, engines not detected was marked as the answer   
    Well this is really weird.
    So I went back to my test craft to see if there was any common scenario that caused my fix to not work. I tried flipping the segments around, using a different root part, turning on and off fuel crossfeed, changing the fuel flow priority. Nothing broke the fix with the extra stage - UNTIL...
    I added an extra docked segment onto the end of the free docking port. You have three segments docked together and I only tried mine with two. Guess what?

    When I added a third segment the fix didn't work anymore. BUT...

    When I added a third blank stage at the top of the list the fix started working again! How odd. It looks like the number of docking ports in the stack is the variable that causes this bug to show up.
    To confirm I reverted and tried a different configuration with a fourth segment. Sure enough it needed a fifth blank stage before the fix would work. BUT if I left out a docking port and connected the butt of one fuel tank directly to the bottom of the docking port above it, the whole configuration only needed four blank stages in the staging list for the fix to work - or five total if you include the engine stage.

    So this is definitely related to how many extra docking ports there are above the engines. With this nuclear configuration it looks like you need the total number of stages in your staging column to equal the total number of docking ports in between each segment of your craft - not including any docking port on the end.
    Can you confirm if this is working the same way for you if you just add a few more blank stages to the column? I would add this to the bug tracker, but my game is heavily modded and the new update is releasing soon anyway. I'll try to reproduce this bug in an unmodded 1.9 game when it comes out before reporting it.
    (edit to add: The problem seems to be caused when any engine plate is staged with the space bar OR an engine plate has its staging deactivated in the VAB. I was able to reproduce the problem with non-nuclear engines as well as long as there was a combination of engine plate + docking ports. Otherwise identical configurations worked perfectly normally if all I did was remove the engine plate from the design.)
  5. HvP's post in throttle issue(im new) was marked as the answer   
    Hello @pieterwNL and welcome to the KSP forums.
    The first engines available to you in career mode are solid rocket motors. They are basically just big fireworks - you light them once and then they burn at full power until they run out of fuel. You can't throttle a solid rocket motor, nor can you stop them once they start. This is normal for those type of engines.
    The liquid fuel engines that you unlock with later tech can be throttled down.
    If that wasn't your problem then we need to know more about your rocket.
  6. HvP's post in Multiple comm sat sets? was marked as the answer   
    Hello @Cabadam and welcome to the KSP forums!
    I can see how those numbers wouldn't seem to make sense. The confusion lies in the use of the term "Kerbol" in the section you were reading. "Kerbol" is the unofficial term for the central Sun in the game. Thus, the six rings of satellites in orbits out to 50,000,000km really does mean to put them in orbit around the game's sun at those distances, not the planet of Kerbin. This way you get deep space communication coverage across the entire solar system, including planets such as Moho and Eeloo.
    For the Kerbin system itself a much more modest set of satellites is recommended.
     
  7. HvP's post in Extract and deliver ore contract was marked as the answer   
    Those contracts will not unlock the ore drilling parts, sorry. But even if you do accept, they usually have pretty long time periods in which to carry out the task so it's not unlikely that you will develop the tech before time runs out.
    Personally, I wouldn't accept any ore drilling contracts unless I already had a plan to set up a mining base on that world, and I never accept the ones that ask me to transport it back to Kerbin. Although, I've also never noticed a reward of 1,000,000 funds before either. And Minmus is the easiest target for a contract like that.
  8. HvP's post in How to pass the lounge bridge of KSC? was marked as the answer   
    The game automatically determines the direction that control surfaces will deploy based on where they are relative to the center-of-mass. If they are in front of the center of mass they will go in the opposite direction than if they are behind it. For flaps this shouldn't matter as much because you should have auto pitch, yaw, and roll disabled from their right-click menu in the space plane hangar, and only deploy them from an action group toggle. For clarity, I'm talking about flaps which add drag and lift without otherwise changing the direction of the plane. Ailerons, rudders and elevators control roll, yaw, and pitch respectively and do need to have those specific inputs enabled (and only those for which they are meant to control.)
    There is an option to reverse the deploy direction of the flaps in the right-click menu (this might need "advanced tweakables" to be enabled in the settings menu.) As I understand it, this only works to reverse the direction they move when using the "Deploy" command assigned to an action group. It won't change the direction they move when under pitch, yaw or roll input - that's based on their position relative to the center of mass.
    I would suggest either reversing the deploy direction of the flaps if you want them on the leading edge of the wing or moving them slightly behind the center of mass marker. It's important to make sure that you check the position of the CoM marker with the tanks both full and empty, because the balance of the plane will move as you consume fuel.
  9. HvP's post in Which parts allow fuel crossfeed and which do not? was marked as the answer   
    Hello @NutellaonToast welcome to the KSP forums!
    Very few stock parts completely block fuel crossfeed, and those will have orange text in the part description which says "No Fuel Crossfeed." Those are: the M-series structural panels and I-beams; the SP-series structural panels from the Making History expansion; and all of the heat shields. The launch stability enhancer technically cannot transfer to other parts, although it is rarely an issue.
    Some parts will block crossfeed by default, but you have the option to toggle crossfeed on individual parts from the right-click part action window. These parts have orange text in the part description which says, "Crossfeed toggles in Editor and Flight. Default Off." Those include: every decoupler and separator, both radially attached and stack node attached decouplers, including the small hardpoint and structural pylon. This does not include the engine plates from the Making History expansion since they always allow crossfeed.
    All of the docking ports have crossfeed turned on by default, but this can be toggled off in the right-click part action menu.
    Everything else will always allow crossfeed.
  10. HvP's post in Rocket cars? was marked as the answer   
    Welcome to the KSP forums @STORMPILOTkerbalkind, you've certainly found a very Kerbal way to get into the game.
    How fast were you going when your rocket car failed? At some point it simply won't be possible to overcome even the most minor instability caused by steering wobble before parts of your vehicle slam into the ground. And even if that doesn't do you in, atmospheric heating will probably start to explode things if you aren't using spaceplane parts. At the highest speeds KSP can't even process interactions with the ground consistently.
    If you don't mind construction spoilers, this video by Stratzenblitz75 gives you an idea of what's possible.
     
  11. HvP's post in knowledge me about trajectories was marked as the answer   
    That's mainly due to the fact that when you're traveling long distances very small changes in the initial conditions will have a large effect on the far end.
    It's practically impossible to launch into a perfectly zero-inclination orbit in relation to your target. There will always be some small degree of relative inclination, and even if it was perfect your aim when making your transfer burn will almost certainly introduce some small error. For a path that extends for thousands of kilometers even a very slight bias towards the normal/anti-normal directions can project your path far above or below the equatorial plane of your target. Imagine shining a laser beam onto a target a mile away. You would probably have a hard time even aiming at the target because tiny movements in your hand will cause the laser to jump all over the place at the far end.
    This error gets compounded when the same path loops around both bodies more than once because each near approach will further disrupt the arc of your orbit.
    You can use this to your advantage to enter a polar orbit by burning normal or anti-normal very early in your transfer long before you enter the sphere-of-influence of your target. This requires far less delta-v than would a plane change while in orbit of the target.
  12. HvP's post in Expansion is only in english? Expansion-shoppage says something different. was marked as the answer   
    From the newest KSP: Weekly blog the developers have announced that:

  13. HvP's post in Strut Attachment in Making History was marked as the answer   
    I'm guessing that the lower central portion was first attached to the bottom of the upper half normally (the small white separator was attached to the small inline battery above it.) By selecting the "translate" gizmo you can click the lower part, hold shift, then slide it downwards to open up a gap. Then then you can attach struts between them to make it appear that the struts are holding it together.
    Once you've done this you can place the other surface attachable parts, like science experiments and RCS thrusters anywhere you want. You wouldn't be able to attach any center node attached parts in the gap between the two sections however because those nodes are technically being used to hold the ship together even though cosmetically there is a gap.
  14. HvP's post in docking alignment problem was marked as the answer   
    Correct, that looks like the only way it works right now. Control points only track targets properly when they are aligned with the root part's axis.
    I tested this by placing different types of docking ports, command pods, and probe cores around a cylindrical test vehicle. If my root part was in the central stack then only the docking ports at either end of the stack held the target properly when at close approach for docking. Any docking ports or control points that were offset from the central stack or aimed radially outwards do not track properly.
    HOWEVER! If you use the re-root tool to make a radially mounted docking port the root port then that docking port DOES track the target correctly. Further testing shows that when SAS is tracking a target it will align your navball to face in the direction of whichever control point you've selected BUT it will use the base of the root part of the craft to determine "center" for tracking purposes and calculates the angle from the target to the base of the root part - instead of the angle from the target to the selected control point. This means that if you are using a large ship and its root part is placed at some lateral distance from the docking port you are controlling from then the SAS will keep turning your ship to bring the base of its root part in line with the target - which causes the docking port you are trying to use to continue to point away from the targeted docking port.
    @bewing I have updated the bug-tracker for this issue to include the above steps to replicate the problem. Maybe you have some thoughts on this. Again, for SAS "hold target" tracking the angle from the target docking port is being calculated to the base of the root part of the ship being controlled rather than calculating the angle to the selected control point.
  15. HvP's post in Space station disappeared was marked as the answer   
    Yea, the ore readouts are a little tricky to understand. The planet has to be the focus of the camera in order to see the ore concentration filters, so make sure you double-click on the planet or moon itself so that the camera switches focus to the body you are wanting to check.
    You will next have to click on the planet resources icon in the toolbar. This is not the same as the "i" info icon. The resources icon looks like a sphere with a triangular wedge cut into it. If that icon isn't showing then it means that you haven't selected the planet as the focus. When you click the resources icon it will show you the resources panel with "Surface", "Ocean" and "Atmos." tabs at the top. Make sure "Surface" is selected then click on the "Ore" filter below it. The other tabs are really only there for mods to take advantage of. Now you should have the cutoff percentages and color scheme filters available at the bottom.
    The tricky thing to understand is that this map from the orbital scanner only shows you the odds that you will find any ore in those biomes due to the average distribution of ore in that region. It does not guarantee you will find ore in those sites, it just shows the probability of of finding ore in that biome. However, if you take the Surface Scanning Module down to the surface and "Run Analysis" it will tell you the ore concentration at that exact spot. It will also make the orbital scan overlay more accurate for those biomes you have analyzed from the surface.
    The difference is subtle but important. The Orbital Scanner cutoff percentage shows you the overall odds that you might find some ore in those highlighted biomes (20% chance, 50% chance, etc.) The Surface Scanning Module tells you the concentration of ore directly beneath you at that point, or in other words what percentage of ore is mixed in with the soil in that spot. The concentration percentage determines how efficient your mining operation will be and how quickly you can harvest ore.
    So in this screenshot, note the icon on the right toolbar that is selected to show the resources panel. And for your previous problem of disappearing ships, note the filter toolbar at the top of the screen that appears when you move your mouse to the top of the screen.

    The last thing to mention, I suppose, is the M4435 Narrow-Band Scanner. This is the one that looks like a hexagon rotating on a post. What this does is let you sample the ore concentration of the site you are over if you have performed an orbital survey. It's not that useful if you haven't run an analysis with the surface scanner first though. Without that surface analysis the Narrow-Band Scanner will only give you an average of the ore concentration within that biome. You'll still need the surface scanner to tell you the actual concentration at any specific site, but once you do then you'll be able to drag the pointer across the Narrow-Band Scanner readout to see the exact concentration of ore at any specific point in order to target the best site to set up a mining base.
  16. HvP's post in Fuel expenditure was marked as the answer   
    @Sarahleth From what I can tell from your screenshot your mission clock is showing yellow digits instead of green digits. This means that the game is slowing playback somewhat in order to have more CPU cycles to compute physics. In atmosphere flight and/or high part counts will often have this effect. If the clock is red then it means that the game is running seriously slow in order to compute all of the calculations the game needs to do in order to run complex physics on high part count scenes.
    It should be easy to test if this is the cause of the discrepancy. The mission clock is counting time elapsed in the game world, not real-world time, and runs more slowly when yellow/red. All you have to do is see if the in-game mission clock is keeping up with your stopwatch.
  17. HvP's post in Sun position isn't updated frequently enough under time warp was marked as the answer   
    Yes, the developers have been working on that and it will be fixed in the next bug patch in version 1.3.1. Apparently, it was a side effect of a technique they used to fix a problem with the shadows.
    You can read about it in the KSP Weekly for June 23rd:
    Here is the relevant quote from them: "The Sun movement has been fixed, so we still retain our shadow rough patch/fix while also restoring the movement of the sun back to the way it was before (nice and smooth)."
  18. HvP's post in Auto-EVA was marked as the answer   
    Hi @KerBlitz Kerman. Good question! Automatic EVA is what happens when you click the EVA button on the Kerbal portraits in the bottom right corner. If your Kerbal is in a part with more than one hatch (like the Mobile Science Lab) then the game chooses for you which hatch the Kerbal will exit from. You can however choose which door you want the Kerbal to exit from by LEFT-clicking on any one of the hatches on the part your Kerbin is in and pushing the EVA button next to the Kerbal's name.
    The Mk1-Crew Cabin has two hatches, but they are on either ends of the cylinder, and usually one or both of them are covered by attached parts. You can only EVA out of a Mk1 Crew Cabin if one of the hatches on the ends is still left open with nothing attached to it. If the door isn't obstructed then you can LEFT-click on the hatch on the end and choose the EVA button next to the Kerbal's name. It won't always AutoEVA from a Crew Cabin by clicking on the portrait because one of the doors will usually be blocked by an attachment point and the game doesn't know which one you are trying to exit from.
    If both ends of the cabin are blocked then you will have to transfer the crew into another part with a free hatch in order to get them out. RIGHT-clicking on the Crew Cabin will give you a menu that includes a Transfer Crew button then it will highlight parts that they can move to. If a part has free space it will be highlighted blue, if it is full then it is highlighted red and you won't be able to move them to the occupied cabins unless you also move or EVA the Kerbin that's in it first.
  19. HvP's post in Proper Re-entry question was marked as the answer   
    Hello @Chads and welcome to the forums!
    I think we can be of more help if we knew a little more about the circumstances of your reentry. At what height are you putting your periapsis when you reenter Kerbin? Are you coming in with the heat shield below you all the way in, or are you flipping around nose first at some point? What is your approximate speed and altitude when you explode? Is one part overheating before the others, or does it just all explode at once?
    The most likely scenario is that you are simply coming down too steeply. You don't want your periapsis to be near or below the surface before you enter the atmosphere. A periapsis of around 25 or 30 km seems to be the preferred reentry method. If you come in too much steeper than that you might still be going too fast when you hit the dense part of the atmosphere and the shock will blow you up. That usually happens if you are still going more than about 3000 m/s below 20km. Unless your craft is very heavy, though, this shouldn't be a problem. I think you're pretty light.
    There are a couple of other design considerations that might be causing your problem. The science jr. cannot take much heat before it explodes and it's doors will extend beyond the protection of the heat shield if you leave them open. Always right-click the science jr. and close the doors before you reenter the atmosphere. It's even better to put the cargo bay between the heat shield and the science jr. because some internal heat will still be transferred up the stack and could cause weak parts attached right behind the heat shield to explode.
    Also, the octo probe core is very sensitive to heat. You cannot allow it to contact the heating effects if at all possible. If your craft is not coming in very straight with the heat shield down then your probe core may be exposed to too much heating and explode. It's best to put them inside cargo bays if it will fit. If you still need the probe core exposed on top then just make sure that you have enough control to keep it out of the flames of reentry.
    All other things being equal, you want the center of mass of your reentry vehicle to be as close to the heat shield as possible. Otherwise you might flip over and come in nose first which could fry your parachutes, science experiments and probe core.
  20. HvP's post in Did the keybinding to focus on vessel change? was marked as the answer   
    Yes, it was changed to be the back quote `
    The one with the tilde ~ under the escape key. Since the backspace shared its default function with the Abort group I can see how it could be problematic. It can be remapped in the settings menu.
  21. HvP's post in I Suck at Airplanes: Help, Please was marked as the answer   
    Hello @daawgees. Let's see if we can figure this out then.
    There a a couple of things I notice right away about your plane. The engines are sitting much higher than the center of mass of the craft.
    If you click on the Center of Mass Overlay button on the bottom left side of the SPH interface (it looks like a weight icon) you'll see a yellow round marker show up in front of your plane. This shows you where the average center of mass is for the plane in its current configuration. If you drain the tanks you'll see it move around a bit as the weight of the tanks get lighter. Now there's another button that looks like a rocket engine right next to the COM button. It shows you a purple ball that indicates where your direction of thrust lines up.
    See how your direction of thrust is so much higher up than your center of mass? This means your engines will push on the top part of your plane more than the bottom part and cause it to pivot forward around its middle like a pinwheel firework. This is also forcing your nose down into the runway when you are trying to take off, making it difficult to pitch upwards. You want your engines to be in line with your center of mass as close as possible from the top to the bottom. Moving them down where your horizontal tail fins are would be a better place for them, and you can just stick your elevator fins on the outside of the MK0 fuel tanks.
    Your steering problems can be fixed pretty well by adjusting the height of your landing gear. You want the front wheel to lift the nose up a little bit taller than the back, so raise the back pair of gear a tiny bit higher on the fuselage. Not too far or you'll drag the rear end when taking off. Also, the small front LY-05 wheel at the nose is still not quite straight up and down. If you chose the rotate gizmo and click on the wheel it brings up that multcolored set of interlocking circles. Press "F" on the keyboard and it switches from "absolute" to "local" rotation. You'll find that in the local rotation, which shows you how the part is rotated relative to itself rather than the plane's grid, the gear is still rotated a little too far clockwise. This is because the underside of the cockpit is sloped. Give it a couple clicks of rotation in the counterclockwise direction. Hold shift down for more precision if you have angle snap turned on, or turn the angle snap off if you have to.
    I think that your plane will still bounce a little at first, partly due to the weight of all that fuel being a little more than those wheels were intended for. Turning up the damping strength and spring strength on those back wheels should calm them down for now.
    You probably DO want yaw turned on for the vertical stabilizer fin on the back. You can safely turn the authority limiter down on that tail fin to about 25 percent or so and still get plenty of yaw control. Roll control works best for control surfaces on the outer ends of the wings, so you don't need those control surfaces close in to the body of the plane. Pitch control surfaces work best near the far back (and sometimes rarely on the front) of the plane. Putting pitch elevators on wings near the center of mass won't really give you any extra control. It's best to keep pitch controls on the rear horizontal elevator like the one you have on the tail of your plane already.
    One more tip about the wheels. Right click the back wheels in the SPH and turn the brake level up and then click "Friction Control". A new slider will appear at the top of the menu (this might need Advanced Tweakables enabled in the main settings menu, I can't remember.) Set this friction control slider to be about twice what the front wheel is set at. I usually leave the front wheel at 1 and the back wheels at about 2.5. This makes your back wheels more "sticky" than the front wheels and tends to keep you straighter when rolling along the ground.
    I hope this helps and isn't too wordy. Planes are harder to build and fly than rockets, but they're so much fun to fly when you get the hang of it. Don't be afraid to ask if there's anything I didn't make clear.
  22. HvP's post in Commnet Connection Very Weak was marked as the answer   
    The large antennas at the Kerbin Space Center are sensitive enough to get a good signal in from the much weaker HG-5's. But the HG-5's themselves are too small to resolve a good signal from each other.
    In the direct case, each antenna has two functions: first, to send a signal from the KSC to remotely control your satellites, and second, to send science data from your craft back to the KSC. The HG-5 antennas will only send a very low power stream of data back to the KSC, but the massive antennas in your tracking station are huge buckets that can pick up extremely faint signals. Inversely, the tracking station antennas send out a broad high power signal that even the tiny dishes on your satellites can resolve easily.
    But, when one HG-5 tries to relay signals to another HG-5 you end up with small dishes trying to resolve weak signals. This is why you have a good connection to the KSC but poor connections between your satellites. If you just wanted to control those satellites then using the larger RA-2 relay antenna (or preferably the largest relay) as your third comm-net satellite around Kerbin should solve this problem because the bigger dish will be sensitive enough to collect the weak signals from either of your HG-5's when they aren't in direct connection with the KSC tracking station and pass them on. However, you will have a problem if you want to use the HG-5 antennas to pass on signals from other craft further out, because they are best suited for relaying signals from a craft in a low orbit (or one on the surface) back to the large stations on Kerbin.
  23. HvP's post in Why can't we use physics warp in space? was marked as the answer   
    If using Windows, hold down the Alt-key (or similar modifier in Mac/Linux) while pressing greater-than (>) to advance physics warp in space. It will still only go up to 4x. The slash (/) key will cancel it.
    Be prepared for the possibility that orbital calculations could lose some precision during a burn at physics warp.
  24. HvP's post in Plane powersliding when braking on runway was marked as the answer   
    As bewing said, having your wheels angled outward doesn't work as well in KSP. It's better to drag the attachment base out from the fuselage and rotate them so they point straight down. The easiest way to do this is set mirror symmetry to 2 and place your gear on the midline under the craft and then use the translate arrows to drag the bases outwards. The wider you can get them the better. You might get away with placing them under the engine nacelles if your center of mass is far enough forward. If not, consider one at the nose, one at the back (but not too far back) and one on each engine nacelle.
    I don't think you need two landing gear at the nose of the craft. One in the center of the nose should be fine.
    If you enable Advanced Tweakables from the settings menu you will find an option to set the landing gears' Friction Control. I've found that increasing the friction on the rear set to about 2.5 or 3 really helps a lot.
  25. HvP's post in Angle of Inclination was marked as the answer   
    Kerbal Engineer does have an option that will make this easier.
    In the Flight Engineer box that's open in your screenshot click edit and find the Orbital subsection. You will find a list of available statistics that you can add to your information readouts. Among the info you can add are the ones for "Time to Equ. AN" and "Time to Equ. DN". Click the "INSTALL" button next to the appropriate selections. These will show a counter for how long until you reach your equatorial ascending node or descending node along your current orbit. When the timer ticks down to near 00 then just burn Normal (towards the north pole, the purple triangle on the navball) if you are at your descending node, or burn Anti-Normal (South, the purple triangle with dashes around it) if you are at your ascending node.
    Note, those selections are specifically for your inclination relative to the planetary body you are orbiting. If you want to find your inclination relative to another spacecraft that you want to rendezvous with then you need to go into the RENDEZVOUS subsection where it says "Selected Category" in the KER edit menu. From there choose "Time to Rel. AN" or "Time to Rel. DN" to show when you need to burn to match planes with another craft you have targeted.
    You can also add this information to your HUD displays by clicking the KER toolbar icon and clicking the EDIT button next to the various items listed as "Orbital", "Vessel", "Delta V", etc...
    There is a treasure trove of other options too that you can add which you may find quite helpful.
    I hope this made sense.
×
×
  • Create New...