Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
A wider field of view would let you see the surface and anomalies with higher accuracy but you would see less of the planet since the best altitude would be lower.
A narrower FoV would do the opposite, giving less detail but you can see more of the planet.
The visible area of the planet would be 180 degrees - your FoV.
The best altitude for a FoV, I would guess, is one where the planet fits exactly in the box KerbNet gives you so you need to turn to geometry for answers.
The altitude would be the radius of the planet divided by the sin of half of your FoV.
A=R/sin(FoV/2).
For Kerbin with a FoV of 60 degrees, you would want your probe exactly twice the radius of the planet or 1,200,000 meters away from the center.
KSP measures altitudes from the surface so make sure you account for that.
Unrelated but a google search of circles inscribed in angles reveals only angles inscribed in circles.