NV14: Corrects negative altitude when the real value is over 300 meters...#1974
Merged
pfeerick merged 1 commit intoEdgeTX:mainfrom Jun 1, 2022
Merged
NV14: Corrects negative altitude when the real value is over 300 meters...#1974pfeerick merged 1 commit intoEdgeTX:mainfrom
pfeerick merged 1 commit intoEdgeTX:mainfrom
Conversation
Ktr128
changed the title
Contributor
Author
|
Today I checked the corrections in a real flight. Everything is OK, the altitude data is correct. |
1 task
Member
|
Oh FFS... really? I hate conversion gremlins. Thanks for both reporting and then finding it (and on the vacuum cleaner flying over 327m in altitude)! 😁 |
Contributor
Author
|
I'm glad I was helpful in the EdgeTX project. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Corrects negative altitude when the real value is over 300 meters above the ground
problem video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgxIYUSzpnM
discussion of the problem:
#1971