Units

[jasc76]

Current Behavior

fw_reference_airspeed setting [cm/s]

cm/s who uses this? Why bother? show me a plane flying 1cm/s?
This is a precision no one needs but makes stuff clunky. Its the same in RTH settings. its just awkward

Desired Behavior

just use km/h
or meters for height or distance
because cm is a precision no one needs

Ok, maybe its a CLI thing. But why not give the ability to set the configurator to something useful for humans

[Jetrell]

fw_reference_airspeed setting [cm/s]
cm/s who uses this? Why bother? show me a plane flying 1cm/s?
This is a precision no one needs but makes stuff clunky. Its the same in RTH settings. its just awkward

Depending on the mathematical operations required for some functions. It is better to use fractions of a unit, to provide the resolution required for those calculations.. So the CLI setting will be defined in that fraction. With mm being a little extreme.
This is why the configurator Application Options provides you with the ability to select different units.
However INAV has many contributors. With some forgetting to include conversions.

[bheatcoker]

@jasc76 I asked the same question in another thread and looks like I was asking something from another planet. It is a GREAT GREAT open source tool. Now, the first time I saw cm/s , cm/degrees and all kind of strange units I honestly thought: "oh oh the person who programmed this tool is not in contact with real life engineering tools at least mechanical engineering, physic, science, etc.., which made me distrust to use it in my plane. Its works very good and I trust iNav, but the units need to be in mm or m for the sake of humanity :)

[sensei-hacker]

@jasc76 I asked the same question in another thread and looks like I was asking something from another planet.

If THIS is what you meant to bring up - this is a completely different thing than what we were discussing.

cm/s, km/h, MPH, and knots are all interchangeable and it will use WHATEVER unit the user wants, set at top right in Configurator.

That's a very different thing than having someone set 1437mm, then secretly rounding it to 1 meter behind their back.

We don't pretend it's millimeters when it's actually meters because that would be lying to the pilot. And would therefore be violating all of the engineering standards I have already listed for you. That's my understanding of your request - let the user enter 569 millimeters, when really the measurement and calculation is done in full meters. You repeatedly said you want to call 2 meters "2000 millimeters" and that's very, very different. Secretly throwing away most of the precision the user entered is not okay and will never be okay. Similarly when reporting measured values. GPS-based altitude will never be reported in millimeters because the precision is around 3 meters. Reporting that we measured the altitude with millimeter precision would be lying to every pilot. Sorry, we are not going to do that. I know it bugs you, but we aren't going to lie.

You can see the altitude in feet, in meters, etc. Not in millimeters because we don't have millimeter accurate altitude. That's how you get catastrophic crashes because the pilot thinks they have enough clearance, but the measurement is actually nowhere near as accurate as reported.

Swapping kilometers and miles is okay, that's supported. Having the user enter 470mm and then behind their back we round that to 0 meters for the calculation is not okay. And will never be okay.