Hamish Willee

The most important there here is that a system that has not updated or does not choose to update should behave in the same way if it gets this command,...

> Afaik in ardupilot the system default is to ignore the position (which is an existing role) Are you saying that if ardupilot has a mission with [MAV_CMD_NAV_VTOL_TAKEOFF](https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1875#top) by default...

@RomanBapst OK, so I had a chat to @WickedShell about this. As I understand the situation (note, the ArduPilot bit below should now be accurate): PX4 current behaviour: 1. Takeoff...

> I don't think this can be the transition alt as PX4 currently is using param 7 for transition alt. That's why you need to read https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1875#issuecomment-1233592269 carefully. That states...

@RomanBapst @sfuhrer My updated assumption about PX4 existing behaviour: - Takeoff vertically - Transition at altitude defined by param 7. - Proceed to waypoint defined by param 5, 6, **7**....

Discussed with @RomanBapst in MAVLink call last night. We're now on the same page. Thinking is currently that we don't need the loiter role - if you need to progress...

@RomanBapst @sfuhrer We discussed it in the dev call, and generally we think that extending this command makes hard to understand, which is in turn risky for implementers. We might...

@RomanBapst The first idea (https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1875#issuecomment-1278566305) seems a lot like the intent I had for the proposal above. So that one makes sense to me. I am not sure I fully...

Ah, thanks. YOur original post did not mention distance :-). I'm not opposed but it would need clear specification.

Yes. The approach for detecting packet loss appears to have been designed on the assumption of single GCS/vehicle channel with no routing. Certainly the issue has really only started to...