Hamish Willee

For "2" my thinking is that if we weren't already using BODY for an origin, we could use it to indicate a body alignment. So maybe use MOV to indicate...

@kapacheuski Yes, much this has been discussed before. The [RFC](https://github.com/mavlink/rfcs/pull/2/files) makes it even more clear - all the frames are are horizontally aligned! So for FRD, say, it is the...

> @hamishwillee Yes, but I think "BODY" should not confuse in terms of frame "origin", It just points to the center of mass of an object. It doesn't matter whether...

With respect to PRECLAND, there is also a PR for precision hold that it might be worth you looking at (for interest): https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1858 With respect to [LANDING_TARGET](https://mavlink.io/en/messages/common.html#LANDING_TARGET) I have no...

I hope you guys feel the questions are resolved/you are resolving these with each other. Often I am not the right person to tell you what to do - I'm...

@julianoes Can you check what PX4 does with MAV_FRAME_BODY_FRD as @tridge has indicated in https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1737#issuecomment-1246403704 and the post immediately above. @tridge I'm fine with this being changed if everyone does...

@dakejahl Can you please help me? - Tridge [in comment above](https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1737#issuecomment-1246403704) wants to interpret `MAV_FRAME_BODY_FRD` as vehicle-origin and vehicle attitude aligned frame. - This makes more sense than what the...

THanks. @tridge et al, please confirm you're OK with the specific words in https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1894

@kapacheuski W.r.t. https://github.com/mavlink/mavlink/pull/1737#issuecomment-1254647347 But there is not much appetite for change. i.e. I don't know if these are a good idea or not, but even if they are, getting agreement...

@kapacheuski The dev call think these are not the right changes - i.e. there is no appetite to add more frames unless there is a use case that actually needs...