I don't think you're understanding what I just said.
These problems are not in 3.3. They are now in 3.4. I didn't touch 3.4. It's either a change you made to AC_AttitudeControl, or a change somebody else made to Heli_Control_Acro. Here's the history. I don't see it. Do you?
No. It is very common, that helicopters have "limited authority" on pitch and roll. If they have full servo throw on pitch and roll, they will usually destroy themselves. I can give you a few helicopter mechanical setup manuals if you would like to see yourself. This is what is typically done. The cyclic throw is always on a reduced range, as is the collective, such that the sum of the two do not cause any control binding.
You are partially right, I did initially think that I had a heli which could benefit from stability patch. I later realized that it was a mechanical setup error. I corrected it.
Well, it was when I wrote it. I'd have to dig deeper to figure out what happened. It's too far back in the history to find. I can't remember if my initial heading lock acro code was never merged in and then you re-wrote it. Or what. I don't have my private repos that far back. Will have to let this go.
But you are right. It's been 30 degrees for a long time. 30 degrees is quite a bit less than infinity which you have changed it to for 3.4...
So here we come to the crux of it...
Leonard, can you please remind me which Dev Call you were on which explained the changes to the Attitude Controller, which would indicate to the other developers, what has changed, and what they needed to do with the frames? Maybe I missed it. I dunno.
Did you raise an issue to tell people "Hey guys, I just made a major change to AC_AttitudeControl, you need to check your interfaces."
Is there an email?
Admittedly, 30 degrees, which is more than I thought. Still a big difference from infinity.
Leonard, what I'm trying to get you to understand here, is that you cannot just keep making major, unilateral changes to the code, that affects downstream users of the outputs of that code, without informing people. It's not fair to other developers.
Do you remember, how the Landing Detector used to have a descent rate check on it? But you removed it, because you thought it worked better without it. I don't recall being asked for my input about that. I did express my concern at the time, but my thoughts on the matter were not valued. Later on, I had a heli crash. It disarmed, because it thought it was on the ground... even though it was still descending at 2 m/s and knew it, it thought it was on the ground because it wasn't accelerating. It was in an established descent. There have been other crashes as well. Expensive multirotors destroyed themselves. Somebody else went and added a 1 m/s check in. You were very upset, because he did it without talking to you. Remember? Eventually you realized it was the right thing to do.
You see where I'm coming from? Other people, sometimes feel exactly like you did.