From e7521d55270105269c17320c2cccba53a6861cb4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Federico=20Disar=C3=B2?= <federico.disaro@skywarder.eu>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 15:51:16 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] corrected typos

---
 README.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index 78dd4c6..a9a9cb2 100644
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ which uses the data measured in real time during the flight as input and outputs
 To organize the work, it's suggested to divide it in 2 tasks:
 
 1. **Define the condition that detects the apogee**: of course the apogee can be defined as the point of the trajectory where the vertical velocity is 0, but this definition is not applicable. Sensors have noise that disturbs the measurements, even at apogee the vertical velocity estimated is never equal to 0.
-   Instead of detecting the exact instant of the apogee, it suggested to **define a robust condition** that, if true, allows to decuce with confidence that that the rocket is **reasonabily near the apogee**. **Finding the condition/conditions is part of the assignment**.
+   Instead of detecting the exact instant of the apogee, it suggested to **define a robust condition** that, if true, allows to deduce with confidence that that the rocket is **reasonably near the apogee**. **Finding the condition/conditions is part of the assignment**.
    *(For example, the function detects the apogee when the altitude is greater than 2700m. This condition define a zone that, in the logged flight, is near the apogee... but what happens if the rocket never reaches 2700m ?  Or if at that altitude it is still moving with high vertical speed? This condition might work for this flight, but is not reliable in a general case and it is considered a bad choice. )*
 2. **Implement an algorithm that detects the apogee**: starting from the condition found in the previous point, implement an algorithm in `apogee_detector.m`  that detects the apogee.
 
-- 
GitLab