What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

What do you guys expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years. It could be anything from game, to larger pits, to smaller robot, or anything.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I expect to see robots.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

districts, districts every where

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I predict technology will be advanced pretty far in five years to the point where FRC robots are a lot faster and stronger than they are now.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I want to see IRI, live, in person, not just over a webcast. (I am a bit bitter, if you cannot tell.)

What do I want to see from FIRST? Districts in my area, and Missouri making a bigger presence on the international level.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I'm going to cheat, I'm going to say what I WANT to see.

Focus on documenting impact: We're an expensive program and right now it's difficult to prove that FTC/VEX/BEST/BunnyBot type programs are not as effective from a cost perspective.

Return to emphasis of partnering with industry: Looking back through FIRST's history teams that partnered closely with local industry were revered. Now many within FIRST revile them. I'd like to see HQ go back to comments about how this is not some science fair, this is a "professional sport" and we need trainers, we need experts, we need professional analysts and strategists. I'd love HQ to come out and say "Teams like 67, 1114, and 254? They get it!"

District Reorganization: Districts are a stop-gap measure to decrease apparent costs to teams (5k => 8 matches is bad, 5k => 24 matches is less bad) and it's wonderful for that. The problem is it's crap for changing our culture. It IS a bunch of nerds in a high school gym. It's not as awe inspiring as full size events used to be. I don't know what the solution here is but it needs to be investigated. (Of course, some of the Regionals are pretty badly run and I'd be embarrassed to bring higher ups or politicians to them too)

Decrease in Robot Size: I think this year's robot size decrease should stick. It opened up the field a lot and led to more exciting energetic games.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I HOPE to see a bigger public awareness for FIRST and all that we do. Right now FIRST has less of a public awareness, from what I've seen, then high school Rugby in America. To do this we as the FIRST community need to be proud of what we do and make it loud around our community and reach for reorganization for what we boldly do. I think FIRST should make a walkthrough of some kind for beginning teams that way they don't get overwhelmed with all FIRST has to offer. I would also like to see a large push from FIRST for all high schools to adopt a FIRST robotics program. Know I want to make sure and note that VEX and other robotics programs are excellent but I have participated in them and they are nothing like FIRST in any way; they seem better fitted for middle school students. If we as members of the FIRST community want to get the same recognition for what we do as varsity players get for what they do then we need to be loud and proud just like varsity sport players are.


What I HOPE FIRST never changes is how competitive it is while still maintaining GP. In other sports and clubs you either get a massive drive for winning with no regards to others or the rules or they don't care about winning just as long as "everyone has fun" and this doesn't promote good ethics either. FIRST seems to be unique with this large drive of winning and the wonderful thing we call GP.


In regard to the technology I hope FIRST progress with the times as technology grows and changes. I would like to see FIRST allow a touch interface controller for the robots along with more technologically advanced interfaces. I am satisfied with the size of the robot now and I would be alright with the size staying fairly similar but maybe changing slightly depending on the size of the game piece. I am for the use of instant replay to determine scoring and rule violations on the field because as a foundation promoting STEM we should use technology anywhere it can benefit us.


I'm sure I left out some great points that I hope others with more experience then me will hit on and what I've said here are my views and I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to speak for the entire FIRST community because I'm sure many people disagree with my opinions.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

More Freedom

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

We will see the continuation of popular games as each season's challenge. (Soccer, frisbee, basketball, etc.)

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

1. The extinction of the Kit of Parts for most Veteran teams. Teams can still opt in to get it, but the majority of parts will be an online choice.

2. *Preliminary* schedules before some events. Note, preliminary (don't mess this one up by thinking that they are final)

3. An expansion of the district model. This model does not fit all regions though, so likely not an all-encompassing system.

4. Viewer-friendly games. i.e. you can explain the game reasonably well in 30 seconds.

5. Comparable robot size with continuation of frame perimeter maximum in place of length/width restrictions. They will never become larger than 28" by 38" (doorways).

6. Possible extra week of competitions (7 in addition to district championships and world championships) pushing back championships one week.

7. MORE. More teams, robots, matches, events, inspiration, videos, volunteers, students, mentors, experience, money, awards, etc...

8. High-scoring games that any level of team can participate in, but never feel constrained in.

9. Additional support for teams creating a simple robot. (Ri3D, easy out of the box bots for rookies)

10. New control system.

11. Revamping of either the structure/format of world championships or the procedure to qualify. Waitlisting will no longer be an option. My guess would be that either Engineering Inspiration or Rookie All-Star Teams will not qualify for Championships (from the remaining regional competitions)

12. More recognition: locally, nationally, and globally. This will affect FIRST in ways we cannot imagine, and the results will depend on from whom this recognition comes from.

13. Extremely slow reduction of robot-related rules.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

.
.
.
.
.
.
Water.

Sorry.

In all seriousness, a few things I expect to see is easy to understand games, more districts and more teams.

A continuation of the financial cap but a reduction on part limits. ie 10 cims if u wanted (but why would you want to?)

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I Expect to see from FRC/FIRST is quadcopters! seriously were at the point were if people can buy kits for 500$. I would love to see some a 4 team alliance, 3 ground robots and 1 airbot. I think this would take First to a new level.
Next I would like to see new ways to get into CMP so no wait list but instead engineering inspiration go to CMP.
Also more outreach for FIRST so the world can learn who we are.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I expect a large increase in the number of events--it takes at least two districts to replace a single regional.

I expect to see a major change in the qualifications for Championship, roughly at the time the district system hits its "saturation point" where the remaining teams are out of range of 2 events, but can do one.

I expect to see the transparency continue.

I expect a new control system, and at least one new Championship venue.

I would NOT expect to see things stay the same; change drives invention, which drives more change.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I would expect more districts, more teams (obviously), more games with the spectator friendly scoring and, more exposure and popularity for FRC/FIRST. I would like to see the current motor rules continue maybe with the addition of other motor types as well.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

A curriculum for teachers incorporating FIRST robotics.

Serious competition to FRC style competitions

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I expect to see FIRST try to tackle the VEX/FTC conflict. (However, I'm not sure I expect great things to result from the attempt.)

I expect to see FRC continue to grow, but ever more slowly, as sponsorship becomes harder for new teams to find.

I expect to see FIRST tinker with competition robot budget rules.

I expect some sort of initiative from FIRST HQ that is intended to help teams recruit mentors.

The Hall of Fame isn't a sufficient statement?

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Sufficient, perhaps. But not clear enough based on the amount of hate these teams have directed towards them.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I think it's clear that they're already moving on this one, and to me, they're moving in a very smart direction, by not trying to "defeat" VEX outright, but compliment the VRC program.

Programs like VEX and FTC have always had a somewhat ambiguous purpose, as they attract two distinct classes of teams. The first is teams which, for any number of reasons, cannot participate in FRC. For students in these programs, VEX/FTC is the pinnacle of their high school robotics careers, and they take it very seriously as a result. Some may move onto FRC eventually, but the majority won't. These teams tend to choose VEX or FTC on the basis of cost, the curriculum options and classroom packages available, and the ease with which competitive robots can be built with relatively few students. VRC seems to have the clear advantage here. FIRST has not been able to match the VEX program on costs.

The second class of VEX/FTC team is the "feeder" team. This is a team closely associated with an established FRC program, or a team created the year before starting an FRC team, created primarily to give new members experience with robotics before tackling the big robots. Everyone involved with these teams knows that, while valuable, it's a stepping stone towards something larger. As a result, when deciding between programs, these teams weigh factors such as parallels in technical knowledge with FRC, ability to use manufacturing resources already available thanks to the FRC program, and the FRC/FTC joint world championship. Cost is less likely to be a pivotal factor, since these teams already have the resources to support a full blown FRC program.

When VRC got started, a whole lot of these feeder teams chose to move to VRC due to the investment in the VEX platform they had made in the FVC years. For the years following this, a lot of newly started feeder teams chose VRC on the relative merits of the VEX and Tetrix platforms. But starting last year with the expanded FTC material rules, things have started looking a lot more favorable for FTC for these teams. This change, of course, drives up the cost of FTC, making it even less favorable for the first type of team, making them even more likely to choose VEX.

The end result I see is, FTC establishes itself as the program of choice for FRC teams looking to build a feeder program. VEX, meanwhile, continues to exist and thrive as an alternative competition for places where FRC is impractical. Students in VRC get to compete for the title of Champions of the World with over 600 teams, rather than compete for Champions of the Side-Event with 100-odd teams. Meanwhile, FTC teams get to compete alongside their FRC parent-teams, and students are inspired to take the next step forward.

If I was starting a mid-size robotics program without a lot of money, to be run as part of a pre-engineering curriculum or as a couple of kids in a garage with an interest in this stuff, I'd choose VEX. Up until last year, if I was starting a mid-sized robotics program to help teach incoming freshmen the basics, I would have still chosen VEX. But based on changes FIRST has made, the answer for the feeder teams, to me at least, is clearly FTC for the first time since the 2009 season.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I hope this is actually sooner. At CMP with so many teams and great robots in each division, allow 4 teams per alliance like IRI where you play any 3.
No need for timeouts and more teams make eliminations.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

If you know anyone involved high up in VEX and/or FIRST, please pass this on. I think this is a genius, and most correct, solution to the issue.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Not quite sure I agree on this accord. I see no reason why the FTC program is established as a "feeder" program vs. a VRC program, but perhaps that is a conversation for another thread.

The FIRST/VEX rift has been growing, and it only stands to expand with the launch of VIQ. At this point, I'm not even sure it's possible to bridge the divide, but competition is good for the community and watching VEX/IFI rise to challenge FLL/FTC has been exciting.

- Sunny G.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

It's weird to say, but there might soon be a day when there's a Vex version of FRC.

Personally, although there are a number of things FIRST doesn't really do right, I'd much rather have a non-profit like USFIRST organize my robotics competition that a company like IFI. I have mixed feelings as to whether or not competiton will really improve things, as once you buy into either Tetrix or Vex, you tend to stick with that system.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Just to clarify, VRC is run by a non-profit organization, the RECF. VRC is run by IFI in the same way that FLL is run by The LEGO Group.

Nowhere did I say that this would happen due to some kind of reunification effort. As I implied in my first post, I think one of the greatest things about VRC is that it gives the competition the grandeur it deserves, with much more generous advancement rules than FTC can have, and their own world championship on the scale of FRC's. I simply think that this is the direction the FTC and VRC programs will naturally gravitate towards over the coming years, due to the nature of the programs. Recent changes by FTC seem to suggest that FIRST is actively trying to fill the niche of feeder programs, by making robot rules more comparable to FRC and giving students FRC-relevant design experience, at the expense of program cost and accessibility.

However, if anything, "the rift" as you call it seems to have actually been narrowing in recent years (the low point to me was FRC 2011 Team Update 4). Some examples from the past few years include the VexPro launch and its embrace in the KOP, and IFI being given the Jaguar development by FIRST. I don't see VexIQ changing things that much either. It makes sense as a feeder program for the non-feeder VRC teams I outlined above, for many of the same reasons that FTC makes more sense as an FRC feeder. FLL, meanwhile, not only makes sense likewise as an FTC/FRC feeder, but is a veritable 20,000+ team juggernaut, with much more mass appeal than any other robotics program out there at any level, and one of the world's most recognizable brands behind it. It isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I'll end with this very wise post from Mr. Dave Lavery from a few years back. Even though we've grown, it still very much applies.

FTC and VRC will both grow to fill their niches, rather than one "beating" the other, I guarantee it. My post simply outlines a likely way in which I see that happening.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Yes! Never too many Roboteers!

Along that line I'm excited about the new VEX IQ, radio controlled robots built with parts that at a distance bear a resemblance to Lego. For $300. So places that were/are under served by cost limits can now get into the game. Places that are limited by mentor skills in design and programing can now get into the game. More Roboteers!

Schools are facing a crisis with rising enrollments, plummeting budgets, teachers not being willing to put the 3.2 million hours of extra time in so after school programs suffer. So parents need to fill the gap.

I see FIRST (and RECF and the people that run all the other programs, BEST, Bunnybots?, etc) to start a 2 pronged approach:

1) Start a better innovation program with the new "soft" industries. Traditional mfg is down, there are lots of workers in the information processing companies. I have limited build skills, 2 years ago would never be able to build an FRC robot. Now with Andy Mark/IFI and others selling parts, I can take my trusty crescent wrench, two screw drivers an a ball peen hammer and off we go. :rolleyes: This new set of parts allows FIRST to go into a "keyboard" companies and show them they can build robots too!

2) Districts, districts, districts! More competitions! Key is I think some bright person is going to figure out a way to allow cross district team events. (think Ed Law and Ether coming up with some 3D OPR calculation math magic)

Then I'm not always stuck in MAR WEST, getting crushed by Miss Daisy event after event, but I can go to MAR EAST and get stomped by the Pi-oneers as my "third district" event. Or make the big leap and go to the Toronto district and get schooled by Simbotics. Or I can stay home and drive 90 mins to my events. I get the best of districts and the adventure of travel.

More events means more robot play time for the dollar and adds value to the roboteer experience. And it also gives the public more of a chance to come see whats going on.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

I think we will eventually get into a "conference" or "league" type setup. Have an "Eastern" and "Western" (or however they decide to break it up) Conference. The top 100 teams from each conference goes to worlds making it a much smaller event with 50 teams/division instead of 100.

They could even break it up into 4 conferences (1 for each division at worlds) and the top 50 go on to worlds to compete with each other then with the other conferences.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

There's been a few mentions of BunnyBots in this discussion which is gratifying. We've worked hard over the last five years building this program into what it is. BunnyBots is, however, very much a part of the FRC world. It's role is to be an engaging, low pressure introduction to FRC for new members in the fall by building FRC-class robots for an original game played on FRC-size fields using FRC legal parts and rules. The idea is that once you hit build season all of the team's members know what they are doing. It's been working exceptionally well in Oregon which is why other teams are exploring hosting one in their area.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

That is FIRST's plan, during partner conferences this year a group of people worked on a unified district points and advancement system. One of the goals of that system was to eventually allow playing in other districts, because they are aware that some teams like to travel outside their area to play with a greater number of teams.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

They do; it's called the Hall of Fame.

That said, I think the HoF, as well as the Allaire Medalists and our Dean's List winners need a lot more recognition from the FIRST side. Why bother having a HoF if you're going to stick them in a corner at the Championship? These guys need a BIG presence on every stage we can give them.

Hopefully that will continue to get better over the next few years.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

At CMP this year, the HoF teams were given their little tables in the corner, and few teams put up more than a brochure (except for 1114, they had a nice presentation), and many didn't put anything there at all. When I talked to the HoF teams about this, they told us that they weren't really interested in setting up a display in the corner if they weren't going to have a HoF pit, and most of them didn't even know that they would be getting any space at all.

FIRST needs to do something about this, if the HoF teams don't even know how much space they will be getting!

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Just a note, I would do some research rather than make a judgment based upon for-profit or not-for-profit status. The VEX competitions (both the VRC and VEX IQ) are organized by the Robotics Education & Competition Foundation (REC) which is in fact a not-for-profit organization. Secondly, just because FIRST is a not-for-profit organization doesn't mean that nobody is profiting off of their programs. How many teams do you think buy LEGO equipment to participate in FLL? And that's not even going into all of the companies that supply FTC kits. Thirdly, regardless of whether the organization is for-profit or not-for-profit making money is not a bad thing. There's a bias against the term "for-profit" but how else is a company supposed to continue to exist if they don't support themselves? All companies, regardless of their status, must generate revenue to cover expenses and continue to expand in order to fulfill their mission.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

FIRST seems to be evolving to look like a lot of things in life, to the point where I can introduce a metaphor that will elicit groans and confusion, but will satisfy me and maybe a few others.

The James River runs through Richmond, VA and some of the topography of the land allows for a number of "watering hole" public parks to spring up and thrive around it. One of the most popular is Belle Isle. It offers a varietry of activities from walking trails to laying out in the sun all the way up to jumping between the rapids and of the dam and jumping off of the very high-hanging pedestrian bridge into the water below. FRC is becoming like the island.

With the smaller dimensions and the kind of game available to play, in addition to the growing district system allows for teams of all shapes, sizes, interests, and goals to get as much out of the program as possible. The game this year allowed for average teams to compete at a high level if they wanted to, as evidenced by results at a lot of events. Still, the best teams were able to dive into the real beauty and complexity of this year's task: the dimensions were so small, a lot of teams simplified, but the best teams packed as much power as they usually do in the smaller footprint. The objectives in the competition were so starkly different and presented such unique challenges, average teams committed to building great, simple mechanisms while powerhouses could manage to pull off both challenges with elegance.

With districts, teams can elect what mountain they wish to climb. If they are just in it for the matches at the qualifier level, so be it. If they want to make the big stage, they can push themselves mechanically, financially, and strategically to reach a goal far more attainable than a lucky draw in to CMP at the average regional event.

I also think FTC will grow at a rate faster than FRC as HQ and the global board of directors (in addition to local boards) are not identifying FTC as merely feeders or intermediaries, but programs primarily designed to positively affect the students involved. FRC is clearly transitioning to not only being about the team, but acting as an agent of change, which is a trend that will likely continue. FTC programs will catch on at the middle school level more, and FTC will have a bigger presence at CMP in the future.

I hope and expect FIRST to continue building the positive trends that are already established this season.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

All of this, with one caveat: Districts, while potentially lacking the wow factor, do add one big thing for changing the culture: getting it spread into more parts of the culture. It is very hard to expose people locally to FIRST (especially at larger-than-SCRIW scale) when the Palmetto Regional is three hours away in Myrtle Beach.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

In terms of FRC...

1. A more global league. How bout more teams from Mexico, Canada, South America, and more in Asia and Europe where we can see different robots based on different technologies around the world.
2. More opportunities to qualify for CMP. Louisiana is in an area that makes it hard to travel to more than 1 regional. Most are 5,6,7+ hours away, and the past few years, bayou reg. has been dominated by teams from florida and texas. I would like to see a district in the southeast, or another regional in louisiana, mississippi, alabama, or north florida.
3. KOP options. Some rookie & 2nd year teams need a structured KOP, but older expirienced teams could use vouchers, or a more "advanced" version.
4. More profesionally built bots. I want to see exciting robots that make us say WOW!! My team has been a part of some zero to zero matches, & it is not a fun expirience for a young team working their butts off.
5. Notoriety. Period. The students, mentors, volunteers, and sponsors of FIRST deserve to be given the recognition they have worked for, because this is how young people make the world a better place.

Re: What we expect to see from FRC/FIRST in the next 5 years
 

Then you're right, FIRST needs to make it much clearer that these teams are to be emulated. (As well as teams like 33, 469 and other non HoF teams) This constant bashing of highly successful teams (on the field and off it) sickens me and FIRST, frankly, FIRST needs to come out and be Frank (heh) and say that teams are free to use whatever resources they can find. Or, you know, whatever the heck they want to come out and say. Just stand by something and freaking yell it every kickoff and put it in the manual. We need to fix this "well, we TRIED but [XYZ Team] had those [expletive] engineers down at NASA build their robot for them" attitude.


I never said those were coherent. Frankly, there's a lot of conflicting things that need to happen and navigating that is hard. But you are completely right.