Re: T-Boning a Rhino Track Drive
 

They are not... But G24 does not specify mechanisms. It's really a question of reading the letter of the rule versus the intent, and not knowing (until the question is asked) if your interpretation of the intent and how it will be ruled is correct.

Re: T-Boning a Rhino Track Drive
 

Sorry for the tangent, but rules like this one makes little sense, in my opinion. The action should(or shouldn't) be a penalty with our without "harm" to the other robot. It shouldn't matter if the other robot built a robust robot or not...

Does anyone expect a ref to determine, in the heat of a match, if a robot was 'harmed' by another robot when they don't have any idea how the robot is suppose to work? And, I've never seen them apply a penalty after a match when shown the clear damage.

Re: T-Boning a Rhino Track Drive
 

I don't necessarily disagree with the principle you're espousing, however I have frequently seen referees walk onto the field after a match to inspect robots for various rules violations prior to allowing drive crews and field reset onto the field. I know in one case, they were specifically looking for damage on our robot.

Re: T-Boning a Rhino Track Drive
 

In 2013 another robot playing defense on us popped a wheelie and got its wheel stuck inside our frame. They kept spinning their wheels, ripping up some of our wires. The penalty was assigned after the match but before field reset when the ref walked up to our robot and took a look inside. The contact inside the frame perimeter wasn't intentional, and neither was the damage. It was damage nonetheless.

I suspect it'd be obvious to a ref that a tank track belt isn't supposed to break. Yet I also agree with the sentiment that the belt needs more robust framing so that a default robot which makes bumper-zone contact with a Rhino bot doesn't even risk damage, even if there weren't a penalty.

Re: T-Boning a Rhino Track Drive
 

I am more concerned about defense as this video was intended to show and the audience to discuss.
Teams with higher bumpers or tank treads higher than our bumpers and/or non-tank treads may end up on its side or bottom vertically stuck.

Its in my opinion that the team that puts another robot in a stuck position, is not at fault of their own if they are:
1. In the act of trying to do something else such as getting in position to score.
2. If the other team is trying to play defense on them and the team is simply trying to counter that defense.

I am envisioning that we will see it quite often this season.