Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

To Cory's point, the camera that captured this image is very close to the same height above the field that 254's is.

You make the call on whether needs to be this high or not.
I think the bigger question is, is the safety risk worth it or not?
Like I said, there is a strategic advantage, no doubt.

Cory, would you agree there is a bit of risk with these towers?

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

I think it would be cool if FIRST had an overhead camera mounted directly over the center of the field. Good teams could even get very fancy with vision tracking off of that if they wanted.

My guess is they wouldn't do something like this because part of the strategy aspect they like is the tradeoff between a harder defense and limiting visibility. This is why I'm surprised they allowed them in the first place.

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Robot inspectors to verify the drivers' stations conform with the Robot rules:

R94 restricts the OPERATORS CONSOLE to 60" long by14" deep. There is no specified height restriction.

R95 prohibits wireless communication to the OPERATORS CONSOLE to only what is provided by the ARENA. Only a wired communication path is allowed.

As far as safety is concerned, that decision can made by referees, robot inspectors, and/or ultimately, the FTA. If somebody can get hurt, or the field and/or surrounding equipment can be damaged, the safety rule can (and should) be invoked to prohibit use of the offending hardware.

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Strategically speaking, higher IS better. Here is what the poofs see. Yes, even behind the Sally Port!

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Thanks for these pictures! Do you know what cameras they are using to see that crisp and clearly?

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

We're using a GoPro

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Thank you!

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Is anyone else getting annoyed with the number of pictures posted on CD that seem to have been taken at a 45 degree angle? I definitely don't expect people to carry around a tripod to get perfectly level pictures but I feel this is a bit much. The height of the pole could easily have been shown if the picture was in portrait format.

I hate to single out this specific post but I wanted to get this out in the open.

/off-topic

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

How big of a screen do you use? Do you use the camera image as the main view for driving or just to find balls and other hidden things?

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

What are teams using as pole? Its COTS?

Thanks

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Doesn't look like a COT to me.

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

1678 specifically tested ours against ball fire, the most it ever did was sway a few seconds and that was tested without velcro at the time. We have it set up before our robot is fully set up most times and broken down by the time the robot cart comes over.

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

There are a number of options for COTS telescoping tubes (painters', window washers' extension poles, collapsible flagpoles, etc.) or teams can make their own.

It doesn't matter from an inspection perspective since the control station is not bound to bag-and-tag or withholding allowance rules and restrictions.

Re: Request: Picture from camera on pole in driverstation
 

Everyone's fighting about safety, and rules, and the refs, but all we have to use is our common sense.

The ref should look at the team's camera pole, and if it looks ridiculously weak, then remove it. If it looks like it will be OK during the match, just leave it.

Simple as that.