Re: Design Sharing
 

I think an appeals process would make things worse

as it stands now, the judgement of the head referee is final. If there was an appeals process, then what does that do to a 3 day competition? If someone apeals a call or decision on the second day, do we stop the whole competition until the call is appealed to a higher authority?

I was totally unaware of team 68s giant spider legs last year - I read the whole thread, and in my opinion, if the wings were deployed and a bot pushed against them, then clearly they were using the dividing bar to hold their position on the top

If I remember correctly, FIRST clarified the rules so that nothing could reach over the side - if this was in response to their bot then I take this as an indication that FIRST felt the bot failed the intent of the rules, but rather than argue sematics, they issued a ruling that made their position clear.

personally I think it was a mute point anyway, those spider arms would have a rotational torque on them and they would have twisted up like pretzels if a bot slammed into them, they would have twisted along their length (like a strand of DNA) and supplied no holding force anyway.

the bottom line for this whole issue of meeting the requirements of the rules, if there is any doubt, ask FIRST - they will tell you before you start building anything whether your idea violates the intent of the rules.

and if you really think your team is the ONLY one out of 950 to come up with your idea, and you dont ask because you are afraid of giving your idea away

well then, you are taking a big risk, your gonna win big, or lose big.

Re: Design Sharing
 

I wanted to add to my comment earlier because it only refers to designs during the build season...

I think that it would be beneficial for teams to share their past mechanisms, designs, ideas, etc with other teams. That's to say - starting after the Nat's or after all the off season competitions - I think teams should be more free about their secrets especially since someone could have walked up to the pit and found out for themselves (for most things, not all). My reason for this view point falls into the same concept Andy B. discussed - raising the bar throughout the teams as well as giving that rookie team without eingineers or guidance something to get them going (physically or mentally).

As a side note - some of you who are adicts and read too much of these forums might think, based on my past posts, that I apply this philosophy to my knowledge of Beatty's past creations without reguard to their secrecy. I have not divulged all knowledge and don't intend to. The things I have discussed I believe were obvious enough for anyone to understand by visiting the pits.

Re: Design Sharing
 

Well, we had a very good argument as to why it was legal. And it was, until FIRST created that rule.

I dont think we would even have utilized the third stage as much as we thought anyways.

If 71 had posted pics in 2002, might file cards on the carpet have been deemed illegal, due to complaints to FIRST?

And, yes there was inertia, but the arms were made of T6 aluminum. The did not twist, or bend terriblly at all. T6 is extremely strong. They weigh less that 15 pounds, and could be lifted very quickly. Even a head on collision at 14 ft/second wouldnt do any serious damage.

Not complaining, simply clarifying.

****Lets just say, we wont be sharing our design this year.****