Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

Well, hook line and sinker you got me. My original commet was I bet they stuck some bumers on the rookie teams bot they were helping with. Then with the flurry of powered dumpers hitting the pages and filling goals faster than a 12 row combine, well I thought maybe they might be on to something.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

I have to agree about MWR - could be epic. Let's just hope it is not epic due to the new field SW.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

I beg to differ. One very prominent helix loaded team will definitely prove that statement wrong.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

I think he was referring to helical "loaders" (where the balls enter the scoring mechanism directly from the helix, such as 217) rather than helical "hoppers" (where the balls are stored in a helix, such as 148). He didn't articulate any difference though, so your statement is still very true.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

MWR should sell ad time between the finals matches. While not quite the superbowl, I am sure there will be a lot watching if it is on the Web or TV.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

So I kept staring at this photo, because something looked off to me, and I couldn't figure out what. I mean, it looks like one heck of a robot, but for some reason it still wasn't screaming "ThunderChickens!" to me when I looked at it... and I just finally realized, it's not ThunderChicken green. (Yes, ThunderChicken is the name of a shade of green. Ask Crayola about it.) It was the color scheme that threw me off. But yeah... I'm excited to see that robot on the field!

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

There seems to be a great deal of speculation about whether or not this bot is our actual bot. Yes I know it is missing our trademark Thunder Chicken green. I should tell you that the bumpers are in fact the standard, retina scorching, Thunder Chicken green. There is a reason we decided to avoid green elsewhere. We wanted to assure that our color scheme would not interfere in any way with the cameras of other bots, speculative or otherwise. This is why the flex loom leading to the turret is black.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

Once again you guys did great.

when your fake bot pic came out we discussed that it couldn't be your bot.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

We didn't even discuss it, we just laughed

;)

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

Well there you go.

Our team has a PS hopper. We probably won't use it.

We were able to shovel balls through the Air lock to our roller. It was MUCH faster and safer then trying to shoot them in. You can even make a pile, and push them in all at once, en-mass :D

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

That was the whole point of our first thread. Anyone who actually thought that robot was ours, just doesn't know us at all.

Keeping on track ... Mike beat me to the punch. We are very concerned that our green will be perceived to interfere with the camera. As such, we have limited our TC green to only the bumpers (believe me, it is enough) and behind the numbers that are cut into the drive base.



We also have very cool flex loom (that Mike referred to) in TC green, but decided to leave it off since it is right at the height of the camera.

Moving on ... Jason pointed out our theory on human loading. We chose human over picking up in 2006. We chose floor over human this year. We have limit ourselves from doing everything since 2005 (for reasons why, look at our 2004 robot) and doing both was discussed, but ultimately cut out. We think that a sitting chicken has no place in this game. 254, 111, and 148 have all reinfoced this thinking. Week 1 should prove us right or wrong either way.

I also think the variance between traditionally powerful teams in basic robot construction type is a sign that there may be a larger range of successful strategy variances this year. We are very excited to be at Midwest next week and can hardly wait.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

I think this has been the most interesting part of seeing all of the highly anticipated robots this season. There is tremendous variety in design when, initially, it seemed as if people thought there'd be none at all. It goes to show that what may be an obvious solution to one is not an obvious solution to all.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

Yes Cory I was talking about having a roller directly feed a helix from the ground. With this design as well as ours it would be virtually impossible to add a human loading portion due to the balls being fed through the roof into the shooter. It would be possible to add a big helix around the bot but then you would introduce the possibility of jamming for the balls that are human loaded.

Also as has already been pointed out, with robots like yours and 148 if any team stops to human load, they will have already lost to you guys. I honestly see no reason to attempt to human load. The human player will better spend there time by trying to make balls on the opposing teams trailers. Plus it is not difficult at all to make a roller to suck up balls. There's enough balls that we didn't feel it would be an issue searching for balls...that is of course unless you guys haven't sucked up half of the fields balls.

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

Hopefully without further derailing this thread, I do see a point to human loading.
A well-timed human load can be safe for being filled up (or at least significantly scored on), and much quicker than hunting balls around the field. More importantly, it can be done about as far away from the opposing human players as you can get.
The balls you load from it can then be scored with more success (hopefully) than your HP can (although this will not always be the case), especially given the ability of a robot to score on any portion of the field (versus HPs who will be better when robots are nearby).
Granted, I wouldn't want this as my only loading option, and it isn't the only loading option of 254, 968, or 148. Human loading does present some obvious risks to being pinned, scored on, and/or being "trapped" in a corner of the field (tactically, not physically).

Re: 2009 REAL ThunderChicken Robot
 

I'm not sure if it's been said;

But is your camera mounted to a different base then the turret?
If so how do you plan to hit a moving target?