|
Re: [FTC]: FTC Expands the kit of parts option for next season
Quote:
Originally Posted by team F.T.C 4240
So now we get to also use VEX?!?!? Just kidding, but this platform is very similar to the VEX platform. It looks inexpensive, it has plastic gears (not a big fan, unless to want to build a light weight flying robot), all the metal parts look very much like VEX, as in if you wanted to alter it then you could just bend it, unlike the C-channel or really any of the Tetrix building materials. It looks more user friendly like VEX, but unlike Tetrix it does not look robust in any way what so ever, which means the first time you get rammed into a wall or pushed across the field, the robot would fall apart or get damaged. It doesn't look all bad though, because they have some pretty cool pieces like the belt drive, which looks like it could come in handy. My guess is most teams that have done FTC for a couple years will mostly use Tetrix with a few of the cool pieces of Matrix, but probably wouldn't use it for anything that needs to be robust. That's just my thoughts on the new Matrix kit.
|
Sigh - See my other post on this subject of obviously incorrect assertions about the strength of the Vex structural parts.
There is plenty of opportunity in the N. VA and MD region for motivated students or mentors to particpate inspirational robotics competion programs (or 4H's vendor-neutral non-competitive program) that use parts made by Vex, Tetrix and other suppliers. And all interested parties should be encouraged to look at all of the options and find the one that best suits their situation.
There should not be sniping and bad-mouthing by participants in any of the programs. Instead there should be support, encouragement, and COOPERTITION (with an extra emphasis on the cooperation half of that ethos).
I have crunched some numbers on the student population in the region, and can assure you that because Robotics/STEM participation in the area is soooo far below what almost anyone would want, anyone who wastes precious time bad-mouthing any program or product that might be a source of inspiration for additional students, doesn't "Get it."
I think I can quote some FIRST luminaries who have spoken out on the subject, if you don't take my word for it.
Blake
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate
Last edited by gblake : 06-09-2012 at 20:35.
|