Quote:
Originally Posted by wgardner
Things I'd like to see. Some might be controversial.
1. A way to make sure that rookie teams with limited financing can be competitive. Maybe a financial limit to the amount that can be spent on the robot? I have seen some teams from underserved communities pack it in after one season when they see what other teams are spending and when they realize that they can't compete financially. I don't want to see this become a sport for only rich kids.
2. An electrical kit of parts that is robust out of the box and doesn't require replacing battery connectors, adding ferrite cores, surge protectors, ferrules, and/or special bracing to connectors, or reading 25 page documents to figure out how to make the wiring robust.
3. Live scoring would make FTC more spectator friendly, but I can see how that would potentially require many more volunteers. Maybe an option for allowing this to happen in cases where those volunteers are available?
4. Updates to the game manual in cases where the rules have been changed from what the game manual says. Many forum rulings are clarifications that don't require game manual updates, but some are truly rule changes. For the rule changes, FIRST should update the manual so it's clear what the rules are. And ideally, the game video should accurately show the game too. 
5. A field that can be built from scratch using readily available parts and clear instructions written by the FTC folks. Then if companies like AndyMark want to market pre-built fields for teams or tournaments, they can. But having a single source for field structures this season wasn't great. And while we're on that topic...
6. Robust field structures. No flimsy ramps that break or get bent, rivets that pop out, etc.
7. Anti-static spray being required on the fields (or perhaps being required if the humidity is below a certain level), or fields being replaced with a new anti-static surface.
Just my opinions. Probably not the majority opinion... |
1. I can see both sides to this. While my team does make robots that are highly competitive and "custom" we spend very little money on the robot. Over the years, our students have reached out to different companies, and have been able to keep those companies as sponsors. They have been able to get metal from one company, plastic from another, and screws/bots/fasteners from another. I'm highly proud of what they have been able to do. Creating a highly custom robot with very little over head. Yes, both of my teams have switched to Andymark motors, but why wouldn't you if they are allowed. We make it a point in Arizona that if any team, whether it be rookie or veteran, that if they need tetrix parts, stock metal, or a field to practice on, that they are more than welcome to come by the shop and grab some or practice.
But back to the point of what you were saying, I wouldn't mind having a financial limit for teams. Just keep in mind that some teams may have the outreach done to companies like we have.
2. Yes, this needs to happen. It comes back to a money issue again, where some teams may not be able to afford to make it robust... it should come that way.
3. It would be nice to have this. I love having it in FRC. (I mentor a community team, not related to my FTC teams)
4. I agree that the video should be correct in every form... even if it has to be redone after a few weeks from kickoff, to show the changes that may happen from rule changes.
5. and 6. FTC needs to go back to a field that teams can build. Spending 450 dollars on a field that can only be used for a year is just not good in FTC. I understand it for FRC, but FTC has been great with the wooden elements that we have seen for the past few years. Along with the fact that the FTC robots are playing on a foam tile field that creates a huge amount of static, and then to put metal ramps that fall apart and create a grounding on the field that can potentially shut a robot off, (and I have seen it happen) just isn't good. Our team decided this year to not buy the whole field, but to reach out to the Regional Contacts to see if we could "store" one of the practice fields down in the metro area where most of the teams are located in Arizona, and where most of the quailfers where being held, and they had no problem with giving us a field, as long as we traveled it to each qualifier in the state. Travel this field this year was a pain. Parts as you have said, just were not robust, and the fact that we could not break down the elements because of pop-rivets just wasn't cool. This field would barely fit in my little Kia Soul..(yes a small car), but for FTC, a field should be able to fit in any car that size or bigger semi easy.
7. Without the static spray this year on the fields, our two robots from my teams would not have done well. In our workshop, we did not spray the field in the beginning, and had a lot of static problems. The later half of our season, we started spraying, and saw a large drop in the amount of times a robot would shock. (autonomous being the worst time to shock as it would restart the encoders and redo the last step, usually running the robot into the wall or completely locking it up.) The Static spray should be enforced at all of the events.