Quote:
Originally Posted by gblake
Go through the build-process once per month (August, September, October, November, December, ...) for those 75-125 students in a herd or in small groups. Re-use a single modest collection of parts and scrap lumber each month to keep costs down. Re-use past games if you need sample problems to solve.
Ask a mature team to help if your group needs a dose of wisdom.
Then use the results of your preparation/practice/training to build one or two prototypes, followed by a good-enough robot, during the 44-day build season.
After a year or two, use the parts you have accumulated to keep a driver-practice robot on-hand all 365 days of the year.
The bottom line remains that time exists, before each build season begins, to prepare the students, and that enough time exists to put that preparation to good use.
Neither the length of the build season, nor current bagging rules, prevent building second robots, or building a decent primary one with time to spare.
Blake
|
This ignores the point still. A new team without direct involvement from a more veteran team is not going to have the payload to be serious with the criteria you have set.
Sure FRC11 bootstrapped FRC193 this way. They are all experienced people with access to our entire shop. So of course they got moving and serious very quickly.
Now try this in reality: where you may have funding for limited play, limited robots and it may not be possible or practical for other teams to help because they are also burnt out.
We are both very experienced - FIRST is now 20+ years old - what do you actually think stops more teams from forming? What made MAR possible in the first place?
Money and commitment. Anything that increases the cost and complicates the commitment hurts expansion. Heck my friend: look at how many posts in 3 topics have been made to defend a -FAKE- 6 week deadline that 90% of the participants have argued they do, or would, buy there way around.