Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunshine
Different strokes for different folks. It's all about the evolution of the individual team and how far mentors can/want to take them.
Who benefited the most. The team who bought a swerve drive from the vendor? Or the team that engineered or re-engineered the idea?
Yes, cots equal the playing field. I'm fine with that. But it's the journey not the destination. Don't buy all cots at the expense of learning.
|
Nicely said. Maybe that's what I was getting at all along?
Quote:
|
The only cots speciality parts we used was the kit bot which we modified to use Mecanum wheels, competition robot parts roller kit, Rev gussets, and a banebots p80 gearbox.
|
Yeah, Those kinds of parts I'm all about. We buy COTS parts too, like gearboxes and the like, linear slides etc etc. I think part of the problem is that I'm still new to the whole "leading the organization thing". I'm just a software guy (Blame it on the software right?), so I've got relatively little experience designing physical stuff. But now I've slipped into a leadership role for the team itself and I've got some freedom to actually make choices that can affect where we're going.
I won't lie, that still kind-of scares me. I'm starting to ramble -- and I know it -- Sorry about that. I suppose I wanted to see how other teams approach the problem. I like to hear from people who have lots more experience than I do and try to understand how they think.
Thanks for the discussion so far everyone.