View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-01-2007, 11:19
Mr. Van Mr. Van is offline
Registered User
#0599 (Robo-Dox)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Posts: 350
Mr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Van has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #5 Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall View Post
Despite that, judging by these two Q&A responses and the update, it seems that the intention of the rulemakers was to ban those old Parker cylinders. To keep things consistent, <R106> therefore ought to also be amended to include something similar to the last sentence of <R105> (stating that even non-purchased, ex-KOP cylinders need to be the same as the ones in the current Bimba form). If that amendment is made to <R106>, the inconsistency will disappear, because the non-purchased ex-KOP Parkers will become explicitly illegal.
Is that the intent here? No Parker cylinders from previous years? If that is the intent, then the first bullet of <R106> is completely redundant since any of the items listed there would be covered by <R24>.

We have nearly all of the pneumatics components that were in any of the previous year's kits - and we use 'em. (We used a 2001 cylinder on our 2005 robot.) We just want to be sure that we are within the rules!

-Mr. Van
Coach, 599
The RoboDox