Thread: Old control box
View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-01-2009, 15:41
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Old control box

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
So, it seems that the operator console is counted as part of the robot. After all, it is part of the control system. The wording of <R11-A> seems to indicate that its exceptions to <R11> are only for weight and volume. But the console isn't in the cost accounting.
This ambiguity in the rules has been around for a couple of years. While I don't disagree with your analysis, I will point out that if that is true, all sorts of rules become ridiculous. Take power sources and distribution, for example: <R01>, <R43>, etc. are essentially impossible to fulfil, if the console is part of the robot.

I've got a hard time believing that that's what was intended (technical common sense and all that). All the same, you'd think that a clear, airtight definition of a robot might have been a useful thing to include.