|
Re: Discrepancy at Chesapeake, Israel, Waterloo?
I do think the efforts of the NASA/VCU field crew should be applauded! It's great that they were able to support so many teams and still run a timely event.
I understand it is difficult, and where to draw the line between team responsibility and teaching a lesson is blurry at best. But all being said, a little leniency for the teams who I think have been incredibly patient adapting to this entire process is in order.
I wasn't on the field the entire time in Chesapeake, but I was there on the sidelines the 3 different qualification matches where one of our partners was disabled by the FTA.
In two matches, everything was hooked up correctly as far as everyone could tell. The robots could not communicate so they were disabled. After some follow-through by our programming mentor & them not working the next match, it was determined one team had a radio problem. Another was never solved.
But red or blue, to allow plug in or not, there are a couple things that did disturb me:
- In our other match, the team had not plugged in their radio after being tethered in the pit. It was discovered once the field was set and all other teams linked and ready. The team was called back out on the field, shown the problem, allowed to plug it in, and then the scoring table was told to disable them. It certainly wasn't a time saving measure! Why not let the kids play? Why embarrass them like that? I'm sure they felt bad enough. This was done repeatedly when these problems happened.
- Teams have no way to troubleshoot problems, particularly with wireless. They are only allowed to tether in the pits and then they step on the field and are told "it's your robot".... Well their only defense is "it worked in our lab" because it's their sole point of reference. I totally agree with Adam's point of getting some more diagnostic tools in so field staff can say "it's an issue with your XXX" and teams have a chance of fixing it! How can you make a checklist when no one knows what you're looking for, and much of it can't be tested?
In general, teams were told to turn on the robot and leave the field immediately (some at the threat of disablement).... no 'gates down'. While I can certainly appreciate the consistency with which the field was run, I don't think it served the interest of teams or time-saving.
I personally am willing to give FIRST the chance to work out the bugs of all this new stuff, but I do think those representing FIRST (paid, volunteer, etc) need to show teams the same bits of compassion. I congratulate the events that have found the way to balance all perspectives on the issues!
__________________
Colleen Shaver (Traitor) - Assistant Director, WPI Robotics Resource Center
FRC190 WPI/Mass Academy (2001-Present) :: FRC246 BU/O'Bryant School (2000) :: FRC126 Nypro/Clinton High (1996-1999)

|