Quote:
Originally Posted by pacoliketaco
I read most of this thread already, and as soon as i saw the picture, i was practically disappointed. I know that is not a very nice thing to say, but i dont see this at all to be in the spirit of FIRST.
|
However, it isn't up to you to speak on behalf of FIRST as to what that "spirit" is, is it? Why say something that you know isn't nice? I'd challenge you to find me any worthwhile description of FIRST's spirit that specifically addresses, inhibits, excludes, or discourages this practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacoliketaco
as far as i can see, swerve drive is very complex, and should only be attempted by teams with the capabilities to make one themselves. and FIRST is about learning, not buying pre-built modules from other teams.
|
Sorry, but this statement is pure baloney. Why shouldn't ANYONE attempt ANYTHING they desire to in this world (provided laws aren't being broken, etc)? If the team supports this idea and this is their way in the door, I say AWESOME even though I also run one of those teams who has similar tooling resources like you speak of ... and since when does buying a pre-built anything preclude you from teaching? There are a ton of ways to learn with these..mechanically, programming, reverse engineering, pre-season training, ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacoliketaco
my team has always had extremely limited machining capabilities (hacksaws, hand held drills, and maybe a circular saw to cut 8020) but we still manage to make effective robots. this makes me very jealous when a team comes out and says "look at our brand new CNC mill"
|
Why let jealousy enter the picture at all? There's a ton of ways to use this as inspiration and motivation instead. I have yet to see a game in FRC that "required" swerve drive. How about "Let's find the Allentown, NJ way to out-build, out-strategize, and outplay these swerve teams using our own resources." OR "Let's deconstruct these CAD files and find a way to build our own.." Or ... geeze...be inspired by what others are able to do ... even when you believe you can "never" have "that" for your team. Who knows maybe one of your students will be inspired enough to design swerve modules in industry someday or will get to run one of those CNC's at work because he/she decided to pursue the education/opportunity because they were exposed to it through another FRC team. I mean it's possible we're all here to help make all of that happen for as many students as possible and the robot competition thingy is secondary, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacoliketaco
but to me, one team making parts, and selling them to other teams is just not right. maybe if you were willing to teach other teams how to, but not to actually make the parts for them. especially something as complex as a swerve drive. whatever. i guess you are doing this to make money, which is fair. good luck with selling these, im sure they will be popular, just as AM mecanums were in 2007.
|
Hakuna Matata...to each his own. Is 221, LLC the team 221 or an offshoot thereof? I suppose you might think AndyMark is 45, which would also be false. In the end, why the heck don't you want to see the bar higher for all teams with more resources/possibilities for all? Why on earth should we stunt the growth of progress for all teams? Look at the history of design and the way things advance. More affordable, readily available resources is always a driving force for this. Why on earth should FRC be any different?
I hope after careful reflection and after you trade in jealousy for inspiration, you might reconsider your position here.
namaste