|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
I think the collaboration thing is cool...But I don't like that you made identical robots and shared the work between the two teams...One of that robot scares me and you guys have just doubled my nightmares.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
I agree that FIRST is intended to help spread and increase engineering knowledge, but the idea of two established teams sharing an identical design seems to have skewed the concept. I feel personally that FIRST should be about each individual team sharing the work load and the joys and the pains that come along with engineering and manufacturing its own unique design. While the idea of developing partnerships and friendships among colleagues and potential opponents is novel and advantageous, I feel that the fabrication, design, and communication that occurs as a single team creates and competes with its own robot cannot and should not be replaced.
|
|
#3
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Quote:
I some what disagree but then again it is all about perspective...if you are a single team and work with a few mentors to build a robot that is considered a fine course of action in FIRST, and when I see this great partnership between two teams I think of it as they are mentoring each other. About building components for each other I also think this is fine. Knowing that at most of the regional I have been to at some point I am working on a robot that isn't mine, and if you team has ever gotten things machined or welded at another company, I believe that all of these examples follow what these two teams are doing. I think that this is a wonderful collaboration of minds and look forward to what they will produce in the future. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Quote:
Thoughts? |
|
#5
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
I don't know how I feel...
I am still thinking it over, but my first impression is that generally I don't like it. I know there are some "real world" parallels, but I don't think they really are that close of a comparison.
I know that Team Ford has made some steps toward collaboration and coordination of chassis. I suppose other have done similar things to one extent or another. Here is the nub of my concern: What would people think of all 16 Delphi teams having the machine that the Chief Delphi Team is making this year (or the Delphi Knights, or the TechnoKats, or whatever)? CEO's love to have winning teams. We all (including CEO's) know that there is a huge luck factor in winning the Championship. Having 16 chances to win is better than having just one. I worry that the pressure to win may increase if this type of collaboration becomes more common -- up to this point, we have always been able to say that TOO close of coordination was out of the bounds of fairness... ...but perhaps not. Beyond this, I am not sure that it is good for FIRST to have 16 Chief Delphi robots out in the wild ;-) It could be a strange new world we are entering. Joe J. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don't know how I feel...
Quote:
1. Do you think you could build 16 identical robots with 16 teams? 2. This collaboration has everything to do with winning. We will have won before the first regional begins by learning how to work together in a long distance partnership by paving the way for teams to think out side the box, sharing information to help everyone. Winning a Regional or the National Championship is nice but it doesn’t compare to working as a team to develop a new process to build a better product. How many teams are willing to share all of there current years ideas to include drawings pictures discussion anything? Team 60 and 254 will and do. 3. Do you think it is easier for two teams to build the same robot or each building their own? The answer is it is much harder to build identical robots. You have to take your ego and put it on the shelf. You have to listen more than you talk. You must be willing to compromise, only if you use the best of everyone’s ideas will the project be a success. In our case we had to deal with shipping and a lag in getting the parts you needed. There are many other obstacles to over come as well. Will we have a better product in the end? We hope so. Have our teams learned some valuable real life lessons? Absolutely! |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
the idea of collaborating in order to design a build a robot together in my oppinion goes along with exactly what the FIRST competition is all about. FIRSt isn't about making a robot over 6 weeks, it's not about competing against other teams, though the aredaline is awesome and the comradere built is even better, but a major component about FIRST is gracious professionalism. In my oppinion, this kind of allianceship is a wonderful thing towards fullfilling the ideals of FIRST. Kudos to Teams 60 and 254
|
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Congratulations on pioneering an amazing new way of approaching our competition. I have a feeling that a few years from now your two teams will be the answer to a FIRST trivia question. "Which two teams were the first to build the same robot?" Next year I'm sure many other teams will follow suit.
|
|
#9
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
Collaboration is Great!
Kudos to you. I "real" life, several teams need to interact and share for the betterment of the business as a whole. Well done. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
That's a pretty scary but brilliant idea, in my personal opinion. So which one of you gets the credit for it?
Call me jaded, but FIRSTers are driven by awards and recognition. It's in our blood (though we don't like to admit it). What happens when both of you go after the same angle on your Chairman's application? Unless the rules change, only one of you can get the credit for it. True, if any team was to break the glass ceiling of "no teams beyond 200 have ever won the Chairmans Award", it would be 254...they definitely mirror the resources and support of a pre-200 team. But if one of you wins with it, the other team needs to find another angle to take next year, because that idea is now "old hat" to the judges. And knowing FIRST teams (for the most part), once an idea is recognized, all development on it ceases - because it has served its purpose. I think inter-team partnerships are great...I used to do it myself. But just as in those old movies with the business partner running off with all the money, things like that happen today, and a team who you thought you knew may not be one who you knew at all. And no, I'm not saying that against either of you in particular, you both are outstanding teams, I'm saying it because you just need to be sure you trust the team you're collaborating with. As for the collaboration aspect, I honestly would be terrified if all 16 Delphi teams had the same game design (or any multiple of teams, for that matter...I'm not just picking on Delphi ). Especially with their game experience, if everyone did this, it would stifle the rookie retention rate. I can absolutley see it turning into leagues of teams that "acquire" younger teams into their pipeline or shutting out teams that they didn't like. And I honestly don't want to see Dean take up an SEC role.Please don't get all upset about my viewpoint - it is only a viewpoint, and its not an angry one, just something from an old FIRSTer who's been through the trials and tribulations of collaboration and who cares about both of your teams. Last edited by Jessica Boucher : 16-02-2004 at 14:15. |
|
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
There are a few points here that need to be clarified.
First -- Yes, we did collaborate, and make the same robot. However, it is NOT the exact same robot. Each of our teams made small adjustments that the other did not. The robot is wired differently, and we will have different programs. We can't wait to see the Poofs at Nats and see what it comes down to. Who will win? Only strategy and driver skill will seperate us. Second -- I cannot think of a team that we could trust any more than the Cheesy Poofs. When they submit their Chairman's Award entry, I hope that they include our alliance. And we will do the same. I think that people are missing the point that we are acting as one team. If the Cheesy Poofs win an award for design, or for performance, or any other award, we can feel that we share it. We each worked on the other's robots, and we are each equally part of the alliance. On team 60, we're so close that we've become family. (Advisors, Machinists, Students, and Parents included) We've done so much together, that it is practically impossible not to be so close. We wanted to work with 254, who we consider an extended group of our family to show everyone what kind of collaboration is possible, when you're NOT worrying about "yourself" and "your own team's awards". Now we're working together to worry about "us" and "our team's achievements". Amanda M |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
But you're not the same team. If you want to be considered as one team, then merge and register under the same number. I personally think that would be an innovative idea....teams working from different states to produce one robot...it seems to be more of what you both are going after. But until you merge, you are still in the competition's eyes as two separate teams, walking a fine line hand in hand.
Sometimes things may start out good, but then something happens that compromises that relationship. I've seen it happen too many times to think it won't happen this time, no matter how good you say your relationship is....and that's what I'm worried about...and it's something you both need to think about. |
|
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 254 robot....almost there!
im split on the idea...
i do like the idea that teams are forming together, and cooperating. however... i dont think its right to do what 60 and 254 did. i mean its kinda cheap. yuo have one team design half the robot, and the other team do the other half. there are teams who are running themselves ragged trying to accomplish a goal. the whole concept of FIRST is to have unique designs. and gauranteed, its a good way to promote first's unity. its bad that the two teams only have to do half the work. its kinda unfair, but what can you do, disqualify them? no because they broke no rule. however, i think it a kick to the chest for some teams. just my 2cents worth. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|