Important Q/A forum responses

[sanddrag]

Let's duplicate/point out the important FIRST Q/A forum here so we have a centralized location for the possibly strategy/material/process changing responses. Only post responses to questions that have to do with things that are not covered or are unclear in the manual or that contradict the manual.

[Guy Davidson]

I thought it should be pointed out that the GDC has started to answer some questions. Here are some of the interesting ones I found at first glance:

Coaches may NOT have laptops on the field

The wrap-around exists!

Herding of more than one piece is illegal

Legs may only be pushed in order to control them

Scoring of other alliance's ringers results in a penalty, but ringer counts, as long as it's the only one in the leg.

Post other interesting links you find, or comment about the ones posted.

[Ian Curtis]

How 'bout defining AM two speeds as COTS mechanisms, which means they must be purchased after kickoff . Those AM people will be making lots of money.

As an aside to AM employees: Interested in selling some stock?

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1100

EDIT: Perhaps this came across the wrong way, and is actually quite irrelevant after what Andy said about this rule change.

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by iCurtis

How 'bout defining AM two speeds as COTS mechanisms, which means they must be purchased after kickoff . Those AM people will be making lots of money.

As an aside to AM employees: Interested in selling some stock?

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1100

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

[Cody Carey]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

While this will not effect our team personally, I can definately see that extra money will need to be spent on everyone's account, and excess paperwork will need to be done. It reminds me of our team having to disassemble the spare KOP gearbox at the door of the Pitt regional in order to get in, only to re-assemble it on the other side. We didn't use it on the robot.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Cody Carey

While this will not effect our team personally, I can definately see that extra money will need to be spent on everyone's account, and excess paperwork will need to be done. It reminds me of our team having to disassemble the spare KOP gearbox at the door of the Pitt regional in order to get in, only to re-assemble it on the other side. We didn't use it on the robot.

Why did you have to disassemble anything to get into the event? I can't imagine how this is in anyone's best interest, nor do I recall a rule that would prevent you from bringing assembled mechanisms in as spares.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

Why did you have to disassemble anything to get into the event? I can't imagine how this is in anyone's best interest, nor do I recall a rule that would prevent you from bringing assembled mechanisms in as spares.

<R29> last year seems applicable. Most of the components of the KOP gearbox were available as COTS, but the gearbox itself would count as a fabricated item, and would be subject to the 25 pound limit. Taking it apart would let you slip a lot of the weight through as unrestricted COTS components.

[ChuckDickerson]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.

[Jonathan Norris]

Originally Posted by DeepWater

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.

Yes it is an annoying rule, but it has a purpose. It provides another layer of rules to ensure teams are not designing or building before season starts, the build season is 6 weeks long. This time is for designing, ordering, building, and testing. You can't say Dave didn't warn us (and here), my team almost got into this situation but I decided to take Dave's advice on this one .

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by DeepWater

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.

I feel confident in in saying that Andy, I, and many others wholeheartedly agree that it is, indeed, a completely ridiculous thing. You must admit that, as the rules are currently written, the only other options available to these teams are to either buy more transmissions or chunk their current transmissions in the trash and kiss their money goodbye. I'm pretty sure neither of those options is preferable to a lot of paperwork getting the transmissions legal. Obviously what would be best for these teams would be for the GDC to reconsider this rule.

EDIT: Jonathan. Saying Dave warned us is like saying the tooth fairy warned us. Everyone here takes anything he says preseason with a grain of salt, for good reason. Unless he was deputized as an official spokesperson for the GDC and I didn't notice, then saying that he warned us is a pretty poor defense. Aside from which, making a preseason, non-authoritive announcement of a possible rule change on CD? Exactly how may teams is that supposed to reach? If FIRST was serious about telling teams they could, and should, have sent an Email Blast.

[Jonathan Norris]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

EDIT: Jonathan. Saying Dave warned us is like saying the tooth fairy warned us. Everyone here takes anything he says preseason with a grain of salt, for good reason. Unless he was deputized as an official spokesperson for the GDC and I didn't notice, then saying that he warned us is a pretty poor defense. Aside from which, making a preseason, non-authoritive announcement of a possible rule change on CD? Exactly how may teams is that supposed to reach? If FIRST was serious about telling teams they could, and should, have sent an Email Blast.

Good point there, but I have learned with Dave that you can tell he is being deceiving an sincere. In those two posts when i first read them I didn't see the deceiving trickery in his post, I saw a general warning to teams about purchasing parts early. I do agree that if they should have sent out and email blast about it, and i also agree that Dave is not a spokesperson for the GDC and likes to play games with us sometimes.

[JoshuaFreier]

Can someone point me to the rule or ruling that says COTs have to be purchased during the season?

Thanks
Joshua

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by JoshuaFreier

Can someone point me to the rule or ruling that says COTs have to be purchased during the season?

Thanks
Joshua

<R17> says, among other things, that any MECHANISMS (COTS or custom) that were purchased before kickoff cannot be used on the final robot.

[JoshuaFreier]

The version of R17 that I have printed says:
"Prior to kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are encouraged... Teams may gather all the raw stock and COTS COMPONENTS they want. .... Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the kick-off presentation may be used for...."

Unless this was changed in update #2 I don't know where you are seeing what you are seeing and if the AM Transmission is a COTS item why wouldn't a team be allowed to pre-order?

Joshua

[ChuckDickerson]

Read the whole rule:

<R17> Prior to the Kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are
encouraged to think as much as they please about their ROBOTS. They may develop
prototypes, create proof-of-concept models, and conduct design exercises. Teams may
gather all the raw stock materials and COTS COMPONENTS they want. But absolutely no
fabrication or assembly of any elements intended for the final ROBOT is permitted prior to
the Kick-off presentation. Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the Kick-off
presentation may be used for prototyping or educational purposes, but CAN NOT be used
on the final ROBOT.