Is a shifting transmission really necessary?

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Gdeaver

The 2005 kop changed things.

Very true for all the points you listed. While the 2005 kop gearbox most likely provided a higher degree of success as a whole, I think it caused an astonishingly lower degree of innovation as a whole, and on a case by case basis in the drivetrain department. You are correct in saying that using a simpler system is a good stategic decision to get more debug time, but even so , I still hate to see teams not strive for more. Many teams made a good strategic decision to use the kop gearbox, and some went on to win events possibly because of that decision. There are so many good things that came out of the having kop gearbox, that I can't really make a case to shoot it down. But all I can say is this: I truly miss walking around the pits and seeing the wide array of custom made gearboxes and drive systems. I really miss it.

And when all the robots have the same frame and the same wheels too, it makes it even less fun to be a pit browser. I have always regarded the frame and drive system as just as important as any other part of the robot. So to me, lacking innovation in those is just as bad as lacking innovation in an arm or manipulator.

When I started in FRC, I thought one of the greatest things about the buildup was that it was not a put together kit. It didn't come with a manual, it did not come with instructions. It was not bought in a store. Every piece of metal was cut, every shaft was machined.

This year, we achieved a higher degree of success as a whole in the sense that nearly every team manipulated the scoring object, and manipulated it well. But that same old smile while browsing the pits doesn't come to my face anymore staring at the same grey gearbox, and the same hole-filled frame rails, and the same 6 spoke wheels.

It can be made analogous to a situation like this. Do you want every highschooler to only pass geometry before they graduate? Or do you want some to only make it to Algebra and others to rise high into Calculus? It is a tough call to make, one that I certainly can't to.

I like seeing everyone being proud of their functioning robot. But I like seeing some teams being proud of thier unique and different robot too. However, I'm afraid these don't coincide, and the latter doesn't come without the cost of others being left with a poorly functioning robot.

There is no way possible to get what I want to see. I have no solution, for what I see as a problem. The problem is I think the Kit is becoming too much of just that, a kit. Where will it go next? 4th and 5th year teams are taking the easy way out by using what they are given, instead of striving for something more.

I think the KOP gearbox and frame are fine pieces of hardware that has made the competition more do-able and more enjoyable for many. But for some like me, the fun and pride in some aspects of the robot and the competition has been taken away.