Update 20 Released

[AmyPrib]

Either I'm blind (possible), or nobody has posted this yet..

http://www.usfirst.org/robotics/2005/tmup.htm

Update to G15 examples
Implementing protective shield over player stations
Practice field availability
Interesting updates on how "backup" teams will work

[Rich Wong]

O M G!
FIRST cares, they really care! (and they listen well too)

They are putting safety barrier over the drivers stations.

[Daniel Brim]

Originally Posted by Rich Wong

O M G!
FIRST cares, they really care! (and they listen well too)

They are putting safety barrier over the drivers stations.

I wonder how expensive this will be. One thing is for sure; it probably isn't cheap. That being said, we should all be thankful that FIRST listens well .

Listen to this FIRST: Thank you

-Daniel

[David Kelly]

Originally Posted by DanielBCR

I wonder how expensive this will be. One thing is for sure; it probably isn't cheap. That being said, we should all be thankful that FIRST listens well .

Listen to this FIRST: Thank you

-Daniel

Once again FIRST stepped up to the plate and is doing what is best for all participants. This hopefully will eliminate the need for refs having to use their discression and distualify/disable a team. This is also a major and long overdue protection for the drive teams.

[dhitchco]

Great move for FIRST!

Every single person near the playing field needs to be safety-conscious. So, while the drivers can't be looking out for flying tetras al the time, the field attendants can be their eyes. The same holds true for the cameraman, etc. Extra field attendants can be a big help at Nationals.

[Kevin Sevcik]

It can't be that expensive. It's a most some sheets of Lexan like the driver station windows. And some steel pipe and Key Klamp fittings. I'd ball park it at sub $500 a side for that configuration.

Anyways, thank goodness I can concentrate on what's in front of my team and not what's above us.

[Logan Byers]

Question: does this mean no more penalties/being disabled?
That would make my day, being a driver and considering we were disabled 3 times at Midwest!

[IMDWalrus]

Originally Posted by 461gopher

Question: does this mean no more penalties/being disabled?
That would make my day, being a driver and considering we were disabled 3 times at Midwest!

Penalties for what?

I didn't see anything in that update about the elimination of any penalties. The only thing that could be interpreted that way was giving the refs a bit more discretion, and that's not going to result in a huge decrease in penalties.

[Logan Byers]

penalties for dangling tetras over the drivers' station!
Update #18
rule S01

[Kims Robot]

Yeah!! Our drivers can take off their russian military helmets!!

Im sure Graeme will be happy that he wont get any more bumps on the head!

[Cory]

Originally Posted by IMDWalrus

Penalties for what?

I didn't see anything in that update about the elimination of any penalties. The only thing that could be interpreted that way was giving the refs a bit more discretion, and that's not going to result in a huge decrease in penalties.

He means that by putting a net/board/whatever over the drivers station, a robot will no longer be penalized if the tetra happens to be over the drivers station while trying to cap.

[BRAVESaj25bd8]

I like the idea of putting a shield over the drivers' heads. However, the G15 update bothers me a little bit. Technically, with this new update, a robot can stay in the loading station even after they have the tetra and possibly draw a penalty. If a red robot is in it's loading zone and a blue robot is just outside of that, the red robot can draw a 30 point penalty on the blue robot just by banging into it while it still has 1 wheel in the loading zone. I do not know if this is completely true but someone please correct me if I interpreted this wrong. I think FIRST should have said that the robot is fair game as soon as it has the tetra and the human player is back safely. The new update really eliminates some good defense that could be played.

[mtaman02]

Yeah, FIRST as always is looking for the safest way possible. Remember one thing there is no amount of money that can equal the safety of ones life. So whether it costs $1 or a million dollars its there to protect you.

I disagree with more field attendents at nationals, While the arena is big enough to handle the extra volunteers the field space allocated for that Division is just a lil bit bigger then the regionals. Those who are on the ground level watching the game won't be able to see the match if you add more field attendents.

All in all another large step by FIRST in the right direction. We do not complain about the safety issues we make FIRST aware of them.

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by BRAVESaj25bd8

I like the idea of putting a shield over the drivers' heads. However, the G15 update bothers me a little bit. Technically, with this new update, a robot can stay in the loading station even after they have the tetra and possibly draw a penalty. If a red robot is in it's loading zone and a blue robot is just outside of that, the red robot can draw a 30 point penalty on the blue robot just by banging into it while it still has 1 wheel in the loading zone. I do not know if this is completely true but someone please correct me if I interpreted this wrong. I think FIRST should have said that the robot is fair game as soon as it has the tetra and the human player is back safely. The new update really eliminates some good defense that could be played.

I would hope that the refs will be directed to look at who makes the contact. If you look at the other Examples, they talk about "who was the cause of the contact and interference". Therefore, if you're just sitting idle in front of their loading zone, and they run into you, that should not be a penalty against the idle guy. You are merely blocking them from leaving their LZ, which should be legal. But I would say only if you are stationary and not actively driving at them to block them.
However, in reading the words of Example 6 in Update 20, it sounds like this situation is desribed, and I don't agree. If Red initiates all the contact with Blue sitting there like a stump, I don't agree that Blue should be assessed a 30pt penalty because they were not the "source" of interference or contact.
Any other opinions?

I do applaud FIRSTs action in putting the barrier in place.

Originally Posted by Cory

Why take the chance? If my opponent is in a loading zone, I'm going to give them their space, let them get out of the zone, and then play defense on them.
We've known about these penalties for how many months now?
It's not that hard to avoid them.

Ok - what if Red is waiting to leave their endzone and Blue is driving by on their way somewhere else. Red runs into Blue (either intentionally or just on their way out of the zone)... Does blue get a penalty? That's sorta the same as if Blue were just sitting there. Yes we have known about these penalties for a long time and people have tried to avoid being anywhere near loading zones. But it has happened, and will happen I'm sure. Just looking for what call is to be made. Since there's an emphasis on "the source of interference" in those examples, it would seem that Blue should not be penalized for that. Nice to get these situations out in the open prior to playing.

[Cory]

Why take the chance? If my opponent is in a loading zone, I'm going to give them their space, let them get out of the zone, and then play defense on them.

We've known about these penalties for how many months now?

It's not that hard to avoid them.