[moderated] pic: The 2006 NiagaraFIRST Triplets!

[Bharat Nain]

Um, WOW! Nice job NiagaraFIRST. I really like the design.

[Swan217]

Aww Karthik, they look just like you...

Watch out for sibling rivalry.

[Rich Kressly]

Congrats to the crew North of the border.

[Conor Ryan]

So...who gets to practice with the practice robot first?

[Tom Bottiglieri]

What's the thickeness of the plastic guarding the shooter and for the hopper?

[Matt]

Great job guys they look amazing.

[KenWittlief]

Now I have to drive all the way from rochester NY to the toronto regional to see this for myself.

Excellent multi-team effort!

[Elgin Clock]

OK, fine.. I have no problem being the first one to say this.

Why are 3 teams still (in their 2nd year in FIRST) making one of the same robot.

I can see doing this your first year (a whole 3 team learning process, and what not, strange as it may be) but to continue this tradition in your second year??

When do you say it's enough, and let each team branch out on their own and make a different robot.

I once hear either Dean or Woodie say of the FIRST competition a while back something to the effect of "It's amazing; we have (x amount) of teams competing and no 2 robots are exactly alike."

I think that was (at one time) the key to the whole competition. You can see the uniqeness in everybody's design.

Now, we have "stock" robots which will add a bit of genericness to the overall competition.

Sure, you may win a teamwork award or something, and sure, you may be inspiring to some extent, but I don't think these teams are reaching their full potential to create future engineers, and "outside the box" thinkers.

Idk.. maybe I'm off base here, but that's just my opinion.

As for the design(s) I like it. It's simple, and to the point.
Albeit the same design for 3 teams, good luck to each of you individually at your events.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Elgin Clock

I once hear either Dean or Woodie say of the FIRST competition a while back something to the effect of "It's amazing; we have (x amount) of teams competing and no 2 robots are exactly alike."(...)

Sure, you may win a teamwork award or something, and sure, you may be inspiring to some extent, but I don't think these teams are reaching their full potential to create future engineers, and "outside the box" thinkers.

We started the year with about 40 interested students, and ended up with about 20 active. Most of the students who left were more interested in building robots than in doing other things like PR, fund-raising, or the animation competition. With so many hands and so few design-and-build tasks available, they were bored. We have discussed starting a new team just so more students can be hands-on in the design and building process. I don't see students being happy building carbon-copy robots, and am curious as to how it worked in the Niagara teams.

[Joe J.]

I was thinking what Elgin and Rick said. I mean, I can see the advantages of having carbon copy robots; spare parts are easy to come by if your in a pinch.

But as for the robots themselves they look great.

[Ryan Dognaux]

The robots look great. If they're anything like last years then all of them will be great competitors.

The issue about collaboration and building copies of robots has been debated and really there isn't a right answer to any of it. There are advantages and disadvantages. 3 teams will have bonded and formed a close knit relationship among each other. They'll all have the same robot and so they can all troubleshoot them for problems. 3 teams = 3 times the power working on one robot.

However, they do lose that sort of robot individualism that makes each team unique. Either way, I'm glad to see them as a part of FIRST and a part of this year's competition. Good luck to all three teams!

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by CatchRothy22

For everyone saying that this is an "awesome" and great idea, and how great their robots are, I think you're out of your mind. First is about high-schoolers, and kids getting involved in engineering by designing and building their robots. I guarantee that the students and kids on these teams didn't build those robots. And building is not simple assembling parts that NiagaraFIRST sent them. 3 teams having the exact same robot sponsored by NiagaraFIRST, I'm sure we can tell who actually built the robot here.


You can find this right on the "About FIRST" page on the usfirst.org site. Teams are supposed to consist of students and kids building the robot assisted by mentors. Not assembling a box of parts sent by their sponsor that's already been duplicated and built by 2 other teams.

I don't see how this is a good idea at all. It completely ruins the FIRST spirit, and takes all the creativity out of the largest part in the Robot season, build phase. This is probably one of the worst examples of gracious professionalism I've seen in my few years involved in FIRST.

Stop selling out to your sponsors, and try creating your own robot for once.

You're beating a dead horse to be honest. This subject has been debated over and over again, this isn't the time or place to bring it up again.

And I will reiterate - Just because a robot looks good and just because it is very well made does not mean that students were not involved in creating it. It makes me SICK when people go ahead and judge a team - in this case, 3 teams - without even the slightest clue as to how that team(s) runs and operates.

Stop judging teams at the first sight of their robot and try have a little decency for once.

[Don Wright]

And building is not simple assembling parts that NiagaraFIRST sent them. 3 teams having the exact same robot sponsored by NiagaraFIRST, I'm sure we can tell who actually built the robot here.

Do you know that this is what happened?

[Dermot_135]

Tight Bots! I was wondering, when did you guys finish building your bots? We were in a bit of a rush!

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by CatchRothy22

For everyone saying that this is an "awesome" and great idea, and how great their robots are, I think you're out of your mind. First is about high-schoolers, and kids getting involved in engineering by designing and building their robots. I guarantee that the students and kids on these teams didn't build those robots. And building is not simple assembling parts that NiagaraFIRST sent them. 3 teams having the exact same robot sponsored by NiagaraFIRST, I'm sure we can tell who actually built the robot here.


You can find this right on the "About FIRST" page on the usfirst.org site. Teams are supposed to consist of students and kids building the robot assisted by mentors. Not assembling a box of parts sent by their sponsor that's already been duplicated and built by 2 other teams.

I don't see how this is a good idea at all. It completely ruins the FIRST spirit, and takes all the creativity out of the largest part in the Robot season, build phase. This is probably one of the worst examples of gracious professionalism I've seen in my few years involved in FIRST.

Stop selling out to your sponsors, and try creating your own robot for once.

Before things get too far out of hand here, how can you make the assumption that these robots are not student-built? My understanding is that NiagaraFIRST is not a company, but rather a name for a group of three high school teams. So, if NiagaraFIRST is making parts and building robots, then that would be a good thing. Would you make the same accusation of 217/229, or 254/22, or 254/60? Using the same jointly-designed plans doesn't mean that everyone isn't making their own parts. I don't know any better than you do what the actual situation is, but it would probably be better to not make assumptions.

(2c)