This is a good observation, and something to pay attention to, not even specifically in this context but going forward in life in general. Sometimes when you’re on a set path, you can rationalize a lot of concerns away really easily, even to the point where rationales conflict with each other. You have to be wary that you haven’t overconstrained yourself and aren’t seeing a problem from a too-limited lens. (Or else you might end up doing something silly and building a wall of hooks in 2015… long story)
Back to the original problem: If all of these things are true:
- Increasing the flywheel RPM (by adding an over-gear gearbox) isn’t possible
- Changing the flywheel diameter isn’t possible
- Using more or less compression does not change the distance you can achieve
Then, you can’t achieve a faster / flatter shot with your current design.
“Anything is possible, we should try to achieve anything” is a nice sentiment, but it’s not the most valuable lesson FRC can teach. Fundamentally this is a competition about cost-benefit analysis. What kind of a shot are you specifically trying to do? Is it just “as far as possible”, or is there a particular target? And what are you willing to compromise to get there? What I’m trying to gently nudge you toward is to decide whether or not you have reached the point where the returns of your efforts have diminished enough that the extra work stops being worth it. I’m not saying it with certainty, but if the ways out of your current design problem are all too much work / too late to do at this point, then I guess you have already answered this question.