17th FRA meeting report

[kane]

Leo, please explain what you are asking.

The minutes should be on the website soon. (Next few days hopefully).

[babeth]

uhh... maybe the fact that item number 3 has a deadline for discussing the topic and addressing ones representative(s) about it that expires next month and still we had no official publication of the minutes in which it was discussed ?

Hes right you know. Because there is a deadline, and the matter merits a serious and thorough discussion, the publication of the official minutes comes very very late indeed. Its a common trick in Belgian politics by the way, and much despised, in order to hamper your opponents. In your case its the bureaucratic mill grinding too slow and thus hampering the democratic process.

In plain words: guys, youre late with the minutes and the discussion of a proposal is in jeopardy due to the deadline approaching.

Hi people, I have just re-read item 3 and e-mailed the FRA, it reads;
Hi, Ive just read Elizabeth Van Sons post, dated 18.11.07, and re-read item 3 on the FRA matters list.
It states; It is believed that this would affect 5/6 machines only.
Pressure for one, and I would bet there are a lot more than five other affected bots, has always been right on the weight limit, the new mk 4 is no acception.
Despite the ram and flipper arm now being made of ally and the armour only 1/16 stainless (very thin by todays standards) I have still had to drasticlly reduce the battery capacity to compensate for the increased weight of the stronger chassis (it was the weak chassis that ultimately lead to the demise of the mk 3).
To loose a further two kilos would be extremely difficult.
It is proposed that the inclusive consumable rule be brought in on 1.1.09, fair enough, how about adding that bots completed before 1.1.08 are exempt?
Any advantage that an extra two kilos would give for the older bots (none in my veiw!) would be outweighed by the more advanced, newer machines.
What say you?, Mike.
Anyone sharing my veiws / proposal e-mail the FRA or we won,t be heard, MIke.

[geeza]

Mike we are in the same position with Turbulence, I think that we have to lose 3Kgs to get in weight. But I think that this has to happen now so that all weight categories are the same. But I also agree that the minutes are taking a while, we shouldnt have to wait until the next meeting for them to be ratified.

[lex]

Even if it was a reasonable idea to make older machines exempt (and Im not saying it is), surely it would be unworkable to police this? Even a machine that attends most of the events would have to have its internal componants catalogued, thickness and type of materials used in the chassis, armour and other parts, perhaps even down to what the nuts and bolts are made of. A machine that only turns up occasionally- like ours at the moment- might not be seen for a few months into the year, leaving us more time to modify Ka-Pow! to make it as light as possible and rush as many advanced features into it as money allows. It could all have been done by January 1st as far as anyone would know or could prove. We could then cheerfully enjoy a 2Kg weight advantage for the foreseeable future, as long as we didnt change anything else. In reality of course Woody and me arent that sneaky, and anyway it takes me months to do anything new to the robot...
Also, if exemption was allowed I reckon it would be a significant disincentive for builders to develop their machines. Its been gratifying this year to see how many machines on the circuit are being revised or replaced with new versions and with 2Kg to lose on any new machine (if the old one is up to the limit) builders of robots with pneumatic-powered weapons may elect to stick with what they have, if the existing machine is exempted from the rule change.
With these considerations in mind Id say if were inclined to accept the rule harmonisation well just have to bite the bullet and work out how to lose a couple of Kg over the year. Or we could just vote no. Personally Im not delighted with the idea of losing 2Kg, even though Ka-Pow! would still be just under the new limit now the nose and the arm have been shortened. I was hoping to add better armour. Still, over the year I expect we can work something out. In the long run well probably end up with smaller, better designed robots. In the short term itll be a pain and cost money...

I agree with John and whoever put the rulechange forward that it makes sense to get the weight limits on par with the RFL, just like we do in 2008 with feathers.

I also see however that robots that came from the original robotwars will have a hard time getting their weight limit down, specially after they already had a weight reduction not so long ago.

Policing a excemption is pretty much impossible. Given the nature of the sport repairs and replacement parts are inevadeble. How much of the original constitutes an old or a new robot?

I dont really see a solution where we can save both sides, so I would suggest in order to move forward to adopt thr 100kg weight limit including gas. As much as that might hurt current robots.

I would suggest however to consult this with DRG and GRA too, since they have a vested interest in this too, and not just the UK roboteers and EOs.

[mightymouse]

There is no conspiracy to pass a new rule by shortening the consultation, not by me anyway.

Time is passing though so I am going to start a new thread for members from my region - East Midlands and Yorks - to air their views, fully in the open. My vote will reflect those views.

Trev

Hardly a shortened consultation... It was after all posted mid October.

Anyway, any members in south midlands region can as always contact myself either via email or through the forum.

To date, no one has contacted me regarding the consultation.

[leorcc]

Will the detailed minutes give more info on the subject than already is posted in the beginning of this thread? I bet there has been more discussion than How ever it was decided to go to the membership for consultation first either by written submission via the members regional chairperson( FRA forum contact page) or info@fightingrobots.co.uk

If so, I would like to see these in the minutes beforehand, not in January.

[kane]

No. People asked us to provide detail from the meeting asap. So we did.