Page Comparison

• End of each term, we can sell equipment to put cash (back) into our cash-box. 24 hours items are listed, FCFS and ig people can bid for it if they want? Maybe just a google sheets with a linked form and ppl can put in name/bid. idk.

• Usually consider: broken, in need of repair, no longer used items.

• Parts come with a written paper saying warg is not responsible for safety or damage to items…

Potential list of things we can sell off:

• older / in a bad state ESC’s.

• Broken/badly damaged video transmitters

• ICARUS motors (vtol, we’ll likely not use them again for a while)

• Older quad/hex motors (we can use them, but don’t really have the parts necssary necessary to actually run them)

• Large/random props

  • we do use these occasionally, but very rarely for warg purposes (usually thrust stand, mosst most recently icarus) and it’s probably better just to sell them off instead of keeping them.

  • We should keep 10-14” props as well as the small props

• Old ESC’s (T-motor ones)

  • these have failed a large number of times… I would not trust flying anything on them anymore

• Old GPS stuff / A/v stuff / etc

  • idk do we ever use this?

• Old 3d printer filament

  • the “USE PLEASE” ASA and the grimy looking transparent PVA?

In the past, we have sold:

• receivers/transmitters

• controllers

• Confirmed. Moved stuff down on the 17th. Will help vexu VEXU move up on the 18th and move in same day.

Anthony Luo Megan Spee

• Levels for each thing

  • a level, for example, unlocks some classes of aircraft? small (houston, phoenix, judie), up to icarus (discontinued lol but this would be the hardest…)

• Confluence documentation for each level

• online quiz + in person demo (for some) levels.

• Will go from basic (no qualification) up to competition ready?

Megan Spee

Anything in this box please critique/discuss, comp selection processes should be scrutinized pretty hard so we can make it better

• How many people, from which subteams, etc.

• Looking at 14-16ish people? or 10-12?

  • this has definitely been discussed before.

  Megan Spee to lead discussion (hopefully)

  • make a decision if possible

• the ‘process for selecting competition-goers’ documentation should be made easily available start of fall term, with expectations outlined pretty clearly.

• Options (what I can think of right now) - self nomination form, ‘up to lead discretion’ / ‘see who ends up coming to flight tests and being the most useful'

  • self nom form lets people declare that they will be interested/ plan to commit to the entire 8mo involvement, but might not reflect reality.

  • leads discretion means each lead needs to be watching for the next 8 months for people who show a lot of initiative, asking people in advance if they’d be interested, and making sure the expectations are known. Requires more oversight and attention to equal opportunity.

• Leave final decision until at least march, can decide key people (pilots, gs operators) beforehand (dec/jan/feb??) to properly train up

Georgia Vachon Westerlund Megan Spee

• Also to be discussed. Projected income and areas that need the most funding

(on my mind: printer, rf stuff, electronics)

• bambu printer :stare:

< Section content moved to end of page for (better formatting) reasons>

• Who will be on-site next term?

• Focusing on comp stuff

• Conops kick-offs - we need to be ready. Schedule out meeting times regularly each week for those syncs and architecture meetings to happen.

• Can leverage existing sync shedules.

• Increasing sync-schedules for comp specific parts (tracking antenna, RF infra, etc?)

• Having concrete test & project plans before the term starts

  • not just “what are we going to test” but also making sure “how are we going to test it” is cared for from all sub-teams and there’s points of contact listed for active projs.

  • Hopefully done before next leads meeting (early sept, probably).

Megan Spee

• interest in aero design and simulation should be utilized this comp season