Other Resources
...
| Table of Contents |
|---|
References
...
Discussed at 2023-05-25 Leads Meeting Minutes , and in 2023 Comp Debrief (Google Drive: 2023 Post Mortem).
Also discussed at 2023-08-17 EOT Meeting Minutes , see end of document for details specific to this.
Purpose
The reason this document exists is based on past faults.
The method and timeline of selecting comp attendees in 2023 was questioned a few times through the winter term leading up to comp. This was because:
Roster was decided in January, 4 months before comp
Comp list was discussed in 1 meeting before the Discord role was added to peoples' accounts
Comp list was under very little outside scrutiny and was not made obvious to the general, wider team
Reasons for the above occurring includes:
Lack of visibility in leads meetings - they aren’t locked to just leads, but there is low-to-no attendance of regular members, and no initiative to share meeting events with regular members
Lack of communication between leads about when or whether or not the travel team names were finalized
The # of cars was intended to be finalized early, to book enough of them. This pushed forwards the entire decision-making process, albeit unintentionally
Issues seen at competition were:
During competition, the team was not a fluid unit, and was instead divided into 2 main groups by role - either working on the drone directly, or working on presentation and report
Caused communication difficulty and felt like there was a disconnect
Members who did not have space in the pit were distant from the rest of the entire competition, and did not network or associate much with other teams or sponsors
Uneven distribution of responsibility
Even then, some responsibilities were not covered at competition
Lack of conflict management and a communications rift within the team in January led to an event in which the technical adeptness/ project scope of attendees was questioned
In the week leading up to comp, it was felt there was injustice in how the travel team was chosen
Whether or not attendees should be required to commit to spending time working on the project prior to comp (at least in the week prior to comp, when the team is spending time making fixes, flying, and preparing every day in the bay)
In future competitions, we aim to minimize these faults and provide a more justified, open method of selecting comp attendees!
Possibly Comp Travel Team Headcounts
...
Formats
...
Pros
...
Cons
...
Historical Formats
undocumented/forgorred
...
2022/2023
10 attendees
Competition and travel fees fully covered
...
WARG can fully cover travel costs
Smaller team means everyone can more easily have an important role
Easier to manage
...
Less opportunity for new or non-critical members
Requires a stricter set of requirements to choose attendees
...
Proposed following 2023 Competition:
~15 attendees
Competition and travel fees about 2/3 covered
...
Gives opportunity to new members to learn
hard to transfer the ‘going to comp’ experience without.. going to comp
Gets people hooked on the team
Allows more capacity for:
Networking with other teams
Spectating teams
Talking to/ learning from sponsors and competition ppl
Media coverage and handling
Diverse skillset
...
More difficult to organize and coordinate a large group
Some people may not have a dedicated role
Crowds the pit
Each attendee paying between $100-$200
Decision Guide
Guidelines:
...
because we do not want to repeat previous mistakes which specifically occurred in AEAC 2023 Competition Roster Selection . This document outlines the selection guidelines and possibly roles while the subpages are specific to each competition we participate in.
The subpages outline how we did roster selection for past years. When doing selection for a futrue competition please use this location.
Historical attendance data
Competition Date | Notes |
|---|---|
2021-06 | COVID-19, no travel. Everyone who was still in Waterloo was invited to participate. |
2022-05 | 8 attendees, leads and senior members. No documentation of this era but things went well. |
2023-05 | 10 attendees, leads and senior members. |
2024-05 | directors please update with what happenned |
Selection guide
Requirements
Finalize attendee count early, then figure out actual names later on
Vehicles needs to be clarified and booked ASAP
Who ends up going is largely based on commitment which can vary over the course of months
Finalize key roles early
These are people who have long-term buildup of knowledge that are considered irreplaceable
Obtaining to one of these roles will be outlined in Skillset Levelling Rubric
TODO Others?
Criteria
Conall Kingshott R D Megan Spee to work on selection criteria post EOT S23 Leads
Criterion | Description |
|---|---|
Project expertise (specific to competition) | People who have worked on the drone and associated competition systems directly. Example: Airframe design, assembly, and wiring. |
Technical expertise (general) | Technical expertise is valued at an engineering competition. Example: Soldering skills. |
Cross subteam involvement (diversity and flexibility) | Someone who can perform multiple different duties (as circumstances require). Familiar with multiple (possibly unrelated) competition systems. Integration skills and architecture knowledge. |
Teamwork | Communication, time management, responsiveness to feedback, ability to collaborate, and conflict management. Has the team’s best interest in mind. |
Working under pressure | Demonstrated the ability to work well in high stress environments:
Example: Debugging during flight test. |
Future team membership/ leadership potential | Value for newer members attending may be very high if they have interest in staying on the team for a while or taking on leadership positions in the future. |
Investment | Strong desire to see competition drone working and demonstrates effort to make it happen. Desire to attend competition. |
Process
Members are assigned to competition roles.
Interest
This stage determines which members are interested in attending competition.
All members have the opportunity to apply if they are interested and available to attend competition through a self nomination form.
Self nomination form:
Makes clear that the member must be available to:
Work on the competition drone for several weeks leading up to the departure date
Travel to the competition venue
Work on competition tasks at competition
Attend the competition banquet
Identification (e.g. name, Discord username, subteam)
Reason why they are a good candidate (e.g. project expertise, cross subteam skills)
Form DRAFT: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1zHzYWMY1_I1I36wxigwXNpZyZluXX7eEwX_4u4NARJg/edit
Please read & review and make comments as you see fit
Shortlist
This stage determines which members have the required skills to attend competition.
A list is created from the self nomination form. Each subteam lead goes through the list and selects members from their subteam that they believe to meet the selection criteria above.
Roles
This stage determines the role(s) of each member.
The subteam leads and directors meet to assign members to role(s) and finalizes attendance.
The meeting is announced at least 1 week in advance
The meeting is held publically, although all remaining members may be muted by default
Subteam leads and directors may unmute members at their discretion
Assignment is by consensus
If consensus cannot be reached, then by voting
Competition roles and tasks
All attendees must hold at least 1 defined role
It’s permissible to be there to learn however that role must be defined so everyone is on the same page
Everyone’s role needs to be clearly defined, communicated, and agreed upon by all parties
Finalize headcount (numbers) early, then figure out actual names later on.
Vehicles needs to be clarified and booked ASAP
Who ends up going is largely based on commitment which can vary over the course of months
Finalize key positions early
These are people who have long-term buildup of knowledge that are considered either irreplaceable.
Key positions include
Pilot(s)
Holds Pilot role.
Holds advanced license
Holds months of experience in flying with WARG
Ground station operator(s)
Holds meaningful experience working with pilot on flightline
Holds irreplacable technical experience
Manager(s)
Holds director role.
Has experience managing the team under high stres environments
Obtaining to one of these key positions will be outlined in Skillset Levelling Rubric
Subteam lead nomination
each subteam lead can nominate/select one of their team members (including themselves) to attend as a specialist for that subteam
this person is expected to be deeply involved in their subteam leading up to competition
more details to be included
to be continued
Role types:
Key: An attendee with this role does not hold any other roles during competition
The purpose of this requirement is to ensure this person is dedicated for their primary role. They may assist with other roles, but should not be relied upon for any other role
General: An attendee with this role may hold this role and other general roles
Role | Description of tasks | Prerequisites | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
Pilot |
|
Where experience is at least 2 months. | Key |
Ground station operator |
|
Where experience is at least 2 months. | Key |
Manager |
|
| Key |
Driver |
|
| General |
Driver with trailer |
|
| General |
Navigator |
|
| General |
Logistics |
|
| General |
Flightline assembly |
|
| General |
Pit organization |
|
| General |
Frame assembly |
|
| General |
Cabin and device mounting |
|
| General |
Harnessing |
|
| General |
Flight Control System |
|
| General |
Tracking Antenna Mechanical |
|
| General |
Tracking Antenna Controls |
|
| General |
Autonomy airside system |
|
| General |
Autonomy groundside system |
|
| General |
Presenter |
|
| General |
Presenter French |
|
| General |
Report Writing |
|
| General |
Media |
|
| General |