I'm no expert in this area, but from what I understand LFS dampers are linear. They are rated, obviously, in m/s. Your 20in/sec is going to be about .5 m/s. You'll have to figure out the conversion the imperial units to metric.

You'll have a lot of trouble matching up damping rates at various speeds because of the linear nature of LFS dampers. They are not progressive or speed sensitive. In other words, they give the same damping rate at any given speed. So instead of rising steeply for the first 2 to 5 in/s and then leveling off, the LFS dampers will just be a straight line if you had them on the same shaker rig as your car. So, you are best off picking a rate that matches pretty closely up to the first 5 in/s or so and going with that.

BTW, a 20in/s rate or a 1m/s rate is an extreme bump and not something you are likely to encounter unless you square up a curb.

Quote from Scawen :

Just to mention - please make sure you research this fully before buying any monitors, if that was your plan!

Anyway as JasonJ says, LFS does support different width side screens. From LFS's point of view any setup is OK, as long as LFS is presented with a single "surface" to draw the images on. LFS itself does not communicate with multiple graphics cards. Screen sizes may be different, provided that all side screens are the same resolution. The setting in LFS allows you to specify main screen width and side screen width. You can see the settings in LFS if you make a very wide and low window, and specify one or more side monitors.

Just a note: The different side screen width's don't really work when you are using a stretched setup with two screens where one of the screens is a different width. At least with the ATI drivers, when the screens are combined, they are assumed to be of equal width. I had a 1680 wide screen working with a 1280 regular screen. The view port side width does work, but doesn't help any because only the 'equal' setting put the view port edge on the bezels of the monitors. If you moved the setting, the view port edge would just slide onto one monitor or the other.

I suspect this has mostly to do with stretching the view onto two monitors and how the ATI drivers worked. I doubt it has to do with the implementation in LFS. BTW, the newer ATI drivers will allow a much higher resolution level for stretched dual monitor setups. I had to get these drives when I got a second 1680 wide monitor to make it work properly. I now use something like 3200x1050 resolution running at about 60fps with an ATI x1950 Pro card.

Or, it could be that I am totally misunderstanding how some of this should work. Either way, it is working well for me now and it is a wonderful new feature.

For any of you out there thinking about a second monitor, look for one that is the exact same physical size, pixel pitch, and resolution. It would be best to get the exact same monitors. Matching colors and gamma on two different monitor types is a nasty and time consuming thing to do if you don't have the professional tools.

The guy was just a sad nutcase with emotional issues that may or may not have been exacerbated by his religious convictions. He was US born and raised and he was a devout Muslim. His family cannot understand what happened. He reportedly had an extreme internal conflict about being deployed to Iraq. He had been reprimanded in the past for poor interpersonal actions with patients (he's a psychiatrist). He has a record of opposing the wars and seemingly had an unusual fear of being deployed.

Personally, I would not call this guy a Islamic extremist. He did reportedly post some questionable stuff online, but that's just a report and not exactly indicative of that kind of behavior (we all post stupid stuff online, now don't we?). He was just a sick individual who lost it. Unfortunately, he had to take a lot of other innocent people out along the way. I will never understand what drives people to do things like that.

Quote from morpha :

I imagine it's extremely disadvantageous in racing conditions as it will greatly increase wear on the brakes, the entire system pretty much. It's a safety feature after all, it's not a driver's aid. I reckon it'll often brake unexpectedly, which might upset your style if you're not used to it, but more importantly, puts strain on the brakes where you normally would not.

Might give a Golf with ESP a go soon to find out, luckily there's a driving camp near me providing both the Golf and the perfect environment for nonsense like that

I mostly agree with that. But depending on your driving style, it might actually help your speed on a track if you are one of those people who tend to slide the car too much. However, I guarantee it won't be as much fun.

Most people who do track days in modern cars that have that kind of stability control will eventually turn it off once they get comfortable on the track. You just don't have the control you need with it on.

For example, are going through a double apex corner and you over shoot the second apex a bit. You lift off throttle and allow the back end to start drifting over to align you nose with the apex. Then you catch the slide, before it really turns into a slide, with throttle again and you haven't really lost any time. But ESC or DSC or whatever you want to call it, probably won't let you do that.

Modern systems are better than what is in my 99 BMW, but I turn it off when on the track because it will grab and jerk the car a bit and I know it has to be heating the rear brakes up. It just feels awful even though it is probably helping a tad.

I do know the C6 Corvette guys will switch to racing mode or whatever they call it when on the track. It allows a much wider range of latitude than the normal street setting will, yet it will still help when things get really out of control.

Quote from Napalm Candy :

Few days ago I have made a topic with a fail in rear suspension. So I think the operation of suspension is too simple in LFS.

I asked it because the scirocco, and the intend to give the most realistic simulation and feeling

Was that the going backwards and e-brake thing? If so, I thought it was shown pretty conclusively in that thread that it wasn't a LFS fail.

Anyway, if the Scirocco has a type of rear suspension that LFS does not model, then yeah, I would suspect that it would be included. But that really isn't suspension physics, that's suspension type.

Quote from Napalm Candy :

I don't know if it is mentioned before, but the new physics include new suspension physics?

No, I don't think that has been mentioned anywhere. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the suspension physics although there are suspension types that are not modeled and not used and things like chassis stiffness isn't modeled.

Quote from kimd41 :

Not sure if this was asked before but: Do the new tyre physics work well with the ramps? I mean, in the current version if the tyre gets between two ramps it'll send you to space, will that be fixed? Or thats not tyre related?

It probably is tire related and is similar to the "Exploding curbs" that people complain about.

It seems to be that the current tire model does not deal well with two contact patches simultaneously. You get two contact patches when hitting a sharp curb and the tire is still touching the ground and the curb at the same time. This seems to generate a huge amount of energy.

You can test it by by using the chicane curbs on KY3 where you come off of the oval. If you place your car in the right place with it stationary, it will start to vibrate and bounce. I think this is because the physics engine is bouncing back and forth between the two contact patches.

I don't know if the new tire physics will address this problem, or if I even have the problem defined correctly. It could be something completely different than dual contact patches.

Quote from ACCAkut :

that was the DP1 tristan and I meant. That guy offered it to them, but afaik the Devs put him on hold, was about two years ago. Funny thing now that same guy offers are wide varity of cars, he plans a sort of Ariel Atom with a Chevy V8 atm

Quote from SidiousX :

I swore that when I originally read about that car, that it was run by two hayabusa engines sharing a crankshaft...Guess I'm wrong.

Partially wrong. The dp1 will have a Hartley V8 which is basically two hayabusa heads mounted on a single block. It will produce well over 400hp in a car that weighs about 450kg with all wheel drive.

He now has plans for multiple cars, some of which can be fitted with a variety of motors, a Chevy LS V8 would be one of the options.


http://www.palatov.com/cars/dp2.html

And Tristan, what makes you think that a dp1 would be less difficult to race than a LX8?

Quote from tristancliffe :

Yup, it's got some GPS elevation data, which doesn't look too bad.

I've already got a couple of videos online that you can either watch or download, and I can upload my practice session as well, which was a bit drier and might show you some more.

It can't do any hard to have my data, and I'd love you to make a realistic track. Not many have managed it, even with large budgets and 'laser scanning'.

Be careful with GPS elevations, they will be about twice as bad as your horizontal precision is. However, it can be used effectively to determine relative elevation differences. You still must bear in mind that you are dealing with something that produces positions within a 3 meter circle if you are using SBAS.

Quote from AndroidXP :

No, read again

What codehound said was that LFS is between GPL (worse) and iRacing (best) in terms of feeling what the tyres do. I cannot say how accurate GPL's tyre model is in comparison to modern ones. You have to keep in mind, though, that GPL models a completely different type of car with the completely different bias-ply tyres (which are very stiff and have almost no sidewall flex), so I don't think a 1 on 1 comparison is fair in that regard. That said, I think people have a bit of a rose-tinted-glasses issue going on when saying that GPL is still the most realistic sim out there. Maybe the one they're most accustomed to, but realistic? Well, who knows, different car and all that.

In regard to LFS, what most people say they feel is wrong is the way tyres lose/regain grip - it seems to happen too smooth, too gradual. So if anything is going to change then I'd say it's rather going in the opposite direction of GPL-like smoothness. However, we don't really know anything about the new tyre model, other than what Scawen said and that the beta testers approve of the changes.

One thing I'm fairly certain of is that the new tyre model will have more load sensitive tyres, since that is from my understanding of tyres the only thing that would fix the issue Scawen described (too much grip on outer wheel, simply reducing grip won't fix it but would only shift at what speeds the problem occurs). By increasing the load sensitivity, the outer, loaded tyre would work less well than now, resulting in a more equal spread of how much the loaded tyres provide grip compared to the unloaded ones.

This should have a quite profound impact on how the cars feel and more importantly how they have to be set up to drive well. First, anti-roll bars will have more of an effect and the effect won't be the opposite from what you expect. The stiffer end of the car would then have considerably less grip, since the loaded tyre (which in a corner also bears some weight of the soft end of the car) wouldn't be as grippy as now. Second, the way differentials work would be vastly different.
Right now, having low-medium locking diffs is not feasible for the most part. Such a diff works rather poorly in corners, since most grip is on the outer tyre whereas the inner one barely contributes and easily starts spinning, taking away power from the outer wheel. For the same reason, high locking or locked diffs don't cause nearly as much turning problems as they should. Again, the inner tyre barely contributes, meaning the tyre that should normally fight against turning the car just sits there doing nothing. The currently fastest setups exploit both these deficiencies to their full potential. On one hand, they use locked diffs (or clutch pack diffs with 800Nm preload, claiming it feels better/not being a locked diff exploiter, ironically without realising that at such preloads the diff is for all intents and purposes locked), granting them full power even when the inner wheel is in the air. On the other hand, they give full ARB strength to the end of the car with the locked diff, causing all the load to go to the outer wheel (sometimes even lifting the inner), reducing the negative impact on turning to zero. This is mostly done on FWD cars, but really all cars "suffer" from high locking diffs being too viable. Overall it would be more important to make the inner tyre do some work, as the outer tyre alone would be much less efficient than both tyres working together.

I'll pretty much have to agree with all of that. Isn't it amazing how all of that comes together with that small statement from Scawen? With that explanation, we can now infer a bunch of things. Ah, I see, the load model for the tire grip is off and therefore...

Quote from Takumi_lfs :

Let me explain it, Victor. How come we are always getting hunted by fanboys. Why arent there any normal persons left here. They all left us with kids. The way they handle "inpatient" members isnt acceptable, and you guys are just doing nothing. Everyday people are having war with eachother here, What are the mods doing in the meantime?

Most of the members here are just making names to themself, Why bother to talk to them then? They cant act serious.

I'm sorry that I turned this thread totally Offtopic, but anyway. Lets not make a war here. This forum and community is here to help eachother.

I'm sorry again.

Labeling people is the first reason you get "hunted". Nobody likes labels and calling people who defend the LFS development paradigm in a logical and reasonable fashion "fanboys" is guaranteed to get a response. Secondly, we do get sick of seeing the "when can I have..." posts. So, yeah, you're going to get flatblasted.

You're trying to get everybody to agree that you're right that things are taking too long, so yes, you're right, things are taking too long. Nobody is happy about that. But some of us understand the why behind the process. We don't like the time it takes, but we understand and we appreciate the results that we eventually get out of it. Quality takes time.

If you fail to understand that, or you fail to read the many threads on this subject, or if you just want your figgy pudding now, then don't blame the moderators if you get yelled at.

Quote from legoflamb :

First off I'm not arguing just making a point.

This is my assumption based off of the original post by Scawen.

It's not just amount of grip that is the issue, it is the amount of grip per amount of load on the tire contact patch.

Right, which is why just lowering overall grip levels for the tire wouldn't be much of a "fix" and probably why (just guessing here) Scawen decided on the rework for the model.

It is possible that the overall grip level for a particular car will remain exactly the same, or even go up a tad, or drop a tad. The distribution of the grip will most likely be spread more even between the inside and outside tires. Imagine if you will that if you even out, so to speak, the amount of grip gained by downward force. Instead of a steep curve, you have a more shallow curve. This would imply that you would have more grip at lower load levels than you have now, and less grip at higher load levels than what you have now. And, because of the way suspensions work, things should even out a bit.

Anyway, I had mentioned this on like the third or fourth page, and it's just my opinion.

(As a side note, I have tried greatly increasing the amount of anti-roll bar that I am using on some of my more "normal" setups. It seems to show improved performance in the cars I have tried. It makes for interesting results.)

Quote from Costas Athan :

I did a search for rollover + FBM (I also tried other keywords) but I don't think that it brought up any related threads. If I missed a similar topic I'm sorry.

Have a look at the replays yourself. Maybe the curb is sharp and tall but after all it isn't so sharp and tall and in addition the speed is relatively slow.

If you search youtube you can find many videos with open wheelers driving over curbs and bumps with speeds higher than 200 kph. Monte Carlo road circuit tarmac has many bumps but the tires are continuously in contact with the road.

If the same curb was in another turn where speeds were higher (e.g. 150 km/h or more) what should happen? Should the car fly out of the track? My opinion is that the car overreacts... And is not only that. Is it possible to drive a Formula BMW on two wheels? In LFS that happened for one or two seconds to me. I counter steered to bring the car back on the road.

You are making the assumption that this only happens with the FBM. It doesn't. It will happen with other cars too depending on the angle you hit the curb, the speed you are going, and how the car is setup. Search for physics, exploding curbs (kerbs), roll over, etc.

You are also missing the point about those curbs. Those are not normal curbs and you won't find them on any F1 track in the world. That corner is about a 80mph or more corner and that's a lot of force being slammed through a very rigid frame with probably a very rigid suspension setup. Plus, you are pulling at least 2gs through that corner. Put those things together, you get a roll-over. In the real world, the car might not roll over, but you wouldn't be going any further anyway because of a broken suspension and possibly a broken frame. So the point is, don't hit that curb.

The contact patch problem is a possible contributor to what you are seeing. Also, there could be a problem with hitting the car frame and we also know in certain situations, that can cause massive forces to occur that aren't normal. However, this is nothing new. It is a bit unusual to see a FBM do a roll over, but that is an off camber corner with a very high and sharp curb. It's going to ruin your day one way or another if you keep hitting that curb so don't hit it.

Quit fretting over this and go learn the lines and have fun. It is a gravity problem. It isn't a CoG or rotation problem. It isn't really a tire model problem.

Yes, LFS has some physics flaws, as do all games. One of LFS' problems relates to how the contact patch is seemingly just a single point and when the tire contacts a sharply angled surface, the model doesn't handle it well when there should be two simultaneous contact points and a huge amount of energy is slammed into the tire. This can cause unusual behaviour.

But, in your case, what you have is a situation where it sounds like you are hitting a very sharp and tall curb with such speed and force that the car rolls over. That may or may not be a physics problem. It might simply be your driving or it might simply be exactly what would happen in the real world.

Look at it this way, if you hit that curb with that kind of force with a real car, you are going to break the suspension so your race is over. My suggestion is, don't do that. It isn't faster, that curb is much too sharp to even clip, and you know it makes you wreck.

Do some searching and you will find all the different physics bugs discussed in great detail. You aren't bringing up anything new here.

Quote from DragonCommando :

Edit: After reading into LFS's current tyre model I found that there is a problem with low speed grip, and thats probably what is happening with the brake stands. I hope that is fixed with the new tyre model, and with the way it's been described it probably has.

It will certainly be interesting to see what the results are. I would suspect there would be some effects on tire heating since they will produce less grip, you would assume that they would also produce less heat over a given corner for example. (and hopefully more even tire heating between the inside and outside tires)

The slow speed grip... who knows? Maybe that got fixed, maybe not, but one would assume that since the tire physics engine has been extensively reworked that there will be some changes there. Like Scawen said, he could have just lowered the grip of the tires but instead, he decided to rework things. I think that's the right way to do it.

Quote from AjRose :

4 Turns lock to lock in a BMW e30.

E30's rock.

Quote from Bob Smith :

It seems standard practise these days, that once the patch has been run past the beta testers and the issues they bring up are resolved, that it will be publicly tested to ensure the official patch is as stable as possible (Scawen has commented that even when a patch has no issues with the beta testers, the community at large still manages to find obscures issues and hardware irregularities).

The extended testing that the patches provide is always good. However, I doubt most of us will be able to make any quantitative evaluations of the new tire physics. We'll be able to make some qualitative evaluations, but that probably won't help much. What we will find is a bunch of little goofy things that the Beta testers will miss.

Quote from Bob Smith :

However, there have already been some compatible test patches, testing some of the new changes, so if that only leaves new tyres and an extra car not being tested, perhaps there won't be a need for public testing of those items.

Yep, who knows? We'll see when we see. But I doubt that those are the only things we haven't seen yet.

Excellent news. Glad to hear about the progress.

Why is everybody assuming that the cars will be slower with this new physics update? Notice that Scawen said that they couldn't make the Scirocco perform as well in LFS as compared to the real world. They found the the tires produces too much grip (I would assume in certain conditions, but maybe not all). However, if they fix that problem, then the rest of the suspension can probably now work better (more like a real car) and thereby allow a better overall level of grip for the car thus producing faster times overall.

Yay! Now I can throw away all my old setups and start again, and that really is a good thing.

EDIT: OK, he said "handle as well" not perform as well. But I would take much the same meaning from that.

Quote from [DUcK] :

yeah if i go too fast round a corner in my road car (ford laser 1993) even with sports suspension the inside front wheel lifts off, and obviously because of the open diff it spins the inside one because it's the easiest to spin or whatever, and the revs go straight up.

having said that there are obviously still improvements to be made on lfs, but they are on the right track anyway

A rwd with open diff does about the same. The driven wheels don't have to come off the ground completely for this to happen. Just the lightening of the load on the inside tires is enough as long as you have a little bit of extra horsepower. On the track my BMW 3 series with 170HP will do it easily... it's very annoying. Once that wheel breaks loose, it will just keep spinning until the weight gets equalized.

Quote from ScoobRX :

Thanks to everyone for the setup tips, and that tool is great

@ [DUck], I would assume that cars with slicks are less prone to such behavior, especially with downforce . That's why I thought there was too much grip, plus the XFG is doing 1.2 G's on a factory style setup (no ARB's open diff and 20N/mm suspension) which is definately weird. Got that with F1PerfView. After adding a rear bar I started to get lift oversteer, but it was still too subtle. The rear end would sort of sway out slowly, and only if you continued keeping the wheel turned would it begin to [slowly] snap away. Far more managable than RL considering all the effort I had to put into recovery was to turn the wheel less. Like RIP2004 said even understeer prone cars should have noticable LO. For example, I know for a fact that Impreza's have lift oversteer with the factory suspension and it's a pretty understeer prone car otherwise.

NSX FReeDoM: Technically my susbscription cost $0, I got the free radical trial. But then I ended up buying the skippy on top of that. I didn't renew because I wansn't convinced the price was worth it. There is something off about the way the cars drive.

Another thing to note, iRacing in pretty much all the cars I have driven, seems to tend to have a lot of throttle steer. The Formula Ford pretty much demands partial throttle through corners to stop you from spinning.

The diff is the main factor in throttle steer although the overall balance does play a roll too. My nearly stock BMW with an open diff will exhibit throttle steer quite nicely, but it is not extreme and is very easy to control. The car, like most stock cars, is setup for quite a bit of understeer. You can really use the throttle steering to help you through corners (and I have a lot of track time in this car, so this isn't just street driving we are talking about).

So, like others have said, LFS does a nice job of throttle steer if you have the right setup. In my opinion, and this is just my opinion, iRacing goes a bit far with throttle steer. A lot of those cars would be down right scary to drive if they really behaved like that. I don't know if that is because they don't have fully modeled diffs yet, or if they have a flaw in the physics, but that's my impression. I am probably wrong about that, but the point is, iRacing cars exhibit a whole lot of throttle steer so coming to something like LFS, it can seem like throttle steer isn't modeled.

I can't get to them either. Network glitch or DNS changes, etc, etc...

Quote from count.bazley :

Technically it is illegal and any company is well within their rights to order a 'cease and desist' on your use of said logo. It usually isn't worth it for an organisation to threaten us mere hobbyists who are in effect promoting the brand for free. However, I do seem to recall American Airlines forcing flightsim.com to remove any downloads featuring their liveries around 10 years ago, so it's not unprecedented.

Probably. I bet AA didn't really care nor did they really want to deny simmers the use of their logos, but the laws say that if you don't protect your marques, then they become public property. That forces them to do things like that if the use of the marques is public enough for too many people to notice. Examples of the loss of trademarks are "Refrigerator" originally owned by Frigidaire and "Crescent Wrench" owned by the Crescent tool company (it was just an adjustable wrench or spanner).

Quote from tristancliffe :

900 in control panel, 900 in LFS and wheel turn compensation to 1.0 = perfectly in-sync real and virtual wheels in all cars.
720 in control panel, 720 in LFS and wheel turn compensation to 1.0 = perfectly in-sync real and virtual wheels in all cars.

Quote from logitekg25 :

i know, i just want the 900, but i dont want to have to fumble around in the options every time i switch car class (and i am about to be a whiner [please forgive me]) i also want the steering wheel to match the 900 degrees of my wheel, because i dont want to shut it off which will make it un-realistic in my eyes.

What part of the above does not compute?

None of the cars will ever match your 900° because none of the cars use 900°. If you want the silly graphical wheel to match your real, physical wheel, use the settings that Tristan posted above.

If you want to use the full 900° of your wheel, you are going to have to set your wheel turn compensation to something other than 1 and then the virtual wheel isn't going to match.

Or am I misunderstanding your question?

(I've never understood the use of the virtual wheel. You have a real wheel in your hands, why do you want to see that silly virtual wheel in the first place?)

Copyright and Trademark laws are a lot more fuzzy than it appears. It is never clear cut. For example, I made a skin that turned the XRR into the Corvette C6R ALMS car. I used the Compuware logo and the other marques on that car to make the skin. Obviously, Corvette had permission to use those logos, and I was just using the same logos to make a representative car. Is that infringement? Possibly, but it would probably come down to intent if it were ever taken to court. But GM would never take you to court over that kind of use and neither would Compuware. It uses their marques in line with the intended use and I was not trying to usurp their marque for a purpose of my own.

Also, if I take a picture of said Corvette at the races, and I get paid to allow the use of that picture (with all the logos in plain sight) on a website, have I infringed on the copyright and trademark laws? No, not really even though I have "reproduced" those logos for my own work.

In any case, using actual company logos on your car skins may technically be against international copyright and trademark laws, it is not an infringement and would not be pursued as long is was done by individuals and not used for commercial purposes. Now if you were in an actual Pro LFS league, that would be different most likely. However, it would be easy to get permission to use a logo in that case if you wanted to. You just have to contact the company and ask permission and they will generally comply.

Quote from AndRand :

Frankly speaking I am curious if devs took mass of air into account in thermodynamical formulas, and in fact that is another thing that gives a lot of possibilities to set - but in the same time time-consuming thing to check. That is the amount of air flow under the fenders.

It is obviously possible to simulate the airflow and some kind of effect of that airflow on tire cooling.

But, the airflow on each car is going to be different based of the geometries and the aerodynamic features of each car. That's a lot of stuff to deal with. I would guess that some general formula could be used.

There is always going to be compromises in how things are done in the sim. Some stuff will be modeled dynamically, and others will probably use a general formula... a one size fits all kind of thing. I would think that airflow cooling of the tires would be one of those kinds of things.