Are we back on the tracks being not bumpy again?
Watching the video, especially the UFR's at the end, every one of those bumps are already there on the track. I don't see anything unusual about the FB02 footage. It all looks like the normal SO tracks to me.
SO does not need more bumps and really, the other tracks don't either. If you want to "see" the bumps better, then turn up the g-force effects.Also, don't forget that the race flywheel is generally much lighter than in a standard car. This means less inertia when trying to mate the clutch plate to the flywheel which will make it much more difficult to pull away smoothly. I think this leads to more of the smoothness problems than the clutch material will. It also demands better rev matching on shifts because RPM will drop more quickly with the clutch in than it would on a street car.
And when it gets too hot, it won't grip anymore and will slip when you apply power. Kind of like when the brakes get too hot.
I wonder if Scawen added a gauge or indicator in the tire temp view for the clutch?
Not that I have seen. You are the best writer who has asked this question, whip out a story dude
Uhg... next time I will quote the whole previous message so you have to scroll through all of it multiple times to see my one line question and you won't have the engery to post silly things anymore.
BTW, if you are using a system of South Azimuth then 0 ° (360° or 400° for you Gon people) is South, North is 180° (or 200°) and everything is backwards anyway, so my question is valid either way you look at it. (And no, I didn't need to look that up on Wiki)
So what is South, East and West?
If you look, you can see that the concrete bariers on the left are farther away from the wall and that the grass section there seems a bit wider. The apex of the curve has been moved further to the right and it looks like it is a tighter radius. It is very subtle, but I think it will force you to lift some in the lower powered cars.
Jeff, you aught to be happy, you got your clutch wear!
I am more interested in the engine inertia comments. I wounder what that will get us? Maybe a cure for the engine bog down under braking problems?
That will be easy. Just reduce the size of the thumbnails.
I hope that is a problem we keep running into in the future
You can see in the BL chicane shot that the concrete barriers are further away from the wall on the left. The grass on that side is wider than before. The left hand corner is now a tighter radius and is further to the right than before. That is the majority of the change that I can see in that shot.
Edit: Oh, and there seems to be light poles there that weren't there before...
Edit: Oh, and there seems to be light poles there that weren't there before...
Last edited by Hallen, .
To me, that is a Sprint car.
Touring car is what I call racing with a sedan or coupe type car that has been modified to some extent for racing.
I leave "stock" car to mostly oval racing done here in the US and to some select club racing classes like the SCCA "Show Room Stock" class (those cars are street cars with roll cages and not much more).
To the OP, like said above, LOTA is probalby your best bet right now for a US based series. There are some very fine series run on weekend evenings in Europe that fit pretty nicely into the weekend schedule here as long as you are willing to get up pretty early in the morning.
It was optional, but I think most did come with the LSD.
Of course the seat doesn't move in relation to the wheel or pedals... but YOU do. Just a small amount of movement of the seat will simulate the feeling of your body movement on g loads. The wheel and pedals don't have to move with this to make it effective. Remeber, you body isn't moving due to g loads because there isn't any in a sim. The seat moving will give you the impression of the g loads.
I personally think that a small seat shaker with maybe a little bit of wiggle to it would be enough to really enhance most home sim situations. Something with maybe a 5° of tilt and an 3 cm of motion would be enough.
I have thought of this before too. One of my problems is that I can't practice enough. I can't tweak my sets to the n'th degree for each track, I just don't have the time.
It would be fun to have a league where you are restricted to testing for only an hour or two for every race. That way, you have to be very diligent about your testing and try and get the most out of it. Then, come race time, it is a bit more evened out. Of course, the best drivers will still win, I would still be mid-pack. But I think it adds another dimension to the game.
However, you would have to have a system that basically policed you when you were not racing online. Of course, LFS checks into the master server every time you start up to verify your license. I am sure a system could be put into place to monitor this. However, it would be easy to get around in a number of ways, so cheaters could still get away with it.
So, the closest thing I have seen so far is what we are doing in the LOTA mini-series we are running right now. There are 6 possible tracks to use and the track is picked randomly just prior to the race. Then we practice for 25 minutes, qualify, then race. If you have tons of time, you could develop perfect sets for all the tracks, but most people are not doing that. It is more fun to "run what you 'brung' " so to speak.
It would be fun to have a league where you are restricted to testing for only an hour or two for every race. That way, you have to be very diligent about your testing and try and get the most out of it. Then, come race time, it is a bit more evened out. Of course, the best drivers will still win, I would still be mid-pack. But I think it adds another dimension to the game.
However, you would have to have a system that basically policed you when you were not racing online. Of course, LFS checks into the master server every time you start up to verify your license. I am sure a system could be put into place to monitor this. However, it would be easy to get around in a number of ways, so cheaters could still get away with it.
So, the closest thing I have seen so far is what we are doing in the LOTA mini-series we are running right now. There are 6 possible tracks to use and the track is picked randomly just prior to the race. Then we practice for 25 minutes, qualify, then race. If you have tons of time, you could develop perfect sets for all the tracks, but most people are not doing that. It is more fun to "run what you 'brung' " so to speak.
My definition of driveable is different than yours. I am not willing to live with stuttering, skipping cars and stop-go motion. It is too easy to miss turn in points, braking points, and where other cars around you are.
Yes, you can play the game with less than 40fps. Will you be as competitive as somebody with the same skills who is getting 60fps? No you won't.
I saw a big improvement in my lap times after I got a better video card. My frame rate was more consistent and everything was much more smooth. It leads to smoother driving. And no, I didn't have better resolution set and I wasn't using more eye candy, I just got more frames. (this is only true up until a point. Anything much past 60fps isn't doing you much, if any, good)
Movies run at 24fps. But, they are shot on film and if you freeze frame you will see motion blur. You won't see that with computer graphics. That is why you need a higher frame rate for computer graphics to make things look smooth.
I can visually tell the difference between 40fps and 60fps. It is quite noticeable. If you can't see that, don't blame it on me.
That wasn't really the point Jeff. If you (the generic "you" meaning whomever is reading this) find oval racing boring, well then don't do it. If you find all the content in LFS boring, and complain that you just can't play it anymore until new content comes out, then I would argue that you are just skimming the surface. It kind of goes back to what mrogers said earlier, but I wouldn't have used those words.
There is so much more to LFS and racing than a new track or even a new car. If you are not entertained by the current stuff, then you will only be entertained for a few weeks or a month if and when they do add new content. It is a perception problem and a desire for others to entertain you rather than you making the most of something and entertaining yourself.
New content is always welcome. I would like to see some more stuff myself. However, good racing is good racing. I can always shave a few tenths off of laps. I can always work on really understanding setup changes to make me a better racer. If you think you have peaked, well, that is the time to dig deeper and fight to improve. It isn't the time to start complaining about needing a new track.
All of this is just my opinion. Nothing more.
If you are bored, then you are not putting enough into it. There are so many more facets of racing than just lapping or even pickup races online. Skinning, setups, understanding the physics, what exactly does 50 Knm/s really mean... etc. Plenty of stuff to do. Organize a league, put a team together for endurance racing... man the list just goes on.
The point is, if you are bored, then I will tell you the same thing I tell my kids: We are not responsible for entertaining you. Quit whining and go engage your mind. You just might find out that you have one and it can be very entertaining to play with.
Well said!
Man, you don't post often, but I may have to go back and read all your posts if they are as good as this.
You do have to study those charts a bit... they do look like brain scans
One thing that comes to mind for me looking at the circle charts is tire deformation. Obviously, when in a corner, the slip angle is high. The sidewall is going to be flexed. But when you add power to the wheel, your slip ratio goes up, but wouldn't your slip angle go down slightly? Or at least change some?
The reason I ask is that looking at the charts, specifically the slip ratio chart and the 8° slip angle (red) it seems that it is possible that adding power would force the tire to a different shape and reduce slip angle. The tire can only flex and twist so much. The longitudinal stress of applying power has got to have some effect there. I kind of look at it from an aerodynamics standpoint where you have relative wind. This is the resultant vector airflow over an airfoil after combining wind, direction the aircraft is moving, prop/rotor wash, etc.
This is also where some robotic (AI driver) testing would be nice. Having something that could drive the same course in the exact same way multiple times would help with data analysis I think.
It also seems to me that if you used look-up tables for tire data, the results we are seeing in those charts would be more predictable and homogeneous than what it seems to be... but I might be way off the mark with that thought.
lol, probably the latter.
But seriously, a lot of drivers have no experience with sims. They have a hard time translating the real world g forces and speeds to a strictly visual experience like it is in the sim. Their feedback is not something I would rely on heavily if I were trying to build a sim.
20-30fps is low for LFS.
You really need 40+ to be remotely drivable.
If your "original" video card is the one built onto the mother board, then it is a large part of what is holding you back. It will most likely also use your RAM for video memory, so it is a double whack.
Get a newer more capable video card. I am sure you can find something for less than $100 that will work.
You really need 40+ to be remotely drivable.
If your "original" video card is the one built onto the mother board, then it is a large part of what is holding you back. It will most likely also use your RAM for video memory, so it is a double whack.
Get a newer more capable video card. I am sure you can find something for less than $100 that will work.
Pressure differences between hot and cold on DOT street tires when used on a race track can be as much as 10 PSI. I typically see 7-8psi on my car (mostly on the front left which is the tire getting worked the hardest).
I would call that pretty significant. I would suspect that full race tires are at least if not more sensitive than my street tires.
If we are setting hot pressures, then LFS has the pressures really, really low compared to the real world. Typical hot pressures are going to be in the mid 40psi range for most street tires.
I did check out the F9 views a bit more last night. The surface view does show a rapid gain and loss of temperature, just like it should, at least on fresh tires. The inner rubber temp just kept getting hotter and hotter and the relationship between the surface and the inner temperature seemed odd at times. I just can't exactly explain why though.
I did notice too that tire deformation didn't seem to change as the tires got hotter. You would think that because the tires are getting hotter, the pressure would be going up, and the deformation would be less. It is probable that the difference is just to small for me to notice though.
I would call that pretty significant. I would suspect that full race tires are at least if not more sensitive than my street tires.
If we are setting hot pressures, then LFS has the pressures really, really low compared to the real world. Typical hot pressures are going to be in the mid 40psi range for most street tires.
I did check out the F9 views a bit more last night. The surface view does show a rapid gain and loss of temperature, just like it should, at least on fresh tires. The inner rubber temp just kept getting hotter and hotter and the relationship between the surface and the inner temperature seemed odd at times. I just can't exactly explain why though.
I did notice too that tire deformation didn't seem to change as the tires got hotter. You would think that because the tires are getting hotter, the pressure would be going up, and the deformation would be less. It is probable that the difference is just to small for me to notice though.
No, that is what we are talking about. It shouldn't be that way because of your point.
Hmm, maybe I will look at that closer. I could be wrong there. I don't look at surface temps all that much.
Good answer. I guess the important thing here is that each type of tire has an optimum hot pressure that they should run at. In the LFS case, it is the lowest pressure possible where your tires don't overheat. I think that is a bit odd.
Secondly, you said it yourself. You use 15psi cold on the loaded side and 16psi cold on the less loaded side. So, you are not using pressure to control temperature, but are using temperature to control the hot pressure. This is again different than in LFS. In LFS, we use pressure to control temp and to some degree the other settings you talk about, but not so much.
Thanks!
Last edited by Hallen, .
Yes, I mean the ctrl+shift F9 temps, but also to a degree the internal rubber temps. Heat transfer seems to happen too easily to the internal rubber, and the surface temps don't cool as quickly as they should. The interanl temps get hot to quickly because of the fast heat transfer, but don't seem to cool as quickly as they should either.
I think the other area of concentration should be tire temperatures and pressures. This might be a side effect of the load sensitivity issues or other issues, it is hard to say.
But, what do we do in LFS if you need to decrease tire temps? You raise the pressure which seems to be opposite of what you would do in RL (Tristian... is that generally true?). You also reduce camber some.
IRL, lower cold pressures allow more pressure build up in the tires, and the tires stay more cool throughout a stint. In LFS, this is not true.
Also, tire heat seems to build up and not dissipate quickly enough. I am not really talking about internal temperatures, but the surface temps. Watching an F1 race, they had a new graphic this year. The graphic showed tire temps. Going through a long corner, you would see the temps rise quickly. Then, on the subsequent straight, the tires would cool quickly. This does not happen in LFS.
These problems might also have an effect on the longitudinal grip problems that we see.
These are just my thoughts, there are no scientific studies that I have done.
But, what do we do in LFS if you need to decrease tire temps? You raise the pressure which seems to be opposite of what you would do in RL (Tristian... is that generally true?). You also reduce camber some.
IRL, lower cold pressures allow more pressure build up in the tires, and the tires stay more cool throughout a stint. In LFS, this is not true.
Also, tire heat seems to build up and not dissipate quickly enough. I am not really talking about internal temperatures, but the surface temps. Watching an F1 race, they had a new graphic this year. The graphic showed tire temps. Going through a long corner, you would see the temps rise quickly. Then, on the subsequent straight, the tires would cool quickly. This does not happen in LFS.
These problems might also have an effect on the longitudinal grip problems that we see.
These are just my thoughts, there are no scientific studies that I have done.
Software development on products for sale is much, much different than for some personal home project... even if the intent is to eventually sell it. Testing, code reviews, code design for maintainability, etc, all plays a roll in how long something takes.
Software development is tricky stuff. Somethings that seem incredibly complex to us, might be a very straight forward mathematical problem to a computer. Other things, which seem straight forward and simple to humans, are virtually impossible to do with a computer. It all just depends.
mrodgers, sometimes you are correct, editing and updating legacy code can take longer to do at times. But this is only if that code is part of supporting classes and data structures that are used in other parts of the program that are not being changed. Then you have to work around existing structures to get done what you need to do all the while trying not to break the other code. Sometimes it is easier to just write stuff from scratch. However, most of the time, it is the ground work that takes the time. The final implementation is fairly straight forward.
Something like getting the AI to be intelligent can be more difficult than what we would think it should be. Software does not make rational decisions and it cannot change once compiled. To make something react in a rational manner in software is quite a trick. I will be very interested to see what Scawen comes up with. Even with the restricted "rules" inside the sim, it will still be a big challenge.
Don't think to yourself that any of this is easy. People have been trying to create tire simulators for years and have only gotten them to partially work. The big question becomes "how do you test it?". There is some math that will help, but in the end, it all comes down to feel. Does it feel right? Does it behave correctly in all situations? How do you quantify that feedback and how do you turn it into verifiable computer code? Not easy stuff to do.
When I ask for a time estimate from my Engineers, I get a guess. "It will take what it takes" is the answer I get most of the time. This is because that software development can still be more of an art form than a science at times.
Software development is tricky stuff. Somethings that seem incredibly complex to us, might be a very straight forward mathematical problem to a computer. Other things, which seem straight forward and simple to humans, are virtually impossible to do with a computer. It all just depends.
mrodgers, sometimes you are correct, editing and updating legacy code can take longer to do at times. But this is only if that code is part of supporting classes and data structures that are used in other parts of the program that are not being changed. Then you have to work around existing structures to get done what you need to do all the while trying not to break the other code. Sometimes it is easier to just write stuff from scratch. However, most of the time, it is the ground work that takes the time. The final implementation is fairly straight forward.
Something like getting the AI to be intelligent can be more difficult than what we would think it should be. Software does not make rational decisions and it cannot change once compiled. To make something react in a rational manner in software is quite a trick. I will be very interested to see what Scawen comes up with. Even with the restricted "rules" inside the sim, it will still be a big challenge.
Don't think to yourself that any of this is easy. People have been trying to create tire simulators for years and have only gotten them to partially work. The big question becomes "how do you test it?". There is some math that will help, but in the end, it all comes down to feel. Does it feel right? Does it behave correctly in all situations? How do you quantify that feedback and how do you turn it into verifiable computer code? Not easy stuff to do.
When I ask for a time estimate from my Engineers, I get a guess. "It will take what it takes" is the answer I get most of the time. This is because that software development can still be more of an art form than a science at times.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG