I just checked some fuel maps comparing NA cars to turbo cars. and the Fuel injected for NA cars @ cruising speed was always more for the NA cars.

Makes sence Turbo cars your not driving on boost. the turbo even though its spinning, has to be thats the only way the air would get in, at that points all it is a restriction plus.

Can't say the OP results surprised me. were your guys really expecting LFS Engine sim to spit out results that were veracious?

It looks like lfs calculates Fuel consumption based on how much torque the engine is producing, In real life thats not how it works.

I doubt it would take months. seeing as they would prob have support from BMW

MmMM i imagine this was close to being in LFS too,(M5). seems similiar to the BF1 but I guess it would have to be for free.

A chemical is some times used to soften the tires and get them really sticky, it smells like bubble gum.
http://www.4cylinder.org/trackbite.html
http://vht.carshopinc.com/prod ... p/products_id/56276/SP162

As for the drag strip, there is no reason why it can't work like a real one. the Demo drag strip Insim program is more functional than the S2 version thing. jst shows how far LFS is lagging in that regard.

Quote :

at least according to scawen lfs has an inner physics loop which afaik does tyres and suspension at 2khz and an outer one which handles collisions damage and a few other things at 100hz

ok that makes sense. i got the impression that only the tires were done at 2khz

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Indeed, before anyone says anything, yes the "regular" physics run at 100Hz, but the internal tire physics do run at 2000Hz.

Android, I think I misunderstood your diagram initially but now I get what you mean. Wouldn't this increase rolling resitance even more than the other way? Do we have any data to back up the thought that they're modelled the way you describe?

Are you sure its 2000hz? that seems a bit high that would mean that LFS can calculate all the tires on the car in half .5 milliseconds. I woud say maybe you meant 200hz, but I can't imagine how you could even run them and different speeds

Quote from Shotglass :

lfs "only" has one section every 22° which is a relatively large chunck of rubber



because otherwise the tyre will just jump from section to section withou experiencing the effect of having multiple section joined together in a flat bit of surface

Would also like to add that, tire size and Speed plays a roll. bigger the wheel less precision.

If LFS calculates the physics @ 120hz ie 120 per second, at 140mph on a 17inch wheel the physics Engine skips over about 6 sample spots which could contain the flat spots.


as for netkar they probably used a combination of the two. They probably used generic effect and used inputs from Engine to modify it for that particular instant.

Another question would be, to what degree they change. Meaning how improved do you think it will get.

At the original poster, taking an educated guess you would not have to re write too much to get it working on OSX. (that really depends on what you call alot i suppose) the main problem i would imagine is direct X. Thats only available on windows the game uses it for its rendering (drawing stuff on the screen). So in order for LFS to work natively on OSX he would have to switch over to OpenGL . i can't imagine all the physics, game code, AI being platform dependent, so i think thats the main barrier. But still makes no sense to do it, are there any drivers available for wheels on mac?.

This is one of the reason why M$ has such a tight grip, things from a development stand point are so much easier than on OSX or Linux.

@ tristan & ball bearing. Lol i thought he went schizophrenic or something

Quote from mrodgers :

Because they are not racers at heart. They are not trying to use sim racing as a means because they can't trackday or race for real, but as a game and don't have the understanding of feedback.

A racer by heart would be actually racing and not bothering with game.

Regardless reason people ask for it is simple. LFS Cars don't sound as real as GTR2 or pre sampled sounds.
As for feedback i never really experienced any that wasn't emulated using sampled sounds.

That said, i rather the calculated sounds. Its a step in the right direction, it offers way more diversity down the road. but right now i would say its like 15% complete before it justifies going calculated instead of sampled.
also easier for devs aswell

Well to me the reason to have is not the obvious "so i can gain an advantage"
its adds strategy makes the race more dynamic and add to the realism.

First off I completly disagree with the logic that one setup can be the best. i said it before there can be some pref when it comes to engines as well. The only time that would happen(optimal setup) is if you had a race with no restrictions on the engine then i suppose it might be possible.

Having the option to build your own engine would imply a real time engine simulation. which means you could have very realistic engine damage IE Spinning a rod in cylinder four or something.

I could understand if u want to preserve close racing but having the same car dosen't do that. by keeping engine the same i suppose some people feel its down the the driver. but i don't agree with that suspension settings are just about performance oriented as the engine. give two racing teams same car and a team who does not know how to set up the car and i certain they will be lapping slower.


With that said i have been in servers where none of the races are close because of the difference in skill. ex one person lapping in 1:29 another 1:27 another 1:25. in those races in becomes clear after the first lap whos gonna win. Sometimes i am racing and i am clearly faster than someone and vice versa. i would not mind racing someone with more power but less skill so it can actually be close.

Quote :

Piece of cake then. So why don't you go, with all your obvious coding knowledge, email Scawen and tell him how easy it would be for him to code in engine tuning/building options for 20-ish cars ranging from a 1000cc four-pot to a highly-strung Sauber F1 car and see what kind of response (if any) you get.

you are aware that you don't program the outcome for each car you program the model to see its own outcome. that said he would just have to code one generic concept of a "Engine" which would be the same code running the XRT engine and the F1 engine only difference would be the same variables that make a road going car engine different from and formula car.
So know programming 20 different things for 20 different cars.

Quote from Jakg :

care to elaborate? i always thought they added new stuff to the DX10 spec that meant that new cards had to be designed to support it.

re reading my post i hope i didn't come off as a dick head.

I missed the point you were trying to make,which is now clear after your second post, and got caught up on a little technicality

Quote :

I don't see why we need so many sockets and why always there is need to get new motherboard, why not create standard board where manufacturers could add what they like but connectors and sockets would be what they are so new board is not needed every time, maybe such board that you could get upgraded without replacing whole board. It would be a challenge, but that would help a lot already.

your vision of one motherboard is next to impossible. it would be too hard to have standard sockets. Jst because the CPU and other chips are almost binary compatible dosent mean there design are anywhere near similar. infact there radically different.

Quote :

Take DX10 - you need specialised "Hardware Stream Processors" to do it, which no card before had.

thats jst plane wrong

Personally i never felt the grahics in terms of candy really bothered me for LFS. sorta viewed it as a game where the physics are the concentration. I can ignore the Gfx because its not what the game is about.

its really the trend of todays games expsecially PC games to jst use the extra power they get with newer hardware, to do what they were doing before and not to innovate.
IE writing more and more complex shaders for surfaces.

I feel LFS should apply it to something more contructive in a sim. few examples
Pixel Shaders -
Used to visually simulate Tire Wear, Graining, dirt
Procedural Track wetness
Really should step it up and be able to have Different parts of the track Dry and different speeds and have it visually represented
Windshield Wipers-
with the advent of Force cockpit view it would be nice to have water on the windsheild visually represented and have the wipers effect it

all of those ad to the overall simulation aspect and prob would look sick as well. on top of that it would be a first for a sim i think i would could marketing and bragging points

I Want That Shifter

I actually don't think that those simulators are Substantially better than what we have today. Most people who test and talk about them don't play video games. So there gonna praise it for its realism even though it might not be significantly better. i would reserve judgment until i got the full specs of the their engine. i would love to see a comparison between Reality Commercial Sim and an F1 sim

You guys know your stuff. So could some one tell me what it is LFS dosen't do or dosent do completely that dropping the clutch @ Full boost,Redline; is always faster?

Am sure he was just dumbing down the language so more people could follow. i know i tend to do that when explaining something that i don't want to go into great detail.
Did anyone watch up to the part with the chassis flex demo. found that to be one of the more interesting part.

I don't usually post, but i found a interesting video that deals with racing physics in games.

http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=314874

I think we should assassinate max its for his own good. i can't stand FIA so damn controlling. i see no need to change F1. if they want more relevants to cars they make a new series with open wheel cars and only power regulation is have to use pump gas.

I suppose what they are trying is to get more fans and lower the cost. when u have teams like toyota spending 400 million a year and not winning races i would be uneasy. i would quit if i was toyota and i guess fia is afraid it will get to expensive for someone to compete and not be on podium. i think thats why they are so restrictive there trying to help the "slower" teams.(IE one make tires,No tc in 08)

if thats the case i think there going about it wrong, if they don't wanna see sato at the back every race. then let the man have more than 300 tires a season and unlimited test time so he can practice.

XRT BLGP



lol could not help it

I have always thought LFS sounded good in terms of how the sounds should sound but the actual sounds them selves are bad. That didn't bother me too much because car sounds ingames almost always sound bad in some aspect. GTR2 had good sounds in the cockpit but as you changed to the tv camera view shit just sucked
In assisting the developers in improving the game sound we should prob compile a bullet list of areas to improve. i doubt hes going to want to walk through a 10 page thread in hopes of finding someone useful tips.

i think the problem with LFS sound is its not dynamic enough so to speak.
i mean if find that below 4500-5000Rpm the car sounds nice but after that just dosent really sound like engines revving that high 8500Rpm.*
at first i thought well maybe its because i am desensitized to this car reeving high( never really drive the car like a normal car) so i drove around the track normally(feels like it has a stage 54 clutch could be my clutch pedal) went back to driving fast and still dosen't sound like its in the high RPMS.

Too loud at low RPMS
then i noticed the car is actually too loud for the rpms its actually at in the lower range. if u listen to a real car drive by the engine is hardly audible(in the cruising RPM range) so is the exhaust(this is from the external view) the tires actually make more noise.

Loud IDLE
i noticed the idle is ridiculously loud i parked the XRT at the 50M marker at blackwood straight and i could still hear the car from 250M marker. also did the test at the start line on blackwood and i could hear the car at the pit entrance lane cones.

Power vs loudness
was curious to see if power played a role in how much noise the car produced so i lined a XRt up on the BLack wood straight took off did a replay and listened from the same spot the car left and noted when i could not hear the car anymore. i redid the test with the hatch and in terms of loudness they were pretty much the same. sound cut out at the same points. went back to an old lfs ver and tried the same test with a 7.5liter V8 (500Hp) same thing.

Attenuation
LFS dosent do this. basically as a sound source gets further away the higher frequencies of that sound are absorbed by air and don't travel as far as the lower frequencies. so stuff like gear wine should not be audible after a certain distance. another example of this is a helicopter u can hear the sound the blades make from further distances than you can hear the high pitched noised from the jet engine.

3D Sound would be nice
back Fires
would rather see this run off of some simulation rather than down shift and hearing a pop. rather have the sound and the size of the backfire dynamic. (love the sound of 4 or 5 cars going into a corner and all that random popping )
---
I don't think LFS sound is actually going to get better without hardware acceleration. i would suggest scawen look at OpenAL and EAX5 as 3d sound and attenuation are easier to implement using them. i can't really comment of all the benefits in terms of sound quality in using those because the documention for EAX5 is under NDA. You have to register with creative as a developer.

i think i how difficult and how long implementing it would take would be dependent on how deep of a simulation u go. i started writing one couple months back but quit when i reinstalled windows and forgot to back it up.

Quote :

As for bringing in Gran Turismo and Forza fans, they'll be on a pretty steep learning curve coming from arcade games to LFS. You wouldn't want to make it too hard on them by implementing realistic tuning (i.e. a more complex system than "buy it, apply it, go win next prize car and complete 2 more percent of the game")

not everyone on GT or forza is car retarded. i always felt when creating a sim should cater to reality & practicality above all.

As some may know I am more on the side of "tunning". its seems quite a few people have misconceptions of what "tunning" would look like
in lfs. I get the feeling that people imagine it would look something like NFS's when it should be noted that NFs' "tunning" is just as realistc as its suspension, tyre, etc simulation.

Your not going to have 1200HP XRT on 40psi going around a circuit track for any amount of time. in real there barriers to how much power you can make One example. Type of Fuel. Eg its impossible to have the above XRT running on pump gas but most likely possible on nitro methane.

the idea that you can tune now with tweak is weak because the changes you make are not realistic.

Alot of people say it won't add anything again i disagree. It should be noted that simulation is trying to emulate reality. and in reality there isn't a racing league in existence that does not have regulations. so to say that everyone is going to use the most powerful setup is again weak. i think it goes with out saying is any Engine modification implemented needs a way to be regulated online by server admin and such.

Deeper Game play experience
one advantage of Engine tunning is not necessarily strategy in racing but more and different classes of racing. you could have naturally aspirated XRT and it could be a different experience to what is currently implemented.

Could balance game play.
Next thing nay sayers are probably saying is well that kills pickup races. no one is going to want to agree on regulations. and that sorta stuff happens alot in real life. answer to that would be Standards. Example STCC league could have their own standard. Advantage of that is STCC founders could balance out the current imbalance between the cars used.
%and just because i know someone is thinking its gonna be hard to keep track different regulations. a template system could be implemented so that once loaded its impossible to adjust beyond or below regulation.

people also seem to think there is a best engine setup, and preference have nothing to do with it. doesn't seem crazy to me to see someone creating a car with a excellent top end. one could be fast on the straight away and slower else where. with some driving skill one might be able fend off anyone any attacks in slower area. that seems like a strategy to me, i would not mind trying giving a situation. (that was off the top of my head)

Adding a full blown engine simulation it would be easy to implement a engine damage, better sounds, Real time back fire and exhaust fumes, and most things associated with the engine.

Simulation and complexity go hand in hand in my mind.

Only down side is LFS community size can't support any of this. though i do make the argument that it would bring in alot of people From GT, Forza, Drag racing fans.

Quote :

The mass makes no difference - it's the inertia that counts

Quote :

At no point have I ever stated that mass, or the location of that mass with respect to the axis of rotation (radius of gyration), has no effect upon inertia,

you didn't say it but u sort of implied it, maybe accidentally idk. you said the mass makes no difference on the engine behavior, that it is the inertia; but mass contributes in determining the inertia. So indirectly mass does make a difference.

Eg. to flywheels with same distribution of mass except one is made out of dence steel and the other titanium or something very light in this particular situation the one with the less mass is going rev faster.

of course this only works in that example as the distribution of the mass can change the inertia. 9lbs flywheel vs a 10lbs flywheel with weight in the center.

Only responded to this thread cause it seems you went out of the way to make him look stupid

Quote :

If you think it does then you are a COMPLETE FOOL.

maybe it would of been better if your first post stated something like mass isn't the only factor to a cars performance.