I would not have posted unless exactly the situation you've described came up. That's why I noticed the bug.
Yeah, that's what I meant under "venturi", that's the principle on which carburetors work.
Cars consume fuel when ignition is off.
Was just testing FZR for something and noticed that killing the ignition while the car is moving (while keeping the throttle fully on) has no effect on fuel consumption. In fact, the car consumes fuel at the same rate as if it was doing actual work.
Agreed, this can be true with some carburetor engines which work on Venturi (as long as the throttle butterfly is open air is coming through and sucking in the fuel - even if the ignition is off), but surely modern racing cars have ECU's that turn off the injectors when there's no ignition.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Agreed, this can be true with some carburetor engines which work on Venturi (as long as the throttle butterfly is open air is coming through and sucking in the fuel - even if the ignition is off), but surely modern racing cars have ECU's that turn off the injectors when there's no ignition.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Loved Scawen with the chequered flag at the end.
You've also said you wouldn't stand in the way of progress if other devs had new content to release, right? So, since really 99 % of this whining is about CONTENT and not tire physics, why isn't Eric releasing imaginary cars and tracks left and right? Without even breaking a sweat it could be 2 tracks and 3 cars every 6 months (this is taking into consideration the "complicated editors" you wrote for him). I mean really, people are importing models from 3ds max into LFS already, why not just let Eric work in something like 3ds max and write a plugin instead?
Give us content, tire physics is already better than anything else out there.
Voted for Webber and Alonso! Grats!!!111one
I was surprised today while watching "Men of a certain age" to see them playing LFS at some Chevrolet convention. Episode is 204 (2nd season, episode 4) and the timecode is 26:00. First it was I think FO8 @ KY1 and then something else at Blackwood RallyX.
I was astonished that it wasn't iRacing since it's a Chevrolet dealers convention. In any case, nice to see someone has some taste :P
I was astonished that it wasn't iRacing since it's a Chevrolet dealers convention. In any case, nice to see someone has some taste :P
It wasn't a matter of being too cautious, it was 0.4 % fuel left in tank..
tires having 29 full laps on them meant that I couldn't run more laps on them even if I wanted (since Scawen still doesn't wanna implement the change tires: NEVER option in the F12).So, lemme get this straight. You troll the forum threads for new member acquisitions, congratulate the team and then steal their driver a few days later with promise of trinkets? At least stop being a hypocrite and don't make congratulatory posts.
Just to let everyone know: the exemption list works like a charm. MoE server is back up and running, not handing out bans left and right.
Well, there might be several hosts out there that run steering lock mods (like drift servers) and tweak servers for some series. But maybe the quickest way to exclude a host from these problems would be by ip and port? We asked our hoster and he'd provide the ip and port of the server if you can add it to some "exceptions" list or whatnot, so we could continue driving.
Scawen, Masters of Endurance server is running a modified LFS.exe but everyone who drives there does so on the same modified exe and the protection against this has always been OOS (if you join on regular LFS.exe it tells u OOS CAR ENG) and you get kicked off.
Why would this all of a sudden be covered by the CPW? This weekend is the official start of the MoE season and 10+ people got banned from the server today and can't rejoin or drive (since it was the only server running that mod for the series). Plz exclude the completely modified exe's from the CPW system like it was before, otherwise about 30 teams and 5 times as many drivers are royally screwed.
Tnx.
No need to apologize for racing (at least that's how I read the "risk" comment). If ur gonna fanny around in any race, just don't go racing.
TBH, 7:40 made my day. Should've gone to the bastard after the race and ripped that iRacing sticker off his car and fed it to him.
Can't be dusting off the classic for just any idiot.
you're a ****ing idiot, just shut the **** up. i wish you would jump off a cliff, and then for superman to swoop in and rescue you and then throw you from an even higher altitude.
IMO, timeouts are so ****ing shitty that if I was hosting/admining any race I would make sure the only penalty/time lost for a team that experiences a real timeout is the time it takes them to reconnect, take a new car and get back on track.
In fact, I'd even use position nodes on a track to get them back all the time of the lap they were driving before timing out. If the driver can provide a screenshot of his last position on track before his screen went to the "connect menu", I'd even give them that distance as "finished" (this can easily be done since the first thing you notice is all the cars dissapearing and/or stopping their movement on the minimap, so there's plenty of time to take a screenshot if your timeout is lasting for a few seconds or even more).
In fact, I'd even use position nodes on a track to get them back all the time of the lap they were driving before timing out. If the driver can provide a screenshot of his last position on track before his screen went to the "connect menu", I'd even give them that distance as "finished" (this can easily be done since the first thing you notice is all the cars dissapearing and/or stopping their movement on the minimap, so there's plenty of time to take a screenshot if your timeout is lasting for a few seconds or even more).
I'm sry to whomever I hit in the chicane just before the restart. I was experiencing sevear framedrops eversince the grid got closer together. :/
I ment the deformation under loading, but yes, you are right there. However heat in a tire air pressure will get higher as a result of heat, not the other way around, and heat cant come from conduction and convection in extermal air beacuse those are 2 ways of leading heat away from the tire thread.
One question though, related to the heating model and why it wouldn't "fit" on the new physics model: if heat is generated through friction/slip angle & ratio/loading/lateral & longitudinal forces and if it was working before, why wouldn't it work on the new physics model? I'm wondering how the new model should generate heat in order for it to be sufficiently different from the old one/more realistic?
I'm sorry if you found my original reply about the tires insulting, but sarcasm is just something that I do all the time and it wasn't aimed specifically to hurt you. Other than the sarcasm, the post was "tire progress" related and factual (with my prick-ish attitude thrown in, but no different than I would say to anyone over MSN/IRC or in real life
). Guess if that makes it unwelcome I'll try to filter my words better. However, just like you I am susceptible to what other people do and say, and a part of the reason for sarcasm was that genuinelly - the last attempt at fixing/adjusting the tire physics was a bit of a failure and went directly against what you usually stand for (and what I respect) and that is "We will not release unfinished/half-done/band-aid updates just for the sake of being on time".
Just keepin' it real, ja? Cmon, just let people help you, ask for data. Don't need to do everything on ur own, we won't think any less of u.So then, it won't be a poke in the eye like the one in patch Y? Tires will heat up and cool down quicker? R2/3/4 will be compounded differently for each of the cars using it? Wear rates too? It won't take five 8 km laps to heat them up if they cool down to ambient temperatures?
That's so nice to hear.
Imo, the only things to fix in LFS transmission modeling are:
1. Proper ignition cut. The way Scawen has currently coded it is wrong and slow, the ignition cut doesn't mean killing the ignition of the whole engine (and I'm pretty sure it does just that, although then turbo boost would be dependant only on throttle pedal position). In real life it's enough to cut the ignition on only 2-3 cylinders of the 6 or 8 cylinders in the engine, just enough to unload the transmission and enable the dogs to catch next gear. This is why XRR is still slower than FZR in accelerations, too much time lost with the current ignition cut (it'd be much faster to just give it the regular lift-type sequential, and yes, it would outweigh any disadvantages of losing some boost for a split second).
2. Having the option of autoclutch only on downshifts in cars with sequential gearboxes (ign. cut and regular), because that's how shifting is done in 98 % of the cases of dog-boxes in real life, making it a lot easier to blip the throttle (without chancing a miss-shift or riding the throttle as many idiots do).
3. Gearbox damage. Stresses on gear teeth and dog rings can be calculated pretty easily and a wear model could be introduced, this would be especially handy in endurance racing and it would force people to learn how to take care of their cars (and not skip blipping the throttle).
4. Clutch heating/wearing model re-done. Currently you can still flatshift in a 500 hp car during the whole 1-hour stint and not have your clutch temp go into the red area, and this is ok, racing clutches made of C/SiC don't really care about being slipped or their temperature, but what they do care about is being constantly stressed with impulses during flatshifts (and not only the clutch, but the whole drivetrain). This is another area where a vibration/stress model would be benefitial (especially for flatshifting in road cars).
5. As yaper said above, dog H boxes on racy slower cars (FWD GTR, FZR). Maybe even a DSG transmission for the never-coming Scirocco.
1. Proper ignition cut. The way Scawen has currently coded it is wrong and slow, the ignition cut doesn't mean killing the ignition of the whole engine (and I'm pretty sure it does just that, although then turbo boost would be dependant only on throttle pedal position). In real life it's enough to cut the ignition on only 2-3 cylinders of the 6 or 8 cylinders in the engine, just enough to unload the transmission and enable the dogs to catch next gear. This is why XRR is still slower than FZR in accelerations, too much time lost with the current ignition cut (it'd be much faster to just give it the regular lift-type sequential, and yes, it would outweigh any disadvantages of losing some boost for a split second).
2. Having the option of autoclutch only on downshifts in cars with sequential gearboxes (ign. cut and regular), because that's how shifting is done in 98 % of the cases of dog-boxes in real life, making it a lot easier to blip the throttle (without chancing a miss-shift or riding the throttle as many idiots do).
3. Gearbox damage. Stresses on gear teeth and dog rings can be calculated pretty easily and a wear model could be introduced, this would be especially handy in endurance racing and it would force people to learn how to take care of their cars (and not skip blipping the throttle).
4. Clutch heating/wearing model re-done. Currently you can still flatshift in a 500 hp car during the whole 1-hour stint and not have your clutch temp go into the red area, and this is ok, racing clutches made of C/SiC don't really care about being slipped or their temperature, but what they do care about is being constantly stressed with impulses during flatshifts (and not only the clutch, but the whole drivetrain). This is another area where a vibration/stress model would be benefitial (especially for flatshifting in road cars).
5. As yaper said above, dog H boxes on racy slower cars (FWD GTR, FZR). Maybe even a DSG transmission for the never-coming Scirocco.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG