Hi all..

I'm pretty sure this has been answered already, but I can't find it if it has...

The BF1 has no starter motor (that's fine and expected).. however, yesterday my littlen had to do a stop / go penalty. The engine died (not sure why, I wasn't in the room at the time.. he may have turned it off) but even though the stop had reported 'finished', he was unable to continue due to not being able to fire up the engine again.

This is surely a bug? but as I don't know if there's a "way around it", I'm posting in this forum to find out if there is or not.

If there's already previous discussion on this item, if someone has a link to it, I'd appreciate it so I can read for myself about the situation.. searching didn't yield much other than that the starter had been removed.



Regards,

Ian

I think it's a feature. That's why the F1 cars have a huge starter pole stuck up their bums during a pit stop.

Yeah, don't think it's a bug. F1 cars need to be held at a constant revs during pits, mid range I found, to prevent stalling the engine.

Maybe it should be in the next patch that if stalled in the pits, then you can restart, but elsewhere on the track it's a no-go.

Quote from Mackie The Staggie :

Yeah, don't think it's a bug. F1 cars need to be held at a constant revs during pits, mid range I found, to prevent stalling the engine.

Maybe it should be in the next patch that if stalled in the pits, then you can restart, but elsewhere on the track it's a no-go.

The question wasn't about the stalling, it was not being able to restart. An F1 car be be restarted in the pits (thanks to those handy mechanics) so not being able to do so in the BF1 would qualify as a inconsistency (rather than a true bug). Probably just got overlooked at the time.

I sincerely hope this isn't a feature.. as it'd be _very_ unrealistic!

I've seen F1 cars stall.. yet they can be restarted (with some help of course).. but it's this help I couldn't find implemented anywhere. I guess it's missing from this patch.



Regards,

Ian

I doubt it's intended to be like that, more of an ommision after the stalling implementation. I very much believe it'll be sorted in the next patch. For now, avoid stalling in the Sauber

Oops! That'll teach me to type a msg and not to hit post before I answer a phone call

As long as I hadn't overlooked the option to restart it, all's good as I don't drive the car myself and Ashley can adapt for now



Regards,

Ian

I don't know if it has something with Ian's problem, but cars in LFS have ability to turn off..self after doing nothing for 15-20 seconds.

Is it known?

Yes - they are removed from the physics engine to save CPU time.

Ahh that's interesting! I was told about this "auto dying" issue and thought "wtf!? my car doesn't cut out when idling".. unless the fuel runs out of course. I don't know whether this was what Ashley experienced or not.. I'll try this myself sometime soon.

Can't say I really like that approach to saving CPU cycles though.. seems a bit of a hack to get around an actual issue.



Regards,

Ian

To cut a long story short - you need to ram a drill up it's ass to start an F1 car. That should be added for pitstops, although I've never stalled in LFS without actually trying to do so.

we should get to the bottom of the auto cut-off issue and why it was implemented. Saving CPU cycles is not a good reason. If it's to save CPU cycles for people on the track but not moving they should just be sent to spec after a given amount for being afk/afm/afg25

It's because Scawen wanted to do it. I'm sure (as he is CLEARLY not the remotest bit of a fool) he considered forced spectate, and other methods, choosing this way as being the best system (perhaps taking into account plans for LFS you or I don't know about).

Don't quote me on the CPU cycle thing please, as that was from memory. It won't be hard for interested parties to search Scawen's posts for the true quote. It is very possible he said/meant something entirely different.

Quote from tristancliffe :

It's because Scawen wanted to do it. I'm sure (as he is CLEARLY not the remotest bit of a fool) he considered forced spectate, and other methods, choosing this way as being the best system (perhaps taking into account plans for LFS you or I don't know about).

Don't quote me on the CPU cycle thing please, as that was from memory. It won't be hard for interested parties to search Scawen's posts for the true quote. It is very possible he said/meant something entirely different.

You're right it seems about the CPU cycle saving. After some searching, I found [POST=630105]this post[/POST]:

Quote from Scawen :

Yes, this is not a bug. Cars which are stopped with engine off now go completely out of the physics system. This is a good feature because it saves CPU on other people's computers. As with many new features, it has caused a few issues that needed fixing, including the one noted above. This is also the reason for the feature that turns off your engine if your car is stopped and you don't use any controls for 40 seconds - this allows the removal from physics system to happen.

I really _really_ disagree with this being a "good feature". This is a sad hack IMO for an unoptimised physics engine and hope that Scawen rethinks this "good feature". IMO, this is like putting 30 coats of paint on a wall... because the damp continues to come through



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

this is like putting 30 coats of paint on a wall...

Oh, so you've met the wife then ?

Quote from Ian.H :

This is a sad hack IMO for an unoptimised physics engine and hope that Scawen rethinks this "good feature".

ok, then optimize the physics engine real quick and this will be all better

Not my engine to optimise.. just expressing an opinion. And the "you do better" response is typical from people who have no clue and is completely irrelevant to any conversation.



Regards,

Ian

I'm sure scawen wrote a well put post about SMT/SMP but i can't remember correctly.
So even with excessive physics usage of the CPU, there has to be a way of utilizing more CPUs for the achievement of more granular physics.
I mean, common, the world evolves -slowly- into parallel processing, i think scawen thought about this too and i hope he is able to intruduce multi-core usage at some point.

regards

Quote from J@tko :

That's why the F1 cars have a huge starter pole stuck up their bums during a pit stop.

I think I've read somewhere that F1 cars actually have a little (, a very little) starter motor or at least they had a few years ago. It wasnt very useful thou, since most of the time it couldn't actually start the engine. Does anyone know better ho it is nowdays?

Quote from hyntty :

I think I've read somewhere that F1 cars actually have a little (, a very little) starter motor or at least they had a few years ago. It wasnt very useful thou, since most of the time it couldn't actually start the engine. Does anyone know better ho it is nowdays?

Probably the same.

I did read that it was planned to change the Regs to include a functioning starter (must start X no of times), but looked earlier and it seems to have been dropped for this season at least.

It is possible to push start an f1 car cause sometimes if the starter in them is bust the pit crew push them. This should be added to so some 1 in there car can push start you

just hold the clutch down the whole time your in the pit, lol