Great Thread! The slip ratio graphs explain my points in a simple manner. Note that race ABS such as that of the Lotus I mentioned is meant to gain maximum braking power and only activates in panic applications for directional control. However, note that if an excellent EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution) system was used in conjunction with an excellent driver or well tuned Race ABS, the stopping distances would be amazingly short. It's simply a matter of making the most of your tires' grip.

Anyway, let's get back on topic.

Quote from tomylee :

I never drove a F1 car but what I see on TV it does not look like that when somebody is losing the control of the car at 300 km/h that he will get it back on track

Exactly, this was my point on the first post of this whole thread. The fact that you never (hardly) ever see an F1 driver rescue a slide at those speeds. Look at turn 8 in turkey last year, so many people were spinning the car.

The BF1, almost corrects itself at these speeds in the game. Good for gamers, but not for realism. I would buy GT4 if i didn't want a challenge heh heh.

Basically the cars stopping quicker with locked wheels is not a huge problem in LFS because you can't lock your wheels without tire damage. So by locking your wheels you gain nothing. The bigger problem is that you get a better start by stabbing the loud pedal and breathing the smoke. Also the aero problems are known, and we can be sure that this will be updated. But it is up to Scavier when it's done. Ground effects are one thing which should be in LFS.

Looking at the aerodynamic bug, the BF1 not loosing enough downforce during large slip angles. I am defenately not an expert on this area, but just by thinking a bit further, the major change that occurs on bigger slip angles is that the "rolling resistance" (the forces that slow the cars down, drag as a major one) grow expotentially. F1 cars are extremely sensitive to any aerodynamic disruptions. Too bad this isn't the case in LFS atm..

But, still physics updates that mainly improve BF1 handling sound a bit odd. Looking this from different perspective: almost non existent engine damage, locked diff better than clutchpack, no reason to use manual clutch, car interiors from 1976 video games and sounds that are just bearable. Plus a lot lot of smaller things.

Imho, BF1 can wait

This is anyway a problem in LFS, that when you lock your wheels there is nothing to feel afterwards. When you check the F1, they always say that after a big lock you have problems to handle the car well.

yeah i've heard the vibrationsfrom the flatspots are so bad that the driver can barely focus.

i would rather see the sounds of the bf1 be improved rather than the physics, they just sound so terrible and really un realistic. they sound like a 2 stroke f1 car

expansion chambers hanging out the side of an f1 car? one can only dream :woohoo:

Quote from DaveWS :

I was watching the Turkish Grand Prix today, and one thing that i noticed while the cars were on the parade lap was the way they were warming up the front tyres. They would be driving at slow speeds and then turn the wheel to full lock, causing the car to understeer ahead and heat up the fronts.

I thought that i would try out this technique on LFS in the BF1. However when i tried it out the car didn't understeer at all, in fact the car was turning far too much, and even sometimes oversteering, not what i had observed on the TV.

I guess that this is a tyre physics issue, so i carried out some more "tests":

This first test is on the skidpad, where i have driven to the outer ring, and at the limits of the cars lateral grip, proven by the green arrows on forces view (f key). I have then turned into the turn with FULL steering lock, expecting the car to understeer wide and take a wider path (as on the TV). Instead the car began to oversteer and take an ever tightening line!

The second test is on the dragstrip. I have driven to the limiter in 4th for a constant speed, and given my best attempt at "threshold" braking. I have then repeated the test with fully locked wheels, which gave a shorter braking distance! (marginally). This test was with the RACE_S setup but no downforce.

The third test is on the dragstrip but accelerating with NO tc. I set a time of 9.5 seconds. I then tried again with tc set to 5%, and set a time of 9.24 seconds. I am certain that if this test was carried out in real life the results would be several seconds out, not 0.26 seconds out.

The forth test is my attempt at a parade lap in the BF1. A total disaster.

Unless otherwise stated the tests have all been with the standard RACE_S setup.

Some tests may have been crude and inaccurate, but still give a conclusion.

I recommend you view the tests in the forces view.

Here is a link to a typical parade lap, where you can see the technique that the drivers are using to warm the tyres: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XFWJIDzQJo

The RACE_S setups are quite oversteery compared to real life(saving!) setups. I bet if you prepared a setup for a 1h30 race, your front tires would be set at a much higher pressures and the car would behave more like the real ones.

I haven't had the time to look at your replays though.

Quote from kieran20 :

i would rather see the sounds of the bf1 be improved rather than the physics, they just sound so terrible and really un realistic. they sound like a 2 stroke f1 car

i guess your seniority has kept the usual suspects from jabbing at you for making such a statement... or maybe they arent awake yet lol.

Last time I did a CFD check, an airflow vector only 5 degrees off dead straight results in as much as 5-15% increase of static pressure at the lower surfaces of the car.

In layman terms, downforce drops by as much as 5-15% depending on the area of the car. Overall loss is along the lines of 7%. The test was done on an Indycar.

Fact is, aero is extremly yaw, pitch and roll sensitive IRL. LFS still doesn't model these factors, that's why it's so weird when the car starts to slide. IRL, cars snap when yawed excessively due to both loss of downforce AND the relativiely twitchy nature of low moment of inertia MR characterisics, coupled with the fact that slicks don't tolerate excessive slip angles very well.

Precisely what I was saying a while ago on this thread. Thanks for confirming it thought.

Downforce does begin to drop off, but only at extreme yaw angles in LFS. I am sure this wouldn't be too much trouble to have corrected.

so if i do a set, make it default in lfs, where u can warm up tyres and understeer like u see in tv (even without brake balancing), then lfs physics become perfect?
no they wont, they will just counter much ignorance.
also if lfs physics were 100% spot on and perfect, these exact same threads would pop up over and over.

findings that aero is not complete when its stated it is not complete from the start, and discovering that it needs undertray angle / height and yaw affecting the produced df etc, when that exact same line is listed over and over in the TODO list... wow what a great feedback.
what next will people find, that the AI DOESNT PIT?
and omg lfs calls itself 0.5v and its not complete!!!!

Quote from KiDCoDEa :

so if i do a set, make it default in lfs, where u can warm up tyres and understeer like u see in tv (even without brake balancing), then lfs physics become perfect?
no they wont, they will just counter much ignorance.
also if lfs physics were 100% spot on and perfect, these exact same threads would pop up over and over.

findings that aero is not complete when its stated it is not complete from the start, and discovering that it needs undertray angle / height and yaw affecting the produced df etc, when that exact same line is listed over and over in the TODO list... wow what a great feedback.
what next will people find, that the AI DOESNT PIT?
and omg lfs calls itself 0.5v and its not complete!!!!

If you look at the date of the first post of this thread, you will find that the aero was discussed a while ago.

In LFS some downforce drop-off IS modelled, just not very realistically.

This has only been added to the "todo list" (hyperactive's log) a few months ago. AFTER the last post before yours.

I doubt that Dave, I bet it was on Scawen's todo list long before we brought it up