rec.autos.simulators

RASF1 things for us to think about

Eldre

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Eldre » Sun, 13 Jul 2003 12:58:53



>> 3) Driving aids. Can the server decide which aids are allowed? F1 cars
>have
>> a much higher performance envelope than stock cars, so it's much more
>likely
>> that a driver without aids will end up in the wall at some point <g>. I
>> think the aids in F1C are much more of a benefit than the aids in NR2003
>to
>> safety and speed. We need to decide which to allow/disallow, and how to
>> police it if they are not server controllable.

>I say allow them all. Whatever it takes to allow someone to drive cleanly is
>fine with me. As they get better, they will gradually turn them off until
>they are down to what the real drivers use. Less accidents and better
>racing.

In this case, I think the driving aids make you faster instead of slower.  That
gives someone who doesn't want to use TC(for example) a disadvantage over
someone who uses it...

Eldred
--
Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my
homepage)
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

David G Fishe

RASF1 things for us to think about

by David G Fishe » Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:13:46




> >> 3) Driving aids. Can the server decide which aids are allowed? F1 cars
> >have
> >> a much higher performance envelope than stock cars, so it's much more
> >likely
> >> that a driver without aids will end up in the wall at some point <g>. I
> >> think the aids in F1C are much more of a benefit than the aids in
NR2003
> >to
> >> safety and speed. We need to decide which to allow/disallow, and how to
> >> police it if they are not server controllable.

> >I say allow them all. Whatever it takes to allow someone to drive cleanly
is
> >fine with me. As they get better, they will gradually turn them off until
> >they are down to what the real drivers use. Less accidents and better
> >racing.

> In this case, I think the driving aids make you faster instead of slower.
That
> gives someone who doesn't want to use TC(for example) a disadvantage over
> someone who uses it...

> Eldred

Well there's some that must be allowed, like TC because that's what the real
drivers have available to them. If someone doesn't want to use it for
whatever reason, then that's their choice. Auto shifting is another one that
should be allowed. There is some form of auto shifting in the real cars
(plus the ability to override it). A sim wheel would have to have F1 paddle
shifters or you can't shift these cars properly. I have a wonky left paddle
right now on my Ferrari wheel and I don't have a clue how to fix it. Some
times it works, and some times it doesn't. Cut out on me in a RASCAR race a
few races back. I can use the hand shifter with the NASCAR cars of course,
but not with the F1 cars.

Based on what I've seen in RASCAR, and after racing online for six years
now, I'd just rather let people use whatever they need to race cleanly. The
less accidents (and especially the less I get caught up in), the better. I
don't care if it gives them some speed. It won't be enough to let a beginner
or struggling driver beat me, and a better driver most likely won't use
them.

David G fisher

Ped Xin

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Ped Xin » Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:11:11



There are plenty of really fast guys who run with zero aids.  Those guys
are several seconds faster than I can manage using TC-Low, and Auto-
Up/Manual-Down.  I really don't think it's a big advantage to be allowed
those aids.  Some of the other aids would actually make you slower in fact.  
I was really struggling at one point until I found out I accidently had the
Steering Aid-Low enabled.  Oops!

Magnus Svensso

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Magnus Svensso » Mon, 14 Jul 2003 01:26:13



Well, "they" in this instance was basically just Ron Dennis.

Nick

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Nick » Mon, 14 Jul 2003 03:58:46


That was the reason for all the electronic stuff, because some of it was
very well hidden, and damn hard to detect. Traction control is pretty
obvious though, you can't hide it all that well <g>

Haqsa

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Haqsa » Tue, 15 Jul 2003 09:04:39

The way it is currently implemented would certainly be hard to hide, but
there is more than one way to do it.  Using electronic throttle control, for
example.


Magnus Svensso

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Magnus Svensso » Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:13:02



Yep, but is it worthwhile? Effective? It mostly wasn't illegal either,
if you didn't use a wheel sensor, but did a so called "closed loop"
system, which btw I believe is what the MotoGP bikes use right now.
But is it TC or just engine management for driveability?

Haqsa

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Haqsa » Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:40:12

You could certainly argue that anything that doesn't use a wheel sensor
isn't true traction control. Hell, I could argue that short shifting is
traction control.  I could argue that high lift cams are a traction control
device. OTOH we have had Paul Tracy recently saying they had traction
control in CART for several years before it was legal, and nobody noticed.
What were they doing if nobody could tell?  And Booty Barker seems to think
some people in NASCAR have traction conrol.  In both of those cases I
suspect it is really just engine management.  What is actually being used in
F1 today?  What was CART using while it was legal?  Since they talk so much
about having to map the track to get it to work I was under the impression
it fell more under the category of engine management and did not use a wheel
sensor.  Regardless, and getting back to the original subject, I see no
reason why people in RASF1 shouldn't use traction control, regardless of
season.  The aliens have always claimed that they are faster without it, so
what is the harm in letting people have it?


Nick

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Nick » Thu, 24 Jul 2003 04:38:13




> >The way it is currently implemented would certainly be hard to hide, but
> >there is more than one way to do it.  Using electronic throttle control,
for
> >example.

> Yep, but is it worthwhile? Effective? It mostly wasn't illegal either,
> if you didn't use a wheel sensor, but did a so called "closed loop"
> system, which btw I believe is what the MotoGP bikes use right now.
> But is it TC or just engine management for driveability?

Engine mapping has been used in F1 throughout the on/off stuff (1994-). It's
not TC by any stretch of the imagination. TC needs more input than just the
throttle opening.
Magnus Svensso

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Magnus Svensso » Sat, 26 Jul 2003 03:43:33



I wasn't talking about engine mapping, but rather engine management in
the general sense like closed loop TC. The way I understand it closed
loop traction systems that was rumored limited the way the engine
changes rpm i.e. the delta of the rotation speed over time. If the
engine exceeds what it "should" do(on a given gear) you could restrain
it a bit by reducing the throttle(w/drive by wire) to get on the rpm
change rate curve. The response time however is much greater than
"proper" TC with wheel sensors and ignition control, and it is reliant
on doing a _lot_ of finetuning, so that's what I meant by if it was
worthwhile. It's more a way to help limit wild wheelspin than keeping
it on the edge of traction.

Nick

RASF1 things for us to think about

by Nick » Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:24:25


Oh I see what you mean. The problem with using that as a TC system is that
different corners on the same track would require different settings in a
system like that, because things like camber and incline of the track change
the amount of power needed to maintain a given slip ratio. Also, if the car
does get away from the driver a bit, a system like that would prevent him
from keeping the car under control as well as he might under normal
circumstances.

An easier system which would have the same effect as that is to have a
'low-sensitivity zone' (I think that's what they call it in racing sims) on
the throttle in low gears to give the driver more pedal movement, and thus
more accuracy.

So you're right, it's not really as accurate or effective as TC, but it
would work if the driver sneezed and accidentally mashed the throttle <g>

At the end of the day, the drivers are pretty damn good at being their own
TC systems. The real benefit of electronic TC is to stop the rear tyres
becoming smoke so quickly.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.