rec.autos.simulators

by **David Upchurc** » Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:24:53

I'm very tired of getting discoed race after race. Is anyone using
http://www.racesimcentral.net/, or know of anyone using it? I'm on dial up
with no cable or DSL coming anytime soon. I know its slower on uplink, but I
would thiunk its still faster than the modem. Any thoughts folks. Thanks
Daveup

by **Schoone** » Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:28:20

Sat is no good for ***, lag times are way to high.

by **SimRace** » Tue, 21 Jan 2003 03:34:21

> Sat is no good for ***, lag times are way to high.

> > I'm very tired of getting discoed race after race. Is anyone using
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/, or know of anyone using it? I'm on dial up
> > with no cable or DSL coming anytime soon. I know its slower on uplink,
but
> I
> > would thiunk its still faster than the modem. Any thoughts folks. Thanks
> > Daveup

Yup. I tried out NR4 and NR2002 over a sat connection and the pings were
measured in the thousands instead of the hundreds for the servers we could
make show up. Satellite is terrible for anyhting lag sensitive such as
online ***.

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 21 Jan 2003 05:06:23

I was reading about a guy in Denver that solved his broadband issues by
using cheap homemade microwave antennae's daisy chained from his ISP all the
way up his valley. I don't have the article but a goolge search may turn up
something.

Mitch

> > Sat is no good for ***, lag times are way to high.

> > > I'm very tired of getting discoed race after race. Is anyone using
> > > http://www.racesimcentral.net/, or know of anyone using it? I'm on dial
up
> > > with no cable or DSL coming anytime soon. I know its slower on uplink,
> but
> > I
> > > would thiunk its still faster than the modem. Any thoughts folks.
Thanks
> > > Daveup

> Yup. I tried out NR4 and NR2002 over a sat connection and the pings were
> measured in the thousands instead of the hundreds for the servers we could
> make show up. Satellite is terrible for anyhting lag sensitive such as
> online ***.

by **Rich** » Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:18:33

yeah , remember when on SAT your packets are traveling 44,000 miles
upstream and 44,000 miles downstream.. 88,000 miles total... Thats a
long way to gooooooo..

On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:24:53 -0500, "David Upchurch"

>I'm very tired of getting discoed race after race. Is anyone using
>http://directv.direcway.com/, or know of anyone using it? I'm on dial up
>with no cable or DSL coming anytime soon. I know its slower on uplink, but I
>would thiunk its still faster than the modem. Any thoughts folks. Thanks
>Daveup

by **Larr** » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 03:11:31

You need to completely forget about Satellite for online ***. It's a
long way from your house up to that bird, and Satellite latencies measure in
the SECONDS, not milliseconds.

SAT is useless for online ***.

Sorry :(

Larry

by **Larr** » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 03:12:56

"Ride packet Ride upon my Mystery Ship....."

Sorry, felt silly for a second there... :)

Larry

> yeah , remember when on SAT your packets are traveling 44,000 miles
> upstream and 44,000 miles downstream.. 88,000 miles total... Thats a
> long way to gooooooo..

> On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:24:53 -0500, "David Upchurch"

> >I'm very tired of getting discoed race after race. Is anyone using
> >http://directv.direcway.com/, or know of anyone using it? I'm on dial up
> >with no cable or DSL coming anytime soon. I know its slower on uplink,
but I
> >would thiunk its still faster than the modem. Any thoughts folks. Thanks
> >Daveup

rec.autos.simulators

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?

Satellite connection? Anyone use it?