Ballracing and Bulldozer

I've just been looking at BRD http://www.interactiveracing.com/ And under 'Services' 'Race Track Design' there's a couple of interesting pictures of what is supposed to be the 'Bulldozer' technology we've heard so much about. To quote BRD: "Taking simulation into the 21st Century. This product developed by our partners in the US is a system that will allow race track designers to see their track designs in a full dynamic 3D racing simulation package. It will allow them to test under countless different conditions the performance of the proposed new circuit or proposed modification to an existing circuit. It will further permit them to simulate the performance of any type of vehicle on the track under race conditions." "Bulldozer is not a passive simulation, it is fully interactive and dynamic. You will be able to interact completely with your new virtual circuit and through the use of high end simulator hardware you will be able to get a good feel for the performance of the track before a single ounce of dirt is moved." All sounds very interesting, until you download the images and run them through Paint Shop Pro! Because they are, in fact, just negative photos of IMS! What's going on!? BRD putting doctored images on their web sit, and passing them off as some kind of 21st century simulator! I wonder, is there ANYONE here who can explain? <VBG> Gerry

Seems to me like a driving sim is a dumb way to generate speed data for an unbuilt track (to design runoff areas and barriers)--first you have to learn the track, then hot-lap on it. And then go through all that learning again every time you change the track design. Might be a lot of fun, but not very productive<grin>. Lap time simulation programs have been around for a long time[*] and they include a "driver model" that just blazes around as fast as it can (given suitable data to define car/tire/aero)...no human driving skills required. We have actually done this kind of simulation for a number of race tracks before they were built. Going back before my time it was even done for Lime Rock and Watkins Glen in the 1950's and 1960's (back then it was done with slide rules!) I've heard that the FIA also has their own program like this, to look at different circuits and maybe even check what effects different rules changes might have on the cars. Yet another shameless plug: [*] Short history of this type of program starting on page 340 of "Race Car Vehicle Dynamics" -- www.millikenresearch.com, under "Books". -- Doug Milliken On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Gerry Aitken wrote:

Quoted text (36 lines)

> I've just been looking at BRD > > http://www.interactiveracing.com/ > > And under 'Services' 'Race Track Design' there's a couple of interesting > pictures of what is supposed to be the 'Bulldozer' technology we've > heard so much about. > > To quote BRD: > > "Taking simulation into the 21st Century. This product developed by our > partners in the US is a system that will allow race track designers to > see their track designs in a full dynamic 3D racing simulation package. > It will allow them to test under countless different conditions the > performance of the proposed new circuit or proposed modification to an > existing circuit. It will further permit them to simulate the > performance of any type of vehicle on the track under race conditions." > > "Bulldozer is not a passive simulation, it is fully interactive and > dynamic. You will be able to interact completely with your new virtual > circuit and through the use of high end simulator hardware you will be > able to get a good feel for the performance of the track before a single > ounce of dirt is moved." > > All sounds very interesting, until you download the images and run them > through Paint Shop Pro! Because they are, in fact, just negative photos > of IMS! > > What's going on!? BRD putting doctored images on their web sit, and > passing them off as some kind of 21st century simulator! > > I wonder, is there ANYONE here who can explain? <VBG> > > Gerry > >

"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > just negative photos of IMS! Looks like Rockingham, UK to me. Infact I'm certain it is - thats the Rockingham building not quite finished - and the T1 Chicane if you're using a roadcourse layout Doug

$50 says those are infact "inverted" pictures of Rockingham in the UK. LMAO! -- ed_

Douglas Ellison wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > just negative photos of IMS! > > Looks like Rockingham, UK to me. > > Infact I'm certain it is - thats the Rockingham building not quite > finished - and the T1 Chicane if you're using a roadcourse layout

You're quite right, it was late when I looked. But why are they negative? When you read the text and look at the picture you are given the impression that these are screen grabs from Bulldozer. That's what I thought they were. I feel I've been misled. Gerry

Ed Solheim wrote: > $50 says those are infact "inverted" pictures of Rockingham in the UK. Must have been the fact BRD wrote: > Taking simulation into the 21st Century. > This product developed by our partners.... And then put what looked like a computer generated image next to the text! Very misleading information. Gerry

Read: "a scam". Very professional - wouldnt you say... -- ed_ "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Ed Solheim wrote: > > > $50 says those are infact "inverted" pictures of Rockingham in the UK. > > Must have been the fact BRD wrote: > > > Taking simulation into the 21st Century. > > This product developed by our partners.... > > And then put what looked like a computer generated image next to the > text! > > Very misleading information. > > Gerry

Ed Solheim wrote: > > Read: "a scam". > > Very professional - wouldnt you say... > Well I spotted it, so I'd stick an 'un' between 'very' and 'professional' because if a dingbat like me can spot it! :) And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't of been for those pesky... Gerry

Ooops.... my bad... I was, ofcourse, trying to say that it is very UN-professional. -- ed_ "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Ed Solheim wrote: > > > > Read: "a scam". > > > > Very professional - wouldnt you say... > > > > Well I spotted it, so I'd stick an 'un' between 'very' and > 'professional' because if a dingbat like me can spot it! :) > > And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't of been for those > pesky... > > Gerry

In article <[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> writes: >Ooops.... my bad... > >I was, ofcourse, trying to say that it is very UN-professional. > I just thought you were being sarcastic...<g> Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.