NASCAR motion base simulator

Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like NASCAR Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be interested in your reply. Thank you! Please reply via email at [email hidden] Mark

I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used with all types of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. Mark wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like NASCAR > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > Mark

I agree and that's our plan. We would make it generic where you could fit different shells on it (like NASCAR, aircraft cockpits, etc). The visual system would increase the cost but we could sell it in different packages. Thanks for the reply. Mark andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used with alltypes

Quoted text (7 lines)

> of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. > > To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. > > Mark wrote: > > > Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a

motion > > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims likeNASCAR

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > Mark >

No problem - One thing, though - as far as shells go, you don't see them too much when you're inside.... are you planning on making them functional from inside as well? Or, perhaps consider making them an option, so a "gaming center" could use them to attract customers, but a home user could save a few bucks. Mark wrote:

Quoted text (28 lines)

> I agree and that's our plan. We would make it generic where you could fit > different shells on it (like NASCAR, aircraft cockpits, etc). The visual > system would increase the cost but we could sell it in different packages. > Thanks for the reply. > > Mark > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used with all > types > > of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. > > > > To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. > > > > Mark wrote: > > > > > Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a > motion > > > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like > NASCAR > > > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > > > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > > > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > > > Mark > >

I think if you could sell just a flat base with motors/software, i would only pay 1500.00 ...2500.00 would have to include alot like a plastic body or something extra.. Mark wrote:

Quoted text (28 lines)

> I agree and that's our plan. We would make it generic where you could fit > different shells on it (like NASCAR, aircraft cockpits, etc). The visual > system would increase the cost but we could sell it in different packages. > Thanks for the reply. > > Mark > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used with all > types > > of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. > > > > To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. > > > > Mark wrote: > > > > > Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a > motion > > > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like > NASCAR > > > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > > > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > > > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > > > Mark > >

$1000 US Dollars. I can do alot with my computer......I'd only be using this thing sometimes. "nascarob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I think if you could sell just a flat base with motors/software, i wouldonly

Quoted text (8 lines)

> pay 1500.00 ...2500.00 would have to include alot like a plastic body or > something extra.. > > > > Mark wrote: > > > I agree and that's our plan. We would make it generic where you could

fit > > different shells on it (like NASCAR, aircraft cockpits, etc). Thevisual > > system would increase the cost but we could sell it in differentpackages. > > Thanks for the reply. > > > > Mark > > > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]... > > > I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used withall

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > types > > > of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. > > > > > > To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. > > > > > > Mark wrote: > > > > > > > Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a > > motion > > > > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims

like > > NASCAR > > > > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000,$5,000, > > > > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We wouldbe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > > > > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > > > > > Mark > > > >

But wouldn't having a "motion" simulator be worthless without code being wrote specifically for it in the Sim? Acceleration would tilt the thing back so you have close to 1 G of force on you simulating the acceleration force... Seems to me the Sim/Game would have to be coded for it. Or isn't this the type of thing you're talking about? As far as the Visual system... 160* wrap around would help quite a bit. But again, the Sim/Game would have to have the coding for it. Both sound very good but without Sims that are coded with this in mind, there's no way to put a price on it. If there was a Sim coded for such... Maybe $2000 max. But then again, such a price would be pushing it without a way to gain that back such as Leagues that pay out quite a bit. Just an opinion, Mike Mark wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion >base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims likeNASCAR

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, >$10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be >interested in your reply. Thank you! > >Please reply via email at [email hidden] > >Mark > > >

Exactly The different views have to be in the s/w as well Great idea though What might be better would be a LAN-equipped package that included the frame, seat, wheel & pedals, PC, monitor, a verbal headset, networking, all ready to place in a room, plug in, and get on the LAN, intranet, or internet Would be great for local events, parties, etc in addition to a major LAN event I would pay $2500-3000 for that plus the cost of a trailer to tow it in In fact I may get on some CAD work right away ! Tim Michael Barlow <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:OeMw6.12071$[email hidden]... > But wouldn't having a "motion" simulator be worthless without codebeing > wrote specifically for it in the Sim? Acceleration would tilt the thing > back so you have close to 1 G of force on you simulating the acceleration > force... Seems to me the Sim/Game would have to be coded for it. Orisn't > this the type of thing you're talking about? As far as the Visualsystem... > 160* wrap around would help quite a bit. But again, the Sim/Game wouldhave > to have the coding for it. > > Both sound very good but without Sims that are coded with this inmind, > there's no way to put a price on it. If there was a Sim coded for such... > Maybe $2000 max. But then again, such a price would be pushing it withouta

Quoted text (22 lines)

> way to gain that back such as Leagues that pay out quite a bit. > > Just an opinion, > Mike > > > Mark wrote in message <[email hidden]>... > >Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion > >base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like > NASCAR > >Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > >$10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > >interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > >Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > >Mark > > > > > > > >

Mike, There would be a program written for each off-the-shelf sim which would interpret the data coming out of the sim into the motion-platform. That way you could use any sim package that we have a program for. We don't want to write proprietary sims for our motion platform, in order to keep the cost down. Extracting the data out of the sims is pretty easy. The top motion sims are way too expensive and too big for home use. And some of the lower end motion sims aren't that impressive and can't take the data from the sim (only works by joystick movements). What we want to do is design a motion sim that would really shake you around and simulate G-forces, crashes, etc, and to make it where you could use it for planes, cars, etc. But we've got NASCAR sims as our main focus. But so far not many people in this survey are willing to pay over $2,500 which could make this project quite a challenge. If we can put together a motion base system at a fair cost for the consumer then we could offer several packages. For instance, package A would be just the motion platform, package B would be motion and a 90 degree visual system, package C would be the motion platform plus a 120 degree visual system, etc. That way you only buy what you can afford and always upgrade later. Comments? Mark Michael Barlow <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:OeMw6.12071$[email hidden]... > But wouldn't having a "motion" simulator be worthless without codebeing > wrote specifically for it in the Sim? Acceleration would tilt the thing > back so you have close to 1 G of force on you simulating the acceleration > force... Seems to me the Sim/Game would have to be coded for it. Orisn't > this the type of thing you're talking about? As far as the Visualsystem... > 160* wrap around would help quite a bit. But again, the Sim/Game wouldhave > to have the coding for it. > > Both sound very good but without Sims that are coded with this inmind, > there's no way to put a price on it. If there was a Sim coded for such... > Maybe $2000 max. But then again, such a price would be pushing it withouta

Quoted text (22 lines)

> way to gain that back such as Leagues that pay out quite a bit. > > Just an opinion, > Mike > > > Mark wrote in message <[email hidden]>... > >Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion > >base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like > NASCAR > >Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > >$10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > >interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > >Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > >Mark > > > > > > > >

To keep the cost down we probably wouldn't design a NASCAR body but a generic shell which would be enclosed anyway. What we are trying to do is make you feel like you're in the car driving and so aesthetics is meaningless. Mark nascarob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I think if you could sell just a flat base with motors/software, i wouldonly

Quoted text (8 lines)

> pay 1500.00 ...2500.00 would have to include alot like a plastic body or > something extra.. > > > > Mark wrote: > > > I agree and that's our plan. We would make it generic where you could

fit > > different shells on it (like NASCAR, aircraft cockpits, etc). Thevisual > > system would increase the cost but we could sell it in differentpackages. > > Thanks for the reply. > > > > Mark > > > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]... > > > I think if you made a *generic* motion base so it could be used withall

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > types > > > of stuff, its inherent value would increase exponentially. > > > > > > To answer you question, $2500. I'm a cheapskate. > > > > > > Mark wrote: > > > > > > > Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a > > motion > > > > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims

like > > NASCAR > > > > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000,$5,000, > > > > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We wouldbe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > > > > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > > > > > Mark > > > >

How about this - Lightweight VR Headwear - easy on the wallet, easy on the platform, no monitors to shake around.... virtual 360�... Mark wrote:

Quoted text (64 lines)

> Mike, > > There would be a program written for each off-the-shelf sim which would > interpret the data coming out of the sim into the motion-platform. That way > you could use any sim package that we have a program for. We don't want to > write proprietary sims for our motion platform, in order to keep the cost > down. Extracting the data out of the sims is pretty easy. The top motion > sims are way too expensive and too big for home use. And some of the lower > end motion sims aren't that impressive and can't take the data from the sim > (only works by joystick movements). What we want to do is design a motion > sim that would really shake you around and simulate G-forces, crashes, etc, > and to make it where you could use it for planes, cars, etc. But we've got > NASCAR sims as our main focus. But so far not many people in this survey > are willing to pay over $2,500 which could make this project quite a > challenge. If we can put together a motion base system at a fair cost for > the consumer then we could offer several packages. For instance, package A > would be just the motion platform, package B would be motion and a 90 degree > visual system, package C would be the motion platform plus a 120 degree > visual system, etc. That way you only buy what you can afford and always > upgrade later. Comments? > > Mark > > Michael Barlow <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:OeMw6.12071$[email hidden]... > > But wouldn't having a "motion" simulator be worthless without code > being > > wrote specifically for it in the Sim? Acceleration would tilt the thing > > back so you have close to 1 G of force on you simulating the acceleration > > force... Seems to me the Sim/Game would have to be coded for it. Or > isn't > > this the type of thing you're talking about? As far as the Visual > system... > > 160* wrap around would help quite a bit. But again, the Sim/Game would > have > > to have the coding for it. > > > > Both sound very good but without Sims that are coded with this in > mind, > > there's no way to put a price on it. If there was a Sim coded for such... > > Maybe $2000 max. But then again, such a price would be pushing it without > a > > way to gain that back such as Leagues that pay out quite a bit. > > > > Just an opinion, > > Mike > > > > > > Mark wrote in message <[email hidden]>... > > >Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion > > >base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like > > NASCAR > > >Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > > >$10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > > >interested in your reply. Thank you! > > > > > >Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Mark, I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. Thanks, Randy On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:07:57 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote: <snip> >... Extracting the data out of the sims is pretty easy....

Randy, in short, you basically intercept the data from the port into another computer which is receiving the data. Then you dissect the data in the packets and determine which data bits are speed, position, altitude, etc. Mark Randy Riggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Mark, > > I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm > saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. > > Thanks, > Randy > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:07:57 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > <snip> > >... Extracting the data out of the sims is pretty easy....

Mark, What data port are you talking about? The only port I can imagine is a multiplayer port and this would of course be a seriously limiting way to get at the data since it's not always active and would have a very slow update rate -- relative to the game engine anyway. Am I missing something? Would you care to elaborate further, please. Thanks taking the time ;-) Randy On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:13:54 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>Randy, in short, you basically intercept the data from the port into another >computer which is receiving the data. Then you dissect the data in the >packets and determine which data bits are speed, position, altitude, etc. > >Mark > >Randy Riggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Mark, >> >> I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm >> saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. >> >> Thanks, >> Randy

FYI, x-plane is set up to dump data to motion platform drivers. There are standards, I think. Randy Riggs wrote:

Quoted text (29 lines)

> Mark, > > What data port are you talking about? The only port I can imagine is a > multiplayer port and this would of course be a seriously limiting way > to get at the data since it's not always active and would have a very > slow update rate -- relative to the game engine anyway. > > Am I missing something? Would you care to elaborate further, please. > > Thanks taking the time ;-) > Randy > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:13:54 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Randy, in short, you basically intercept the data from the port into another > >computer which is receiving the data. Then you dissect the data in the > >packets and determine which data bits are speed, position, altitude, etc. > > > >Mark > > > >Randy Riggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> Mark, > >> > >> I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm > >> saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Randy

Wasn't there already a hydraulic chair that actuated based on joystick inputs? i.e. you pressed the brake pedal and the chair would pitch forward...hit the gas and the chair tilted back... $600 seems to be a price that I remember for that simple device....but I could be waaaay off base. dave henrie "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> FYI, x-plane is set up to dump data to motion platform drivers. > > There are standards, I think. > > Randy Riggs wrote: > > > Mark, > > > > What data port are you talking about? The only port I can imagine is a > > multiplayer port and this would of course be a seriously limiting way > > to get at the data since it's not always active and would have a very > > slow update rate -- relative to the game engine anyway. > > > > Am I missing something? Would you care to elaborate further, please. > > > > Thanks taking the time ;-) > > Randy > > > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:13:54 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Randy, in short, you basically intercept the data from the port into

another > > >computer which is receiving the data. Then you dissect the data in the > > >packets and determine which data bits are speed, position, altitude,etc.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > > >Mark > > > > > >Randy Riggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > >news:[email hidden]... > > >> Mark, > > >> > > >> I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm > > >> saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Randy >

Hi Andrew, No doubt if the software was setup to broadcast g and attitude info then getting at the data is easy. I thought Mike was saying he was planning on getting it from current sims. Randy On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 01:18:51 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: >FYI, x-plane is set up to dump data to motion platform drivers. > >There are standards, I think. >

Do you mean that you packet sniff during a multiplayer game and try to crack the packet format? I suppose that would work in our "fat packet" mode... I don't know what kind of latency you would have, so maybe only getting 10 or 15 updates a second wouldn't be noticeable, unless your actuators can really move the cockpit around in an instant. We actually put in a hook for a custom telemetry .DLL into the Heat patch for some engineering students that are working on a motion base for a project... one could make a DLL that would translate to any other format pretty easily, since we send out all the orientation, velocity, rpm, etc with no latency. It would be nice if this were all standardized, though... If you want info on this, Mark, feel free to drop me a line. -Dave Pollatsek "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> FYI, x-plane is set up to dump data to motion platform drivers. > > There are standards, I think. > > Randy Riggs wrote: > > > Mark, > > > > What data port are you talking about? The only port I can imagine is a > > multiplayer port and this would of course be a seriously limiting way > > to get at the data since it's not always active and would have a very > > slow update rate -- relative to the game engine anyway. > > > > Am I missing something? Would you care to elaborate further, please. > > > > Thanks taking the time ;-) > > Randy > > > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:13:54 -0600, "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Randy, in short, you basically intercept the data from the port into

another > > >computer which is receiving the data. Then you dissect the data in the > > >packets and determine which data bits are speed, position, altitude,etc.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > > >Mark > > > > > >Randy Riggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > >news:[email hidden]... > > >> Mark, > > >> > > >> I'm curious, would you describe how you plan to do this? Not that I'm > > >> saying you can't, I just wonder how you'd go about it. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Randy >

Dave W. from PeriSoft was on Track Talk tonight and gave us an update on his Gforce hydraulic simulater. Basically the same thing you were talking about trying to get prices for.

RU NUTZ? (Don't gimme NOCRAP in E-mail)

If I spent $2500.00 on something like that my wife would spend that much again to have me shot. Mike

Tell her I'll do it for $1250, then she can buy more shoes :) j/k "Race1530" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If I spent $2500.00 on something like that my wife would spend that muchagain > to have me shot. > > Mike >

[email hidden] (Race1530) wrote: >If I spent $2500.00 on something like that my wife would spend that much again >to have me shot. Well then you're ahead of the game aren't you? The bank account would be dry. ;-) Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

Mark wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > Mike, > > There would be a program written for each off-the-shelf sim which would > interpret the data coming out of the sim into the motion-platform. That way > you could use any sim package that we have a program for. We don't want to > write proprietary sims for our motion platform, in order to keep the cost > down. Extracting the data out of the sims is pretty easy. The top motion > sims are way too expensive and too big for home use. And some of the lower > end motion sims aren't that impressive and can't take the data from the sim > (only works by joystick movements). What we want to do is design a motion > sim that would really shake you around and simulate G-forces, crashes, etc, > and to make it where you could use it for planes, cars, etc. But we've got > NASCAR sims as our main focus. But so far not many people in this survey > are willing to pay over $2,500 which could make this project quite a > challenge. If we can put together a motion base system at a fair cost for > the consumer then we could offer several packages. For instance, package A > would be just the motion platform, package B would be motion and a 90 degree > visual system, package C would be the motion platform plus a 120 degree > visual system, etc. That way you only buy what you can afford and always > upgrade later. Comments? > > Mark

Can you tell me how this would differ from NASCAR Silicon Motor Speedway (http://www.smsonline.com)? It's a great idea, I'm just wondering if you're planning to offer any additional features.

> Can you tell me how this would differ from NASCAR Silicon Motor Speedway > (http://www.smsonline.com)? It's a great idea, I'm just wondering if > you're planning to offer any additional features. SMS was our inspiration. If you're racing as much as we are at SMS you'll pay for our sim in a short time. If you want SMS in your home it would cost $100k. If our project works we can do it for under $5k easily (maybe much less). Plus your wife would love it that you're racing at home and not at SMS! Imagine having a motion NASCAR sim at home! Mark

SMS so totally sucks Great idea gone horribly bad 4 tracks, 3 have a drafting model only the shuttle should use And after all the promising 6 months later still no Bristol I hear their 'fix' to drafting at Daytona was a rule that the lead 3 cars must break draft when running up front ! Gawd what a waist Mark <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ac4bf76$[email hidden]... > SMS was our inspiration. If you're racing as much as we are at SMS you'll > pay for our sim in a short time. If you want SMS in your home it wouldcost > $100k. If our project works we can do it for under $5k easily (maybe much > less). Plus your wife would love it that you're racing at home and not at > SMS! Imagine having a motion NASCAR sim at home!

To avoid tossing the monitors around and make it virtual 360�. How much would the cost be of a >good< comfortable headset be vs. monitors and hardware, plus mounts? Don't forget the wear on the motors and hydraulics. Mark wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Just curious -- what's the most would you be willing to spend on a motion > base NASCAR simulator for your home that uses off the shelf sims like NASCAR > Heat and would use your PC as the visual system? About $2,000, $5,000, > $10,000? What about with a 120-160 degree visual system? We would be > interested in your reply. Thank you! > > Please reply via email at [email hidden] > > Mark

The down side I can quickly see in the case of N4 is when you've stripped a gear or blown both rear tires. All of the inputs say you should be accelerating, but you aren't. The simulated g-forces in that example would be wrong. "Tim O" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > Didn't realize someone had posted basically the same things as I did > until after I replied to your message. Sorry about that! > > Tim > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:48:27 -0800, Tim O <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >How about making the cockpit operate it from the motion units own > >inputs rather than a games outputs? > >The unit would tip back when it's gas pedal was pushed, forward when > >the brake was pushed, and tip opposite the way the wheel is turned. > >The downside to this is that having this setup would basically make it > >specific to either driving or flying sims. > >I suppose there could be some type of "loop through" for USB > >controllers as a workaround for this, but I don't know much about > >this, and should probably shut up. :-) > > > >Tim > >

How about making the cockpit operate it from the motion units own inputs rather than a games outputs? The unit would tip back when it's gas pedal was pushed, forward when the brake was pushed, and tip opposite the way the wheel is turned. The downside to this is that having this setup would basically make it specific to either driving or flying sims. I suppose there could be some type of "loop through" for USB controllers as a workaround for this, but I don't know much about this, and should probably shut up. :-) Tim On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 19:42:38 GMT, "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> But wouldn't having a "motion" simulator be worthless without code being >wrote specifically for it in the Sim? Acceleration would tilt the thing >back so you have close to 1 G of force on you simulating the acceleration >force... Seems to me the Sim/Game would have to be coded for it. Or isn't >this the type of thing you're talking about? As far as the Visual system... >160* wrap around would help quite a bit. But again, the Sim/Game would have >to have the coding for it. > > Both sound very good but without Sims that are coded with this in mind, >there's no way to put a price on it. If there was a Sim coded for such... >Maybe $2000 max. But then again, such a price would be pushing it without a >way to gain that back such as Leagues that pay out quite a bit. > >Just an opinion, >Mike

Didn't realize someone had posted basically the same things as I did until after I replied to your message. Sorry about that! Tim On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:48:27 -0800, Tim O <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >How about making the cockpit operate it from the motion units own >inputs rather than a games outputs? >The unit would tip back when it's gas pedal was pushed, forward when >the brake was pushed, and tip opposite the way the wheel is turned. >The downside to this is that having this setup would basically make it >specific to either driving or flying sims. >I suppose there could be some type of "loop through" for USB >controllers as a workaround for this, but I don't know much about >this, and should probably shut up. :-) > >Tim

No, no, no. Both, silly! Both! Both, I say! For the love of all things simulated, both! 8 ) Tim O wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I understand what you're saying, but I'd prefer a full motion cockpit > to headset immersion. All a VR headset is going to do is fill your > field of vision. > > Tim > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:37:22 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >To avoid tossing the monitors around and make it virtual 360�. > > > >How much would the cost be of a >good< comfortable headset be vs. monitors and > >hardware, plus mounts? > > > >Don't forget the wear on the motors and hydraulics.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 01:17:52 GMT, "Mike White" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The down side I can quickly see in the case of N4 is when you've stripped a >gear or blown both rear tires. All of the inputs say you should be >accelerating, but you aren't. The simulated g-forces in that example would >be wrong. Very true. Since this thread seemed to be heading along the lines of a "value" motion simulator, my solution seemed cheap. Definitely not ideal, though. Tim

I understand what you're saying, but I'd prefer a full motion cockpit to headset immersion. All a VR headset is going to do is fill your field of vision. Tim On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:37:22 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: >To avoid tossing the monitors around and make it virtual 360�. > >How much would the cost be of a >good< comfortable headset be vs. monitors and >hardware, plus mounts? > >Don't forget the wear on the motors and hydraulics.

Our sim will handle all of the NASCAR handling qualities to simulate any blown tire, skidding, braking, even the engine vibration, etc. If we can't simulate the NASCAR realism and shake you around like the real thing then we won't do it! Mark Mike White <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4fax6.11208$[email hidden]... > The down side I can quickly see in the case of N4 is when you've strippeda > gear or blown both rear tires. All of the inputs say you should be > accelerating, but you aren't. The simulated g-forces in that examplewould

Quoted text (29 lines)

> be wrong. > > > "Tim O" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Didn't realize someone had posted basically the same things as I did > > until after I replied to your message. Sorry about that! > > > > Tim > > > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:48:27 -0800, Tim O <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > >How about making the cockpit operate it from the motion units own > > >inputs rather than a games outputs? > > >The unit would tip back when it's gas pedal was pushed, forward when > > >the brake was pushed, and tip opposite the way the wheel is turned. > > >The downside to this is that having this setup would basically make it > > >specific to either driving or flying sims. > > >I suppose there could be some type of "loop through" for USB > > >controllers as a workaround for this, but I don't know much about > > >this, and should probably shut up. :-) > > > > > >Tim > > > > > >