A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Simulators
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

IRacing Pricing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old March 11th 08, 10:47 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Bart Westra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default IRacing Pricing


"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
>I disagree; I would say that the sensation of speed actually *is* one of the
>aspects of racing that may be simulated properly.
>
> What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
> things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter, you
> feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings" any day,
> and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent sound system.
>
> You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the car
> on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out there have
> no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems from a lack of
> sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly great racing driver
> must also have a musical sense...
>
> A novice driver with no fear for his life would go too fast in RL too,
> because the skill to read speed comes with practice, practice, practice.
> Judging speed is one of the key factors of becoming a racing driver, and it
> is the key to race simulations well, too.
>
> However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the details of
> the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has improved this in
> the front axis area, but this is still the main problem and shortcoming of a
> sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read what takes place at the
> rear end of my cars.
>
> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be simulated
> per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull connector to simulate
> that.


Wouldn't a simple way be to have some G-meters on the dashboard? Like what the
rev meter does for speed?
And in the sound department, the sqeal of a slipping tire can help to assess
(loss of) grip. I used to turn the relative volume for sqealing up for this
reason in GPx.

Bart


Ads
  #112  
Old March 11th 08, 11:32 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Tony R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default IRacing Pricing

Bart Westra wrote:

>> However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the details of
>> the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has improved this in
>> the front axis area, but this is still the main problem and shortcoming of a
>> sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read what takes place at the
>> rear end of my cars.
>>
>> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be simulated
>> per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull connector to simulate
>> that.

>
> Wouldn't a simple way be to have some G-meters on the dashboard? Like what the
> rev meter does for speed?
> And in the sound department, the sqeal of a slipping tire can help to assess
> (loss of) grip. I used to turn the relative volume for sqealing up for this
> reason in GPx.


In my view for a sim to work you have to "feel" it. For me this is
primarily graphically. FFB adds to immersion rather than giving really
useful feedback what the car is doing. Once tuned in to the graphics the
seat of the pants feel comes to play by how the car rotates. It takes
time though which is why most novices can't get any sensation of a car
moving underneath them.

The audio adds to the sensation of speed but again for me this is
primarily graphically fed. That "woah" feeling as you go that bit faster
through a corner. Bumps help to add to the speed sensation.

It needs to be feeling too fast to look at g-force meters in my view...

Cheers
Tony
  #113  
Old March 12th 08, 05:12 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
alexti[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default IRacing Pricing

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:41 +0100, Asgeir Nesoen wrote:

> I disagree; I would say that the sensation of speed actually *is* one of
> the aspects of racing that may be simulated properly.
>
> What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
> things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter,
> you feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings"
> any day, and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent
> sound system.
>
> You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the
> car on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out
> there have no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems
> from a lack of sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly
> great racing driver must also have a musical sense...

I wonder how well you can really judge the speed by the sound. It seems
to work well at low speeds, but at high speeds it's much more difficult.
Human ear apparently has logarithmic sensitivity to the frequency, but
the speed depends on revs linearly. For example, there's about 1000
difference between C# and D in 11th octave. That's about 6%. Considering
that good musician can likely tell about half of variation, that 3%. At
300km/h it's 9km/h. Not too bad, but probably not good enough for driving
at the top level. And that's assuming that one is in perfect environment
for listening. Driving sim without sound is kind of strange, I felt
uncomfortable without it, but I could go at practically the same speed as
with the sound.

In a sense, I'm not sure that feeling the speed is even important. It's
not like it's written at every corner at what speed it should be taken. I
think it's more of a judgement of the rate of change of the angle of your
viewpoint in comparison to the curvature of the turn. It sounds kind of
weird, but one can drive the track he has never seen quite fast and in
this case knowing one's speed doesn't help one much.

> A novice driver with no fear for his life would go too fast in RL too,
> because the skill to read speed comes with practice, practice, practice.
> Judging speed is one of the key factors of becoming a racing driver, and
> it is the key to race simulations well, too.
>
> However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the
> details of the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has
> improved this in the front axis area, but this is still the main problem
> and shortcoming of a sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read
> what takes place at the rear end of my cars.

And in real live you don't even know how much traction will be in the
coming corner (and by the time you arrive there it may be too late) - it
mostly comes from experience in recognising what you see (probably it's
more applicable to rallying than to track racing, where the traction
rarely changes dramatically).
>
> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
> simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
> connector to simulate that.

I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.
  #114  
Old March 14th 08, 03:43 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Asgeir Nesoen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default IRacing Pricing

Well, I disagree on a number of points, but I'll start with a field of
which I know a lot, namely recognizing minute changes in pitch.

I play several instruments, and I'd say I would be able to "hear", or
"regocnize" a change of a 20th of a seminote, or 10 times more sensitive
than you presume. If you're trained (piano tuners, organ tuners) or with
"perfect pitch" sense, you'll be able to recognize maybe a change of a
50th of a seminote.

You would, in a race care hear the "rate of change" in pitch more than
"aboslute pitch", and a normally musical ear will draw massive info from
a changing engine "tone". You would not translate pitch to speed, but
you'd translate rate of change to speed.

It is difficult to describe engine noise as frequency, since you hear
overtones of the base frequency. An engine with 12000 revs/min equals a
base frequency of 200hz, 20 hz lower than the "little a" of 220 hz. This
area is by far the most sensitive area of an ear, and we would have the
most resolution in this area. Our ears are most sensitive in the
"speech" frequencies.

If you make these assumptions, you'd come up with a hugely effective
instrument for speed reading. If you don't go faster with sound than
without, you need to practice your ear. One way to do this is to stick a
piece of carton over your in-car rev meter, so that the only input in
the speed dept would be the sound, and you would HAVE to use your ear.

With practice you will be able to judge your speed accurately to 1 or 2
km/h, and this would be a perfect tool for racing. You would not be able
to say "I'm now running down the straight at 301km/h", but you would be
able to say "I'm now running at 3kmh slower than my target speed at this
point". Again, not an absolute reading of speed, but a very good
relative reading of your speed.

And you're right: Grip is changing all the time, and this is where a
real car would give you heaps of info, but the sim gives you very
little. This is probably why it is hard to push very hard on a sim car,
because you only get sound from tires, and no G-pull, no vibration. In
real life you would also get much more info from the tyre screech than
in a sim, since the sound will accurately describe what happens with a tyre.

---A---

On 12.03.2008 05:12, * alexti wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:41 +0100, Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
>
>> I disagree; I would say that the sensation of speed actually *is* one of
>> the aspects of racing that may be simulated properly.
>>
>> What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
>> things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter,
>> you feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings"
>> any day, and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent
>> sound system.
>>
>> You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the
>> car on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out
>> there have no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems
>> from a lack of sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly
>> great racing driver must also have a musical sense...

> I wonder how well you can really judge the speed by the sound. It seems
> to work well at low speeds, but at high speeds it's much more difficult.
> Human ear apparently has logarithmic sensitivity to the frequency, but
> the speed depends on revs linearly. For example, there's about 1000
> difference between C# and D in 11th octave. That's about 6%. Considering
> that good musician can likely tell about half of variation, that 3%. At
> 300km/h it's 9km/h. Not too bad, but probably not good enough for driving
> at the top level. And that's assuming that one is in perfect environment
> for listening. Driving sim without sound is kind of strange, I felt
> uncomfortable without it, but I could go at practically the same speed as
> with the sound.
>
> In a sense, I'm not sure that feeling the speed is even important. It's
> not like it's written at every corner at what speed it should be taken. I
> think it's more of a judgement of the rate of change of the angle of your
> viewpoint in comparison to the curvature of the turn. It sounds kind of
> weird, but one can drive the track he has never seen quite fast and in
> this case knowing one's speed doesn't help one much.
>
>> A novice driver with no fear for his life would go too fast in RL too,
>> because the skill to read speed comes with practice, practice, practice.
>> Judging speed is one of the key factors of becoming a racing driver, and
>> it is the key to race simulations well, too.
>>
>> However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the
>> details of the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has
>> improved this in the front axis area, but this is still the main problem
>> and shortcoming of a sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read
>> what takes place at the rear end of my cars.

> And in real live you don't even know how much traction will be in the
> coming corner (and by the time you arrive there it may be too late) - it
> mostly comes from experience in recognising what you see (probably it's
> more applicable to rallying than to track racing, where the traction
> rarely changes dramatically).
>> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
>> simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
>> connector to simulate that.

> I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
> on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
> it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.

  #115  
Old March 14th 08, 08:12 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 239
Default IRacing Pricing

On Mar 12, 12:12*am, alexti > wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:41 +0100, Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
>
> > All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
> > simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
> > connector to simulate that.

>
> I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
> on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
> it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.



I would guess that for race driving the vast majority of G-force
sensing occurs through tactile pressure on the driver's body, and very
little of the 'inner-ear' acceleration sensing comes into play. I
believe I've read studies to that effect, but can't site them off the
top of my head.

You can test it yourself next time you are driving your street car.
Pay attention to how much you feel small changes in lateral G's on
your body. I can feel changes in body sensations well below where I
think my inner sense of balance comes into play.

In fact, though, it's not always 'seat-of-the-pants' feedback that you
are getting. At low G's you actually get more sensation in your back
as your upper body is pulled sideways. In my experience I don't start
feeling much sensation in the seat until reaching higher G's. This
concept is integrated into the response curves of my GS-3 motion seat.

Pat Dotson
UltraForce Simulations LLC
http://www.ultraforcesim.com

  #116  
Old March 15th 08, 03:55 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
GaryR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 90
Default IRacing Pricing

New news..

http://www.iracing.com/news.htm


>On 14 Feb 2008 20:03:25 +0100, Uwe Schürkamp > wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:28:48 +0100, Jan Verschueren wrote:
>> "Backspace" wrote...
>>>> <snip>
>>> Don't try to BS me. Ask Jackie Stewart what he thinks of GPL
>>> for the real facts.

>>
>> I wouldn't dream of BS'ing you. Jackie Stewart indeed didn't like GPL '67
>> when he tried it. People who're used to driving real racecars are missing a

>
>His dislike may have been influenced by the fact that he tried it using
>a gamepad and not a decent set of wheel and pedals as I seem to recall,
>so all kinds of driving aids would have influenced the experience.
>
>Cheers, uwe


  #117  
Old March 15th 08, 05:39 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
alexti[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default IRacing Pricing

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:43:59 +0100, Asgeir Nesoen wrote:

> Well, I disagree on a number of points, but I'll start with a field of
> which I know a lot, namely recognizing minute changes in pitch.
>
> I play several instruments, and I'd say I would be able to "hear", or
> "regocnize" a change of a 20th of a seminote, or 10 times more sensitive
> than you presume. If you're trained (piano tuners, organ tuners) or with
> "perfect pitch" sense, you'll be able to recognize maybe a change of a
> 50th of a seminote.
>
> You would, in a race care hear the "rate of change" in pitch more than
> "aboslute pitch", and a normally musical ear will draw massive info from
> a changing engine "tone". You would not translate pitch to speed, but
> you'd translate rate of change to speed.
>
> It is difficult to describe engine noise as frequency, since you hear
> overtones of the base frequency. An engine with 12000 revs/min equals a
> base frequency of 200hz, 20 hz lower than the "little a" of 220 hz. This
> area is by far the most sensitive area of an ear, and we would have the
> most resolution in this area. Our ears are most sensitive in the
> "speech" frequencies.

Oops, now I see a fatal flaw in my argument. Of course, being
scientifically minded I've optimistically assumed that the engine revving
at 18000 makes 18000 rotations per second = 18 kHz, but simple reality
check confirms that automotive technology is still in the stone age I
agree with your estimate of ear sensitivity at 200Hz range. In fact, it's
probably even easier to tell the difference because of 2x and 4x waves.
That's very unlike 18kHz range where overtones are out of the range.

>
> If you make these assumptions, you'd come up with a hugely effective
> instrument for speed reading. If you don't go faster with sound than
> without, you need to practice your ear. One way to do this is to stick a
> piece of carton over your in-car rev meter, so that the only input in
> the speed dept would be the sound, and you would HAVE to use your ear.
>
> With practice you will be able to judge your speed accurately to 1 or 2
> km/h, and this would be a perfect tool for racing. You would not be able
> to say "I'm now running down the straight at 301km/h", but you would be
> able to say "I'm now running at 3kmh slower than my target speed at this
> point". Again, not an absolute reading of speed, but a very good
> relative reading of your speed.
>
> And you're right: Grip is changing all the time, and this is where a
> real car would give you heaps of info, but the sim gives you very
> little.

Yes and no. In the sims you usually have a lot of information about the
grip if you've already run through that spot before (or typically just
run on the same surface), but in the real car you have to guess amount of
traction purely from the visuals. Of course, you get much more info when
you actually get there, but by that time it may be too late. That
probably makes most people to leave much healthier margin of error when
driving the real car.

> This is probably why it is hard to push very hard on a sim car,
> because you only get sound from tires, and no G-pull, no vibration. In
> real life you would also get much more info from the tyre screech than
> in a sim, since the sound will accurately describe what happens with a
> tyre.

I wonder if you can hear tyre screech in something like F1 car. That
engine must be making a lot of noise...

  #118  
Old March 15th 08, 05:44 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
alexti[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default IRacing Pricing

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:12:36 -0700, pdotson wrote:

> On Mar 12, 12:12Â*am, alexti > wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:41 +0100, Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
>>
>> > All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
>> > simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
>> > connector to simulate that.

>>
>> I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the
>> pressure on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated
>> relatively easily - it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.

>
>
> I would guess that for race driving the vast majority of G-force sensing
> occurs through tactile pressure on the driver's body, and very little of
> the 'inner-ear' acceleration sensing comes into play. I believe I've
> read studies to that effect, but can't site them off the top of my head.
>
> You can test it yourself next time you are driving your street car. Pay
> attention to how much you feel small changes in lateral G's on your
> body. I can feel changes in body sensations well below where I think my
> inner sense of balance comes into play.

I'm not certain how to filer out inner sense of balance. Normally, those
two kind of perception seems to be tightly integrated.

> In fact, though, it's not always 'seat-of-the-pants' feedback that you
> are getting. At low G's you actually get more sensation in your back as
> your upper body is pulled sideways.

You're certainly right about that as far as street cars are concerned.
This would come from the extra tension on your muscles. Not sure about
the racing cars where you're strapped in tightly - there you would have
to rely on the pressure, but you can probably still feel G's through
tension in the neck muscles.

  #119  
Old March 29th 08, 04:46 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
GaryR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 90
Default IRacing Pricing

OK, so we know it will cost money.. when the heck can I start!!!

GP

>On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:34:57 -0500, "Duffer" > wrote:
>
>"jason moyer" > wrote in message
...
>On Feb 27, 12:41 am, "Jeff Reid" > wrote:
>
>>> NR2003 had more acceptance

>
>I> think it had more to do with the physics being more believable than
>>GPL's, but YMMV.

>
>I thought that N2K3 used GPL's engine though?
>


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iRacing Who? [email protected] Simulators 62 August 10th 07 10:01 PM
iRacing what? _Mitch Simulators 4 August 1st 07 04:27 AM
Will iRacing ever produce a PC sim ? DB Simulators 86 September 15th 05 08:33 PM
iRacing and Piratebay ymenard Simulators 6 July 23rd 05 01:44 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.