SimRacing.org.uk

Pre-Season Fun Race – Willow Springs

This is a test event for Season 28. It will feature in the Graduates series (67s), but we will be using the 1965 car set for this race and its s free choice of chassis.

Willow Springs International Motorsports Park is located in Willow Springs near Rosamond and Lancaster, California, about an hour north of Los Angeles. It is a historic race track, in existence more than 60 years. It is the oldest permanent road course in the United States.[1] Construction began in 1952, with the inaugural race held on November 23, 1953.[2] The main track is a challenging 2.5-mile (4.0 km) long road course that is unchanged from its original 1953 configuration. The interesting elevation changes and high average speeds make it a favorite of many road racing drivers.

A chance to set some UKGPL lap records - we have not raced here before.

We will use the 60fpsV2newmod (ftp://ukgpl3.dyndns.org/Replays/Archive/Season27/60fps/) for the whole of the mini-series.

Please restrict chat to pit messages including at the end of the race until ALL drivers still racing have crossed the line.

The race will be run under INT rules. A maximum of two resets are allowed, followed by a compulsory stop and go in the pits.

The race will run on one server, UKGPL8.

Race List = IGOR
Server = UKGPL_8
IP address = TBA
Race date = Sunday 01-03-2015
Time = 21:00 UK time (21:00 GMT)
Track =  Willow Springs  (http://srmz.net/index.php?showtopic=9290)
Race length = (30 laps) 40 -45 minutes
Variant = 1965
Damage Model = Intermediate
Qualifying time = minimum of 30 minutes

Help
I'm using the 67 update that allows me to have more than 64 tracks - I have 66 now available through GEM.

I cannot, however, upload Willow Springs as when I try to install it says I have exceeded my limit. I could delete a few tracks but I suspect there is a fix?

No way this is a bug in GEM...
GEM will allways set it back to 64 tracks whenever you let it save settings  ::)

So just delete some seldom used tracks in 67season.ini

This is a limitation of the old track installer, which is not aware of installations with the patch for more tracks installed.

The way I've found of sorting this is to cut the bottom section of 67season.ini's contents up to event 63 to a temporary text file, change the max tracks to 63, save 67season.ini. Install the track, copy the previous stuff back to 67season.ini at the bottom of the file and amend the "duplicate" event so that it's at the bottom of the file with its real event number. Save  67season.ini and you should then see it in GEM.

What I always do is rename 67season.ini to 67seaso2.ini, and copy gp.ini and rename the copy to 67season.ini . This way you'll always have the default Papy tracks installed and you'll have room to install more tracks with the track installers. You can also now copy 67seaso2.ini and rename to alltrack.ini,  whenever you feel like it you can always copy the newly installed tracks to alltrack.ini for a complete list.

GEM+ automatically ticks the 'enforce 64 track limit' box when you click on the seasons button, if you forget to untick it every time it deletes every track in every season.ini file. So, when you have assembled an alltrack.ini file it's best to also keep a backup of that in case you forget to untick the box.

Thanks - that gives me a couple of options to try.

Unable to D/L this track because stupid SRMZ wont let me  >:(

It isn't on UKGPL3 either  :-\

Now it is ;)

Not good , keeps saying can't find install.ini  ::)

Now try the .zip ::)

 :) :) nice track to race, even so landscape may not paragon of perfection.

however, unfortunately I am sure I will not successful in combat fatigue atm. so wont turn up for race :(

It's just FUN!

You need a combination of Monza and Brands setup ;)

Be aware of a cooking front left tyre >:(

Ah, just missed the start. At least I got some practice laps in :). Shame it won't count for lap record though ;D

Done many laps here for oAo, great track and should be a good race!

Plus, good to have some workarounds for the GEM+ 64 tracks bug!

I'm crap in these things but it is good practice with the RFB LOL.  Sorry for the shunt Billy. I'm still a bit of a liability ATM.

Get them Rugby Football Boots off, no wonder your crap !

he he he he ! 

Sry to those i contacted with lap 1.  :-[

Had some fun trying to catch back up, but last turn caught me napping twice, berm flipping me both times.

Grats to finishers.

Congrats Clive! Nice recovery Axel to finish on the podium!

Very exciting and tense race at times. I dodged several bullets. Narrowly missed DaveC at least 2 or 3 times. I'm glad I didn't hit you Dave. It wasn't easy breaking the slipstream. I had to push as hard as possible to try to keep Dean from closing on me. It wasn't working until he made a mistake. That was a lot of work to run down Axel and Andreas. Then I had to give it everything I had again, to break the slipstream to Andreas. That's the best drive I've had in while. I only made one significant mistake. I spun on lap 4.

Thanks guys.

Yeah, was lucky that Andreas seemed to have problems in the last laps...

Made a stupid setup change in last second before the race what made my rear end very nervous, so I lost it  ::)

Great battle with Ray with unlucky ending...
Ray, what FOV do you use?

Sorry guys, maybe I should have taken the BT7 or Fezza, but i arrived late and just grabbed the BT11 and an unchanged setup from Brands Hatch. By the time I had got the IP, discovered that I did not have the pword, quit and looked up pword, re joined and tried to remember this track, it was getting close to grid time.

Only one real flying lap got me 3rd place with race fuel, which should have alerted me to having a car that was too fast  :-\. Followed Dean and Axel for a couple of laps until Dean ran wide and I cruised up behind Axel who seemed to be struggling with his rear end as the tyres got warm. When Axel performed a half spin I was through and just settled into a regular lap time waiting for Axel or Dean to hunt me down as they obviously had the pace as they showed in quali.

But cars appeared to be running off track and losing whatever gains they had made leaving me to potter home. I only put the wellie to the metal on the last lap and clocked my FL, but it was far from clean or perfect.

I think maybe people were just pushing too hard and that extra 5% was making them run wide onto the sand, thus losing at least 10 secs as they recovered?

Itw as a long time ago when we ran the "Masters" series that I last raced here...it is still a great race track.  ;)

In the BT7 I always reserve the right to own any line into and through any corner since I am forced to concede all straights to any other type of car. As such once I have decided my line (which I stick to lap after lap) I rarely if ever check who is around me. Okay I'm a bit more careful than that but you get the drift. As for FOV I use the default at 78°. As you said good battle and sorry for any contact. I was glad to see you stay on track and make it onto the podium. Grats again to yourself, Clive and Greg.

Do you use a 4:3 Monitor? than its ok...

But if you use a 16:9 you will misinterpret distances!
That is what I was thinking...

(http://picload.org/image/cigilgw/fov94.jpg)

Yeah I have dabbled with monitor settings to see what suits me best and do use a 4:3 monitor. In short I saw you, knew you wanted thru, but felt obliged to stick to my usual line through the corner expecting you to nail me on the straight. Me personally, in a fast car I would not try and overtake a slow car in a corner with a long straight coming up. But each to their own as I have no wish to tell others how to drive and have no complaints if I come worst off when its my fault or not for that matter.

Wasn't expecting to take part;  but was just able to download the track/download a setup from current favoured author & [as it was a FUN even]  went straight for the qually session.

Spent a lap looking over Ronnie's shoulder;  then ventured out.
Was fairly pleased to have got a 1:29 after a lap or two;   track did start to flow once I realised that after every green building on the left;  there was a right turn that probably needed some attention.

I probably didn't help Greg;  apologies.  There were a couple of times where I was ahead;  you were coming up & I eased off slightly (I thought) to aid your pass.  Maybe that did not go too well with the tow I was giving you at the time.


Somehow I managed to start spluttering with about 5-6 laps to go; despite apparently having put enough in the tank at the start.    Could have done without the reset/S&G; but didn't make any difference to the result.
Maybe 60FPS is not very economical from a fuel perspective?  :)

I know a few years back on a previous install;  I seemed to have to overfill by 10-15%;   but that behaviour seemed to be resolved after a re-install.
There again;  thinking about it - 60FPS was being used around that time too...

Anyway; was good to be on another test since machine rebuild.


EDIT: oh yes - there were a few times when I saw the latency bar appear & grow quite tall.  Wasn't really aware of seeing anyone else jumping around  (or indeed;  not really aware of seeing anyone!).
But was not until after the event;  that I realised my DSL speed was lower than expected.   Which was then traced back to a 'phone being unexpectedly reconnected upstairs without a microfilter...



Cheers,
Dave.

I'm using 78° on a 32" HDTV. Should I trying setting the FOV at 94°?

I played around with the FOV a year or two after my start with GPL. I never felt I could make any improvements so I went back to default to which I'm accustomed. After some time to adjust I wonder if it would be an improvement for me. Initially, it's likely to cause me difficulty such as my experience before.



No need to apologize. The one time I noticed you lifted to allow me to pass was scary. I wasn't expecting it. We got lucky I didn't hit you. I was going to tail you closely through the final turn and pass you before T1. I don't expect you to let me pass but I appreciate it when it's clear I'm being allowed.

You had a good pace following me for a few laps.

It could have been rather interesting had I qualified near the front Clive. I doubt either of us could have broke away from the other without the man behind making a mistake.


Looked like you and Andreas had a good race going too. I saw him on your tail for many laps. You may have been a little faster but not enough to break the tow. Same thing you could have done to me or I to you.

Only reason I lost it once was because I wasn't using all of Prib. Have you ever read that before? :lol: I only had the distance meter and tire temps displayed. I didn't know my previous lap time, so I may have pushing much harder than I would have, had I known what my pace was. I wouldn't have had the tires displayed if we didn't generate so much heat in the LF tire. Luckily I'm not distracted by prib. I only glanced at the tire temps twice. The LF changing to red caught my attention and I later looked at the LR temp after I slid the rear once much more than I liked.

Yes you should!

78° on a 16:9 Monitor provides an increasing optical distortion to the boundaries!

Changing what the wise programmers at Papyrus made for us, will not improve your driving.  It will change the perspective you see.  Could the diagram maker explain the diagram?  What do the lines show?

Just put these 3 jpg on desktop and doubleclick, then switch between them:
No change in perspective for the first 2
Big change for 3rd pic!!!

78° in 4:3 (640x480, 256 colors, server)
(http://picload.org/image/cwgocap/wil_78.jpg)

94° in 16:9
(http://picload.org/image/cwgooiw/gplc652015-03-0315-44-21-408.jpg)

78° in 16:9
(http://picload.org/image/cwgoopr/gplc652015-03-0315-47-44-903.jpg)

The diagram is supposed to explain the screens.  I will correct your understanding of optics and distance, by fixing your inaccurate diagram.

specsavers ?   ;D

 . . .  :D  No, more like a mild pair of Binockers . . .  :laugh:

It's an interesting topic this, iRacing also have an auto-setup for it, based on your distance to the monitor (FOV point to monitor point in Axel's diagram, in a perpendicular line to the monitor). I know what you mean in the bottom one, as that's what I use with my 22" widescreen. I tried meddling when I got it, but just went back to default as that's what I've always driven. With default FOV, I feel the car is now bigger (more proportional to real life), but also take into account that objects may be a bit closer than they appear (especially in the mirrors).

Generally, with the screen right behind my wheel, my eyes are 20-30 inches from the monitor, depending on if I'm in a crouching or more straight-arm style, but I like to get as close to the screen as possible (given the lack of 3 monitors). I can check the iRacing calculations if you want the formula for what FOV suits what distance to the the screen (but it's probably calculable based off the maths anyway).

I suspect your instincts are correct Lestyn.  The guy who posted all that mathematical stuff certainly gave the impression of an authority in all things optical.  Such stuff does create much interest, but with hindsight, it might have been better to be cruel, as a lot of carnage has resulted in all those careful calculations.

Put into plain English,  he was treating each computer screen as if a flat photograph.  He was then saying, how far from that photograph should you put your nose, for things to look a realistic size.  Try it with a snap of a loved one sometime! :-*

Now let's see if I can grab my corrected diagram.  Hmm . . . . .

Ok folks, so . . . here again is the Cookie diagram of FOV, to show how the Field Of View changes the World :




The diagram tells us a widescreen gives us a wider view. This is wrong!  To gain a wider Field Of View you must change  . . . can anyone guess . . . the FOV!  The red lines are wrong until you change to a higher Fov.  A widescreen changes only the up and down you see - you see less - left & right are normal.  The black lines are correct for all and any width monitor with default.  Non-default is de fault of de user. :)

When you switch to 94, you see more sideways. And because you squeeze more in from the sides, everything ahead looks smaller, and further away.  The light blue line is the correct distance.  The dark blue is further - 94 gives you the wrong distance.  A good diagram describes clearly what it is trying to show.  Do not be fooled! :scared:


(http://picload.org/image/cwgalog/fov_revealed.jpg)

This is not the first time I've corrected a Monitor - or an LCD - in this matter.  Considering the importance placed on maximum rules to stop us crashing, it's better to stick to advice you are sure of.  The greater the change from default 78, the stranger your GPL World will become.  78 is what you get when driving a real car up, down, forwards, backwards, sideways, and upside down!

Had overcooked my left front tire. Also lost just a little bit of concentration. But in the end the right and faster Lotus-Man was in front. All in all it was such a good race!

So which FOV should we be using o wise one ???

IMO FOV 94° is correct for a 16:9 Monitor

Just look at the 3 screenshots ;)

We all agree the first picture is the GPL reference FOV 78° in 4:3!

Now compare it with the two 16:9 pics...

A stationary snapshot, will not tell you much about moving graphics.  We automatically understand our 3D World, but most seem to think our Monitors show only 2D.

Use any FOV number it pleases you to use.  No problem if you simply want a pretty picture.  But I have seen accidents caused by a GPL driver using a very low number.  And I have been hit twice in 10 seconds, at low speed, by a driver using a very high number!   If by making things more difficult for yourself, by using unnatural graphics, you crash into other cars, no problem.  If you crash into me, you are being irresponsible.  :angel:

Comparing Pic1 to Pic3 perspective: this is definitely not the same! So you are WRONG!

94° in 16:9 squeezes nothing! Compare 1 + 2... You can put P1 over P2 and nothing changes.

Of course our monitors are 2D yet...

END of discussion!

If you want it mathematical correct, just read here: https://www.quaddicted.com/engines/adjusting_fov_for_widescreen

Using this formula you will get FOV 92,092° for a 16:9 (based on 78° for 4:3)

Here's my two pence worth

from a drivers point of view I find I am able to place the car more accurately into a corner apex which I think is because of the perceived closer view of the road . The downside being the peripheral view is restricted making close racing very dodgy due to the limited ability to see cars alongside .

A wide angle is preferable to a narrow one , but narrow angle better for driving .

Like everything else in GPL it seems a compromise has to be reached !

 

Bernie,
I do agree with Martin, that a FOV of 78° is the only correct way to see the GPL world as it is intended, on a 4:3 monitor!

Our dispute is about the use of a 16:9 monitor, wich would deform this world if you use the same 78° FOV.

Afair you use a 32" TV - monitor, so the size should not matter...

IMO
With the use of any other than 92° FOV with a 16:9 monitor, your GPL world will be deformed

PS
I learned that FOV 92° is correct after a research in the net and use it.

Anyone who has put on a helmet, and done some real life racing will know, this restricts your field of view.   Real racers  often have to turn their heads left and right to check mirrors.  For us, it's our blind spots which need this, as sound is not always enough.  That is why the glance left & right was made.  Everyone should learn to use it.

The biggest challenge to all Sims racers, is G force - we don't have it!  Seat of the pants racing allows you to feel the road when glancing.  So we all need some practice doing this. :)  As for FOV, it is generated internally, and has nothing to do with screen type or size.

So true and the best available FOV to help you see when its safe and when its not safe to complete that pass you thought was possible.

Damn it Martin, you talk so much sense, but then you have always been my GPL Guru 8)

"Ye gads, stop shining that spotlight!"  A larger head is no help to laptimes.  Grumble!

I'm sure we would all  prefer to believe everything broadcast on Television' and on the Internet is perfect, and 100% correct and truthful.   But Website information is only as good as the guy who made it.

The staff here at Ukgpl put in huge amounts of work, to help make our racing possible, so there's no pleasure in lengthy debate.  It's not surprising when racers are mislead by . . . . misleading information.  It's hard to judge facts, when you see instead, attractive fiction.  Sexy fashion magazines have similar warpages. :laugh: