This looks sweet. I hope it works out.

The decision to not penalise Charles McKowen for the incident in the last race has not been contested and the results above now become final.

Results from Race 2 repeat:

Driver Standings at the end of Season 1:

Team Standings at the end of Season 1:

Quote from GeForz :

Just post smaller images

Fern bay before the Green chicane?

Quote from tinvek :

confesion time

although ive played rfactor demo and not got on with it i did re dowload and patch it the other night and was going to buy it!!!

however when i clicked the purchase link the screen came up saying that the publisher didnt support this game yet !!??!!


could this have been a sign from above ?

Probably. Just don't do it man.

Quote from rc10racer :

Ok you have your fun now time for my fun

Too easy. Fern Bay, just before coming onto the bridge.

EDIT: I lie, al's right.

Quote from Dj-Aeri :

And what about Victor & Eric's work? are they still working in the LFS?

Durr. Well, we know Eric is. Victor never contributed much to LFS itself but mostly LFS world, liveforspeed.net, lfsforum.net etc, which he has done a fantastic job with.

I can't say I agree with you on the point about "race cars being impossible to catch". I've done my fair share of research on the matter. Race cars are harder to drift than road cars? Yes. Impossible? Far from it. Why?

Racing tyres have generally stiffer sidewalls so they peak at lower slip angles. Therefore upto that point they gain grip really quickly. After that the curve levels off and it feels as if they have lost grip, where as they have merely stopped gaining grip.

On top of that, race cars run on racing rubber which is very heat sensetive compared to normal road tyres (different compounds, I know this from one Todd Wasson so I don't think I have the right to go into too much detail as he makes his living from this type of thing - not that he's passed on his infinte supplys of tyre wisdom to me ). Anyway, road tyres are hardly affected by temperature at all until they hit some insane temperature. Temperature effect is apparently exaggerated in LFS for road tyres a lot.

And then you also have aerodynamics. You'll find that most wings will lose a significant proportion of their downforce with the increase of yaw angle. I know very little on this matter though.

Lastly, the fact that race car drivers don't drift doesn't mean they can't - it's just slower than going around normally so they avoid it as much as possible. As you pointed out, there have been a number of incidents where F1 cars have recovered from notable slides.

Quote from Ian.H :

Wrong! Hackers are good guys for the most part, the site was compromised or in more common terms, cracked, _not_ hacked.

I know a fair few hackers.. infact, IIRC, I found LFS from someone's .sig in the alt.hacker usenet group that I used to frequent. There's some infinitely smart people there, _real_ hackers... would they break into a site for fun? give you a serial for app x? not likely... would they help you find / fix a security hole if they could, most definitely!

Please learn the correct terms before slinging mud at the wrong people... Scawen's a hacker, I'm a hacker.. as are most who post in the Programming forum here.. do any of us feel the need to compromise someone's site? very unlikely... I'm very much the opposite and will try and help someone defend their servers if I can with any info that might be of use.. so have a think and forget what the media tell you



Regards,

Ian

Fair enough.

Hackers are just a drag on an economy. Phlos shouldn't be allowed to touch a PC till the age of 21 at least.

Passwords sent out (to some teams that haven't posted in this thread too), if you have not received one please let me know ASAP.

I have received a complaint with regards to Charles' driving on lap 1 - it will be investigated, This is why these results remain provisional, as soon as I find James to get him to investigate and penalise if necessary, they will become final. Congratulations to De Loor Motorsport and its drivers - Lars Thomsen and JJ Nylander who remained committed to LXCC throughout the season and never needed replacement drivers!

Results from Race 6 repeat:

Driver Standings for Season 1 Tuesday:

Team Standings for Season 1 Tuesday:

Last edited by axus, Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:31.

Sorry about the delay. I've just been piled with work. Anyway, here they are:

Results from Race 9:

Team Standings after Race 9:

Driver Standings after Race 9:

Well done, everyone! Sorry I couldn't be there to admin last night, and thank you Charles for standing in for me as admin.

This brings what has been a slightly messy season to an end but the good news is that season 2 will be starting in another 2.5months or so and it will bring many more improvements than those seen so far towards the end of this season. James has been working on a fantastic site to automate participating racer selection and many other things, Kerian's been hard at work to create an InSim app to make qualifying automatic... we'll soon be amending the rules and we seem to have put server problems behind us thanks to SamH and his great servers. We hope to see you back then when LXCC becomes the league it was meant to be! Keep your eyes open for discussions about rules and announcements in the next few weeks.

On a side note, I've also been looking for someone to do race reports for Season 2, sadly I don't have the time anymore but I'd like to have them. If anyone would like to do this, please drop me a PM.

EDIT: Expect results later today - just gotta take care of some schoolwork and other things first.

I'm back.
Passwords sent out, if you have not received one, please PM me ASAP.

Event 2 - rescheduled due to server crash - Saturday division only
Date: 10.02.2007
Track: Aston
Configuration: North
Weather: Cloudy Afternoon, High Wind
Laps: 19 laps

You know the drill:

Team Name
LX4 Driver - Real Name and Surname (LFS license name)
LX6 Driver - Real Name and Surname (LFS license name)

I'll do results later tonight.

Quote from duke_toaster :

For the benefit of the tape


(Spelling not included)

*snore* Enough already. What's Sam got to do about it? Or anyone here for that matter?

Passwords sent out, if you have not recieved one, please pm me ASAP.

Jakg - you don't get the whole sarcasm thing, do you?

To clarify my comments on "arguably best" - I have no problem with it being used. It's just when it's used in every single review it completely loses its meaning. I'd rather hear what's so revolutionary about physics in terms of features than read such a meaningless phrase chucked about. If you got behind the secnes and asked developers to comment on certain aspects of their code and then wrote about that, I'd quite happily read the magazine because I actually learn something from it. As it stands, it's just completely lacking substance because all the writers are to obsessed with sitting on the fence. On the other hand, think about Top Gear - everyone loves Top Gear because it's edgy and funny and the presenters aren't afraid to say what they think.

You feel the need to break down my post and take each statement out of context so now I'll do the same.

Quote from shrapnel :

Well, this term has to be used, mainly because if it is not then a massive flame war starts somewhere or other. Probably does anyway.

But what's the point of using it EVERY single time? The statement that Sim X arguably has the most accurate physics of any sim doesn't say anything to begin with and you're taking away any possible implied meaning (saying it because it's very likely true but covering up in case you offend someone) by repeating it in every review.

Quote :

So, hang on, now you know what I know? And what all of our writers know? Perhaps you need a different magazine because the fact is, when we have provided technical articles, they have only received negative feedback from people that don't understand them.

I am glad you feel it necessary to offer insult here, I don't think I would knowingly assume that I know what you know.

Wasn't an insult. If you knew enough on vehichle dynamics to back up a definitive statement on physics you wouldn't be writing magazine articles for AutoSimSport. I can name probably 5 people off the top of my head all in all in sim racing circles (that doesn't include me and there might be more, but I highly doubt the numbers go into double digits) that can make a statement like that - and those are not all necessarily people with whom I have direct contact.

Quote :

Don't you do that anyway? Or does an author having an opinion force you into complying with it?

No, I merely have a problem with the fact that writers don't back up anything they're saying in the articles so it's just the same generic article every time a new sim comes out.

EDIT: What I'm basically saying is because everyone only reads articles about the sim(s) they love, if you slate them, they're gonna get offended and not like your magazine. But rather than writing your articles in such a way that you don't offend anyone yet still give valuable information you guys just write empty articles that don't really say much so there's no way anyone can be offended.

Last edited by axus, Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:22.

Event 6 - rescheduled due to server problems - Tuesday division only
Date: 06.02.2007
Track: South City
Configuration: Town Reversed
Weather: Cloudy Sunset, Low Wind
Laps: 26 laps

You know the drill:

Team name
LX4 Driver - Real-life name (LFS license name)
LX6 Driver - Real-life name (LFS license name)

Event 9
Date: 03.02.2007
Track: Fern Bay
Configuration: Black
Weather: Clear Day, High Wind
Laps: 15 laps

You know the drill.

Team Name
LX4 Driver - Real name (LFS license)
LX6 Driver - Real name (LFS license)

I've been my forgetful self again. :doh:.

I'm glad you guys are actively taking steps to include LFS into your magazine. However, I could never shake the feeling that you have a bunch of hippies writing all the articles over there. I don't think I've read one article about a new sim that doesn't describe it as having "revolutionary" physics, and describing them as "arguably the most realistic physics of any racing sim to date". "Arguably"? Any sim can be argued to have the most realistic physics so this statement is just dull and shows a writer who's just too damn scared to have an opinion. I also never found out what's so damn revolutionary about these physics when ISI have been selling crapMotor in different disguises for so long now, only adding a new variable every few months or so. Your articles are never technical enough to get anything but a huge yawn from me. Let's face it, none of your writers really know how tyres behave, what a lateral slip curve looks like, what the effects of having a combination of slip ratio and slip angle are, how fluid dynamics work or anything like that. Instead of pretending to and hiding behind language in case you're wrong, why don't you just tell me what's so "revolutionary" about these physics and let me make my own mind up about which sim makes which aspect most accurately? Oh, shit, sorry, that would mean that the writer who has to review the latest rFactor patch (and is secretly a biased fanboy) has to say that it's not really revolutionary.