Quote from Arrow. :

... depends on the last times from practise

I like the idea, it looks fun. A question though. If the handicaps are calculated from the practice times, and drivers practice in their own car, then they will be driving as slowly as possible during practice to minimise the handicap. Would it be better to derive handicaps from WR, which could be done before the event?

Also, I presume the handicap wouldn't be purely the difference between the lap times of 2 cars, as the faster cars will be slowed by each car they need to overtake (allowing for acceleration times as per Tweaker's comments)

Quote from Kid222 :

My DFP is acting also bit strange.
But it's little bit different story. When i drive straight, my DFP is turned like 5-10 degrees to left.

I've got a different wheel (Momo red), but I usually recalibrate the wheel and pedals before each session to keep them true. Have you tried recalibrating? (I'm sure you have, but thought I'd mention it just in case ...)

I've read some article in the past about changing potentiometers. I don't think it's too difficult. I think it would be worth investigating as they don't cost much to replace.

Assuming this problem would have less of an effect for the braking, the alternatives would be:

1. swap potentiometers between brake and accelerator, or
2. swap brake axis to right pedal, and accelerator to left pedal, then drive cross-legged

There's a rule that you missed Dan ...

All drivers who have an licensed name beginning with 'h' or 'v' should carry an automatic 50kg weight penalty (for some reason having such a name gives a speed advantage otherwise - look at the list and I think you'll agree )

I can't practice today ... it's the last OLFSL race of the season. I'm getting concerned with all this practice people are doing and we're still 3.5 weeks away from the start of the season!

I guess I'll need to join the crowd if I don't want to be watching the first RSWC race from the rear of the pack. I'll be online in the next few days, probably Wednesday.

Quote from jwardy :

... it was just so rswc drivers , fans ,etc can see ...

Wow, did you say fans back there? Like the style, thinking big.

Quote from GFresh :

... that HUGE pile up at the end of the first lap..

I slowed and tried to go around the carnage, but a car backed down the track into my path, and zoooommmmmm. Launched me high over the pitlane (got a stop go penalty for that!), through the roof of the pits and into one of the garages. Luckily wasn't too far to go to get my car repaired . Then I mistook the stop go penalty for a drive through, therefore went through the pitlane more times than I would like (never had a stop go penalty before ... I'm usually very cautious about speeding!)

Decided to carry on, more to see if I could improve my best lap than anything. I got a few blue flags, but it was easy to let drivers few as most made it very clear which side they would overtake.

Nice event to round off the season with. Nice one Dan.

Team Name - Parkfield Motorsport
Driver #1 - [PM] Ant
Driver #2 - [PM] bozo
Reserves -
We are Qualifying on Server: Battle Of The Teams #2

This feels like a well planned big software release, gradually leaking details to keep the expectant crowd salivating.

Next we'll see a countdown for the release of further details ...

I hope that my previous teammate still remembers me, and is planning to keep me company again.

License name : bozo
Ingame name : A.Turner
Car : RAC
Team :

Last edited by bozo, Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:55.

I'm not raising a complaint, but ...

In the rules it states that you should drive clean and fair. I would interpret that to be very much akin to the old CRC rules. The one that sticks in my mind is that if you hit somebody and gain advantage, at the very least you should let them regain that position, even if other drivers are let through whilst waiting for the driver that was hit.

In the first series, in one of the first races, I remember Vain struck me accidentally, and then took the very noble decision to wait for me to return to the track before continuing his race, even though by then we were at the very rear of the pack.

As I say I don't want to make a complaint against any driver, but I would like some clarity on this matter, and perhaps to include some suitable wording in the rules. In my view there should be no advantage if you hit somebody from behind. Perhaps this is something to consider.

I'd prefer not to have the event this Sunday (14th), as it's the penultimate OLFSL race, and I don't know what time I'll be starting that one.

Frustration! Every race where I'm doing well I get hit from behind and spin off! Don't think the culprit this time waited, but can't be sure as haven't watched the replay.

So, I got up to 10th, got hit and rejoined in 16th. Then had some passing to do, which went ok. Some good battles. Got side-swipped once as somebody came past, and got hit from the rear once more later on, but kept it straight this time and the car behind lost more time than me.

Been an enjoyable season though, especially towards the end as I have got a bit more competitive (lap time wise). Special thanks to Hyper for his assistance whilst practicing last night. I managed to knock over 2 seconds off my lap times as a result. Nice one .

Hopefully catch you all at Sunday's race. I'll be there, as long as my OLFSL race doesn't clash.

Thanks Dan

Quote from BlueFlame :

Bozo was threatening all the time, but i thought everytime he got close, I was able to respond and keep the gap pretty big, although he was closing it down quite rapidly at first.

You were doing very well to stay ahead. Over the last 5 laps or so I was closing you down, but nowhere near fast enough to put any pressure on you.

T2 incident on the first lap was a bit of a shame, but I don't think anybody is really to blame on looking at the replay. I was nudging Beano as he slowed rapidly (due to Baker ahead of him slowing rapidly) and pulled left to avoid driving him off the road, and collected BlueFlame instead, who had zoomed up the inside.

LFS License : bozo
LFS ingame tag : [FF] bozo
Real name : Andrew Turner
Age : 40
Location : England
Team : Flying Finn Racing Team

Quote from LFSn00b :

...What happened to AtomAnt anyways?

He retired. Then he derailed a bit. Not sure of the background, but started posting some crazy stuff and got the heave ho!

Otherwise he was such a good egg.

Quote from Albieg :

Evidence? What kind of evidence? Emails? Short messages from Stepney to Coughlan?

De la Rosa writes to Alonso on 25th March:

"It comes from Nigel Stepney, their former chief mechanic - I don't know what post he holds now.
"He's the same person who told us in Australia that Kimi (Raikkonen) was stopping in lap 18. He's very friendly with Mike Coughlan, our chief designer and he told him that."

This mail (along with tons of other communications) shows total awareness of the fact that Ferrari's data was used inside the team to gain an advantage. I really couldn't see harder evidence than that. Coughlan and Stepney lawyers have a huge problem to solve because all of this evidence would stand perfectly in a trial.

During the original trial it was accepted that Coughlan had privileged information. This second trial was about whether that information had been used by McLaren. The drivers were given immunity if they provided whatever evidence they possessed. The emails and SMS were only between the original parties and the drivers, not with other team members. I stand by my comments, from the 'evidence' that has been published, there is nothing that directly implicates the wider McLaren team.

Quote from FL!P :

I meant the opposite.

It's the same both ways. There's just no evidence either way.

Quote from FL!P :

Sorry I misunderstood your first post, and thanks for the clarification.

No worries. I wrote quickly and perhaps without making myself clear.

Quote from FL!P :

At this point it's not a proof that no one else at McLaren had got or used Ferrari's data.

Yes, I agree. There's no proof of the information going any further into the McLaren organisation.

Quote from FL!P :

I've read they'll release more info in about a week (after blanking out whatever data Ferrari wants to keep secret). Maybe some of it will bring more light on this.

But surely the verdict today should have clearly shown what info was presented that would result in such a verdict being given. To make suggestions, for instance, that the test driver could not have decided by himself not to try a particular weight distribution because it was so different from what McLaren had been using, and therefore must have consulted the team, and use it to back such a verdict, is ludicrous.

Anyhow, I hope that McLaren win the remaining races, and the commentators highlight the ridiculous nature of this verdict. I'm sure Martin Brundle on ITV in the UK will not hold back.

Quote from FL!P :

Read the whole report. There's lots of hard evidence. What I quoted is just the final summary.

I did read the whole report before posting ... and kept coming across statements where the WMSC were given evidence that Coughlan or de la Rosa had information, and then surmised that they 'must have' informed the team, and the team 'must have' made the decisions about what they did with the info. But you could equally look at it another way. I'm a test driver and I need to perform for my team to stay in contract. If I can acquire info and use it, and it makes me look good, why should I tell the team - especially if the info was gained in a rather illicit fashion.

I'm not saying that I believe the team is completely innocent, but I would say the evidence does not prove guilt, and the punishment does not fit the crime.

I would like to see the evidence presented to an impartial judge/jury. My worry is that with Mr Ecclestone now making noises that the punishment could have been a lot worse, McLaren may decide to make the payment and live another day. That's not justice, and even by F1 standards, it does smell somewhat!

Quote from danowat :

All input greatly recieved, together we can make it all better, so anything, good or bad, let it out

Now I hope you weren't expecting anything bad, as I think the decent attendances, friendly banter and lack of complaints really do speak for themselves. You're doing a great job, and as with RRSC1 the unique nature of the series has great appeal.

Superpole? It did take too long before. The current format is good in that it only takes 20 minutes, and it allows for valuable track time. During a weekday I find it hard sometimes to get online much before the start time, so the extra 20 minutes is really helpful.

Superpole did add some great pressure though, and allowed some chatting for those waiting. Overall I wouldn't mind it being reintroduced, as long as it can be completed in a speedy manner.

I find the races can be too short. I would prefer them to last an extra 10 or 15 minutes. I'd also like a sprint race to be added. If the sprint race was held before the feature race, then reverse grid in finishing order of the sprint race for the feature race would certainly add to the on-track action.

I like the idea of ballast for everybody that is quicker than me. Lots of it . Seriously, when I started RRSC1 it was to learn about driving the FZ5, and I did improve over that first season. With RRSC2 I decided to concentrate on the RAC, but unfortunately I don't seem to be improving. Ballast is therefore a good idea to even the field a bit, but anything that could be done to help the tail-enders would be a real bonus. 1 or 2 track sessions with a seasoned racer providing advice would be good before each race.

So, with only circumstantial evidence, the WMSC has severely punished McLaren. There was no evidence that the McLaren team were in receipt of anything confidential, but they have concluded that Coughlan and de la Rosa must have passed information to others in the team. This would not stand up in a court of law, and I very much hope that this farcical decision is challenged.

Well, not a great race for me. Was going nice and steady in 16th, but got hit, spun, then couldn't get same rhythm going again.

Interestingly, my best splits all came on the same lap - pity it wasn't during qualifying!

I was 10kph slower down the straight than most drivers ... so I can definitely blame my setup for coming 19th! Nearly held off Dan in the last couple of laps after his pitstop, but could only watch as he sailed past on the back straight.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

He won't be able to see it, have you seen the track? The turns have 20 mile run off areas now.

Just so long as they haven't touched Eau Rouge ... speaking of which, I just checked to make sure that wasn't the case, and found the following on Wikipedia ...

"Properly speaking, the Eau Rouge corner is only the lefthander at the bottom. The following righthander that leads steeply uphill, which was introduced in 1939 to shortcut the original hairpin "Ancienne Douane", is called "Raidillon" (fr:Raidillon de l'Eau Rouge)."

Well I never!

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Integrity? ...

I was very surprised that it took so long to release the verdict, seeing as they would have prepared the statement many days in advance

I'm looking forward to their explanation tomorrow. I cannot see anything that would warrant the punishment that has been given though. The best bit is McLaren needing to prove they have no Ferrari IP in their 2008 car ... how do they do that, by requesting Ferrari's 2008 design?