• This Website Is Not For Sale
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Laser scanned ?

Discussion in 'rFactor 2' started by Eric Bergeron, Mar 19, 2016.

  1. Eric Bergeron

    Eric Bergeron


    I am a beginner in simracing and there's a question I ask myself .....
    rFactor 2 is considered one of the best simulation, so why does not have scanned laser tracks? (I'm not talking budget here)
    To talk about a game as a "simulation" should it not contain high precision tracks?
    Are ISI tracks as accurate as scanned laser?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. JeffL

    Right on Brother, I hear ya, it's all good.

    Traditional surveying is very accurate also. ISI also has a method they hold close to the vest.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Other considerations:
    You can't laserscan historic tracks. You can't laserscan fictional tracks. Some ISI & 3PA tracks make use of aerial LiDAR data.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Bram

    Administrator Staff Premium

    Odd, I always tell people that Toban, Mills Metro, Lienz and Essington are laserscanned too :) And will continue to do so just to make a point this whole laserscanned stuff is so overrated. It's not a requirement to have a good race simulation.

    There is a large group in the community that seem to have something against fictional tracks. I bet you that the majority of them actually thinks those awesome tracks are real life venues :)
    • Agree Agree x 4
  5. fortyfivekev


    The simple answer re. RF2 is that laser scanning is expensive and ISI don't have the cash.

    If you are using simracing to train for a real motor racing career then laser scanned tracks obviously have some advantages. For the rest of us, I think the main benefit is that laser scanned tracks can seem more alive (surface-wise) than a lot of other tracks. As for fictional tracks, although some of the RF/RF2 tracks are fun there are so many good real life tracks available in the various sims now I really can't see the point.
    • Haha Haha x 1
  6. High precision is relative to vehicle's speed and update rate of physics engine. The highest calculation rate any racing game physics engine currently uses is 400 updates per second (rF2, AMS).

    Simple math quickly tells you that a car going 150 mph (241 kph) will cover 0.17 meters each update. If you consider how shocks & springs work in sine waves, then you need about 10 update cycles to have a meaningful response. That implies pavement polygons shorter than 1.5 meters are useless and if speeds are higher (oval tracks), then the optimum value increases.

    Guess what? Aerial LiDAR point clouds are typically under 2 meter density and often under 1 meter density. UK has some coverage at 0.15 meter.

    Guess what else? The fastest monitors only update the picture 144 times per second and the typical monitor updates the picture 60 times per second. Which means you will never see all the physics going on.
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 2
  7. A few of the ISI tracks are as accurate as laser scanned versions from other games. The best example for that is Atlanta Motorsports Park. I think Mores, Silverstone, Lime Rock, Indianapolis, Atlanta itself, and possibly Palm Beach and Sepang, are the ones that fit that category.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Eric Bergeron

    Eric Bergeron

    It is a very good point i never realised !
    thanks for explanation. :thumbsup: