rFactor 2 and BTCC: Thruxton Announced for the Sim!

I believe it was mentioned that it's not a BTCC, nor Formula E track.

Looks like this Q4 all in will be expensive.

Still looking forward to the new tracks.

Finally a track that hasn't be done to a this high of a level before in rF2...

It's been at least 2 years since I could say that... Most of the new MSGS tracks over that time have already been in rF2 albeit in a high quality mod... Thruxton is one of those tracks that deserves this treatment... So I'm happy to see it make it to rF2...

However as a BTCC fan I'm disappointed the stand alone game looks highly unlikely... 2024 might as well be 2042... Although something good can happen in that time frame I don't think MSGS has the talent and work ethic to get there...

Given how poor my last run of rF2 was I'm still a long way off of dropping any money on the BTCC content... Once it's all there and packaged on sale I might take the plunge... It's current pricing is a joke, rip off, cash grab or whatever your favourite way of describing insane pricing... Electronic Arts...

By then I'll know more about the BTCC game and if MSGS has managed to turn around the trend they have had since they took over rF2... There's been a little noise that this has happened but it hasn't been loud enough for me to trust MSGS yet...

that gives me instantly Toca Touring Cars 2 Memorys... good to see Thruxton back again in a Simracing Title

AngryWolfCorey said:

They are the same thing. "Laser scanning" is a marketing term for end user lay people & the process that lidar does where lidar is the actual overall technology. Technically speaking, lidar is one of several forms of remote sensing. It stands for light detection and ranging.

This is a general response, so, forgive me if you know all of that.

Click to expand...

boxer said:

How so? Lidar is done with a Laser.
.

Click to expand...

davehenrie said:

I think this might make a good article for the Race Dept contributors. The difference between Laser & Lidar.

Click to expand...

I will have to do some research.

But yeah, I just thought of LIDAR as the aerial thing which has 0.5-2m error range, while Laser Scanning being the thing where you go on the premises with a camera creating a pointcloud 360° which is much more accurate. Could be wrong tho.

Trebor901 said:

Pretty sure it would have been done from map coordinates and pictures. No race track would let in someone to laser scan the track to create a mod there'd be a huge bill for closing the circuit then licencing to use it in a game.

Click to expand...

It was done from 1m LiDAR data freely available in the UK - it gives you a 3d point cloud of the terrain so for a mod is about as accurate as you can get without access to the circuit (although I have driven there) - your assertion that it’s ‘not right at all’ is a pretty strong one, perhaps if you could elaborate I might be inclined to fix the issues?

pre9v said:

Thruxton

Version 2.0 release notes: What started as a ‘quick job’ to add extra grid spots turned into a several weeks long complete reworking of the entire track using LiDAR data. Key updates listed below: Track layout and elevations completely...

www.racedepartment.com

Laser scanned for a year and a half, and free!

Click to expand...

this is good but LIDAR data is not as accurate as a ground scan!

Julian Strasser said:

I will have to do some research.

But yeah, I just thought of LIDAR as the aerial thing which has 0.5-2m error range, while Laser Scanning being the thing where you go on the premises with a camera creating a pointcloud 360° which is much more accurate. Could be wrong tho.

Click to expand...

This is absolutely correct - what’s termed LiDAR is usually aerial laser scanning which although a type of laser scanning is nowhere near as accurate as the scans close to track surface from a vehicle, essentially with the former you will get accurate layout and elevation changes (and camber if hi res enough) with the latter it will pick up every bump on the track…. Although really they both employ similar technology.

This is turning into THE BTCC sim! Brilliant!

James Skinner said:

This is absolutely correct - what’s termed LiDAR is usually aerial laser scanning which although a type of laser scanning is nowhere near as accurate as the scans close to track surface from a vehicle, essentially with the former you will get accurate layout and elevation changes (and camber if hi res enough) with the latter it will pick up every bump on the track…. Although really they both employ similar technology.

Click to expand...

Ok, again, like how people are using "laser scanning," the way you are using accuracy is technically incorrect in how it'd be used in the lidar industry. Accurate lidar data would mean it's accurate compared to survey controlled points or verified ground points with ground elevation data matching. Duplicating a bump in a road with a lot of points doesn't technically mean it's accurate in lidar terms. Accuracy does not mean the amount of points captured which in the industry is more referred to as "quality" or "point density." But you can have highly accurate data with low point density just like you can have inaccurate data with high point density, so unless I am mistaking what you mean the way you are using accuracy here is technically incorrect in terms of lidar.

So, e.g., say you're using lidar with 1m vertical accuracy. What that actually means in practice is your elevation data can be up to 1m off or "incorrect" & still be considered accurate. So, meaning, you might take a z-value (elevation) of a lidar point & it says the top of a hill is 34.3m. But in the real world it's only 34m. So it's 3 cm off, but as 3 cm is less than 1m, it will still be considered accurate. But the overall point being, accuracy is technically speaking different and not automatically tied to point density/amount of points.

Also, even the worst modern lidar is going to pick up camber in a road. The widest circuit is something like 45m across. Even contemporary "poor" aerial lidar you'd get something like two or three points per meter. Most current sensors, even aerial lidar you're likely to get at least five points per meter, enough to easily catch camber. Current "bad" lidar you might miss individual bumps but you're not going to miss something like camber.

But, yes, they all "employ similar technology" b/c whether ground, mobile, drone, aerial or bathymetric lidar they all use lidar sensors that "laser scan" features.

For a quick really lay reference scale for types of lidar (in general decreasing order of point density):

1. Ground lidar
2. Mobile lidar
3*. Drone lidar (is really a form aerial lidar but b/c it can "hover" is similar in density to ground or mobile)
4. Helicopter aerial lidar
5. Aerial lidar
6. What is jokingly referred to as "faux-dar": laser extrapolated points from photogrammetric data which isn't actually lidar at all.
?. I honestly don't know much about bathymetric lidar as my 20+ years in the industry have predominantly been in aerial lidar.

But, even within those types of lidar you can have varying degrees of point density which itself may change over the course of a project depending on whether they are using DTMs (digital terrain models, ground+veg+sometimes buildings) versus DEMs (digital earth models, or ground/"bare earth"), e.g. DTMs tend to have higher density than DEMs b/c DEMs will have "holes" from the removed vegetation or tree canopy if it's dense enough to block the lidar from hitting the ground.

In conclusion, no, no matter how loud people say it, laser scanning is not different than lidar. It is what lidar does. "Muh ground scan." Yeah, ground scan using what? Light. A laser is amplified & concentrated light. You are ground scanning using lidar. Lidar is a former acronym now word that means Light detection and ranging. It is a form of remote sensing that uses light like sonar uses sound waves and radar uses radio waves.

Julian Strasser said:

I will have to do some research.

But yeah, I just thought of LIDAR as the aerial thing which has 0.5-2m error range, while Laser Scanning being the thing where you go on the premises with a camera creating a pointcloud 360° which is much more accurate. Could be wrong tho.

Click to expand...

Well, I've worked in the lidar field for 20+ years. It's all lidar, no matter what lay people call it or no matter how people confuse the acquisition methods.

Whether you grill fish or bake it you're still cooking it, just your method of heat application is different. Same with lidar. Whether ground or aerial acquired it's still lidar which "laser scans" objects just with different sensors & a slightly different processing methodology. E.g., ground lidar doesn't have to factor in pitch & yaw of a plane but it does have to factor in the movement of the vehicle & they both have to factor in atmospheric conditions like humidity & amount of light versus scan angle, etc.

ExCeL London circuit coming! In my opinion a track nobody really needs.
Think that´s it with new Q4 stuff.

Yes agree. I'll drop this drop. Then waiting for sale to buy single pcs if at all. This FE stuff is one of the most non-interesting things to me. Sad.

Jerec said:

ExCeL London circuit coming! In my opinion a track nobody really needs.
Think that´s it with new Q4 stuff.

Click to expand...

Well there had to be at least one disappointment in the pack didn't there. Imagine btcc cars on the London excel track though

BTCC BMW cool! Bahrain cool! But the other content....
Imagine: Croft and Thruxton are well done mod tracks available on Steam Workshop for free!! Ok Bahrain is also available on Steam Workshop, but the official payware track might be better.
But the mod tracks Thruxton and Croft look really good!

Vava they lied to you usually your guess is fairly acurate but not this time. FE it is... that's another DLC I'll pass on... May be if the Bahrain track the prototype ever go on sale I may get them but no rush. Croft would be nice but the existing one is already good enough for me. I dont drive it that often to get it.

That new FE track is the track nobody asked for and always knew they never wanted.

Tarmac Terrorist said:

This is turning into THE BTCC sim! Brilliant!

Click to expand...

Brilliant, if you’re willing to pay twice the price a stand-alone BTCC game would have cost. And a BTCC sim would include all the liveries, tracks and rules of the real championship.

Kingkoenig said:

Brilliant, if you’re willing to pay twice the price a stand-alone BTCC game would have cost. And a BTCC sim would include all the liveries, tracks and rules of the real championship.

Click to expand...

Let's hope that when there are entirely done releasing BTCC content (cars and tracks), there will be an affordable pack with it all... But currently they are surely going to milk that content as much as they can.

b)b said:

That new FE track is the track nobody asked for and always knew they never wanted.

Click to expand...

Nobody except the FE organizers, nobody except those who race fE with rF2. Same could be said for almost any car or track combination. An F1 fanatic could give a fig about GT or BTCC cars. A non-Hybrid prototype could hold very little interest for WEC fans that want to race the current LMH/LMDH cars. A Tilke designed track in a formless desert may not interest those who enjoy driving tracks like the Nords' forest roads. Two relatively small, flat airfield road circuits may not appeal to users who enjoy mega tracks like Le Mans.
rF2 has a large tent, YOU don't have to appreciate all that is covered. You get to choose and enjoy/scream at what you want.