I know that all tracks have their inaccuracies and I’m not a stickler for perfection. A bit of unrealistic rise or fall in elevation or maybe a bit too much or too little camber is to be expected if a track isn’t laser modeled. And mostly it really doesn’t matter. We still have a very reasonable model of the track and everybody has to race the same surface. But the ramp at Tabac at Monaco I think is in a different category. It is such a unique feature and is so drastic that it presents a special case. It is very difficult to get right and I think it shouldn’t be made harder that the real thing. It is something that I think should be modeled as accurately as possible. As an old GPLer, for many years I had no idea that the ramp ever existed. And even after I became aware of it it was of no consequence because I never had to drive it. But then I bought rF2! From the first time I tried to go over it I’ve been amazed at how difficult an obstacle it is. I mean wow! Even letting off the brakes early it slams the front end and it’s a real crap shoot as to whether or not I can stick the landing. Well I did some research and I concluded that rF2 ramp is much shorter and therefore steeper than the real thing was. AND, in rF2 there is a little trough across the track right at the take-off line where the pavement changes! It is about 6” wide and appears to be an inch or so deep! Well that will sure rattle the suspension at just the wrong time! To figure out the historic layout I dug through old footage on You Tube. I found some shots taken from a great distance (across the harbor) and perpendicular (or very nearly so) to the track that allows one to see the rise from the side. The best shot is from 1955. There is also a 1968 shot that confirms that the start point didn’t change over that 13 year period, though that shot doesn’t show the end point as well. look at 1min15 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5YULS02iBk and 2min56 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dwezl59pF24 and 4min47 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPH5ipV9iQg&feature=related From those videos, using landmarks that still exist today (concrete supports along the harbor edge), and from the measuring function of Google Earth I’ve concluded that the historic ramp was about 85 feet long. In rF2 I used the wheel base of a BT-20 as a kind of measuring stick. I “freeze-framed” a slow car (following the SC) to measure how many wheel base lengths it took to traverse the ramp. It took 6 lengths. I’m not sure of the exact wheelbase of the BT-20 but a BT-24 was 93”(from GPL). Using 93”, that would make the rF2 ramp 46 feet long. As you can see it is about half the length it should be. Which will make it steeper too. (6.2 Vs. 3.4 degrees for a 5 foot rise.) Now I’ll bet that it will be just about impossible to convince ISI to make a change to a track that has already been released but in my view this is a case that should be carefully considered. As I said, it is such a unique feature that presents a huge challenge to master and be consistent on, even when modeled correctly. But just for the goal of creating a realistic sim experience of contending with this trademark feature begs for it to be made right. At least please get rid of the “trough”! Let me guess Tim… the trough really existed! (You conviced me that those crazy wooden posts were all over Spa!) Am I wrong about the ramp? Is fixing it something ISI would consider doing? Do your guys have counter data?
Well, there's this: [video]http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=dU_xkM7TZR0[/video] ...from the movie Grand Prix. Reference material doesn't get much better Keep in mind, too, that it's filmed for a movie, and they've got a big lunkin' camera on the front of the car. So they're not going anywhere near race speed, either---if that bump doesn't seem as violent as it does in-game.
None of the videos show Tabac at the times you indicate. The first two are showing the final turn at that time, and the third is showing the other (station) hairpin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vjzp4Dd2nk 1:30s You can also see the large angle difference on many period photographs http://www.f1-photo.com/Photo/Siffert_1966_Monaco_01_BC.jpg/Search:1966%20monaco/p20x16 I believe you are incorrect, and that the track is correct.
I'm sorry Tim, but in the second vid, it is Tabac. The seconds before you can see them exit the chicane, and it is one continous shot to Tabac Other vids there indeed isn't Tabac corner at given time. However, having said that, I don't find it looking really wrong..... Maybe a bit smoother, but when comparing onboards, I find it looking pretty much the same.
Yeah, father and son F1 photogs. Hopefully (fingers crossed) going to be able to use their photos for our Web site on the car/track profiles, etc.
You don't see Tabac though, it's behind a tree. You see him start to brake, behind the wall where you wouldn't see Tabac properly anyway, then it skips to the hairpin.
The OP does seems to be right. The rf2 ramp does seem to be a bit short compared to the youtube video of the real track. The curve needs to extend to the steps.
My bad... I had so many freakin vids open I got confused. time on 1955 vid should have read 1:45. This is a key view actually shown by by DJCruicky above. time on 2nd vid is correct, 2:56. time on 3rd vid should have read 3:38 Wow, yeah, I forgot about the movie... I have the DVD! The scene you reference makes me want to say yeah, the game is fairly accurate. But head-on shots can be deceiving when it comes to judging longitudinal distance and lengths. I did use the movie to help analyze the situation. It has to be the definite source, being that both are 1966. Let me preface my criticism with a bow to ISI for what you guys have created. It boggles my mind to think of how many man-hours must have gone into researching and building such a complex track. It is an absolute work of art. (You like the way I pat you on the back with one hand while I poke out your eye with the other?!) Ha Ha! All kidding aside, it is great job you ISI guys have done. But I think the pics I’m posting show that the ramp is too short. I will shorten my estimate of the true length from the 85 feet I posted earlier to about 70. This is based on the cement supports along the edge of the track. Google shows these to be 42 feet center to center. Regarding the pics I'm posting below, the line marking the ramp start can be deduced from the link that blakboks provided. The track breaks upward just before the Marlboro sign where the pavement color changes. The upper line is more subjective since the track there has a more rounding transition than the start line. But after looking at many views and angles I think the line I show is the top of the incline, before the rounding. There is a change in cement color there that might be where they transitioned from the flat pavement section to a curved one. By my estimate there are about nine 1966 Ferrari wheel bases on the rise. In rF2 I estimate only about five BT-20 wheel bases (down from my earler count of six). View attachment 3755 View attachment 3756 I just saw DJCruicky’s post. Very good view. I’m not skilled enough in moving rF2 cameras around. Thanks DJ for showing that. Note the “trench” in DJ’s bottom pic.
Good one! With your comment can I assume it's accepted that an error exists? If so, the next logical (or perhaps irrational) question would be: Is there any chance it would ever be corrected? It wouldn't be for the sake of "looks", it's integral to the integrity of the Monaco sim.
Imho the two arcs have different radius. The one in the video seems to have the apex just above the small water tunnel under the bridge, the ingame one have the apex just above the central column. So, in the video I see (starting from the right); column A, column B, the rock and the water tunnel. The apex seems above the water tunnel. Bigger radius. Ingame I see; column A, column B, the rock and Water Tunnel. The arc apex seems above the column B. Smallest radius. If inter-distances between columns and water tunnel are correct in the model..then something could be wrong in the ramp lenght.
I'd be glad to help nail the characteristics. I enjoy archival research. And I love technical details. Must be the old engineer in me. Plus I love Monaco! Went there a couple of years ago and walked and drove the circuit. Did about a 15 minute PB... driving it!
from the movie still / screenshot post by DJCruicky, it does look like there could be some room to take another look, particularly since it's not a trivial part of the circuit. A more obvious thing is the height of that stone wall/ramp next to the track. In the screen it seems to arc too high and then drop again towards Saint Devote, but in the movie shot it seems like it reaches a lower high point, and perhaps stays level to Saint Devote. My years of the longford circuit project have got me keen for details Speaking of, I'll get back to it... Cheers!
I crash on that horrible, evil ramp all the time. I hope that it turns out that it was actually shallower, like the OP says, because I think I'm too stupid to drive Monaco in the '60s cars if it wasn't.
