Forums

Wasn't sure which thread to bump but I guess this one makes sense.

Here's the new version of Rio in progress. It builds upon Wolf's layout (from the OPE version that Pavel posted), incorporates Pavel's LP and pitlane from the version at the top of this thread (room for some tweaking here due to some subtle changes I've made to the layout), and has some new textures and objects.

Edit: Removed this version since I posted a new one

Awesome so far! I love the hollywood logos on the wall. Does Rio have any banking? I watch a youtube replay, and if it does it sure must be slight.

I can't find any references to banking at Rio, and it's hard to tell from the videos. I always assumed it was flat.

If I remember right, in the TV coverage they mentioned, that it wasn't flat, it had a baking of around 2 degrees, but I don't know, if it was so in every turn and how much exactly.

(04-15-2020, 02:25 PM)Dennis Wrote: [ -> ]If I remember right, in the TV coverage they mentioned, that it wasn't flat, it had a baking of around 2 degrees, but I don't know, if it was so in every turn and how much exactly.

It's so funny you mention that... I am creeping on youtube now for pictures to try and make my own judgement lol.

This is a view looking at the exit of one, coming onto the back stretch. I think maybe 1 and 4 might have just a LITTLE banking... it's hard to see.

Maybe like 5 degrees?

---

Here is an animated gif... Deferran entering Turn 4.... to me it looks like it's just barely banked... even less than Milwaukee...

---

Wait.... I found better video... here is the video link.

I think it's banked for sure.... watch the mountains on this video and see how they slope when he goes into the corner:

https://youtu.be/KQrAcOYo2YY?t=2157

I'm going to work on some other stuff on Rio while we figure out the banking question. Shouldn't be too big a deal to change it at any later stage. I reached out on Twitter and hopefully someone might know for sure.

Somewhere between 2-5 degrees seems reasonable.

OK, so I think this is a little agressive but I found this on duckduckgo.....

http://nascarfan19.weebly.com/emerson-fi...edway.html

They are saying 7 degrees in "one and two" and 4 degrees in "three and four". I think the names "one and two" "three and four" are NOT being used in the same way I name these corners. Personally, I call 1 and 4 the turns, while 2 and 3 are the "doglegs" on the back stretch (which aren't really "corners" in the traditional sense) I know from watching a lot of CART when the drivers name the corners they name them entrance/exit 1/2 and such (I still don't understand this to this day)

I did find this wicked photo that would make an amazing track menu picture....


Just because I wanted to take my own measurements if we can't find anything better, I took 2 still shots from deferran's in-car and compared the 2 by super-imposing them in gimp. There is a 2.1 degree angle of difference...

(red is at the apex turn 1, green is on main straight)

---

Finally - I found something i trust a little more....

http://www.gdecarli.it/php/circuit.php?var1=121&var2=2

Description Proposal dated Autumn 1995 for the new oval and for changing the street track. It’s quite similar to what it has really built in 1996. Originally the track should have been 1.3 mi long (not shown in my map), but an agreement between FISA and Cart dated 1992 allows oval circuits outside USA only if they are at least 3 km - 1.86 mi long
Years 1995
Direction Anticlockwise Anticlockwise
Progetto Proposal Proposal YES
Proposal not developed YES
Car Circuit YES
Motorbike circuit
Type Oval course
Inauguration
Closing
Last update of this page November 9th 2007
Info last update October 1995
Designer
Distinctive points Curva 1 - Curva 2 - Reta Oposta - Curva 3 - Curva 4
length 3000 m 9843 ft 1.864 mi (12)
length 2092 m 6864 ft 1.3 mi Original proposal (12)
Max. banking (bends) 3 ° 5.2 % (12)

(04-15-2020, 03:59 PM)samsepi0l Wrote: [ -> ]I know from watching a lot of CART when the drivers name the corners they name them entrance/exit 1/2 and such (I still don't understand this to this day)

On ovals that appear to have only 2 180° turns, there are technically 4 90° turns, so 1/2 is at one end of the track and 3/4 is at the other. And the exit of turn 1 IS the entrance of turn 2, even though that point is at the apex of the physical curve. Don't try to find logic in it, you'll hurt your head; it's just one of those perverse American things that we do to make us different from everyone else.

@samsepi0l-
First link looks like some fictional version of Rio. Probably can't be relied on.
The second link describes the original proposed layout with 3 degrees banking. That one was not built. It then goes on to the revised layout but is silent about the banking.
So we have a couple of data points here - you measured it to be 2 degrees based on the video, and we know that at least originally, Rio was going to have 3 degrees.
Of course it is not a stretch to believe that they just carried over the plans to have 3 degree banking to the finalized layout, but that would just be a guess.
Among other things, your aerial photo is helpful to determine the location of the start finish line. It appears to be further up the main straight, not in the center as the current ICR2 version has. I also need to widen T3 which was apparently 85 feet wide according to some pre-1996 race hype that I found.

Need some thoughts on this: Let's say I am going to give T1 and T4 about 2.8 degrees of banking. Right now, each turn is divided into two sections, or 3 points (corner entry, middle and exit). If I just bank the middle point, then the turn will start at 0 banking, get to a maximum of 2.8 degrees, and then go back to 0 at the start of the next section (i.e. the back straightaway). See illustration.

Is this how it would've been designed on the real track, or would banking have started before the corner? And would the banking get to the maximum of 2.8 degrees and then start leveling out right away? Or should the turn be at maximum banking for longer?