Does a car need wheels?? gt/vision gt relented

[MatskiMonk]

Even the 2X, which is pushing it in my opinion, has a basis for reality, it's not the laser propulsion itself that is implausible, because that's been done (to a degree), it's being able to sustain the kind of energy required to power it from something like an on-board engine or small battery that pushes it beyond current boundaries - that and the fact no car would ever be allowed to race that can achieve those speeds and uses the drivers arms and face as a crumple zone.

The RBX cars are pretty plausible, all you'd need is the budget. Perhaps the unique grip offered by it's tyre model is a bit much - but that's the tyres fault, not the car design, and those g's aren't that amazing given they are not sustained for more than a moment, as @Griffith500 explained in the Motec thread.

As for hover cars... expending all that energy just to overcome a sustained 1g is pointless, there's no benefit if you are racing on tarmac, though I'm sure with thrust vectoring (and enough power) you'd be able to achieve the necessary cornering ability.

 

[sparkytooth]

i welcome the idea of a hovercraft like car, where you control the thrust instead of the wheel torque. if its a mini jet engine with thrusters that can point strait or at side angles (for turning), it would be super fun to do drifting in every corner and maintain 100% control. we already have the physics for thrusting because thats exactly how the X2 is propelled.

also the X2 has unique downforce, the exhuast is forced upward and pushes down on on the vehicle (atleast thats what i understand from the marketing video).

I don't know, it does seem fun from a hooning perspective on paper, but in-game.... I don't know, although any type of machine is welcome to me, a hovercar is very weird.

 

[MatskiMonk]

IMO the concept would need to be one of a car that could change direction without relying (as much) on grip to do so, rather than a flat out hover car.

edit:

I've just decided what's going to be visionary about my car from the (if you designed your own VGT thread)

 

[nickg07]

You guys should try Wipeout 2097.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Even the 2X, which is pushing it in my opinion, has a basis for reality, it's not the laser propulsion itself that is implausible, because that's been done (to a degree), it's being able to sustain the kind of energy required to power it from something like an on-board engine or small battery that pushes it beyond current boundaries - that and the fact no car would ever be allowed to race that can achieve those speeds and uses the drivers arms and face as a crumple zone.

The RBX cars are pretty plausible, all you'd need is the budget. Perhaps the unique grip offered by it's tyre model is a bit much - but that's the tyres fault, not the car design, and those g's aren't that amazing given they are not sustained for more than a moment, as @Griffith500 explained in the Motec thread.

As for hover cars... expending all that energy just to overcome a sustained 1g is pointless, there's no benefit if you are racing on tarmac, though I'm sure with thrust vectoring (and enough power) you'd be able to achieve the necessary cornering ability.

Griffith explained how 20g's is possible to survive, he didn't explain how you can be cornering at 400 km/h, covering 110 metres/second, experiencing 20 lateral g's, while at the same time retaining control of your car and not crashing into a barrier or flying over a curb and into the grandstands.

Kind of hilarious how you can so easily justify a laser powered car and something being driveable at anything close to X1 speeds, but poo poo the idea of a hover car and declare it pointless.

 

[NightHawkFur]

[Insert BTTF 2015 Joke here]

 

[Bo]

Griffith explained how 20g's is possible to survive, he didn't explain how you can be cornering at 400 km/h, covering 110 metres/second, experiencing 20 lateral g's, while at the same time retaining control of your car and not crashing into a barrier or flying over a curb and into the grandstands.

Kind of hilarious how you can so easily justify a laser powered car and something being driveable at anything close to X1 speeds, but poo poo the idea of a hover car and declare it pointless.

Considering how much you hate the idea of VGT's and fantasy cars, you're weirdly enthusiastic about this. Are you feeling OK?

 

[MatskiMonk]

Griffith explained how 20g's is possible to survive, he didn't explain how you can be cornering at 400 km/h, covering 110 metres/second, experiencing 20 lateral g's, while at the same time retaining control of your car and not crashing into a barrier or flying over a curb and into the grandstands.

Kind of hilarious how you can so easily justify a laser powered car and something being driveable at anything close to X1 speeds, but poo poo the idea of a hover car and declare it pointless.

How is it hilarious?

You're not misrepresenting the various points of my post (and perhaps Griffith's in the Motec thread) for the sake of an argument are you?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Considering how much you hate the idea of VGT's and fantasy cars, you're weirdly enthusiastic about this. Are you feeling OK?

Ironic isn't it But also untrue. I'm not against the VGT Project and if you knew my posting history, you'd see I was wildly enthusiastic about it from the beginning. What I'm not enthusiastic about is that it's taken up the majority of real car DLC modeling effort.

How is it hilarious?

You're not misrepresenting the various points of my post (and perhaps Griffith's in the Motec thread) for the sake of an argument are you?

It's hilarious because the very same arguments you use to justify the X cars and laser power are the very same arguments that apply to a hover car.

has a basis for reality

because that's been done (to a degree)

all you'd need is the budget

VGT project is supposed to be about pushing boundaries, that's how you get laser powered cars. The X1 project is about pushing boundaries that's how you get cars that can corner at 20 g's and not crash. But a hover car, which would likely not come close to those speeds given the limitations of using air propulsion in counteracting g-forces quickly, is somehow going too far. Makes perfect sense.

 

[ManicDan]

Griffith explained how 20g's is possible to survive, he didn't explain how you can be cornering at 400 km/h, covering 110 metres/second, experiencing 20 lateral g's, while at the same time retaining control of your car and not crashing into a barrier or flying over a curb and into the grandstands.

Kind of hilarious how you can so easily justify a laser powered car and something being driveable at anything close to X1 speeds, but poo poo the idea of a hover car and declare it pointless.

the answer to that is very easy. the steering wheel does not feel g-forces, its round. nomatter if we push 1 or 1000, the only limit is our ability to hold our arms up, and even then its opposite forces thanks to one hand being on each side.

if i turn left i am moving counter clockwise, my right arm might have a hard time going up and left, but my left arm has an easy time going down and right, so they equal back out.

if cars were built with sticks like we have in planes (what do they call that stick anyway?) it might be a better argument, since as i turn left i have to move the stick left, and then both my arms are wanting to move right making the turn harder to perform.

in cars, if you are strapped in, you can turn. as far as controlling the insane speed of a redbull car, that just takes practice, and a proper tune.

 

[Griffith500]

What are the typical lateral g forces achieved with a car with wheels? And longitudinal? Why do they differ so much?

Given the motive power likely to be available, even with perfect vectoring, "cornering" in a hover car would be comparatively dull. They could be fun on purpose built courses, though.

If you leverage aero forces, you can borrow from the "kinetic energy tank" in the same way that the inertial reaction from tyre contact patches does, or at least more effectively.

But I think you'd have to be going very fast to get any real responsiveness, at which point the aero could provide the hovering force as well, and then what you have is an aeroplane.

Sounds good to me.

EDIT: as for conventional hovercraft, a lot of their agility (such as it is) comes from controlling the skirt friction. So they'd be rubbish if it weren't for the contact with the ground. That large immovable lump we call "Earth" is very useful in inertial situations, as it turns out.

 

[suomi1]

=> Does a car need wheels?? <=



Hmmm.....
No!

A car has wheels, if it doesn't, that's not a car.

 

[Johnnypenso]

the answer to that is very easy. the steering wheel does not feel g-forces, its round. nomatter if we push 1 or 1000, the only limit is our ability to hold our arms up, and even then its opposite forces thanks to one hand being on each side.

if i turn left i am moving counter clockwise, my right arm might have a hard time going up and left, but my left arm has an easy time going down and right, so they equal back out.

if cars were built with sticks like we have in planes (what do they call that stick anyway?) it might be a better argument, since as i turn left i have to move the stick left, and then both my arms are wanting to move right making the turn harder to perform.

in cars, if you are strapped in, you can turn. as far as controlling the insane speed of a redbull car, that just takes practice, and a proper tune.

You realize at 20g's your arms would momentarily weigh 300-400 lbs? Can you curl 300 lbs? I can't.

 

[Griffith500]

You realize at 20g's your arms would momentarily weigh 300-400 lbs? Can you curl 300 lbs? I can't.

The arm itself "weighing" that much, and supporting that much as a free weight at the end of it, are two very different things. Then there's the issue that these are inertial forces, and weight is a convenient analogy only (cannot assume similar geometry).
EDIT: the issue is one of mechanical stress; it should be evenly distributed over the entire body, in order to minimise its effect. Enter buoyancy.*

I think this is irrelevant now; removing the ability to react against a practically immovable object is a far bigger step than anything else in the game.

* For reference, 20g develops 20 atm static pressure in the buoyancy tank, which is about 300 psi. That's resisted by the entire body surface of 2 square metres, or 4000 square inches. That results in a local force of 0.075 lbf, or 0.3 N; not quite "20 times your weight". Sustained operation may be uncomfortable; enter the exoskeleton! You could also charge the tank at a lower pressure and the driver at a higher pressure in anticipation of a g shock, and even alter them both dynamically.

 

[FiftyBelowZero]

Hoover car, you say?

 

[Jimmy_Pop]

It is 2015, I want my flying DeLorean, with the optional Flux Capacitor

 

[NightHawkFur]

and when you hit 88mph, your copy of gt6 will turn into gt1

 

[Boxout]

and when you hit 88mph, your copy of gt6 will turn into gt1

Seriously why not? Just think about it...

Could be a new set of special events, where you start in a normal GT6 event like a time trial where the goal is just nailing a time in one lap, similar to the senna events, but after reaching 88mph you get sent back to an old GT game from 1 to 4 to have some good variety, in the same track you were racing, with the same car but in a direct port from the game you got sent to, and your clock keeps in sync with time of the place you left. And in the last straight you get send back to GT6 so you complete the race.

Just think how awesome would that be, why isn't PD working in that?

 

[BrandonW77]

Hoover car, you say?

Aren't all the cars in GT6 Hoover cars?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Seriously why not? Just think about it...

Could be a new set of special events, where you start in a normal GT6 event like a time trial where the goal is just nailing a time in one lap, similar to the senna events, but after reaching 88mph you get sent back to an old GT game from 1 to 4 to have some good variety, in the same track you were racing, with the same car but in a direct port from the game you got sent to, and your clock keeps in sync with time of the place you left. And in the last straight you get send back to GT6 so you complete the race.

Just think how awesome would that be, why isn't PD working in that?

That's probably more realistic than a car cornering at 20g's with a human behind the wheel

 

[NFSCARBON1]

A VGT hovercar with laser propulsion? Presumably it'll have active aero too?

Would this do?

 

[NLxAROSA]

and when you hit 88mph, your copy of gt6 will turn into gt1

Shouldn't be too hard, 75% of GT6 is GT4 already.

 

[sircarltonlotus]

I think people need to take their arguments to Adrian Newey about the red bull cars. I think he made it quite clear the car is perfectly feasible if no regulation existed. Piloting it IRL is not really the concern, it was purely to demonstrate what a "car" is capable of. Unless of course Newey is a secret idiot. The 2X again is the brainchild of chaparral. Write to them and ask for an explanation about the laser. People are trying to make out pd and kaz are responsible for these "cars". As for a hovercar, forget it. The chaparral with its no wheel drive set up is easily the worst car to drive ever, in my opinion.

 

[Imari]

If you look at the tracks and the like that we have in GT, I don't see how a hovercraft could ever be faster or better than a car of similar power. It's going to be noisy, blowy, and manoeuvre like a hovercraft. Anything you do to try and negate this is going to either take more power or make it into a small plane that doesn't fly very high.

Vision GT was supposed to be about the future of grand touring. Obviously some manufacturers have kind of ignored that and built racecars, but whatever. At least their cars demonstrate some future way of making cars that might be beneficial or interesting.

I don't see any aspect of building a hovercar that would be beneficial or interesting that doesn't make the vehicle into something that isn't a car. If there is one then by all means they should go for it. But I sort of doubt it.