The New Creek by Rip

[RIPPERTON]

What do you guys think about my new track design for the creek. Heaps faster, figure 8.
As you come out of 3 and head over the hill, you dont go down the hill but stay level and cross over to the t9 approach and head towards t8. do t7 , a new faster t6 and t5 and head through the tunnel to t9 and continue to t10. Now theres 4 lefts and 6 rights.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e62/ripperton_2008/CreekMod.jpg

[Zee]

Pretty good rip. :ayyy:...I woulda chucked a chicane in the back straight to break up boring bit.

[Tarrasque]

Why have a bridge, make it a jump!

I dont think there is anything wrong with the current creek design.

[Captain]

I like your thinking mate :ayyy:
To be honest I prefer it as it is, but for first effort it's pretty good.

[RIPPERTON]

You mean like this.
You dont want to ruin the elevator effect of t4 and would be good to slow ppl down a bit before they got to the old 7/6.
Yeah now still 12 turns.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e62/ripperton_2008/CreekModChicane.jpg

[RIPPERTON]

I dont think there is anything wrong with the current creek design.

Yeah but with council wankers that have our money burning holes in thier pockets its good to have proper track designs to use as ammo against their stupidity just incase they get the urge to change something

[Captain]

Can I suggest the bridge the other way? So that 8 -> 9 you go over the bridge and down...

[lilninja]

Ya Can't take out turn nine!!! thats one of the best turns 4 7 & 9 would destroy the right side of ya tire

[RIPPERTON]

Can I suggest the bridge the other way? So that 8 -> 9 you go over the bridge and down...

No you cant Captain
t3 exit is already elevated, its already a bridge, (paddock entry), Youve got to use existing topography as much as possible to cut costs
Plus if 8 9 was a bridge, t9 entry would be an impossible downhill.

[RIPPERTON]

Ya Can't take out turn nine!!! thats one of the best turns 4 7 & 9 would destroy the right side of ya tire

Thats ok then you would just have a tire thats equally destroyed on both sides. Dont forget t1 is a left side killer

[JOLT]

I like. Not that i hate all the lefts but to mix it up with some rights like that would be sweet.

[lilninja]

very true, + i love right handers!

[zenodamper]

Well, I like it - you would get some nice momentum up thru 8 and around 7/6 into 5 - and yep, I do like rights too... :D

[Zee]

Sold! when does construction begin :-)

[Kat00]

Make T3 like the current T9, put the bridge over near T8 an horseshoe into T4 and your on a winner.

[RIPPERTON]

I dont think there is anything wrong with the current creek design.

Movers and Shakers would like to have the MotoGP back in town and so would I for that matter.
The current Creek layout wont cut it for MotoGP cause its too slow and small so it needs to be redesigned to be faster so the 800's can breath.
My design is just an honest go at achieving this goal and for an affordable sum. The amount of alterations I have in mind are minimal. It is definitely better than the slapshod scratchings we saw in the paper a few months ago. Sure the overall real estate available to us may be the ultimate limiting factor but as I said before, the public has to take the initiative so that a realistic design can be set forth and considered and agreed upon by the public. Once the public and certain professional racers can agree upon a better design we can push aside any unwanted proposals that originate from council offices.

[RUSSELL]

i love it, more the fact i get to ride fast thru a tunnel. suggestion? make the tunnel longer???

[hoffy]

3 to 4 would be a wild ride, as there's gonna have to be some serious elevation, it would be fast !!

[Johnny]

3 to 4 would be a wild ride, as there's gonna have to be some serious elevation, it would be fast !!

3-4 already has most bikes lifting the front wheel as it is , with the longer straight, its not going to get less.
Besides, this, I like very much, a few more right handers is always good, but there is too many straights as it is, and that between 3-4 is a big one, 4 could get messy.

[hoffy]

3-4 already has most bikes lifting the front wheel as it is , with the longer straight, its not going to get less.
Besides, this, I like very much, a few more right handers is always good, but there is too many straights as it is, and that between 3-4 is a big one, 4 could get messy.


turn 4 could potentially be a blind right hander with the elevation as you come over the hill...will be fun coming onto that corner at 220 + :mod_smilie_rockwoot

[Mr.Ed]

The best thing about the design is that, unlike previous ones I've seen, this one seems to take run off areas into consideration! :ayyy::ayyy:
The last plan I saw for the "New Creek" (the one where they'd run it clockwise) going fast into what is now T1 would pretty much to suicide on a bike. I'm sure MotoGP takes that into consideration as well.

[Dr freedom]

I think the way things are these days, if you can design it for both cars & bikes, you will be onto something.
I say this as its the only way out of the hole NSW is in via the current way of thinking.

30 million given to v8 supercars for a homebush, just to see Skaife go even more broke is ridiculous.. upgrade the facilities we have ffs.

[Captain]

I think there are some track rules, not sure whether these apply to F1 or motoGP as well. The only one I recall was that you had to have a hard braking zone at the end of the straight ... hence the sharp right-hander (T1) in the proposed EC layout.

Re making T9 'impossible', that might well be the case, I haven't considered the existing elevations etc. But I do recall reading about track design (around the time that the proposed EC layout came out) and was surprised to learn that a good track is intentionally 'difficult', even 'wrong'. Things like weird double apexes, off camer turns after a hill are all intentional to challenge drivers and riders.
:confused1:

An interesting article . (http://www.sportrider.com/features/146_0402_alan_wilson_safe_race_track_design/index.html)

http://images.sportrider.com/features/146_0402_alan06_z.jpg
Think that designing a racetrack is just a matter of drawing any ol' squiggly oval? This diagram of the Barber circuit shows the exact measurements of each turn down to the inch. And this isn't even a topographical map (showing elevation changes).


But like I said Rip I like the concept, I used to doodle with track designs many years ago for fun .... and it seems I'm not the only one, there's seems to be a bit of a 'passion' for it. I came across this too: http://www.ten-tenths.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=59

[RIPPERTON]

i love it, more the fact i get to ride fast thru a tunnel. suggestion? make the tunnel longer???

The tunnel would be longer than Ive drawn it.
The flyover (3-4) would have to be about 2 and a half track widths with a wall along the left and crash room out off to the right that doesnt drop off. ie the run off next to the track would have to be level for at least a track width then slope down to existing ground very shallowly so that cars and bikes that loose control on the flyover would not get air and slide off a cliff so to speak. The upper part of the tunnel entrance would need its own wall to stop cars sliding off and dropping down to the track below plus room for air bags on that wall.
Designing the flyover / tunnel with all the necessary safety features would be quite a challenge.
You might even need 2 tunnels. one for race track and the second one for track access.
The tunnel could end up being 60m to 80m long.
For comparison the existing paddock access tunnel is 55m long

[RIPPERTON]

Im getting excited just thinking of riding up the new back straight 3 4.
its 550m long (the main str8 is 810m) and would need 4th on a liter bike then back to 3rd for the elevator right (4) which crests into a blind brake zone for the chicane 5 6.
The track would gain only a few meters in length but lap time would drop because its had 90 degrees of turns removed.
ie the old 9 is only 90 degrees instead of 180 and old 4 is gone

[jasonbw]

I'd get rid of the white van facing the wrong direction at the T2 exit and you're on a winner. Imagine T4 (old T8 reverse direction), damn man, that'd be ballsy after a 550m straight... off camber crested.... sweet!

[*Oggy*]

Pity the newer games dont have the facility to create your own tracks... I remember getting the "motox madness" game and you could create tracks using photoshop.. by varying the "greyness" in colour changed the altitude, so you could contour the track and then add the physical components.....

[LAW]

I'm looking forward to rolling off the throttle inside a tunnel and getting 3 foot blue flames reverberating over the already deafening race pipe on my 650 'twin. at road speeds I'm already singeing the corner of my P-plate from overrun flames :D

Looks sweet Rip but maybe shorten 4 and 6 to make 5 more of a corner and give the rhs of the tire a break?

[RUSSELL]

The tunnel would be longer than Ive drawn it.
The flyover (3-4) would have to be about 2 and a half track widths with a wall along the left and crash room out off to the right that doesnt drop off. ie the run off next to the track would have to be level for at least a track width then slope down to existing ground very shallowly so that cars and bikes that loose control on the flyover would not get air and slide off a cliff so to speak. The upper part of the tunnel entrance would need its own wall to stop cars sliding off and dropping down to the track below plus room for air bags on that wall.
Designing the flyover / tunnel with all the necessary safety features would be quite a challenge.
You might even need 2 tunnels. one for race track and the second one for track access.
The tunnel could end up being 60m to 80m long.
For comparison the existing paddock access tunnel is 55m long



Ripper 4 PM? got my vote champ