#technical talk

[charles-leclerc-official]

The timing of Ferrari announcing they are changing the front suspension of next year's car, and still working out the direction for the rear suspension does seem to correlate with these last few races where Charles was doing a lot of data gathering after it was clear the suspension was not supporting the aero upgrades.

The current tests for the 2025 car are using a pull rod configuration instead of the push rod(which is what the current SF-24 uses)

Interesting timing. I think in the coming weeks Charles' performance specifically will be used to make more finalization on the choices for the rear suspension as well. That is a more key area and they probably need to take their time with it since they haven't run a push-rod rear suspension for this regulation cycle.

I think the data they have gathered since the upgrades has not only been informing solutions for this year, but more importantly next year as well. Since this year finally exposed the suspension as a key issue it makes sense that they want all the data possible if they are going to completely change directions.

It also may be that the pull rod on both the front and the rear supports a better front end. That also may be found. Teams that use the same configuration regardless of the method have seen better results in stability there, so it's a possible avenue. The real thing is that there does seem to be a performance disadvantage to the push rod rear if the front is the opposite. The teams that do use different configs on the front and rears have the push-rod rear suspension, and that seems to be important for balance.

At the very least the suspension seems to be a key focus for Ferrari in developments this year and next year. Considering what we've seen this is where we want the engineering focus to be. The aero packages have been strong, in fact the problem with the aero is that it's working as expected and the current suspension cannot support the improved aero performance.

Good to see the team identifying these mechanical issues and actually taking steps to address them long term.

[wyveraine]

I finally put the settings back on "high" after playing an overwhelming majority of my time in Wilds on the worst quality for best performance mode. Happy to say that a few handful hours back into it there has been no stuttering and no graphical trouble! The frame rate is definitely a little lower but it's capped at a solid 45 and that's good enough for me.

The only problem was unrelated: I started a quest and 7 minutes in a random joined and it immediately ended. It was a 30 minute long quest, so I'm suspecting this random might've triggered a built in anti-cheat protocol that bailed me out, but that's pure speculation. It was indeed strange behavior.

[stiffyck]

i can proudly say i was a john walker fan before this movie dropped btw i get bragging rights about him

[tawnysoup]

You both jump in place for a bit, grinning.

[3000-200-grains-of-salt]

etho!

[turtleblogatlast]

Leo learns something about himself 🏳️‍⚧️

Based roughly on this old post.

Bonus:

[Leo is taking the fact that he was born biologically female simultaneously very well and also not so well but overall he’s mostly coping with the fact that it was Draxum that just essentially gave him the turtle equivalent of ‘The Talk’.]

[aquilaofarkham]

NEW HADES 2 CONTENT INCLUDING A NEW FAMILY PORTRAIT

[theoldkyokodied]

guess which game(s) I've been playing

[that1notetaker]

Unnatural World Disaster x Love & Peace. You'll never guess which is which

[spoopdeedoop]

wait oh my god i forogt to put this shit here too im sorry. i dont have a brain

[yelsapo]

"The camera was positioned in a storage yard 66 metres away."

Or, in other words, 73 yards.

[yellowceiling]

the silliest hedges (minus sonic) baking!!

[inkskinned]

we were sitting on the floor and i was cutting out tiny pictures to make a collage for a friend's birthday. you were on your phone and you laughed about something, and i was still in love with you then, so i asked what had you giggling.

"sorry. i was just..." you took a moment and went back to texting. "i was telling someone about how you're afraid of the dark."

i'm afraid of the dark because something bad happened. "oh." i felt a little slinky of shame crawl down my throat.

you glanced up, and maybe it showed on my face, because you rolled your eyes and held the phone to the side casually so i could see the group chat. "what? was it a secret?"

i looked down to the scissors in my hand. "i just..." no, it's not a secret. it just felt like something private, something serious. saying why would you tell someone that just feels like an accusation. it's unfair. i honestly am not even ashamed of it, it's just a fact about my person that i don't usually share.

what a strange experience. is this a human thing or a generational thing? for our grandparents: did they need to worry about how quickly someone can just... share your personal information? again, i didn't even really have a true objection. what could i say? i want any person in my life to feel they can be honest with their friends. it's not like i said don't tell anyone this.

i cut out another letter to complete the rainbow happy birthday, started hunting for the exclamation mark. i heard you sigh dramatically.

"don't make a big deal about this," you said.

this entire conversation was a pattern for us, and this was when we got to my least favorite part of the pattern. i would get my feelings hurt in some oblique not-technically-terrible way, and then it would be making a big deal about something. you'd get frustrated for me for being soft, but i was born soft. you knew i was soft when you pierced me. it's one of the things that made controlling me so easy.

"i'm not," i felt my voice crack. the question came without my wanting. "why are you guys talking about me?" and why are you saying that thing? why not like - i'm telling them how you're generous and kind and pretty.

you let out this low, tragic groan. "oh my god." you tossed the phone away from your body. "there, see? i just won't talk to them if you don't like it."

the rest of the hour went the way it always went, between us: i said i don't actually mind if you talk to your friends but -, you found a way to call my minor expression of discomfort "being dramatic." you got upset that i had been offended. i ended up apologizing, even though i hadn't actually done anything.

afterwards, you picked up the phone again. after texting for a little bit, you snorted. "okay," you said, "but it is kind of funny you're afraid of the dark. i mean, when you think about it."

[rosurie]

cw: body horror

parasite

[charles-leclerc-official]

Can you please explain anti stall?

Anti stall is a system that keeps the engine running and engages the clutch when the revs(revolutions per minute) go too low. This keeps the engine running at a higher gear. If the car slows and the gear also drops accordingly then there is risk of the engine stalling out. This keeps the engine running at the pace needed to recover the car. There is a time limit built into the system, so if a driver crashes the engine is not kept running indefinitely. It requires that driver input if they are able to keep driving.

If there wasn't this system then a driver would be at risk of their engine stalling every time they spun out or lost speed. It would make it less likely for them to be able to recover from mistakes.

A driver has to manually disengage the clutch to turn off the anti-stall.

This is mostly relevant when a car is stopped at the start of the race, or when they spin out and slow suddenly.

It's a system that is part of the ECU(electronic control unit)

The reason the anti-stall was triggered on Charles' car in Austria(2024) is likely because the engine switched off, which would have dropped those revs low and the computer would be trying to keep the engine running. This of course was futile as the issue for the loss of speed was the engine. It's something the team need to look at.

The anti-stall in this instance was a symptom not the problem.

[thepandalion]

ok no I need to talk about this

the reason ralsei is changing is because of susie

the way he said it, darkners that are based on memories of loved ones can "only appear in specific darkness". meaning, originally, ralsei was kris' memory

and, similarly, gerson was presumably Alvin's?

except. gerson came back. it's the third sanctuary. a different dark world. but he's still here. and why?

because SUSIE remembers him. she wrote alvin the letter from him. she fought him and won and came back to look for him. because now he's in her memories, too.

following that logic, of course ralsei is in her memories too. more prominently, too, each time she returns to an adventure. he strays further from the blurry memories kris has, into something that's both theirs and hers

and, while we're at it, maybe ours, too. we shape him with our choices because we're part of this team too