Message posted by Vince on July 05, 2009 at 22:51:05 PST:

Just some observations:

a) As noted, the track is very narrow and has no run off.
b) It looks extremely simple and low precision; there doesn't seem to have been any ground prep around it and it sort of looks like the paving machine was hand-steered as the straightaways aren't perfectly straight and the corners don't follow an even radius. The presence of the parking lot didn't bother them as they modified the track to go around it.
c) Of course it's 0.5m resolution so we might not see it, but there doesn't seem to be any support infrastructure (timing / measurement equipment, cameras, covered staging area)
d) It's more of an oval than a road coarse in terms of layout; 3 lap lengths

Now some conclusions:

a) What is being tested is small and doesn't need side-by-side or competitive testing; not likely running at high speeds or pushing any physical limits or there would be run-off & barriers.
b) This isn't a big-budget or critical project; perhaps some proof-of-concept testing.
c) Either the test subject does it's own measurement or measurement isn't necessary.
d) Since this is oval-like, performance testing on left & right turns isn't critical, so this is either straight-line or endurance testing.

I personally don't think this is for target testing. It's not realistic enough. No traffic, cross roads etc. I'd also say it's unlikely that that kind of test would go on so close to base buildings.

As for recreational use: Who would want to drive a dirt bike / ATV around on a paved course when you can drive in the desert with real terrain and obstacles. I don't see it.

One of my thoughts would be that this might be a running track. That would explain a lot of it's odd features including close proximity to the base that don't really make it suitable for vehicular performance testing. Whether that would be recreational running or some sort of "development" would be another question.

Vince

In Reply to: More satellite image clips posted by Joerg (Webmaster) on July 04, 2009 at 13:01:43 PST:

Replies: