Hi Marc,
I can see people are not that eager to reply, so allow me to try
Please note, however, I'm not a "professional" track builder (so far I've only done 3 projects for personal training purposes) and seasoned modellers can have a totally different opinion.
To answer some of your questions, basically, the more data you can obtain about a track the more realistic it will be. The data is mainly compiled from official track specifications, Google Maps (or, better, Google Earth), photos and footages taken on the track.
Normally, things like length, min/max track width are quite realistic as these figures are usually stated in the official track specs. However, things like elevation, camber and "bumpiness" are more difficult to evaluate and they are often based on a subjective perception. For instance, one can't rely on elevation values provided by Google Earth or GPSVisualizer as they are so inaccurate for a relatively small area of the track. However, it's not a huge problem to reproduce these features if you obtain correct numbers.
Of course, laser scanning sounds great for this purpose, but it's still quite expensive. iRacing, being a multi-million dollar business, can surely afford it; however, KRP is basically a one-man project. All tracks downloadable from this forum are made by members of the community free of charge.
Still, if you have an opportunity to laser-scan your tracks, it seems like it's technically feasible to create a track for KRP with point cloud data. A frame rate can become an issue, though, as it is recommended to keep an eye on the number of collidable polygons... Well, anyway, it would be SOO great to test drive such a track one day!
By the way, a forum search mentions one project which was supposed to be done using the laser scanned data (Autokomerc in Serbia). That project took about 2 years to complete. For some reason the track was removed from public access soon after its completion
Well, hope the above helps a bit.
Kind regards,
LXS
I can see people are not that eager to reply, so allow me to try

Please note, however, I'm not a "professional" track builder (so far I've only done 3 projects for personal training purposes) and seasoned modellers can have a totally different opinion.
To answer some of your questions, basically, the more data you can obtain about a track the more realistic it will be. The data is mainly compiled from official track specifications, Google Maps (or, better, Google Earth), photos and footages taken on the track.
Normally, things like length, min/max track width are quite realistic as these figures are usually stated in the official track specs. However, things like elevation, camber and "bumpiness" are more difficult to evaluate and they are often based on a subjective perception. For instance, one can't rely on elevation values provided by Google Earth or GPSVisualizer as they are so inaccurate for a relatively small area of the track. However, it's not a huge problem to reproduce these features if you obtain correct numbers.
Of course, laser scanning sounds great for this purpose, but it's still quite expensive. iRacing, being a multi-million dollar business, can surely afford it; however, KRP is basically a one-man project. All tracks downloadable from this forum are made by members of the community free of charge.
Still, if you have an opportunity to laser-scan your tracks, it seems like it's technically feasible to create a track for KRP with point cloud data. A frame rate can become an issue, though, as it is recommended to keep an eye on the number of collidable polygons... Well, anyway, it would be SOO great to test drive such a track one day!
By the way, a forum search mentions one project which was supposed to be done using the laser scanned data (Autokomerc in Serbia). That project took about 2 years to complete. For some reason the track was removed from public access soon after its completion

Well, hope the above helps a bit.
Kind regards,
LXS