NZFF

Bill Ortis has produced an impression of a full-sized "B797" version of the Boeing Blended Wing Body research aircraft.
The model in itself is something of a research vehicle, the first to crack 65,000 polygons in FS9.
This is most noticeable in the VC, where things are very "round" and "thin" as required.
According to Bill, the poly limit using the new technique is somewhere around 1.5 million, which opens up intriguing possibilities:
FS9 performance, with FSX-like resolution.

Here's the last bit of the inaugural London-Auckland flight, non-stop via Vladivostok.

Charl , its a PAX carrier that looks like a B2 with and lot off THUNDERBIRDS .. then a little more !

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Aug 14 2010, 03:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Charl , its a PAX carrier that looks like a B2 with and lot off THUNDERBIRDS .. then a little more !

Very impressive looking model indeed !
And yes Ian,........ it does remind me of the "Fireflash" nuclear powered aircraft off THUNDERBIRDS

Lawrie.

Jeepers those guys .. surprised BP did not call International Rescue

Charl wrote:

QUOTE (Charl @ Aug 14 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bill Ortis has produced an impression of a full-sized "B797" version of the Boeing Blended Wing Body research aircraft.
The model in itself is something of a research vehicle, the first to crack 65,000 polygons in FS9.
This is most noticeable in the VC, where things are very "round" and "thin" as required.
According to Bill, the poly limit using the new technique is somewhere around 1.5 million, which opens up intriguing possibilities:
FS9 performance, with FSX-like resolution.

I'm not sure I follow the logic around why you need to crack 65,000 polygons to get FS9 performance and FSX resolution?? As far as I'm aware FSX is not about polys its about the effects - especially textures and materials. Surely if you have a PC capable of rendering a 65,000 (or god forbid 1.5 million) poly model, then I'm sure it would run FSX just fine too. I'm not against detailed models, but in my mind, just because you can, does not mean you have to. I see too many models using extreme detail in areas where you literally can't see it, and this just results in performance loss for no visual gain. Additionally these complex models can be let down if the texturing and shapes and proportions are not done correctly as well. This is not a criticism at the 797, as I'm sure its an ok model.

I'm no modeler so can't comment on where design time and effort should be directed.
Suffice to say that some of the FS fraternity are excited by all this.
I think for this particular model a couple of details in the VC were quite successful as a result of having some more poly's to play with.
(Remembering that it is described as an "accidental" VC, to try out a few things, like that air vent shape)
There is no performance hit, even for quite modest computer setups, apparently.

Looks cool!

http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Boeing_797.html

Btw, DO NOT click the manual link inserted in the picture. It has a virus in it. That's what AVG free told me.

Nzeddy wrote:

QUOTE (Nzeddy @ Aug 14 2010, 09:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Looks cool!
http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Boeing_797.html
Btw, DO NOT click the manual link inserted in the picture. It has a virus in it. That's what AVG free told me.

CONFIRMED - the links on the site have been hacked...