Go Back   Knife Edge > RealFlight - Designer's Corner > RealFlight G3 - Designer's Corner
Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use. | Looking for technical support? Read this!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-25-2008, 08:38 PM
brentg's Avatar
brentg brentg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 466
New projects coming

Here are a few of new projects coming soon. Dornier 17...... Bristol Beaufighter, and one for the folks down under a DH Vampire, I had a requester ask why most of the War planes here are U.S, British ,German, or Japanese.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dornier1.jpg (55.8 KB, 31 views)
File Type: jpg dornier2.jpg (90.3 KB, 30 views)
File Type: jpg beau1.jpg (281.0 KB, 38 views)
File Type: jpg beau2.jpg (279.2 KB, 32 views)
File Type: jpg DH_vampire1.jpg (195.0 KB, 39 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-25-2008, 10:20 PM
brendan554's Avatar
brendan554 brendan554 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: ann arbor michagin
Posts: 98
Send a message via AIM to brendan554
those look really nice. good job
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-25-2008, 10:52 PM
smwpuck19's Avatar
smwpuck19 smwpuck19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 73
Send a message via AIM to smwpuck19
Rock on! Those look great!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-26-2008, 12:32 AM
Junkboy999's Avatar
Junkboy999 Junkboy999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wichita ,KS
Posts: 1,676
I'm so excited

Geee Mate, I'm so excited I just drooped my vegemite sandwich
__________________
Terry
Junkboy999 The dumb Thumb
When in doubt RTFM = Read The reFerence Manual I'm serious this is the manual click the link
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-26-2008, 12:41 AM
BigGuyJT's Avatar
BigGuyJT BigGuyJT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fresno, Ca
Posts: 762
Very nice Brent!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-26-2008, 01:57 AM
pilot07's Avatar
pilot07 pilot07 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 364
looking good!
__________________
Blade 400
Trex 500
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-26-2008, 04:21 AM
rcplanefubar's Avatar
rcplanefubar rcplanefubar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: St. Paul MN
Posts: 941
Send a message via Yahoo to rcplanefubar
Looking forward to the Vampire.
__________________
Kick the tires and light the fires!
Fly fast take chances!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-26-2008, 08:58 AM
willsonman's Avatar
willsonman willsonman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,953
Loving the Do-17. I'll throw in my $.02 and suggest a better font for the numbers on the beaufighter. Looking great though! Also perhaps a little more curvature on the wheels.
__________________
RF loading quote of the day:
Loading: Gerfiburlating Wonkevators ( have a screen shot to prove this one)

Last edited by willsonman; 06-26-2008 at 09:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-26-2008, 09:26 AM
brentg's Avatar
brentg brentg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 466
$.02 cents always accepted.

Thanks for the input on the font, think I have a RAF font on my archive disk somewhere. The wheels and parts are set in stone, All models are under the 8000 poly limit and this one is as close as it gets 7999 , cant afford 300 poly wheels on this one I do cut it close

The Dornier 17 is a older project that has some smoothing issues that only show in RF, but looks good at short distance, one of those projects that I am going to post and move on.

Thanks for the accurate rating on the Hawker, this one was at the wire also and decisions must be made in certain areas, I do think it goes without saying that most of the time as RC flyers we are looking at our models in the air with gears up and 100 ft away

Most of my real models I fly at home would rate a 3 or 4 at best, most are scuffed up..

Last edited by brentg; 06-26-2008 at 09:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-26-2008, 09:52 AM
pplace's Avatar
pplace pplace is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentg
All models are under the 8000 poly limit and this one is as close as it gets 7999 , cant afford 300 poly wheels on this one I do cut it close
I do like the looks of all 3 aircraft.....very interesting choices to model. Nice job!

Curious why you are so determined to stay under 8000 polys? Even bumping up your limit to 10,000 would give you more room to work with.

Plus I'm pretty confident that it's not the poly count that slows FPS, more so the complex editor / physics of aircraft. If you need suggestions or help about collision meshes just let me know. I'd be glad to help you out if that's the reason.

Good job, keep it up.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-26-2008, 10:18 AM
brentg's Avatar
brentg brentg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by pplace
I do like the looks of all 3 aircraft.....very interesting choices to model. Nice job!

Curious why you are so determined to stay under 8000 polys? Even bumping up your limit to 10,000 would give you more room to work with.

Plus I'm pretty confident that it's not the poly count that slows FPS, more so the complex editor / physics of aircraft. If you need suggestions or help about collision meshes just let me know. I'd be glad to help you out if that's the reason.

Good job, keep it up.

I totally agree about the complex editor and use of pods slow RF down, Trust me I am not determined to stay under 8000 polys, I have used collision meshes with just the right amount of positioning over the said part, Proper tree placement, The problem with me lies in the Dos kex convertor, it wont work at my end with meshes, and the Max plugin errors out also, I have had only one instance where this worked and it hung up in the editor when doing physics, so it has been easier to just take more time and stay under than fight the mesh issues.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-26-2008, 10:41 AM
willsonman's Avatar
willsonman willsonman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentg
Thanks for the accurate rating on the Hawker, this one was at the wire also and decisions must be made in certain areas, I do think it goes without saying that most of the time as RC flyers we are looking at our models in the air with gears up and 100 ft away

Most of my real models I fly at home would rate a 3 or 4 at best, most are scuffed up..
Yes.. but if my model that had retracts that behaved that way I would not consider air worthy. That very reason is why I do not weather my CSs and such. While can certainly appreciate the the work I have yet to purchase a model with that kind of detail. Even if I were to scratch-build something I still would not because it just does not matter.
__________________
RF loading quote of the day:
Loading: Gerfiburlating Wonkevators ( have a screen shot to prove this one)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-26-2008, 10:59 AM
Wingman57's Avatar
Wingman57 Wingman57 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Park Falls, WI
Posts: 1,030
Awsome looking models Brentg. Keep up the good work.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-26-2008, 11:07 AM
brentg's Avatar
brentg brentg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by willsonman
Yes.. but if my model that had retracts that behaved that way I would not consider air worthy. That very reason is why I do not weather my CSs and such. While can certainly appreciate the the work I have yet to purchase a model with that kind of detail. Even if I were to scratch-build something I still would not because it just does not matter.

I should have been more clear, The gear doors are cut directly from the wing, yes a litlle extrusion would make them thicker and more pleasing to the eye but could cause issues lining up, once cut I dont touch, The rear gear was done because of lack of poly count, My models at home dont have detail nor do I want them to, my point was I really dont care what they look like as long as they fly well, Most are banged up. As far as the cs's . To me it does not matter if the cs is detailed or not, I totally agree with you, most planes on the market are not.. But I feel some here get into the Multiplayer scene and look for realistic looking schemes to fly, granted some would say why not get a full blown Flight sim, but I think all can be happy somewhere in the middle.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-26-2008, 11:14 AM
willsonman's Avatar
willsonman willsonman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,953
gotcha
__________________
RF loading quote of the day:
Loading: Gerfiburlating Wonkevators ( have a screen shot to prove this one)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:04 AM.