New projects coming
- Thread starter brentg
- Start date
brendan554
New member
those look really nice. good job
Junkboy999
New member
I'm so excited
Geee Mate, I'm so excited I just drooped my vegemite sandwich
Geee Mate, I'm so excited I just drooped my vegemite sandwich
rcplanefubar
Active member
Looking forward to the Vampire.
willsonman
Well-known member
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.
Last edited:
brentg
Well-known member
$.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..
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:
pplace
Well-known member
brentg said: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 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.
brentg
Well-known member
pplace said:
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.
willsonman
Well-known member
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.brentg said: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..
brentg
Well-known member
willsonman said:
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.
willsonman
Well-known member
gotcha
