Boeing 797 - Boeing Y3-Ecoliner,Boeing.įSX Boeing B-797 Flying Wing Super Liner by Lionheart Creations Ltd Boeing B-797 Super Liner, Skunk Works Project X-48.

The Boeing Company: Today Tomorrow Beyond. This is the Boeing B-797 Blended Wing Body Super Liner, designed to carry 1,000 passengers and with a unique flying wing style body that would avail far better, more economic flight cruise properties. Blended Wing Concept Blended Wing Aircraft Waiting to Take-off Boeing 797 Blended Wings Blended Wing ConceptįSX Boeing B-797 Flying Wing Super Liner. Boeing 797 Blended Wingsīlended Wing Body Disadvantages Fsx Boeing bei Īrtist concept of of the blended wing body aircraft. EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif., Ap/PRNewswire/ - The Boeing (NYSE: BA) X-48C research aircraft flew for the 30th and finalīoeings X-48B Blended Wing Body (BWB) demonstrator is a cutting edge experimental aircraft (link experimental aircraft to Innovation landing page TBD) with potentialīoeing Flying Wing Airliner boeing blended wing for fsxīoeing X-48C Blended Wing Body Research. Includes the Boeing Business jet in with both blended winglets and split. Kostenlose Lieferung ab € 20īoeing news releases. Fully customized system simulation for all major and minor aircraft systems and.

Boeing X-48C Blended Wing Body Research.

OTOH, the A-26B Invader has great frame rates (above 30) in all views for me. Aircraft - Boeing 797 Blended Wing Body Concept (MSFSaddons exclusive) An MSFSaddons exclusive, the conceptual Boeing 797 Blended Wing Body plane for Microsoft Flight Simulator. Some of the older ones (like the Shrike) with C+ gauges dropped frames to 18-25 for me (from 35) although I am not certain that is the cause. Notes from Atreea: As a model from FS2004 converted to FS2020 legacy format, It has no functional displays, buttons or gauges in the cockpit and the engine looks static & may have no engine sound. The later Aero Commanders ported very well with no changes but the prop texture, minimal frame hit (running 30-34). A few years later in 2006, it made its way around the net as an email hoax, claiming to be the Boeing 797. XML gauges for FSX would likely be an improvement as well native format textures.ĮDIT: I just went to check some of my other port overs. I have not tried converting the textures to DDS to determine impact but this does conclude for me that better performance for port overs is attainable with some minor tweaks.ĭraw calls are important so fewer texture sheets would help. However, with a few changes to the VC setup, I jumped it to 25fps and 34 in the air. I got 15 in the VC, 25 in Spot view, and 34 in the 2D panel. When I first put it into FSX, I changed only the prop texture. In FS2004, I maxed out to my FPS lock at 35fps in the VC, the Spot view, and 2D panel. It's not always the number of polys, or the textures, but may be the gauges used, or how the gauges are displayed, or the number of vcockpit sections.įor example, I just did a quick conversion portover of our AC500S Shrike. If these textures were in DDS, it might be in equal performance with FSX models.īill, I say yes primarily because FS2004 constructed aircraft are not 'tuned' for FSX. Mind you, the 797 does 'not' have DDS textures, so the test wouldnt be a 100% 'match' for performance, and the 797 uses 'alot' of 32bit high rez textures. So, if no bump maps are required, and you convert the textures to DDS, couldnt you have an equally 'smooth performing' FS2004 mesh in FSX?Ĭoncerning DX-10, I believe the only thing DX-10 requires is DDS textures.įor those that would like to test this, they could try running an airliner in FSX, checking the frame rates, and then running the Boeing 797 Blended Wing (download here at new addons section) and again check the frame rates.

One of the reasons I bring this up is that I can now make highly sophisticated aircraft mesh in FS2004 format that is equivalent to FSX mesh (basically the same) and it appears to run perfect in FSX.

Now the Skylark utilizes all the nice FSX materials such as bump mapping, even enabling surface deformations as well as the rivets and screws, etc.īut on some planes, I am wondering if they can just be in FS2004 format. I could actually see no reason to convert the monster into FSX. The pixels for the rivets would be scaled the size of plates, so it would have looked goofy. If a plane has no bumps to bump map, and the glass and chrome in the FS2004 port-over look reasonably good already, then why make it in FSX format? For instance, the Boeing I just created was so huge, that you really cannot bump map it. Now, before you immediately answer yes, think about if they 'really are' performing worse? Boeing to take on Airbus with (1000 seat) giant 797 Blended Wing plane Boeing is preparing a 1000 passenger jet that could reshape the Air travel industry for the next 100 years. This is going to be a difficult question for alot of you that are FSX hardliners.ĭo you think that FS2004 planes run worse in FSX then FSX planes?

Boeing 797 blended wing fsx planes