NZFF

I consigned Cam's v1 787 to being some "What If" AI in my sim.
Here's v2 and I'm not sure if it's there yet...he seems to cater for the same audience addressed by Abacus, if you get my drift.

Anyway, a couple of shots, you decide:

Still waiting for Project Opensky, QualityWings and possibly the PMDG 787.

Due to the increased size off the windows, 'portholes' it give you a mistaken size , the 787 is almost compatible in size to a 777 - 200 , Charl , i think this time your well ahead off your time .

I gave the models a go as well, and the v2 is no different from what I see,..the overall shape is pretty reasonable I reckon . Maybe the windows need to be redrawn with bigger bmps to add more detail but for me its whats underneath...those undercarriage ... I cant quite put my finger on it but to me they just dont look right, for me if a model doesnt look right sitting on the tarmac it gets binned no matter how good it looks in the air...just my opinion. I tried to re texture the wheels so that they dont look like they were fitted with bridgestone eager low profile racing tyres but they have only one single wheel map for all the wheels so nothing much could be done to improve the look,..shame really...

787 airliners.net

Adrian Brausch wrote:

QUOTE (Adrian Brausch @ Nov 23 2010, 09:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...bridgestone eager low profile racing tyres...

Haha now you mention it...also the engine intakes actually are sloped, not vertical
http://www.airliners.net/photo/All-Nippon-...iner/1814927/M/

I am hoping POSKY will come up with their 787, soonish.
They've shown they can do the modelling, with their excellent rendition of the 777's nose/fuselage blend (and brilliant VC).

took it for a spin from NZAA to Kingsford Smith today and found out that when light on fuel even with a descent rate of only 1000ftm and throttle cut it still climbed to over 350kts so only way to decend was to flip the spoilers every minute or so. Changing the FDE is fairly easy but still a pain..would have thought it would have had some testing before release. Still it is free so cant winge too much

Where is the smoke from the aft E&E bay ?
I would have said that the 787 is closer to midway between a 767-200 and a 767-300 in size not a 777.

cowpatz wrote:

QUOTE (cowpatz @ Nov 23 2010, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

between a 767-200 and a 767-300 in size not a 777.

I would to compare the both , you are right , i think till we get and compare between types , it the engine diameter and so so called larger windows that seem to give a false impression .

cowpatz wrote:

QUOTE (cowpatz @ Nov 23 2010, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where is the smoke from the aft E&E bay ?...

Haha I ain't going if it ain't Boeing...thank you Wikipaedia:

hmmm interesting comparison ...but the model Air NZ is getting is the 787-9 (Air NZ is the launch customer) which would be pretty close to a 777-200ER in length and capacity

Naki wrote:

QUOTE (Naki @ Nov 28 2010, 09:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

hmmm interesting comparison ...but the model Air NZ is getting is the 787-9 (Air NZ is the launch customer) which would be pretty close to a 777-200ER in length and capacity

deceptively large, yea I reckon the 787-900 be pretty much same size of the 777 as well. Just went to Posky website and one of their main guys that owns the server and pretty much runs Posky has resigned effectively immediatly,....hope this doesnt pull the rug from under them theyve been an institution for flightsim for many many years

Read about it here...

Posky Website

Wikipaedia: .. Hmm yeah , is only as good as the info punched into it - but old rule .... Charl Haha I ain't going if it ain't Boeing .. Very true for me at least

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Nov 24 2010, 12:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...only as good as the info punched into it...

Ooh can't let that lie, so another of my incredibly detailed comparison scale drawings, accurate within a pencil width:



The NZFF Walking Encyclopaedias are right (as usual) the 787-900 is a virtual clone of the 777-200ER (and will presumably eat existing 767-400ER customers too)
The mix of payload/range is quite bewildering, the airline builders obviously know which city pairs they are designing for....

Model Length W/span Range
767-300ER 55 48 6000
787-800 57 60 8000
767-400ER 61 52 5600
787-900 63 60 8500
777-200 64 61 5200
777-200ER 64 61 9000
777-200LR 64 65 9400
777-300 74 61 6000
777-300ER 74 65 7900

*******************************************

As to POSKY....
They are way past due a shakeup in the way they go about things.
Navigating their website requires a working knowledge of binary machine code.
"Assembling" one of their offerings is generally more trouble than it's worth, I've only done it fully for their amazing 777.
And, the FDE department needs new blood.
So this could be good news all round, I don't see Hiroshi disappearing too easily.