Heinz 787

[WombatBoy]

Here's the newest video of the 787: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=44811&pid=494421&st=0&#entry494421

What do you guys think? To me the textures are very "sterile" and bland. Somewhat lifeless. There is a lack of dirt anywhere...I mean the first time the plane flew it was in the rain, and no dirt?

[Kesomir]

It's definately a lot better than Heinz previous, but I'm hit with the thought that it's still at Abacus quality.

But, still in development, so we'll see.

- Painted on FMC looks flat and both render baking and texturing need to be sorted.

[MdMax]

There is a lack of dirt anywhere...

If you add dirt on textures, then you should change the flight model and add drag in planemaker (body coefficient of drag).

;D

[-TheoGregory]

There's a big difference between coloring and texturing...

[WombatBoy]

Haha, that's very true Theo

[tkyler]

Everybody knows that commercial passenger aircraft are the most popular market segment in flight simulation.  There is a bit of a "rush" to get some payware airliners to market and being that the market is non-existent at the moment for x-plane, then anything is better than nothing.  That is what Heinz will capitalize on and he'll make a decent amount of change from that segment of the x-market that is starving for some airliners.  The quality is mediocre enough though that it does not preclude development of another higher quality 787 should someone choose to make one.  Now if he charges 40.00+ US or something for it....well then that'd be ludicrous...and if someone actually paid that much for it....well then call Heinz a genius.  Hopefully, the price will be commensurate with the quality and the x-plane development community won't look like it's gone crazy.

[gilbenl]

God Awful. Does he know you can measure things, and use reference images...?

[Ben Russell]

it'd be acceptable as freeware.

The model is ok.

The cockpit is ok.

The interior cabin is a joke and should be deleted.

[Kiedels]

Yeah let's try to convince him to make a version without the cabin. I'm never going to look at it anyway, and it'll just slow my computer down.

[WombatBoy]

Agreed. Who flies from the cabin anyway? While it is fun to look out the window like a passenger upon landing, a simple window hole does that.

He would be smart, like you said, to give two versions, one with cabin and one without. Or just one version with some instructions on how to remove the cabin if your computer is slow.

[Ben Russell]

I don't think it'll hurt your FPS.... that's kinda the problem, the average yoke has more polys. :/

Heinz can do a lot better.

[Cameron]

A few quotes from Heinz:

"This plane will not be cheap to produce as a licensed product." (licensed meaning by Boeing)

"Like every other virtual plane the realism is limited to what can be done in a simulation so 100% realism to the real plane is not possible. There are also limitations to what is allowed to be released .....that is some things will remain classified by Boeing. In short the project will evolve through updates after release as more information becomes available."

Do I even have to say anything? I question a lot of the authenticity here...

[alexgeo]

Why are there random chairs laying around the cabin... ??

The yoke needs some work.

[gilbenl]

A few quotes from Heinz:

"This plane will not be cheap to produce as a licensed product." (licensed meaning by Boeing)

"Like every other virtual plane the realism is limited to what can be done in a simulation so 100% realism to the real plane is not possible. There are also limitations to what is allowed to be released .....that is some things will remain classified by Boeing. In short the project will evolve through updates after release as more information becomes available."

Do I even have to say anything? I question a lot of the authenticity here...

Translation: "I don't have enough information/don't care to look."

$20 says his so called "license" is derived from an e-mail to the effect of "I'm Heinz. I build plane. Cool?" which either was not replied to, or by a confused "Okay...? *Standard legal don't steal our stuff* Love?, Boeing"

I mean I respect the guy for trying, but a pig with makeup is still a pig; maybe a pig with a publicist, is more apt.

You can do much better Heinz...you know it, I know it, we all do. Do it?

[JBalsa]

Now at first I thought; 'Oh well this isn't so bad actually. Everything looks in place and I would expect that he followed references to build the plane! What could possibly be wrong?'

I thought wrong. So when exactly Boeing change their quadrants to square shape how long ago?

See for yourself!

No better than freeware IMO.

-Jason

[WombatBoy]

Whoa! The two look barely similar! Just the color and the displays look alike. You would think that if it really is licensed by Boeing that it would at least be recognizable as a 787 from the inside and that they would have provided him with some panel diagrams. At least if you believe what Nicolas said here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=44897&view=findpost&p=496023

[dan]

That 3D cockpit looks hideous. The exterior isn't much better, pretty dull if you ask me.

Thankfully I'm not desperate for airliners, yet, so I'll be waiting patiently for Javier's CRJ200, and wont be wasting my money on this one!

[tkyler]

You all seem to forget Heinz's Boeing 787. It is the only plane officially licensed by Boeing.

Boeing has supplied a lot of blueprints and 3D models for these design. So the information used to built this model comes from Boeing themselves, not from some guessing.

And we all know that Heinz always delivers on the flight model as well so it will be a good one.

Picked this quote up from the org.   I passed it through the Google Translate Filter....with settings to translate from "hype -> english" and this is what I got out.

Hey....over here...look at Heinz 787.  I'm going to make some money off of it so I need you all to know about it.   It's officially licensed by Boeing.  One guy who works in the mail room at Boeing sent overall brochure dimensions and a promo 3D model for the design. So the information used to built this model comes from Boeing themselves, not from some guessing.  And we all know that Heinz can deliver on the flight model so it will be a good one.

After further review, I'm come up with some observations.   Nobody's forgetting the 787.....at this juncture, it just doesn't appear to be worthy of mentioning at the quality level being discussed in the thread that quote was pulled from.  No need to jump in our faces waving your hands...we see it!  Secondly....if Boeing has supplied dimensions and 3D models, then why does almost every cockpit element look off proportionately?  As Google translate told me..."dimensions" probably means some overall dimensions and nothing too specific.  Thank goodness for the google translator or I might have thought that Heinz was a privileged member of the Boeing engineering society and felt quite jealous that I couldn't get in.  

Seriously though, I think there's a market for everything, including Heinz 787.  Personally I like Heinz and his work's place in the market, he is probably the best at balancing quality / price in my opinion.  BUT PLEASE....don't start saying that the 787 belongs in the same quality category with the 777 or CRJ and other heavies in the works, we're not blind man!  The fact that the quote comes from someone who stands to make money off the product, with no real supporting points is just unprofessional...and is the real reason for my posting here.  Perhaps if a watermark on all the textures saying "officially licensed" were included, it might make it a bit more real eh?

[MdMax]

Hi all !

Like Tom, I don't think Level-D / Flight1 / PMDG customers will buy the Heinz 787... not for now, not with this modeling, textures and gauges.

But let's talk about an "officially licensed product" by Boeing, I just found a 787 here for FS:

http://www.abacuspub.com/catalog/s658.htm

Please look at the screenshot of the virtual cockpit (especially the PFD), and at the Boeing license at the bottom of the page. ;D Believe me, it's not a joke or an april fool... it's just Abacus. If there are customers for Abacus, there should be a lot more customers for Heinz.

[AADX]

"officially licensed" has nothing to do with quality, has nothing to do with the branded company, and proprietary information is still subject to confidentiality.  Brand licensing is only between someone who wants to vend an item with the label "officially licensed" and is between a vendor and the brand-licensing-attorneys/agency.   It doesn't make the item any better.  It also does not yield privilege to content not already public, part of media kits, or simply factual published public data.  NDA's applicable to proprietary information would then preclude it being released as a product using the same data values in the acf.  so..  officially licensed is just a marketing maneuver.  the cost of which, will be passed on, plus margin for using the word... while the term is leveraged to mean more than it is...

[MdMax]

Hi Jason and welcome ! Thank you for clarifying that point. And your add-ons are good examples showing that when quality is here, it's not very usefull to be allowed to use names like "Cessna", "Bell" or "Agusta" to be able to sell something.

[AADX]

ty max.  i've had an acct here since it opened.  I don't post here for a couple particular reasons.  this one just needed to be said.

it's common convention that a named item is called what it's named.  a piper malibu is a piper malibu, duh.  in citing the name doesn't elude that piper has given any official endorsement nor my citing the name doesn't mean I am or representing piper.  just calling a spade a spade.  that's it.    example being with cessna.   my 182 *is* inside Cessna now, they have it on a machine, with xplane, attached to real G1000 unit for their analog-to-glass transition trainers.  however, licensing agency representing Textron, said "pay up sucker" essentially for using Textron held brands Cessna and Bell.    ~looks around ninja style~   um.. okay.  no.  tyvm.. I won't pay $7000/3years and I think it was 40% to license the names.   So.. they became CX & BX models.  and the brand licensing agency can take a flying leap, no pun intended.  Else i'll just take them down all together, I don't really care.   Cessna is a name that was previously 'exclusively' licensed by Microsoft, for any use in any simulator (commercially).  They tend to gloss over any uses of brandnames on items that sell for $0 (item is $0 as long as you pay accolades and reverence to the benevolent freeware martyr), but if you make a penny from your spade painting, calling it a spade, they come and jump on for their cut.   shure fine super and dandy.  is their prerogative.   Licensing is a huge deal in the auto brands, and auto-sims. Likely why Austin hasn't still ever moved on X-Auto.   Interestingly enough, Austin/Laminar, at last I heard doesn't hold any licenses for any of the brands included with x-plane.  Graphsim does, yet Laminar vends x-plane directly, above Graphsim.

Anyway.  EA Sports holds official license on Porsche and Lamborghini. (I think M$ still has a stranglehold on Ferrari)  yet EA Sports driving games suck.  the licensing makes no difference to the outcome.  I have my quotes, from bell factory instructors, from agusta engineers, from cirrus, from cessna, from velocity, from career time in type other pilots across the board...  I have it where it counts.   leave the licensing to the lawyers and marketing types, it's all it is.  

Tom's translate.google.com ,  hype->english worked pretty well, I think it missed the last line tho.    

Expect that 787 to hit an org store page for no less than $49.95, of course, marked down from $89.95 and/or with a coupon.

[Morten XPFW]

I can guarantee you Heinz didn't get cockpit dimensions from Boeing.

On our team at XPFW we have a Boeing flight test engineer that

flies on the real 787 testprogram these days, and not even we got those dimensions!

"Blueprints" of the panel and exterior are publicly available and we

also have them.  The 1900 pages FCOM and QRH is also possible to get

if you have good connections in airlines - like we do  It also contains official

preliminary performance data that will get updated as testflights proceed.

Cant believe it has been 4 1/2 years since we build the XPFW 787

XPFW Boeing 787

Must say we nailed it pretty good 4 years before first flight..

Will be interesting to compare the two.

At the time we used a Piano analysis report of the 787 for performance.  The software

that Boeing and Airbus etc uses as a preliminary design tool.

Anyway, there is a good chance this project will get back to life

M

[Goran_M]

It appears the wording of the 787 promotional information is gradually changing.

From being "made to the exact specifications provided by Boeing" to "Accurate dimensions based on drawings supplied by the Boeing Corporation" and "Virtual cockpit based on the real 787".  Taken directly from the org newsletter I just got.

The word "based" leaves open a plethora of possibilities.

Personally, I would love it if we all (developers) got along and shared a beer once a week.  But when a developer blatantly lies to the people ready to fork out some hard earned cash for something that isn't what is claimed to be made by the developer, it kinda gets under my skin.  When a developer does this, he flushes his dignity down the crapper.

I'll be watching for any other "mutating" promo information.

[Morten XPFW]

Admitting at .org he doesn't have the FCOM or QRH which

contains VITAL information on VC, systems, avionics, flightmodel etc etc.

Without it he is pretty much in the same situation we were in 5 years ago..    

It's none of my business really, and I don't like to put down other designers work,

but, when he gives the false impression this thing is almost

made by Boeing and will charge an out of proportion price for it, as we say here

in Norway, lets call a spade for a spade.. .  Not only will he ripp people off, but what

concerns me is he will make the rest of us designers that have been modeling airliners

for years look like idiots since our acf are not "Boeing Certified". XPFW, XPJ, Benedikt etc.

Not very nice...