Nieport 17c.1 Under Construction

FSIC Messageboard

Tech Talk

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Nieport 17c.1 Under Construction
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-06- 11:31 AM With current WWII projects completed, work began in ernest on the Nieport 17c.1 this weekend. Tools called on so far include; Hippies Tools, Bigmunger, OPStudio and SV's tutorials. Thanks to all of you my Nie17c1 is coming along nicely! I'm sure I'll have a series of questions for this my first complete aircraft effort so here's the thread! Questions: 1) On a rotary engine do I remember that the prop is fixed to the radial cylinders and they both rotate?? 2) I understand that the lower detail lods at various viewing distances. But why do some parts have three detail levels and some four? It seems that three detail levels should be adequate. Whats your advice? 3) What key considerations should I remember to keep fps as high as possible? (I'm using AC3D.) 4) SV- I'm planning on using "Nie17c1" as my disignation for this model. Have you guys set a naming convention yet??? ------------------ Ronin's current project... Nieport 17c.1 IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 02-06- 02:18 PM Sweet! 1. Yes, a rotary engine that is the case, but I think the nieuports have radial engines, just like the WW2 planes - cylinders that radiate from teh center, bu the engine is fixed. 2. The more stages of simplifications gives you better look/FPS rate. For us beginers I would stick with 2 levels and lower the switchin distances. Look at my new Albatros, I feel this is the best way to do it now - and fast too. I don't switch in things like ailerons and wing struts. Instead the main wing low detail LOD also contains the ailerons (fixed obviosly). This switch happens now at 1000 feet (1000000 for setting). My albatros works very well now for FPS and looks swell as you zoom out - you should not see any visual "switching" as you pan back. So many parts just switch out after 500 or 1000 feet - gone, not needed. This is especialy true for WWI as we have so many little parts. I use 2 levels for the fuslege - one full complex and the other very simple, but not just a box - a little more - look at the new (today) albatros. 3. Biggest key is keep to as few polygons as you can. Do get clever to keep the plane looking good though. Also beware alpha (transparent) textures, in certain cases they can crush FPS. Do make 1 sided polys when evey you can. Also DO NOT triangulate unless you must - squares and more complex polys are better - whatch to keep them co-planer though. 4. No we don't have any standard. I would do what you have done here, make sure you are very model specific, like "AlbatrosDva" instead of "AlbatrosDv" - I'm sure we'll model every last WWI plane Also do post any questions any time you get stuck here - no reason to suffer... This is gonna be a sweet plane! ------------------ -Sv =FC= WWI in SDOE! IP: Logged
Falck Pilot	posted 02-06- 02:35 PM SV, in my experience with ac3d the only way to avoid triangles is to fit a mesh manually to a set of vertices. Is there an easier way to do this? ie automatically make convex hull do quads instead of triangles? IP: Logged
Michael Pilot	posted 02-06- 03:06 PM The Nieuport had a rotary engine. There were no radial engines at all in WWI. The Sopwith Snipe was intended to have a radial, but problems with overheating could not be overcome and the plane was produced with a rotary 230 hp Bentley BR2. IP: Logged
JT Pilot	posted 02-06- 03:54 PM Ronin, Something else that came up in another thread.... SDOE will check all of the polygons of the highest LODs for bullet hits. You can, however, tell it to skip certain LODs by giving them the obNoCollide property. For instance, you probably don't need everything in the cockpit susceptible to hits. I would make it so only the canopy and pilot gets hit... maybe the tub too. Anyway, this is how I understand it as it was told to me. If any part of what I said is wrong, please let me know. IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 02-06- 04:55 PM Wow, you're right Michael! So it's inline or rotary eh... I didn't relize this whole rotary engine thing effected my Fokker DVIII has a rotary engine - I better get to work! -Sv IP: Logged
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-06- 07:35 PM FPS TIPS: Thanks for the design for FPS tips,guys. ROTARY ENGINE: So if the Nieport had a rotary engine, then that means that the cylinders spin around a stationary crank shaft at the same rate that the propeller turns? An I understanding this correctly? ------------------ Ronin's current project... Nieport 17c.1 [This message has been edited by Ronin (edited 02-06-2000).] IP: Logged
Michael Pilot	posted 02-06- 08:08 PM That's right Ronin. What I've done (for the visual effect) is to attach a disc to the stationary prop, textured with a picture of an engine. The whole model starts to spin when the engine is started. When the stationary prop disappears, it reveals a further disc set slightly further back. This is textured with a sort of radial blur to simulate the spinning engine. Seen through the spinning prop texture, it looks as if it's spinning too. IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 02-07- 06:02 AM Michael, Can we just update the prop load and propfast lod to also contain the engine? The prop is just a LOD, it could be anything... This way the engine would spin with the prop as low speed, then at high speed the engine blur would spin like the propfast - well not spin, but just rotate with changes in RPM... or is this what you did? Falck, Only use convex hull in an emergancy as it does always result in triangles. I used the convex hull for my SE5a - it has too many polys. Stick to extrusion - if you have a very complicated area then convex hull that and join it to the extruded areas. I did my alabtros fuselege like this with good results: I built a fuselege former at the largest cross-section. This was a 12 sided elipse. Then I extruded it with about 8 segments. Then I moved each new former to a strategic location on the plan. Then I sized the formers to match the plan of the fuselege. The very front and very back formers ended up as single points for my Albatros. (snap vertecies together). Next select each formaer one at a time (by selecting verts) - then chose sruface - remove surface only. Also make 1 sided and check normals. Also I made the mid section 2 sided so it would double as a cockpit inner wall. This method resulted in an all-quad low poly fuselege that looks great! Much better than the SE5a... Here is another trick: let's say you have a front fuse and a back fuse, but the midle needs to be a seperate complex convex hull. How do you attach them? Here is one way: Select all the verts of the back former of the front fuselege, and all the verts of the front former of the back fuselege. Now choose copy. Now hide the 2 fuselege parts. Now chose paste - you will see the two formers. Now build your convex hull over it. Now unhide everything. Now select all objects. Now choose object-merge. Now choose optimize verts. This will take the duplicate vets you now have (the convex hull has the same former as the front fuselege and back fuselege) and share them. This is vital - now you can get nice smooth shading. If you ever want to join two polys, just make sure you snap together any verts that should be shared - then choose optimize verts. The key is that optimize verts will share any verts that are at the same exactl location. The way to get to verts at the same location is to "snap vertecies together." This is just an example, I wouldn't necessaraly build a fuselege like this, but there are some key things I learned about basic 3D editing there... -Sv -Sv IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 02-07- 06:17 AM Spanky here... SV can you futher explain this? "Only use convex hull in an emergancy as it does always result in triangles. I used the convex hull for my SE5a - it has too many polys. Stick to extrusion - if you have a very complicated area then convex hull that and join it to the extruded areas" I Get what you mean by extruded but what is a convex hull method? and is this what you explain in your tut for the SE5a? If so you should update it if you can cause i use your site all the time. IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 02-07- 09:29 AM My site is only a historical documentary. I do update the tutorials, but not the SE5a history, use that at your own peril I am no 3D expert - far from it - I am learning every day. -Sv IP: Logged
Whirlwind Pilot	posted 02-07- 03:21 PM He means model the object face by face and merge it onto an extruded body. I usually extrude and use the 3 views to move verticies for the body shape. IP: Logged
Michael Pilot	posted 02-07- 03:50 PM Sv: That's what I was describing. I attached an engine disc to the stationary prop lod so both prop and engine spin when the engines starts. I didn't see any point in having the "fast" engine actually spinning because with blurred circular texture I'm using it would look exactly the same whether moving or not. IP: Logged
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-07- 06:25 PM Micheal: Hmmm... thats the approach that I was considering. Good idea! Ronin IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 02-07- 07:44 PM Did the Nieuport use the LeRhone 80hp rotary? I have a manual of that engine, as well as the Hispano Suiza if any one needs tech details. I could make some scans from it as well if you need. Email me for faster results, I'm deep in project land and not reading the boards much right now. Pang IP: Logged
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-08- 06:31 PM Pang: The 80hp Le Rhone was used in the 10 and 11 series Nieuports. The Nieuport 17c1 used a 110hp Le Rhone 9J Rotary Engine. I'd love to take a look at what you have though. I'll email you... Ronin IP: Logged
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-11- 11:46 AM The Nieuport is looking so cool! Need some opinions... AA) In combat did these planes come apart much?? What pieces of the AC realistically need to be able to become detached on damage??? BB) How many polys on the detailed model is a good target to keep FPS acceptable? How do you check the poly count? I'm using AC3D and OPS 1.2. CC) I need a cockpit pic of the Nieuport17c1. Anybody have one?? Ronin IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 02-11- 02:40 PM The article I have in front of me by William E Barrett says that the earlier Nieuports were criticized as being "frail", with the exception of the 27 which was sturdy, without sacrificing performance. Nieuports were also known for having superior turning performance, according to this. IP: Logged
nuum Pilot	posted 02-11- 02:45 PM Ronim, I have a N17 cockpit pic. I don't know if this one is from a C1 model. I am sending to you. I have a lot of images from Nieuports. If you want I can send to you. Keep up. nuum WWI aircraft IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 02-11- 07:31 PM This article also said that the Nieuport models were tough to tell apart, even the pilots got the designations wrong many times. I would think that they must have had very similar cockpits, but that's just a semi-educated guess. IP: Logged
Ronin Pilot	posted 02-12- 08:03 AM Just wanted to say thanks to Pang for a cool LeRhone engine pic and Nuum for a nice shot of Nieuport cockpit!! Had rev. 0.5 in the air last night... ------------------ Ronin's current project... Nieport 17c.1 [This message has been edited by Ronin (edited 02-12-2000).] IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center