CGI - Attempted reconstruction of ProjectFear possible Boeing AII-X demonstrator

[insidersource]

Yes, because they don’t carry weapons unless carrying weapons is a research or demonstration objective.

You have evidence that it wasn't a demonstration objective?

 

[quellish]

You have evidence that it wasn't a demonstration objective?

I am not the one making claims about landing gear and carrying JASSM. Do you have evidence for those claims?

 

[CiTrus90]

I know it may just be the kink on wing giving that impression from that angle, but I wonder if the leading have two sweep angles, the one further out being aligned with the wing trailing edge.
Roughly Like so :

EDIT : That can make only 3 angles, not 4
Also, it seems to me there is more space between the nose and the canards.

Sorry if I get back to you so late, but I think I may have found a combination of angles that doesn't require the double wing sweep in order to match the pictures:

I've just been tinkering with the 3d, trying to match the aircraft silhouette from as many angles as possible and this is what I've got so far.

I'm not going to show the other views of the model yet, because it needs further refinement, but once all the surfaces are put at their proper heights in the z axis as well, it appears to be as close of a match as it's possible with such low resolution footage (well, for me at least...).

It's a bit easier for my OCD to accept this version, rather than requiring a a double wing sweep to explain the shape of the aircraft

 

[galgot]

Yep! I think you match the thing pretty well, with just 3 angles.
Do the angle of the wing kink (the outboard green line) has to match the other green lines ? I thought it could be just parallel to line of flight.

 

[BDF]

Sorry if I get back to you so late, but I think I may have found a combination of angles that doesn't require the double wing sweep in order to match the pictures:
View attachment 816046
I've just been tinkering with the 3d, trying to match the aircraft silhouette from as many angles as possible and this is what I've got so far.

I'm not going to show the other views of the model yet, because it needs further refinement, but once all the surfaces are put at their proper heights in the z axis as well, it appears to be as close of a match as it's possible with such low resolution footage (well, for me at least...).

It's a bit easier for my OCD to accept this version, rather than requiring a a double wing sweep to explain the shape of the aircraft

What is nice about that configuration from a LO standpoint you got it down to 4-5 spikes

 

[CiTrus90]

Do the angle of the wing kink (the outboard green line) has to match the other green lines ? I thought it could be just parallel to line of flight.

I kept it angled for the moment, but I'm unsure.

If you look at screenshot #2 in my opening post, the left and right wing seem to have completely different wing spans and shapes: the only way I was able to mimic that appearance (so far), was with a combination of keeping that line different from a straight line (i.e. not parallel to the line of flight) and the difference in height between the wing twist/kink and the rest of the fuselage.
Dialing down that correlation is going to be painstakingly time-consuming and, in fact, I'm still not 100% happy with my results with this current model.

This was more of a "proof of concept" to reassure myself that I can try and work out a shape that doesn't require a double wing sweep in order to be a close match.

As a side note, another thing that I noticed with regards to the "triangles" at the rear of the aircraft (which I suppose might be where the exhausts are located), is that they appear much farther apart from the center of the fuselage than I would have expected them to be, ending sort of "inside" the wing area (forgive me for the improper/not-technical expression).
And then I remembered I have seen a similar configuration before on another aircraft, albeit a single-engined one:

 

[FlyGuy369]

More work so far, the nose is ugly, trying to figure out the software better. Was able to hit M 2.47 so far.

 

[JetBrain]

More work so far, the nose is ugly, trying to figure out the software better. Was able to hit M 2.47 so far.

"Was able to hit M 2.47 so far" is based on the Mach angle?

 

[FlyGuy369]

"Was able to hit M 2.47 so far" is based on the Mach angle?

No, flying it in the sim. It will be available for everyone to try out in a month or so.

 

[CiTrus90]

Attempts at reconstruction are still ongoing, albeit without much of a breakthrough...

Here are some comparisons between my 3d model and screenshots taken from the video:




And here I point out some of the more obvious discrepancies:




I clearly have some of the angles way off, above all, those for the main wings and wingtips and that might possibly be due to my fixation with keeping no more than 3 angles for edge alignment.

Trying to reconstruct the geometry of a wing similar to that of the Bird of Prey is a lot more complicated than I initially thought, to the point where I've also spent quite some time analyzing BoP's pictures and, besides marvelling every time that I look at it, I still don't fully grasp their shape.

Pictures are often very deceptive, be that due to the angle at which the shot was taken or due to the optics used, but it further complicates trying to replicate what can be seen in a 3d model.
Just look how much different the wings look between these two photos:

Now imagine trying to do the same thing, but starting with very low resolution footage instead of HD pictures like the ones above here...
A lot more work is needed to at least get as close as possible to what can be seen.

Just for the sake of it, here's what this last version/attempt looked like:



Following some of the suggestions and pointers I received, I decided that allowing for bigger engines would actually be wiser which, in turn, required changing the intake location. I decided to opt for an intake similar to that seen on Boeing Concept 2409 since, so far, it's the closest concept to resemble this unknown bird.


Onto more trial and errors...

 

[joshjosh]

Attempts at reconstruction are still ongoing, albeit without much of a breakthrough...

Thanks for keeping at it .

What of the canards? The footage appears to show a more complex shape on the starboard canard than a single straight leading edge. Perhaps the canard has two angles on the leading edge, or perhaps the tip of the canard is deflected in some manner (a control surface), or maybe this is just an artifact of a low resolution video. What do you think?

 

[CiTrus90]

Thanks for keeping at it .

What of the canards? The footage appears to show a more complex shape on the starboard canard than a single straight leading edge. Perhaps the canard has two angles on the leading edge, or perhaps the tip of the canard is deflected in some manner (a control surface), or maybe this is just an artifact of a low resolution video. What do you think?

I'm not sure.

Looking at the footage, I'd think that they have only one single straight leading edge and that the more likely explanation (for me at least) is that it's an artifact due to the low resolution.
I believe that a lot of the "noise" and "distortion" that we see in the screenshots, should be "mentally" filtered out by looking at the video of the object in movement and trying to keep into account what it looks like from different angles, but as you pointed out it might be a series of several different things that can give such a result.

I think that trying to keep the model as simple as possible, for example by reducing the number of alignments to the lowest that can give a similar silhouette, should be one of the driving factors to inform the shape of this reconstruction attempt.
But then again, that's my own bias and I could very well be incorrect.

 

[CiTrus90]

Not a lot of time and luck available lately, so I decided it was time to wrap this effort up.

The general shape of the model is as close as I was able to match the screenshots as I could. Higher resolution would have certainly helped, but I'd say we're already lucky enough to have been able to see this footage at all.

So, here it is...not what I think the F-47 will look like, but what I think the Boeing AII-X demonstrator could look like, based on ProjectFear's video:

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I like it a lot.

 

[FighterJock]

Interesting design CiTrus90, nice work.

 

[scautomoton]

Great effort. I have enough difficulty capturing surface curvature and shape blending when I have good 3-views with multiple cross sections available. Based on what I've seen here my skills are found wanting.

 

[CiTrus90]

I have enough difficulty capturing surface curvature and shape blending when I have good 3-views with multiple cross sections available.

Trust me, me too...

Based on what I've seen here my skills are found wanting.

Looking at how skilled other members of the forum are, like Galgot, Olly, Skyraider3D and many, many others I also fall quite short of what I see in the abilities of others.
You as well, with the fantastic models you've built, are a source of inspiration and awe. Heck, if I were to take an X-Acto knife to cut a piece of plastic for a scale model I'd probably send myself to the ER

This is the greatness of a site like SPF, that people that share a passion can contribute in whatever way they can, even if we all come from different walks of life and even if we are all lacking in some ways.

 

[galgot]

I like it a lot.

Would certainly make a good banner replacement. Especially the one on blue sky background.
Aren't you tired of that SST ?

 

[CiTrus90]

Would certainly make a good banner replacement. Especially the one on blue sky background.
Aren't you tired of that SST ?

Appreciate the thought, but I prefer the SST much more than what I came up with here!

Also, the one currently on the banner was a real project, mine is just speculation and as such it doesn't really mean much.
I like me some good speculation and what-iffery, but the focus of the forum should remain on real projects.