Let say… We are the 11th of october 1971, they are rushing the prototype to 1st flight, making it fly unpainted, cause they want to move on fast to the testing schedule. And want to be able to shown the monster at the 1972 Paris air show.
Here are photo shots from that very first flight, taken from the chase plane. testing various configurations above clouds layers.
Absolutelly love the model and also lighting… Especially on those where there is “fire” comming from the engines… Those without fire seem to me little bit too flat in the sense of colors and composition (in the sense they need something to catch the eye to bring attention to plane)… Maybe some clouds would help or better lighting? … Again those with “fire” going out of the engine are much better (captivating/interesting) from my POV (wallpaper worth)
From your Video i see your model is rigged… Seems like you are going to do animation? Would really love to see it start from Airport up to the sky (into some sexy volumetric clouds )
This is a very good start. The modeling is very good however the only thing that throws of your realism is your texturing. I noticed that you just applied flat textures across your airplane. I noticed this on the wings and thrusters. If this were in the background I would say that this was pretty good but this sort of falls into the uncanny valley for me. But I think with a little work you could make the top row;).
Thanks for your appreciation. I did used bumps maps here, only it’s noticeable at closer views, and at certains lightning angles. It’s visible on render #20 posted above, on the engine pod, you can see small rivets lines on the middle panel for example… I did make it VERY subtle because I did not wanted it to look like a WWII warbird that it’s not. I do like it as it is and feel in a pleasant and comfortable valley , and leave the top row to others, thanks
A very interesting model! As I read in the article you linked in the first post, there were two prototypes, but none was completed before Boeing closed this project - so this is a kind of an “alternative history”. You have tried to recreate all the details of the initial concept - the one that used the varied-geometry wing. I can see in every detail your master knowledge of various technical solutions, used in that time in the aerospace industry…
A comment to Chariot Rider’s suggestions: on such large, polished sheet metal surfaces (like in this aircraft) the flushed rivets are hardly visible - even if their shade differs slightly from the color of the the skin. We can suppose that on the just-finished prototype like this one they did not have any occasion to accumulate micro-dust and other dirt, which makes them more visible on the used cruiser airplanes.
An honour to have a comment from such an experienced aircraft modeller as you, Sir !
Yes this plane was never build. The aerodynamic concept was very sound though, having a delta
wing platform for supersonic cruise, best shape for it, and a low sweep wing platform for
takeoff and landing, permitting slower speeds and engine regime ,hence less noise. That was a big
problem for the Concorde, it had to use a lot of power at low speed.
The problem is just before they started building it they discovered the design could brake-up during
certain maneuvers and under certain g loads. Requiring heavy strengthening on the structure that would have
risen the weight to over 340 tons… This in turn would have shorten range, requiring calls on routes
a 747 could do in one flight.
So they went back to a plain Delta wing platform, that is the 2707-300 project; but then couldn’t make it
very much lighter, interest from the airlines faded, fuel crisis, and government funding cut. End of story.
But very interesting story. Shows what panic it was in the US airplane business when the Concorde flew,
in certain circles they thought they could loose commercial aviation market lead, hence government funding
for this project , thinking all airliners would be supersonics in the future They had to do it faster, bigger, stronger…
would have been longer than a 747. In the end we are still flying under Mach 1 in big tubes with wings,
and Airbus is rivaling Boeing.
yes , for a plane of that size it’s hard to see bumps and hoops from the rivets or structures lines when you
have a complete view of the thing. and it’s not a B-52 also, on which you can see stressed skin effects.
This was to be an hi performance plane, smooth.Even more so if the thing is brand new.
here closeup view where you can see the bump work though :
I will dirty it more a bit when I’ll do an airline livery. Though airliners seldom gets very dirty, and usually underside, near landing gears/flaps and such, with hydraulic fluids, dust and such…
)
Will see… I’m not done playing with this model anyway 
They had to do it faster, bigger, stronger…