Maybe Michael also uses FS9 then. You guys probably don't know about the work at the train sim sites, but some of them have used the open Ruby scripting language of Sketch-Up to produce specific .mdl related plug-ins. I am referring to LOD generators, untextured surface highlighter and other very useful additions. They work just as well for FSX .mdl's as they do for Train Sim ones. So, we have specific Sketch-Up tool's to help us and Arno's magnificent program to put the finishing touches on and convert.

 

I tell you...I see aerial photos that show GA planes around the Garmin facility (in the KSLE area). So I go to the Warehouse and run a search for GA planes and come up with a Quest Kodiak and Diamond Katana. Both perfect and - to me at least - look absolutely plausible and proper in the scenery. That was a whim, took maybe an hour, if - and while the Kodiak is 3500k, the Katana is 95. I don't know how many polygons you can fit into 95k, but I'll take 'em cause I can't draw either - not compared to that elegant piece of digital origami that is ready made for placement in the FSX - or FS9, for that matter - world.

Doesn't the Ruby language work only with the payware version of Sketchup? I never tried it.

 

There's an easy way to tell if a Warehouse model is going to be too complex for FS9. Once the model is loaded in Sketchup, choose "Model Into" from the "Window" menu. I go by the number of edges. 2,000 - 2,500 seems to be the point at which the model won't compile properly.

 The payware version of SU is identical to the free one with the additional capacity to produce commercial quality layout. An example would be a three view drawing of a machined bracket. Ruby script is something I'd associated with web development as a way to incorporate dynamic graphical elements and I could be entirely mistaken. At any rate, it is open source and is reported to be easy to learn.
 
 Insofar as vertices, I have read the true killer is "draw calls," or at least some sort of obscure balance between the two. While SU uses colors, MCX renders those colors and they show up fine (by and large) in FSX, each one represents a single draw call; whereas a texture that has the colors "burned into it," is only one draw call - and the default result is a .bmp, by the way.
 
 I suggest that your 2000 vertex threshold might represent resource exhaustion, because I am able to compile and test much larger models. From a 20k polygon model I derive a 2000 poly low LOD version. I am not suggesting it is feasible or practical, but it is possible and they appear to work fine. Consider some larger scenery projects where the terrain details have to be built as a model; those can be immense as well. I think the volcanoes at Kamchatka are 600 or 1,100 mb. Imagine rendering that sucker, take for freaking ever.
 
 Speaking of which, I am getting a nice library of my own, I like collecting unique or obscure models. If you need a Tu-204 or a J-15 or something, I could probably make you some nice compact ones to try..