To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cadOpen lugnet.cad in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / 16649
Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:51:49 GMT
Viewed: 
10576 times
  
On 11/22/2009 12:18 PM, Tore Eriksson wrote:
Please tell me where the reference to plnxzb.dat is. (Parent file, line nr)
/Tore

It's in town_full.dat, right after tbfire.dat. By the file name it
sounds like a "plane" for the "X" and "Z" axes. So it probably was just
used for orienting other models.

Would it be safe to simply replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat?

Mike


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:57:09 GMT
Viewed: 
10607 times
  
On 11/22/2009 2:51 PM, Michael Horvath wrote:
It's in town_full.dat, right after tbfire.dat. By the file name it
sounds like a "plane" for the "X" and "Z" axes. So it probably was just
used for orienting other models.

In fact, come to think of it, I probably added it myself when I was
working with the file years ago! ;)

Mike


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:08:57 GMT
Viewed: 
10571 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
On 11/22/2009 12:18 PM, Tore Eriksson wrote:
Please tell me where the reference to plnxzb.dat is. (Parent file, line nr)
/Tore

It's in town_full.dat, right after tbfire.dat. By the file name it
sounds like a "plane" for the "X" and "Z" axes. So it probably was just
used for orienting other models.

Thanks, I'll have a look at it.

Would it be safe to simply replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat?

I'm not sure. Check if there'll be any color changes. It may have been inlined
first, then color edited. But that sounds like an awkward way to go(?)
If you see no color difference, just replace the reference(s).

/Tore


Mike


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:03:52 GMT
Viewed: 
10571 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
Would it be safe to simply replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat?

Mike

I've checked this out now, and you can't replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat. It
will not come out with the same colors, regardless which main color you use in
the calling Type 1 line.

/Tore


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:57:44 GMT
Viewed: 
10555 times
  
On 11/22/2009 7:03 PM, Tore Eriksson wrote:
I've checked this out now, and you can't replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat. It
will not come out with the same colors, regardless which main color you use in
the calling Type 1 line.

/Tore

Is it an official part? Why isn't it included with the official
distribution?

Mike


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:59:10 GMT
Viewed: 
10681 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
On 11/22/2009 7:03 PM, Tore Eriksson wrote:
I've checked this out now, and you can't replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat. It
will not come out with the same colors, regardless which main color you use in
the calling Type 1 line.

/Tore

Is it an official part?

After searching Peeron and BrickLink, I think that this is not a real LEGO part.
There are more of them in Datsville.

Why isn't it included with the official distribution?

If it is an existing LEGO part (which I tend to doubt), the .dat file may not
have been submitted to the Tracker. Those two x772p???.dat parts must be made
from existing LEGO parts, but I don't think anyone has made a better version of
them yet to submit to the Tracker.

/Tore


Subject: 
Re: 606p01b.dat (Was: LGPL Datsville)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Wed, 3 Mar 2010 23:34:42 GMT
Viewed: 
17595 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
On 11/22/2009 7:03 PM, Tore Eriksson wrote:
I've checked this out now, and you can't replace 606p01b.dat with 606p01.dat. It
will not come out with the same colors, regardless which main color you use in
the calling Type 1 line.

/Tore

Is it an official part?

After searching Peeron and BrickLink, I think that this is not a real LEGO part.
There are more of them in Datsville.

Why isn't it included with the official distribution?

If it is an existing LEGO part (which I tend to doubt), the .dat file may not
have been submitted to the Tracker. Those two x772p???.dat parts must be made
from existing LEGO parts, but I don't think anyone has made a better version of
them yet to submit to the Tracker.

/Tore

Maybe we can replace them after all. Look at this picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/40764264@N02/4405232940/
The orange poles indicate the occurances of x606p01b.dat. They are all in
undeveloped areas, so I think it's possible to replace them with other
roadplates.

/Tore


©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR