 | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hi all,
to draw a model, which I own for over 5 years, I have now done CAD files for the
60ies hook coupling and the 60ies 4.5 train waggon wheel with riffles.
Now at last I was able to render the "Esso promotional set 121".
The result can be seen here:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Ben/train-engines/train121_v3.jpg
The dats I designed for the model are uploaded here and will hopefully be added
to parts tracker soon:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=105523
Interestingly I found three totally different shapes of hook couplings (I was
only aware of 2) and have learned in the meantime that even 2 more cross
combinations exist in rare quantities, so there are 5 different couplings in
total!
A)
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=999418
this hook design was basically used in combination with the part 3176.dat
Plate 3 x 2 with Hole (better to be named "Plate 2 x 3 with Coupling,
Female") and used in sets like 111 153 113 in first release 1966
B)
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=999419
this hook design was basically used in combination with the
Plate 2 x 4 with Coupling, Female
in sets in upgraded version 111 153 113 and others in 1967
C)
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=999420
this hook design was used only in combination with the
modified Plate 2 x 4 with Coupling, Female
It has been used in the last sets which came with hook couplings as probably set
116 (1968++)
As written there exist obviously cross mixes of 737 and 3176 parts, but those
odd combinations seem to be quite rare. Among nearly 30 couplings with the 737
plate I have none with the hook in year 1966 shape. Same with 3176 plates and
hooks in 1967 design. A friend of mine found both in his bigger collection.
Kind Regards,
Ben
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> to draw a model, which I own for over 5 years, I have now done CAD files for the
> 60ies hook coupling and the 60ies 4.5 train waggon wheel with riffles.
>
> Now at last I was able to render the "Esso promotional set 121".
> The result can be seen here:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Ben/train-engines/train121_v3.jpg
>
> The dats I designed for the model are uploaded here and will hopefully be added
> to parts tracker soon:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=105523
Excelent work, but most of these parts are already on the parts tracker.
For the hooks I only found two versions, but I haven't yet finished the
curved end.
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x509.dat
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x508.dat
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x507.dat
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x447.dat
And thanks for your historical overview of when the different types of
hook couplings were used and in wich sets. Very interesting.
Niels
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > Hi all, • [snip]
> > hopefully be added
> > to parts tracker soon:
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=105523
>
> Excelent work, but most of these parts are already on the parts tracker.
> For the hooks I only found two versions, but I haven't yet finished the
> curved end.
Hello Niels,
> http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x509.dat
Great! I wasn't aware of this one so far and would have done it myself soon.
> http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x508.dat
So we did double work here: I had mine drawn in late october but the upload at
ldraw failed. Then I had a three weeks vacation without online access. Now I
uploaded them at brickshelf to publish them. :-(
> http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x507.dat
That would have saved me some hours of work, if I had known about your work on
these (even if I think mine are more accurately done)....
> http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x447.dat
At least in this case I have been a few weeks faster. ;-))
I had a close look at your file and I am not sure if yours or mine is the better
- they nearly look identical. Kudos to all your great work on "new" old parts!
Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
And then the electronic units of 118 and 138?
http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#139
And then I have a question about naming: why do you name the pieces totally
contrary to peeron? I would not have found your parts by myself, because I would
have looked after the peeron numbers. Is there any system in your
x???-numbering?
Kind Regards,
Ben
P.s.: I have one more comment on your file:
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x245c01.dat
I think that one never existed in real life.
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x245c02.dat
All motor wheels looked like this. The set 100 type motor never appeared with
spoked train wheels and the set 103 type motor never came with 4-stud-train
wheels.
So x245c01.dat should better be deleted.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > > Hi all, [snip]
> > > hopefully be added
> > > to parts tracker soon:
> > >
> > > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=105523
> >
> > Excelent work, but most of these parts are already on the parts tracker.
> > For the hooks I only found two versions, but I haven't yet finished the
> > curved end.
>
> Hello Niels,
>
> > http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x509.dat
>
> Great! I wasn't aware of this one so far and would have done it myself soon.
>
> > http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x508.dat
>
> So we did double work here: I had mine drawn in late october but the upload at
> ldraw failed. Then I had a three weeks vacation without online access. Now I
> uploaded them at brickshelf to publish them. :-(
>
> > http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x507.dat
>
> That would have saved me some hours of work, if I had known about your work on
> these (even if I think mine are more accurately done)....
>
> > http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x447.dat
>
> At least in this case I have been a few weeks faster. ;-))
> I had a close look at your file and I am not sure if yours or mine is the better
> - they nearly look identical. Kudos to all your great work on "new" old parts!
>
> Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
>
> And then the electronic units of 118 and 138?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#139
>
> And then I have a question about naming: why do you name the pieces totally
> contrary to peeron? I would not have found your parts by myself, because I would
> have looked after the peeron numbers. Is there any system in your
> x???-numbering?
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Ben
There is a logic to Niels' xNNN numbers and although this has been explained
several times before, it probably deserves repeating.
The LDraw convention for part numbers (initiated by James Jessiman) is to use
3-digit part numbers where the "official" number is not known.
During development, and certification prior to release into the official
library
these parts are prefixed with an "x" - so x507.dat on the Parts Tracker will be
released as 507.dat unless its true number is identified.
Independently, peeron started using xNNN numbers for the parts it needed to add
to its reference library, starting with x1 and now over x1200.
So there is no linkage between a peeron xNNN number and a LDraw xNNN number.
Indeed in many cases an already allocated peeron xNNN number cannot be used for
LDraw because the equivalent NNN number is already in the official library.
For prolific authors, like Niels, the LDraw parts admins (Steve Bliss and
myself) allocate batches of available xNNN numbers to avoid unnecessary
interaction for each part submission.
When we come close to running out of 3-digit numbers, Steve and I will decide a
new policy. If the confusion between LDraw xNNN.dat (NNN.dat) numbers and
peeron
xN, xNN, xNNN and xNNNN numbers is too great, we might need to develop that
policy sooner.
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Chris Dee wrote:
> If the confusion between LDraw xNNN.dat (NNN.dat) numbers and peeron
> xN, xNN, xNNN and xNNNN numbers is too great, we might need to
> develop that policy sooner.
Wouldn't it be best to create 'inventorying policy'? Inventorying is
much faster than actually modelling the parts, so the {ldraw} part
library is {in my eyes} just a subset of peeron library.
And while you think about some new policies, some 'length' property for
parts with variable lengths (strings, hoses, tubing) would be useful too.
Regarding inventories, there should be also a way to differentiate
between two sets with the same model, same number, but different parts.
This probably belongs somewhere else, but maybe Dan reads that ;-)
Regards,
Jindroush 'too many suggestions' Kubec
www.kostky.org - for Czech LEGO fans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
> Chris Dee wrote:
> > If the confusion between LDraw xNNN.dat (NNN.dat) numbers and peeron
> > xN, xNN, xNNN and xNNNN numbers is too great, we might need to
> > develop that policy sooner.
>
> Wouldn't it be best to create 'inventorying policy'? Inventorying is
> much faster than actually modelling the parts, so the {ldraw} part
> library is {in my eyes} just a subset of peeron library.
There are, I believe, efforts ongoing behind the scenes to unify and improve the
part number assignment/tracking/allocation process and this is one facet of
that. I am not sure the principals in the matter are ready to speak out about
it.
> And while you think about some new policies, some 'length' property for
> parts with variable lengths (strings, hoses, tubing) would be useful too.
There are more things to consider here than just length but I agree.
> Regarding inventories, there should be also a way to differentiate
> between two sets with the same model, same number, but different parts.
> This probably belongs somewhere else, but maybe Dan reads that ;-)
Try lugnet.db.inv ?
Good suggestions, keep them coming!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
> > > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote: • [SNIP]
> > And then I have a question about naming: why do you name the pieces totally
> > contrary to peeron? I would not have found your parts by myself, because I would
> > have looked after the peeron numbers. Is there any system in your
> > x???-numbering?
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Ben
Dear Chris,
thanks for your patience with stupid newbies like me. Sorry for being not able
to find out these things for myself.
Your explanation has now been very clear and (semi-)logical for me. I would have
wished to find a numbering which had been the same for peeron and ldraw, but I
can guess that this would need lots of communication and organizational
work....
> There is a logic to Niels' xNNN numbers and although this has been explained
> several times before, it probably deserves repeating.
>
> The LDraw convention for part numbers (initiated by James Jessiman) is to use
> 3-digit part numbers where the "official" number is not known.
>
> During development, and certification prior to release into the official
> library
> these parts are prefixed with an "x" - so x507.dat on the Parts Tracker will be
> released as 507.dat unless its true number is identified.
>
> Independently, peeron started using xNNN numbers for the parts it needed to add
> to its reference library, starting with x1 and now over x1200.
>
> So there is no linkage between a peeron xNNN number and a LDraw xNNN number.
> Indeed in many cases an already allocated peeron xNNN number cannot be used for
> LDraw because the equivalent NNN number is already in the official library.
>
> For prolific authors, like Niels, the LDraw parts admins (Steve Bliss and
> myself) allocate batches of available xNNN numbers to avoid unnecessary
> interaction for each part submission.
>
> When we come close to running out of 3-digit numbers, Steve and I will decide a
> new policy. If the confusion between LDraw xNNN.dat (NNN.dat) numbers and
> peeron
> xN, xNN, xNNN and xNNNN numbers is too great, we might need to develop that
> policy sooner.
Ok, my confusion has now passed, but other newbies will follow for sure...
Sorry for bothering and stealing your time.
Kind Regards,
Ben
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
>
> Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
Guyvivan and I working on that part already. But in the moment I did not
have the time I need to bring it forward.
>
> And then the electronic units of 118 and 138?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#139
>
> And then I have a question about naming: why do you name the pieces totally
> contrary to peeron? I would not have found your parts by myself, because I would
> have looked after the peeron numbers. Is there any system in your
> x???-numbering?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Ben
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> >
> > Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> > http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
>
> Guyvivan and I working on that part already. But in the moment I did not
> have the time I need to bring it forward.
Sounds great, Michael!
I am looking forward to get that file onto my PC.
Regards,
Ben
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Reinhard "Ben" Beneke schrieb:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > > Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> > > http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
> > Guyvivan and I working on that part already. But in the moment I did not
> > have the time I need to bring it forward.
>
> Sounds great, Michael!
>
> I am looking forward to get that file onto my PC.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ben
I just saw this old message and I do not know wheather you have seen
this: http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x593c01.dat
cu
mikeheide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Reinhard "Ben" Beneke schrieb:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > > Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> > > http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
> > Guyvivan and I working on that part already. But in the moment I did not
> > have the time I need to bring it forward.
>
> Sounds great, Michael!
>
> I am looking forward to get that file onto my PC.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ben
I just found on Peeron the following part:
x468cx1
Electric 4.5V Battery Box 6 x 11 x 3 & 1/3 with Red Dot and Single Plugs
In the instruction it seems to be the same as
x468cx4
Electric 4.5V Battery Box 6 x 11 x 3 & 1/3 with Bottom Plugs and
Separated End
but with a red dot between the Single Plugs.
As you wrote earlier in this thread that you own the set 118, please let
me know (maybe a picture) that this is real what Peeron says.
cu
mikeheide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
>
> And then the electronic units of 118 and 138?
> http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#139
As I don't have any of these files, I cannot create them.
Although I have created mockups for the microphone and control unit
for personal use.
If you want to create these parts, please do.
I can send you my mockups, if you like to.
Niels
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> > Any chances we will see the oldest type of batterybox soon?
> > http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#100
> >
> > And then the electronic units of 118 and 138?
> > http://www.fgltc.org/bwoabs/9v_12v/9v_12v.phtml#139
>
> As I don't have any of these files, I cannot create them.
> Although I have created mockups for the microphone and control unit
> for personal use.
> If you want to create these parts, please do.
> I can send you my mockups, if you like to.
>
> Niels
Dear Niels,
thank you for your offer. But I fear to work into your mockup would not save too
much time on my side. Basically I wanted to avoid doubled work. I am really
interested in these LEGO® sets since I know about them. And since they mean
something to me, I would like to draw them sooner or later.... So maybe I start
making up these files later this winter.
Leg Godt!
Ben
| | | | | | |
