 | | Re: Hollow axles actually not that hollow...
|
|
(...) Geoffrey, if you're looking for a time filler be my guest. There as still some parts in the need for a CA re-write: (URL) also these parts: (URL) looking for gifted people to get dressed up for a PT-party. w. (16 years ago, 7-Mar-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Hollow axles actually not that hollow...
|
|
(...) If someone really wants to go to the trouble of making a cross-section, and knows how to do so, adding in the missing surfaces shouldn't be that big a deal, yes? (...) I'd say no. People are clearly already concerned with keeping file size as (...) (16 years ago, 7-Mar-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Detailed Information on the Emerald Night Train #10194 with Photos
|
|
(...) Just to clarify the two parts I've left in the post are incorrect and the motor is indeed an XL (fits in the seven-wide cab). From (URL) Tim (16 years ago, 7-Mar-09, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Hollow axles actually not that hollow...
|
|
"Travis Cobbs" <tcobbs@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote in message news:KG3zI9.Cno@lugnet.com... (...) The computer hasn't been programmed with a representation of "solid" for an internal representation of a LDRAW part, yet. But he brings up an interesting (...) (16 years ago, 7-Mar-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Hollow axles actually not that hollow...
|
|
It's a computer representation of the piece, it's not meant to show how it's actually constructed. -Stefan- (16 years ago, 7-Mar-09, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
