 | | Why aren't the technic gear teeth primitives?
|
|
I was thinking that the teeth for the old technic gears (3647-1649) and the beveled ones (32270 and 32296) should be made into primitives. I tried editing the 3648 part in ldraw, but the file was too big to even load! (25 years ago, 28-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions on primitives
|
|
(...) The INVERTNEXT directive takes care of this problem. Quoted from BFC proposal: "INVERTNEXT This option inverts a subfile. It may only be used immediately before a subfile command line, and it only influences the immediately following subfile (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Two questions on primitives
|
|
Two questions (if these have already been discussed, just direct me to the appropriate LUGNET post): 1.) I've noticed the new BFC complient primitives on the Parts Tracker. How are we going to resolve the fact that the cylindar primitve can be used (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: New Part - 2587 Knights Armor
|
|
(...) I tried this with real parts and find that there is a conflict in real life. If I put the head on the torso+armour first then add the helmet then the chin strap does not go as far below the grin as when I put the helmet on the head alone. If I (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Liftarm width
|
|
Thanks Steve, looks like a good project to recreate them with the correct width and BFC-compliants. Philo (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
