 | | Re: 6002, similar to 6909?
|
|
(...) I haven't seen this part yet, but I have 6059 which is a 3 x 3 x 6 round panel with a spherous top. the problem I discovered was that the top part wasn't a true sphere so I would not be able to use the sphere primitives and the file size would (...) (23 years ago, 13-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 6002, similar to 6909?
|
|
Don and Mark, I recently aquired partn number 6909 which is a 4 x 4 x 6 (?) Round Panel with Spherous Top. I can't help but notice how similar it is to 6002 and was wondering if you two were going to try to make that part also. I tried a little, but (...) (23 years ago, 13-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 30086 (and 30087) 'Rubber' Dinghy
|
|
(...) I had this same problem when I first put this mpd in my /parts directory. Apparently, MLCad does not like mpd files in the /parts directory. I had to separate the mpd into its subparts. Since I'm more picky than some, I put all the subparts (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Part Authoring FAQ (was Re:Some submission guidelines...)
|
|
(...) Oops, sorry about that. Really all this info should be added to the FAQ on www.ldraw.org. All the FAQ says about submitting is "When you have finished the part, you should check it for technical mistakes with l3p -check, and then send it to (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Some submission guidelines (was: Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.)
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Don Heyse wrote something that triggered me to write at length: (...) Posting to lugnet.cad.dat.parts as an MPD is cool. It's better than the alternative (posting several messages, possibly pointing links to (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: 30086 (and 30087) 'Rubber' Dinghy
|
|
I'm having a little trouble loading this as a part in MLCAD. When I load it on its own it's okay but when you use it in a Model the bow moves away from the side ribs. Does anyone else have this problem. Other than that it looks good. (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.
|
|
(...) I was under the impression that you can submit them all as one MPD file and then someone in charge takes it apart and puts the individual files in the right directories (as long as the MPD file contains the paths). After all, LEDIT doesn't (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.
|
|
(...) Actualy I think it would be better to submit the primitives seperately so they can be used on other models as well, plus it makes the file smaller which was why I split the piece up in the first place. I'm somewhat of a byte miser trying to (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.
|
|
(...) I don't *think* it has been submitted. Then again, new primitives are handled differently than new part files. Steve (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 6002 mpd version, now I think I got it.
|
|
(...) Sure, but if you're going to submit the hi-res version of 6002.dat then why don't you just submit the new primitives along with it in an MPD file? I think that's reasonable. By the way, do you happen to know if the hi-res sphere primitive has (...) (23 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
