 | | Comments on some unofficial Train parts
|
|
Hello everyone, glad to see the traffic on Parts Tracker! As a railway fan I am double-glad to see some Train-specific parts developing. However, I have noticed some issues with part naming so I think it's better to solve them while the parts are (...) (16 years ago, 15-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Updated Primitives Reference
|
|
(...) Don't worry Chris, we all know the precarious nature of unofficial stuff. But in the meantime it helps to have a quick reference of the shapes available! Philo (16 years ago, 7-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Updated Primitives Reference
|
|
(...) Sorry, but this is a bad idea. These primitives are unofficial - which means that before release the names might change. In fact some of them will definitely change. I don't like to break other peoples webpages, but this might happen now. (...) (16 years ago, 6-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Updated Primitives Reference
|
|
LDraw author J.C. Tchang has created an updated Primitives Reference, based on (URL) but including unofficial primitives on Parts Tracker as of 2008-12-08. It is available here: (URL) you can see it is written in French, but I hope that thanks to (...) (16 years ago, 20-Mar-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Official Parts using MLCad colors
|
|
Hi folks, working on the LDConfig file (URL) came across official parts that use colors present in MLCad but not the still official LDraw color chart: (URL) to mention a few: Color 430: 3811p02e.dat Color 431: 973p2e.dat Color 485: 973p4t.dat, (...) (16 years ago, 10-Feb-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: searching for people that have 1966-1970 electric parts
|
|
(...) Can you please check the thickness of the pins of the cables. I think the red single connectors are a little bit thinner than the gray double connectors. If so, we have to care about the difference in building the LDraw-Parts. If I am right, (...) (16 years ago, 4-Feb-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: searching for people that have 1966-1970 electric parts
|
|
(...) (URL) 002 - have 2 in working condition. Dave K (16 years ago, 3-Feb-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | searching for people that have 1966-1970 electric parts
|
|
I am searching for people that still have the electric parts that where produced during the time 1966 - 1970. If you have such parts, please leave a note here. As soon as I have my questions totally clear I will then ask in detail. cu mikeheide (16 years ago, 3-Feb-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: need help with 61808.dat
|
|
(...) The thing is that I got this far, but I don't know how to proceed. It's kind of split into three... First, the "wings" that, when assembled, cover the pump. I don't know how long should I make the quadrilaterals. I tried measuring but there (...) (16 years ago, 29-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: need help with 61808.dat
|
|
(...) Please tell us more exactly what problem you run into. So we can help to solve your problem. cu mikeheide (16 years ago, 29-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | need help with 61808.dat [DAT]
|
|
Hey, I've been working on 61808.dat, the Nynrah Ghostblaster, though I've ran into problems with it, which should be quite obvious with a person who hasn't been modeling parts for long and a part as complex as this. I want to get this ready one day, (...) (16 years ago, 29-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
(...) And what about LSC email? I have a few issues to submit but got a bounce back a few minutes ago :( Philo (16 years ago, 29-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
(...) The motm address should now be fixed. -Orion (16 years ago, 29-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
(...) As far as I know Dan and Orion are still working to fix the addresses after we had changes in the DNS. Please send your POTM submissions to my privat address at: ldraw[at]holly-wood(.)it Bye, Willy LDraw Contest Coordinator (16 years ago, 27-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
(...) There is a problem with all email to the adresses that ends with ldraw.org. I also do not know exactly what is the problem, but it seems to be bigger because it is still not fixed. (16 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | what's wrong with the POTM email?
|
|
I was intending to submit 61810.dat to the POTM contest (well, OK, little are my chances, probably, but you never know :) ) though I can't send the email: (...) I did double-check that I'm using the right email address, even sent it another time but (...) (16 years ago, 26-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
|
(...) We are aware of this and do have a plan to rectify it. Steve and I went through this a while ago, with a view to distinguishing between beams and lift-arms and consistently naming the beams. I recall our thinking was that "liftarm" would (...) (16 years ago, 24-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
|
(...) Excellent Willy. That's awesome. I still hate the names but at least they're consistent. Tim (16 years ago, 21-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
|
(...) When I standardized the headers of the certified parts at the PT back in August 2008 I tried to rename them as following: "1 x 1" are called Beams example: (URL) X 0.5" are called liftarm example: (URL) aware that only certified parts apply to (...) (16 years ago, 20-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Fixing the liftarms
|
|
Hi all (and especially Chris Dee), I find the inconsistency in the naming of liftarms in LDraw to be quite frustrating and was wondering whether or not it would be worth setting a standard name class and sticking to it. Here's a sample list: Technic (...) (16 years ago, 20-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
