 | | DAT voting page up
|
|
Once again, sorry for the delay. :-( The first vote announced on lugnet.cad.dev: (URL) Terry K -- (25 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
A note on the 9V Mini-motor: There is a box3#8.dat primitive which Ldlite is currently unable to draw. This primitive forms the wire notch on the top of the motor, but since the voting page is done with Ldlite, a hole exixts. Terry, maybe you could (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) A big update - and welcome to some new names - great work. I have some comments on the new parts: Airport Runway baseplates (606p33, 608p33) and Crosswalk Baseplate (425p01) These appear to have been authored by concurrently defining the white (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) These are mine. i have not had any rendering problems so tell me the positon and size of the problem. (...) i was not aware of this... thanks for the tip. (...) That was probobly my fault... but does it really matter? (...) does it really (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Just view them in LDraw (Over left front) at 50% and you should see (they do render OK in LDLite). Basically what has been done in the past is to redefine the entire part, missing out (fromn the colour 16 definitions) the area of surface which (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Wait, isn't pink one of the 16 defined LDraw colors? I t doesn't need to be dithered. From ldraw.doc: ... 9 Light Blue 10 Light Green 11 Cyan 12 Light Red 13 Pink <-- LDraw color #13 14 Yellow 15 White ... Or is this pink a different shade (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
check out belvill set 5845. the jetski has a part that has a pink body and light pink triangles. (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Do you think it is really required to inline it? I was under the impression that the next release of ldlite would address the 3#8 problem. -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) How many of you have voted? I am having trouble with the CGI program server and wonder if any of you have had trouble. And I have not received any votes in the mail yet. -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) You bet it does. (...) See above. -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I searched all parts here and couldn't find any that uses the box3#8 primitive. Where it is used ? Leonardo (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36d3bf77.1968270@lu...et.com>... (...) server (...) votes (...) Terry, I voted yesterday and got a message about some changes going on there. It said something about a 48 hour delay, I think. Sorry I didn't read it that (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) It seems to be molded as two parts which have been glued or welded. I'm not going to pry mine apart to find a second number. If there is a different official number for this part, our standard would be to use that number.[1] (...) You mean the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Chris Dee wrote in message ... (...) (425p01) (...) do (...) redefine (...) with, (...) An example: Adding a white rectangle to a color 16 surface: 1. Delete the color 16 surface from the part. 2. Add the white rectangle. 3. Fill in the area around (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) tag? (...) You might be right about this one. It's a small part with rather oddly rounded surfaces. I'll take another look at it. (...) OK, and I'll also implement the use of sub-parts to separate the front face. If anyone has the triangle (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Yes, very much. (...) Y,VM. Steve (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I have not yet finished reviewing the parts, so I haven't voted yet. Steve (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Here are some notes on pieces I've looked at. I'll post more after I've looked at the others. I'm not claiming I've done a complete review of everything, just looked at some parts in different views, scanned the code for obvious anomolies. Steve (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <36d42e85.12776501@l...et.com>... (...) You are correct. I designed it this way so people could see the pack when viewed from the front, but for actually placing it on a minifig it should be turned around, like the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I can understand that -- those thin-wall parts with decoration drive me crazy, because the decoration isn't visible in the default view. (...) I thought about Electric, and I'd be OK with that. (...) I followed the naming precedent from #2625, (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I didn't vote yet, pending the authors responses to my comments. Chris (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) In real life the joins between the curved surfaces are smoothed. I approximated this by drawing the cylinders, but missing out the junction lines you refer to. It is a tricky part to model accurately and has no possible use (IMHO) except (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) What about the Wheels category? That is the major function of the part, after all. (...) I think it's white in real life. I didn't check out this part yet, but does it use quads or lines for the 'text'? Quads will scale better and also convert (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i do not know that either. but making the false bottom would take me alomast as long as making the baseplate itself would. (...) some town sets, some divwers sets. it cmoes in town jr police station i think (...) no the part has only ever come (...) (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) it is white. the text uses quads. (25 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: <snip> (...) If we were using the correct brick code, this would be white. Since we're instead using the xxxxPyy code, it can be anything the modeller wants. IRL, the element has appeared (at least) thusly: 1x2 Brick: White, Green (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
I apologize in advance if I missed the discussion on this, but is the word "pattern" at the end of lots of the parts really necessary? It seems rather redundant. Especially in parts that already have "logo" in their names. Also, maybe the "needs (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) battery (...) My thought on that would be yes if the part can be opened or exposed somehow in the model it is used in. I've actually been trying to come up with a program that with strip the unexposed or (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, "Pattern" just sort of became a standard way of identifying a patterned part. "Logo" I think should refer more to a specific type of pattern. Necessary? I don't know. But I seem to be blindly following the convention. (...) In a perfect (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Hi x996 / x998 Do the 1 x 8 light bricks really look like this - what set are these from. On the Blacktron II Base the two 1 x 8 light bricks are identical with the lights midway between studs - and the studs have hollow tops. Chris Dee (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, that all makes sense. What it needs is some optional lines, not hard-lines. No biggie. Like you said, this part goes inside the other (and as far as I know, won't attach to any other brick any other way). (...) I don't think this needs a (...) (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Well, duh. Why didn't I think of that? Steve (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Except the actual text-parts are done in negative-space. There aren't any drawing commands for them in the part-file. If you delete the 3004.dat reference, the text disappears (because the background shows through where text should be). Steve (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
that would be my fault. all the things that i have seen regarding the lighting bricks are wrong then terry, if the lighting bricks get in or what ever then can i send you the fix? (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) sure. is this a serious problem? (25 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Assuming they pass the vote, then yes, you can send fixes. See Jonathan? This is what happens (and will happen) when you don't have real-life examples to work from. You may think they are accurate, but you really don't know. -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
here is what i will do to my non-patterned parts. bar 7 x 3 with double clips: no changes baseplate 32 x 32 raised with ramp: as i said the baseplate has been fixed and sent. regarding the problem with the bottom doesn't the cnayon plate need to be (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
wht the raised baseplate: for example the "walls" of the small 4 stud area go up 3 bricks and accross 1/2 a stud area. is this accurate enough or do you need to measute with a ruler? (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) done (...) You know, I've never looked at the bottom since you usually can't do anything with the bottom of a baseplate. Matter of fact I don't think I've ever looked at any of the real ones I have other (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
jonathan wilson wrote in message ... (...) go (...) need (...) Its precise enough for me. Since we already know that LDraw itself is not accurate, but it is precise. Roy (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) need (...) You should measure with a ruler or with lego parts (or for detailed parts people have resorted to calipers). With a plate and a brick, you can make pretty accurate measurements based on wall thickness (4 ldu), plate thickness (8 (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
well... my raised baseplate is that accurate and is finished. (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed that and send the fix to terry. also i added a missing stud at the edge next to the ramp. (...) i will fix this asap (...) i will not fix those (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Without the actual element in front of you, how can you be 100% sure that you've actually fixed the problem? (...) Have you asked yourself why you missed this in the first place? --Todd (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) (Isn't it quadruple clips?) (...) Nope, it's not. Nope nope nope. Seriously, Jonathan, go buy some LEGO. Seriously. Or ask someone to snail mail you a crystal ball for heaven's sake. You shouldn't have to ask questions like this. Questions (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) i have fixed it because i built kings mountain fortress on the part and all the studs are in place (...) it was a small oversight on my part. even if i had the part in front of me then i still could have missed the stud (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Old version tiles didn't have these grooves and LDraw, to my knowledge, doesn't model it because of precision. Case in point ... (...) <FLAME><FLAME THROWER><AIR SUPPORT><ICBM> Nuff said Roy (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) You can't. Even with a part in hand you can't because how do you know every part thru the ages is the same. A case in point, I just did an inventory of all the parts I have and found two 45 1 x 2 slopes that (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) hmmm... i never noticed that before.. that the LDraw model of 3068 (as well as other tiles) doesn't have the fingernail groove around the edge... although i say that's BS.. in my opinion (looking at a couple stacked here on the desk, up (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up) [DAT]
|
|
(...) never (...) okay.. so here's a 3068 with the groove... any reason why we haven't already updated these??? (please feel free to let me know if i'm treading on some sacred ground or something here... but in all honesty, i don't see a problem (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I recently offered to do just this and apply it to the existing decorated tiles (more than 10 minutes work to do it properly, IMHO), (URL) since I do not own all the decorated tiles myself I need guidance on which ones use the tile with the (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) oh yeah.. i just meant 10 minutes to do one and see how it looks... doing all of the tiles in our catalog would be at least an 11-minute job ;) J (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I disagree with the first sentence (as I've said). I don't have this part, so I can't give any detailed feedback on the accuracy of the part-file; I must stick to generalities. An easy way to fix this part (enough to earn the coveted 'needs (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) The best measurements are against other lego parts. The ruler is a fall-back for odd-sized bits. Steve (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) I think that this part is OK. I haven't done a detailed check. (...) It was. Richard actually went through some trouble to get that part correct. That's how I know what I know about the fix I suggested (in a different message): Richard went (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <36d6f2f0.17111521@l...et.com>... (...) Is the soccer ball part spherical with printed pattern, or does the physical part consist of hexagons and pentagons like a real soccer ball? -John Van (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
It's not an update. It's an A/B version thing--Tile 1x1 Old Style, Tile 1x1 New Style. Steve (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
Since I am not an LDraw part developer (although I did try my hand at one part), I will add my $0.02 to the fracas and be done with it. This outlook is based upon my knowledge of engineering documentation systems in the real world. With that said, (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) ^^^ I avoided using this word in my posts on the subject for fear I would spell it just like this, which of course is another word for dirty :-) Good points in your post, though. -John Van (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) The curved edges are an essential part of the piece, especially when viewed in LDLite or POV-Ray. Not modeling them would be like leaving the curved edges off of the Windscreens - the edges are a highly recogizable feature of the part. --Bram (...) (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) the canyon raised baseplate does not have the rounded edges. (25 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
(...) I think the grooves should *definitely* be added -- if someone is behooved to take the time to do the mods correctly. I just noticed the tile thing last night when I was toying around with some little chess pieces I made in LEdit which use a (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) I just checked (using an actual copy of the element :) It's beautiful! -- it's actually a physical imprinted pattern in the plastic of hexagons and pentagons -- then all the pentagons are decorated black. --Todd (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Then it's broken too. :) --Todd (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) on (...) in (...) i (...) never (...) That's gravy, man. The more the merrier. Roy (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) already (...) problem (...) Like crazy, man, now what part number do you want with your gravy. Anyone for 3068A? Roy (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) Really? Another version change. I'm thinking we need to look a little closer for a list of these version changes over the ages. How about it? Anyone else out there have more examples in this line. Todd, as an (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) all (...) Oh, man, do I need your energy. Roy (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) If we follow the standards set by James and use australian english, shouldn't we change the description ? I don't think the word "soccer" is used there. Leonardo (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
in australia they call it soccer. football refers to aussie rules. therefore soccer ball is the right name (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) Are you sure about that? Surely, in England they use the term "football", and I would guess that they use the same word in Australia. (...) Sorry, I didn't understand this sentence. (...) This doesn't convince me. Fredrik (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Soccer ball name
|
|
(...) I don't know for sure if "soccer" is used in Australia or not, but in either case, isn't "soccer" guaranteed not to be ambiguous, unlike "football" or "fussball"? In Brasil, do you say "football" or "soccer"? If you don't say "soccer," what (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) in australia they call the game that the soccer ball comes from soccer. (...) in australia the term football refers to the australin game aussie rules which is different. (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball name
|
|
(...) In the beginning of the century, some british came here and started playing football. At that time it was common to use words from other languages but as the time passed we changed those words to portuguese and now we call it "futebol". (...) (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) I've searched the web and discovered that in Australia what they call football looks like rugby. I've only seen one picture but it's a completely different game. (...) Go to your favorite search engine and type "australian footbal". Leonardo (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) This sounds very familiar, yes. I was undoubtedly wrong. Fredrik (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) Well with at least one different the Aussi rules football is WAY more violent than rugby, more like american football (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball name
|
|
let's just say that in France nothing comes to mind when you say soccer, it doesn't come close to any name which we use. I'm ready to bet that it is the same in Brazil (BTW we won the world cup :-P ) Todd Lehman a écrit dans le message ... (...) (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
I've never authored lego parts for ldraw, but I did for pov-ray (at the time I was using Anton Raves library which is very good (a lot more detailed than ldraw, I haven't tried l3P so I don't know the quality of the output) but it was lacking some (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball name
|
|
(...) I only get the one copy -- the one you e-mail to me (assuming it makes it to me OK, which is highly probable but not guaranteed). I also see a copy of the article you posted when I read via NNTP. If I were reading lugnet.cad.dev via e-mail (...) (25 years ago, 28-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) In this case, all the tile elements probably have new, 5-digit part numbers. It would be appropriate to use these numbers for new versions of the tile. In general, if TLG modifies a part but retains the original part number, appending a letter (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball name
|
|
(...) Yes, but you didn't have a LEGO set for your team. :-P Unless those unconfirmed rumors were true. Nah, Matt would have had some by now... Steve (25 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Soccer ball pattern
|
|
(...) Seems like there should be a soccer-ball tessalation[1] somewhere on the web, which could be ported to LDraw relatively easily. Steve [1] May be a mis-use of the term -- not sure of the limits on tessalations. (25 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) True, but it's also a precedent. I'd rather have the bottom surface than curved edges. I'd consider a part with all surfaces more accurate than a part with closely-modeled upper surfaces, but the underside completely missing. Maybe I'm just (...) (25 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Now, if they were going backwards, they'd really be moonwalking[1] Steve [1] A dance move made popular by Michael Jackson, where the dancer walks backward, but makes it look like they are walking forward. (25 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
My favorite part change is the 1x2 plate with laser prongs. The height of the prongs in relation to the 1x2 plate has changed, and the two versions do not line up. -gyug (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
Paul Gyugyi wrote in message <36DB9CF5.6A730D96@g...yi.com>... (...) Now here is a good example of how TLG/LDraw part numbers come in handy. Paul, I'm unsure as to what part is a 1x2 plate with laser prongs. Has it been modeled in LDraw? If not, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
Earls HouseHold wrote in message ... (...) I've always thought it was pretty stupid to reply to your own post. So, call me stupid. Here the list of changed parts I've been able to come with. It is in no way complete or do I say it is correct. Any (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
(...) 3945.DAT Plate 1 x 2 with Handles (URL) don't know about this part nowadays, but I remember back in the days of classic space that this part came in _many_ versions. At least I can remember three different. Some has 2 unit long handles with (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
(...) Part #3945, the 1x2 plate with two side handles. Steve (25 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) I don't think so. (...) Yes. (...) Here's another: 3062 brick 1 x 1 round 3 versions- no lip at the bottom, closed stud, and open stud. --Bram Bram Lambrecht / o o \ BramL@juno.com ---...---oooo-----(_...o---...--- WWW: (URL) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
Earls HouseHold wrote in message ... (...) Those numbers are handy, because there is no standardized name scheme. And in most common part dictionary, (I mean ldraw part name library) this part is named as " ....with handles." Selçuk (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
Bram Lambrecht wrote in message <19990302.220734.509...no.com>... (...) Don't go that far, even regular rectangular bricks has several different versions. My oldest ones has slits through under side tubes...And there are the other ones without (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [3068 with groove] (was:DAT voting page up)
|
|
(...) The changes in the 1x1 cylinder brick are functional -- with the bottom lip, the cylinder will fit between 4 studs, and with the hole-y stud, you can put an antenna rod through the cylinder. Another functional (but less important) varied (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
