 | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad —John VanZwieten
|
| | | Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) that (...) haven't (...) just (...) them, (...) should (...) There are some exceptions to an otherwise good rule. For example, the new Technic Link which appears on the Y-wing. If I find out from someone how (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | regarding my raised baselpate it is now (in the version i sent to terry last night) it is now mabie only 3-4ldu out maxumum ,if that, the fix adds a stud along the bottom of the piece next to the ramp (i discovered that there was one missing) also (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) How could the TLG part be wrong? I'm not understanding this... (...) No, it isn't a good use of 'needs work'. You are talking about skipping half of the surface area. (...) No, it's not appropriate to use 'needs work' for this part. (...) Very (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Modeling without the real element -- bad —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | (...) my part dod not match the tlg part. (typo) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
