Subject:
|
Re: is anyone else finding...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 12 May 1999 16:30:45 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
jsproat@&StopSpam&geocities.com
|
Viewed:
|
75 times
|
| |
|
|
Bram Lambrecht wrote:
> blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve Bliss) writes:
> > Really? Considering what they do, they are a decent size. I don't
> > think that plate-based hinges could deliver the 'clicking' function
> > of these hinges. And they need to have (at least) a 1x2 footprint for
> > stability. A 1x1 would wiggle around too much.
> Good arguments, but I think they could have been two instead of three
> plates high.
Anakin's Pod Racer has these ratcheting hinges in a plate. It's what's
holding up those long yellow vanes on the top and sides of the thrusters.
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@geocities.com>
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/5249/
May the Force be with y'all.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: is anyone else finding...
|
| Sproaticus <jsproat@geocities.com> wrote in message news:3739ACB5.A314A0...ies.com... (...) But the hinge part of the plate runs parallel to the long side of the 1X2 plate, while the X-Wing brick hinge has the hinge part running perpendicular to (...) (26 years ago, 12-May-99, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: is anyone else finding...
|
| (...) Good arguments, but I think they could have been two instead of three plates high. The worst one though, is the hinge used for the X-wing canopy. It could have been a plate, which would make it easier to place things behind the pilot. Don't (...) (26 years ago, 12-May-99, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general)
|
96 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
