Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.


Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#1
I started doing the hooks and plates for the early train connections and now it is time to start uploading them and here comes the trouble:

What is currently on the PT?

Hooks: x507 and x508
Plates: 737 and 509 for the hooks, 753 for magnets

x507
This is actually a part that consists of two parts, the bottom plate and the hook-element
Furthermore there are two versions of it, the earlier one where the hook is connected in the middle with a small round element and the latter part which has a rectangular interconnection with the botom plate.

For compatibility I would propose:
- add the two versions x507a and x507b
- make x507 a "move to" to x507a

so far so good, what number to assign to the bottom plate?

x508
This part is one mold, I  can simply use the existing file on the PT and amend it.
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#2
(2017-08-31, 6:49)Gerald Lasser Wrote: I started doing the hooks and plates for the early train connections and now it is time to start uploading them and here comes the trouble:

What is currently on the PT?

Hooks: x507 and x508
Plates: 737 and 509 for the hooks, 753 for magnets

x507
This is actually a part that consists of two parts, the bottom plate and the hook-element
Furthermore there are two versions of it, the earlier one where the hook is connected in the middle with a small round element and the latter part which has a rectangular interconnection with the botom plate.

For compatibility I would propose:
- add the two versions x507a and x507b
- make x507 a "move to" to x507a

so far so good, what number to assign to the bottom plate?

x508
This part is one mold, I  can simply use the existing file on the PT and amend it.
We are out of 3-digit part numbers so we now use uNNN or uNNNN. Where there is some resemblance to a Peeron xNNN number it is acceptable to use a matching uNNN number rather than something from the u9NNN series. So please use u886 for the plate (or u886a/u886b if there are two versions) - see http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x886 .

Note that on release xNNN numbers will lose the 'x', but uNNN number retain the 'u'.
Chris (LDraw Parts Library Admin)
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#3
(2017-08-31, 15:23)Chris Dee Wrote: We are out of 3-digit part numbers so we now use uNNN or uNNNN. Where there is some resemblance to a Peeron xNNN number it is acceptable to use a matching uNNN number rather than something from the u9NNN series. So please use u886 for the plate (or u886a/u886b if there are two versions) - see http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x886 .

Note that on release xNNN numbers will lose the 'x', but uNNN number retain the 'u'.

OK, will do!

Thanks
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#4
I uploaded now the base as u886 to the PT, I also made a small PPT to show my intent:

   

Where I see a collision coming up are the assembled hooks marked in yellow.

They are permanent assemblies. Rightfully they shall get a xxxc01 and xxxc02 number, however the appropriate numbers x507c01 and x507c02 (using the x507 hook and the 737 plate), are already used, though in the unofficial library, but I guess those parts are already used in some MOCs in the wild.

So shall the assembly be numbered x507c03 and c04? would that make sense? Or use 'a' and 'b'?

The existing x507 would then be made into a 'move to'
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#5
As Chris said in his comment: Any part beginning with x will loose that initial x upon release.
Hense, there is no need for a Move to, and a bulider will have to update any model using the unofficial part, anyway.

I also think, that it is wrong to use c01 and c02 for the same assembly in two different positions.
It would be better to use c01-f1 and c01-f2.

Why would you name the fourth part 509bc01? I don't understad were the b come from.

Wouldn't it be better to abandon the 'random' number x507 (and all of the assemblies using x507 and x508), and create u886ac01 and u886bc01 instead? The third hook would become 508 on release.
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#6
(2017-09-06, 16:05)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: As Chris said in his comment: Any part beginning with x will loose that initial x upon release.
Hense, there is no need for a Move to, and a bulider will have to update any model using the unofficial part, anyway.

I also think, that it is wrong to use c01 and c02 for the same assembly in two different positions.
It would be better to use c01-f1 and c01-f2.

Why would you name the fourth part 509bc01? I don't understad were the b come from.

Wouldn't it be better to abandon the 'random' number x507 (and all of the assemblies using x507 and x508), and create u886ac01 and u886bc01 instead? The third hook would become 508 on release.

Thanks for your opinion,
 
Using the proposed numbering based on the "u886" number also for the assemblies and abandoning the x507 makes sense.

And as the part-naming conventions suggest, saving the default positions with a "f" suffix is fine.

509bc01, well spotted, that's a typo or a copy/paste artifact.
Reply
RE: Train Hooks from the 1960's x507, x508 and their plates.
#7
(2017-09-05, 22:51)Gerald Lasser Wrote: I uploaded now the base as u886 to the PT, I also made a small PPT to show my intent:



Where I see a collision coming up are the assembled hooks marked in yellow.

They are permanent assemblies. Rightfully they shall get a xxxc01 and xxxc02 number, however the appropriate numbers x507c01 and x507c02 (using the x507 hook and the 737 plate), are already used, though in the unofficial library, but I guess those parts are already used in some MOCs in the wild.

So shall the assembly be numbered x507c03 and c04? would that make sense? Or use 'a' and 'b'?

The existing x507 would then be made into a 'move to'
If people have used the unofficial x507c01 and x507c02, then they should suffer the consequences if these change - thatis the well-documented caveat of using UNofficial parts. But, in fact these will not be released as x507..., so there will be no impact.
Chris (LDraw Parts Library Admin)
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)