Unofficial File parts/3010p26.dat
part image
File Header:
0 Brick  1 x  4 with Red Mail Horn Left-Aligned Pattern
0 Name: 3010p26.dat
0 Author: Ulrich Röder [UR]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !KEYWORDS Set 116-2, Train

0 !CMDLINE -c14

0 // Main

Status:
Certified! (ACCX)
Size: 594 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=certify
Steffen=certify
cwdee=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
~Mail Horn Pattern
Status: Certified! (ACCX)
~Mail Horn Background Pattern
Status: Certified! (ACCX)
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Wed Nov 14 05:40:02 2018, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: UR

At Thu Nov 15 02:25:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
I think this should be numbered ...p26, not ...p24b,
check http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptpatterns.cgi?p=3010


At Thu Nov 15 08:00:02 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: UR
Certification: novote
Comments:
That was actually my first thought ..... Steffen

But after deeper research I found this more accurate history, according to which the mail horn sbrick as well as the one with the envelope represent a pure color variant exclusively for the North American market.

Have a look here: https://www.doctor-brick.de/threads/lego-4-5-v-eisenbahn-116-mit-zubehoer.6306/

In that sense, I have relied comparatively on the nomenclature of 3010p20a and b, and also on the Peeron reference, where it is handled the same way.
In my opinion, this also makes sense for an effective and efficient finding and insertion of the components.

3010p12 and 3010p13 would have to be designed in the same way in the alternative color scheme to complete the elements of the set variants.
Accordingly ..in that case... one would have to rename them then in 3010p26,3010p26a, 3010p27,3010p27a, in addition with appropriate sub-files.

In my opinion, it is logical to follow the original lego numbering and that the related components of a set are close together in their numbering.

what do you think?


At Sun Nov 18 17:55:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.


At Sun Nov 18 18:25:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
we normally do not have a ...b variant without an ...a variant.
thus, having p24 and p24b breaks that scheme.
following your argumentation, they should be p24a and p24b,
but I still do not like that approach, because the patterns
are not really variants of each other, they are completely different.
A variant would be some slight variation of the pattern, but a full inversion is too much IMHO.
I am still convinced that the current p24 and p24b should be 2 separate pattern numbers.
I keep up my hold vote here for now, but if others do not agree with me then will convert to cert.


At Sun Feb 17 12:07:51 2019 part 'parts/3010p24b.dat' was renamed to 'parts/3010p26.dat'.

At Thu May 23 21:10:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
removing hold


At Mon May 27 22:50:02 2019, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Darats
Comments:
Removed duplicated lines.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.

At Fri May 31 15:15:02 2019, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR

At Sun Jun 9 07:20:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.


At Sun Jun 9 08:25:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.


At Wed Jun 26 18:05:01 2019 a Parts Tracker Admin edited the header.

At Wed Jun 26 18:15:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: cwdee
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.