Unofficial File parts/55768.dat
part image
File Header:
0 Train Front  6 x 14 x  7.667
0 Name: 55768.dat
0 Author: Ulrich Röder [UR]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 !HELP Position: 1 2 0 80.21 -180.873 1 0 0 0 0 -1 0 1 0 2494.dat/27 Degrees
0 !HELP Position: 1 2 0 96 -198 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2919.dat

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !KEYWORDS Set 7897, ICE

0 !HISTORY 2013-08-14 {LEGO Digital Designer} Original part shape
0 !HISTORY 2020-02-01 [UR] File preparation for LDraw Parts Tracker


0 // Main

Status:
1 subfile isn't certified. (SN)
Size: 11580 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=novote
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
~Train Front 6 x 14 x 7.667 - Side
Status: Needs more votes. (N)
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Fri Jan 31 15:15:02 2020, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: UR
At Fri Jan 31 15:45:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Looks good at first sight, but should be named 6 x 14 x 7.667 (sorting purpose, not useful here, but consistency...)

At Fri Jan 31 16:45:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
...done..
THX Phillipe

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sun Feb 2 09:40:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
...History date corrected

At Sun Feb 2 11:40:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Missing some condlines on the transition from roof to front.

At Sun Feb 2 13:30:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
did you mean these ? :

5 24 36.48 112 -238.93 32.05 124.58 -255.8 31.13 126.21 -257.9 38 112 -236.37
5 24 -32.05 124.58 -255.8 -36.48 112 -238.93 -38 112 -236.37 -31.13 126.21 -257.9

only they're not on the roof ...

Anyway, it is funny that the standalone version of edger2 serves up these two condlines ... the integrated version in LDPE, on the other hand, does not show anything - each with identical settings.

That's nerving ... with a "?" in each eye

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sun Feb 2 15:35:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
No.
These are missing , in the subfile:
2 4 45.89 6.67 -28 50.8539 14.0585 -28
2 4 50.8539 14.0585 -28 54.8 22.02 -28
2 4 54.8 22.02 -28 57.67 30.43 -28
2 4 57.67 30.43 -28 59.41 39.14 -28
2 4 59.41 39.14 -28 60.004 48 -28

The surface around the headlights is also very wrong. Something has gone wrong here:
2 4 16.2 92.69 -210.39 38 92.69 -210
Check out some of the images on Ebay of this part.

And here too. Shouldn't be concave:
3 16 41.2 114.38 -236.11 38 112 -236.37 39.44 130.23 -256.07
3 16 38 112 -236.37 36.48 112 -238.93 32.05 124.58 -255.8
3 16 32.05 124.58 -255.8 39.44 130.23 -256.07 38 112 -236.37
4 16 38 112 -236.37 41.2 114.38 -236.11 42.4 103.2 -220.23 38 98.23 -218.2

Unmatched vertex:
2 4 -25 127.8 -259.93 -25 135.88 -264.99
2 4 -25 135.88 -264.99 -25 143.92 -270

I think more of the area between the headlights could be moved to the subfile.
And the four cavities under the front.

At Mon Feb 3 13:15:02 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
well .... the corner gave me a headache from the start ... I agree with you ... because the original file only provided chaos
I think it looks pretty good now ..

... was actually my thought to pack more into the subfile ... but after good ten hours I pulled the parachute line ...

thanks for your detailed review, Magnus

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Wed Feb 5 22:10:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
The studs should be "in system" .
Something has gone wrong in the conversion of this mesh.
1 16 0 168 130 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 6584.dat
1 16 50 144 -10 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3004.dat
1 16 50 120 -10 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3004.dat
1 16 50 96 -10 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3004.dat
1 16 50 72 -10 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3004.dat
1 16 50 48 10 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3010.dat
1 16 20 24 20 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3010.dat
1 16 0 0 20 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3010.dat
At Thu Feb 6 03:15:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
Yepp .. had noticed it too ... and was already working on it ...
should now fit
thanks for your watchful eye

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Mon Feb 17 19:40:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Sorry, but this is also wrong. True to LDD, but missing details.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Lego-Eisenbahn-7897-LegoTrain-Front-6-x-14-x-7-2-3-55768/232936265293?hash=item363c15564d:g:LesAAOSwrlBbpRpd
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/zf0AAOSwsh5bpRpb/s-l1600.jpg
At Mon Feb 17 20:15:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: GeraldLasser
Certification: novote
Comments:
Wow, I think you found the filthiest Lego Part on Ebay.... Unbelievable what people sell

At Sun Jul 12 23:45:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: UR
Certification: novote
Comments:
..I never liked these large moldings ... which some manager forced for profit reasons ... now I have one more reason to know why ..... said with humor.

Actually, I just wanted to do a favor to the people who are busy with the "train poster" of the latest genre.

Must laugh ... If I had known what was going to happen to me ... I would have kept my hands off.

Anyway ...
... just amazing every time, what you conjure up every time you do your research ... Magnus.

Thank you for your effort !

Filthy ... indeed..Gerald ...

I will take care of it .... There is no "giving up" .... because "there is no".
.. the question is only ... when ...

At Mon Jul 13 21:55:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Wed Jul 15 15:20:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: UR
Comments:
Stud group used

At Sat Aug 1 15:05:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
Why don't you give us a correct rotation matrix, only the position?