Unofficial File parts/26445-f2.dat
part image
File Header:
0 Technic Pneumatic Tube  4L with End Bulges
0 Name: 26445-f2.dat
0 Author: Philippe Hurbain [Philo]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !KEYWORDS 32 mm

Status:
1 subfile isn't certified. (CCSN)
Size: 369 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
Steffen=certify
UR=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
~Technic Pneumatic Tube End (Bulged)
Status: Needs admin review. (CCF)
Download: parts/165.dat
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Fri Dec 13 17:15:03 2019, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
At Fri Jan 3 11:45:01 2020, the following review was posted:

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

At Fri Jan 3 20:10:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
contains a stray
1 16 -40 0 0 0 80 0 2.5 0 0 0 0 2.5 4-4cylo.dat
which duplicates the 166.dat

At Fri Jan 3 20:35:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
I checked all similar files, this is the only one with this flaw.

At Fri Jan 3 22:00:02 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Could someone please explain why we need these straight hoses with formed ends, as shortcuts in the library?
Isn't this a soft plastic that doesn't gets deformed until it is mounted on a connector?

I'm only using the Hold-vote to draw attention to my question, after Steffens review of this set of files.

At Sat Jan 4 12:05:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
(keeping hold for reason above)


Magnus, I understand your point. The bulges only are there when this hose is put to a connector.
A builder doing that will anyway have to modify the hose using LSYNTH and the "primitives" 165.dat, 166.dat, u9255.dat.
So the real use of having the ...-f2 variants in our library is not really there.
However, also the ...-f1 variants serve no real purpose in their "unformed" state, other than for inventories.
There, the straight form makes sense, but in nearly every model, they need to be formed etc.pp.

And still: I like the current status:
The presence of the ...-f1 variant I think is without doubt, it is the standard form of the tubes.
And regarding the ...-f2 variants: I like that they are there. They do not hurt IMHO. I like to be able to simply
pick them and later form/modify them. We will never find a "formed" version which will fit all models. Therefore,
our only option would be to delete the ...-f2 variants. And I would consider that a loss rather than a win.
So my vote is: let's keep the ...-f1 and ...-f2 variants as they are now on the PT. I like them.

What do others think?

At Sat Jan 4 13:10:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
Comments:
Removed the extraneous cylo. As for the shapes, I hesitated too... then came to more or less the same arguments as Steffen. Also, even for BOM/parts lists, and even if it is less realistic, I find bulged shape somewhat more iconic and that should help to identify the part at first sight.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sat Jan 4 13:55:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: UR
Certification: certify
Comments:
.... it was actually clear to me from the start .... from the first doubt (which I also had) one inevitably comes to the final thought, which Stephen brought to the point very nicely.

At Sat Jan 4 16:50:01 2020, the following review was posted:

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