| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | CrazyChris  | | Posted: | Feb 23, 2018 20:33 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7735-1 | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, PurpleDave writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, CrazyChris writes:
| | It is common knowledge that the hinges with hollow studs were introduced around
1987.
|
Introduced =/= exclusive. Old molds can be run alongside new ones for various
amounts of time. Old parts can be in inventory for years as they bleed the stock
down, and until the stock hits a low threshold they might not order up a new
run of parts using the newer mold in that color. I shouldn't own one of
these in dark-bley...but I do:
|
I know, but I refuse this kind of reasoning. Because it does not explain, why
set A is affected, but not set B. These parts were quite common and exist in
not too many colours. So, if old stock ever existed, please explain why it should
have been used only for certain sets, and not for all?
Back in those days, I got lots of sets, and the hollow studded hinge plates where
contained quite everywhere, while the older version never appeared in any set
after 1987.
But of course, this is not an hard proof, just some knowledge from an unimportant
collector...
Now I see why many people stopped contributing to BL catalog.
|
 |
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Feb 23, 2018 19:59 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7735-1 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| But SezaR is right.
It is common knowledge that the hinges with hollow studs were introduced around
1987.
It is also common knowledge that the set 7735 was produced from 1until 1990.
(same as 7745, 7824 and some town/space sets that also were produced both before
and after the change).
So of course, the hinges with hollow studs must be alternate parts for all these
sets.
Some inventories already show this, it ist just logical to correct all affected
sets.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2018 11:13 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7750-1 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| | | Very strange that people start to doubt the authenticity of a MISB bag, no?
|
Well, who guarantees that it is a MISB bag?
As the bag is loose, the set has been openend.
It is no problem to create such bags and fill them with whatever parts you want.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2018 05:04 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7750-1 | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
|
It is interesting to compare your photo of the parts bag with the photo which
was originally used to request the addition of the single extra as seen in this
message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1072545
So interesting, in fact, that I have attached both photos for the sake of easy
comparison. I am rather surprised to find that the parts were packaged so differently
(and more than a little suspicious that one of these sealed bags may not be direct
from LEGO, although I don't know which).
|
The second bag doesn't look like an original bag. It looks as if the parts
we re-packaged using a foil heat sealer machine.
When I was a child (and also today), I opened lots of MISB sets from the early
1980s. And the round 1x1 plates never came loose, they were always on the sprue.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2018 17:59 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7725-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | I believe I've gotten everything lined up properly for you:
First version - 16 curved conductor rails 3241
Second version - 15 curved conductor rails 3241 + 1 special conductor rail 3241c
Correct?
|
Yes, correct. Thank you.
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2018 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7865-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| In Inventories Requests, CrazyChris writes:
| | x461b is the newer part, x461 the older one (because x461b exists only in red and appeared not before 1983 in 7727).
|
Self-correction to avoid confusing: x461b exists in both colors, x461 exists
only in black.
Therefore, x461b must be the newer part, because the black ones x461 already
appeared in 1980s sets.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2018 08:47 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 7725-1 | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part 2731a Light Gray Train, Track 12V Conducting Rail Curved with Connection Wire and Short Connector
* Add 1 Part 3241 Dark Gray Train, Track 12V Conducting Rail Curved (Alternate) (match ID 2)
* Add 1 Part 3241c Dark Gray Train, Track 12V Conducting Rail Curved, interference-free (Alternate) (match ID 2)
Comments from Submitter:
Parts 2731 was released in 1986, so it cannot be contained in a set from 1981. If it does, it should also appear in set 7727 from 1983, but it doesn't.
In 1981, the power came to the rails by using a simple 3241 conducting rail (=16x 3241)
In later revisions, the interference-free part 3241c was contained (same as invs from 7730 and 7740).
Therefore 15x 3241 and 1x 3241c as second alternative.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Jan 27, 2018 08:36 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 7865-1 | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 2 Part x461b Black Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Steam Engine Cylinder, Round Surfaces, Interior Grooves (Alternate)
Comments from Submitter:
Inconsistency among sets.
x461b is the newer part, x461 the older one (because x461b exists only in red and appeared not before 1983 in 7727).
x461b is listed as alternate part in two short-produced sets 7730 and 7750. So, it must also be an alternate part for this set 7865, which was produced from 1980 to 1990.
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2018 15:46 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 180-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| Thank you for these words.
However, what are the next steps from your side?
Is it okay if I upload the file to my FTP and post the link here?
|
|
| Author: | CrazyChris | | Posted: | Jan 24, 2018 08:02 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 180-1 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
| I understand your point of view. But I really would appreciate, if you try to
understand my point of view, too:
1. The Excel file
I did not do this on my own. Instead, it is the result of hours of work, and
many E-Mails from and to other collectors.
When I sent the file to you, this was NOT a request. It was an offer to you,
an offer to Bricklink.
I waited for response. For questions, for a proposal of how to continue, for
any sign of interest.
But there was no response.
I don't say that the file is final or error-free. But it is a base to start
a discussion from - a better base than the current state of BL's inventories.
I am thinking about to upload the file to my FTP, and the provide the link here,
to spark a discussion. Does this comply with BL rules?
2. Quality
As I said before, I won't fill any ICRs or related. This is NOT because
of laziness. The main reason for my choice is: to ensure quality. For me, dealing
with the ICRs forms (and related) is like tumbling through a dungeon while blindfolded.
It is complex and hard to understand, I am not sure what I am doing. There is
a high risk of making mistakes (and therefore being rejected).
I don't want to make mistakes, I want to achieve a result with high quality.
3. Consistency among sets
Right now, BL inventories of the train sets show many inconsistencies. The reason
is obvious: many sets were treated as their own, and not as part of a group of
affected sets. The ICR process doesn't allow to handle things like "set group
consistency" (if it does, I haven't found it yet). Every affected set needs
to be treated in the same way, imho this is a very essential requirement in this
train topic. If the technical implementation doesn't help us, we need a workaround
to cover this requirement. Therefore, the changes should be done by the experienced
hands of a single admin person, and not by the users.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
