Daetrin

@Ripper_L or @Harbinger - lmk if either of you want to grab this or need help - it's a good idea.

I meant if he thought we should allow it, or hold off on it for now. In the end I'm hoping to get some type of trade-off list like: Reasons to do it A B C Reasons not to do it A B C

@Sly11, you've been silent on this. It would be great to hear from our other DO as well their opinion

My initial thought is to simply allow weathering as a note on each item. This is what BSN does for the biker scout, e.g. "Gloss white, semi-gloss, or lightly weathered. "

Please feel free to jump in anytime

My guess is MEPD will....not. Unless, those dirty FOTKs *want* a different CRL and have it all on MEPD. And, the LMOs approve a CRL that is identical to ours. But with dirt.

Do you have a thought one way or another?

Yes, that is the ask. Someone wants to recreate that dirty look. The alternative would be to toss it over to MEPD and keep ours 100% clean.

FYI, the LMO has approved adding weathering for the following CRLs 1. TFA 2. ROTJ Do we need to add it as well to the TLJ? I'll try to re-watch the movie this weekend to see how prominent they may be.

For weathering, my push has been to allow light weathering as an option on the TFA for sure, and now also the TLJ (likely). The previous LMO (Eric/Darth Aloha) was adamant in now allowing weathering for TFA, even though they are in numerous scenes of the film. I'll for sure bring it up with the new LMO and see if he is open to that change.

As always Paul - your knowledge and expertise are highly appreciated

ABS is what probably 90% of troopers sport, and there are many reasons why it's been proven to be the preferred thermoplastic for decades.

My collection seems inadequate now. Yeah, I know we shouldn't be comparing sizes... ;-)

Thanks Dave for the feedback. It is great to hear that this forum area has been beneficial all around: Win for Jared, win for you as a GML, and a win for the detachment as it uncovered a loophole in the CRL that has gone unnoticed for years, and will soon be fixed. Three beers!

From a CRL perspective, we'd have to allow lopped off backs on L1 to allow it on L2/L3. L2/L3 can only add to the base, not take away.

Thanks Daniel - that's what I thought, I appreciate you confining.

Your kits. I'm just curious to see what yours looked like in the end is all.

Thanks! For reference - can you please post pix?

Thanks Jared for letting us use your thread this way. My $$ says that after a few days of discussion it will be allowed for ANH suits at least, but as you note, it doesn't hurt. 'Sides, I have a full queue of OT CRL updates to make and hope to them soon.

I hope I captured the issue correctly. Please chime in if not: https://www.whitearmor.net/forum/topic/44328-should-cutting-off-the-back-of-shoulder-straps-be-allowed/

If you look at the shoulder straps in the CRL, it says this: Shoulder Straps For 501st approval: These shall be securely mounted in front and may free float in back. They may be affixed with rivets, Velcro, or adhesive. For level two certification (if applicable): No visible rivets are allowed. For level three certification (if applicable): These shall free float in back. These shall be glued in front. The plastic shoulder straps need to be held down in the back via a white elastic band to the white fabric that connects/bridges the chest and back piece. Along with this picture When you get your kit, that front tab is present on both sides, and for years people just glue/velcro (or in the old days rivet) the fronts and let them free float in the back. Right? Well apparently people take a look at some screen shots like this: And say "hey, you can just chop the back tab off of the straps and you are good. In fact, some EI & Centurions get approved with this modification. Other GMLs are saying "wait, wait, but that's not per the CRL!". Who is right? Ugh, Captain Grey Area. Why? Older GMLs may not think about it since all kits come this way, and maybe in their garrison people leave it on and all is good. Why not? That's what we've been doing since 2005 at least, right? Others point out that it's not seen on screen, the CRL doesn't explicitly require them, and since there is this cool picture on screen, off they go! Also, the fact that Centurions are approved this way lends weight, right? Anyway, it's worth getting everyone on the same page. My question is: are there many TKs in ANH/ESB that have the tab in the back? I'm just trying to ascertain to what level we update the CRL, e.g. we can allow either on L1, but restrict L3 if the photo evidence is suggestive one way or the other.

Thanks. And those GMLs are likely wondering why a different GML will accept. I'll split this off in to a separate thread so as not to distract.

Amazing! The data deserves its own thread.

I apologize for not being clearer. Just because someone is a DL doesn't mean a discussion is closed, or your opinion is not welcome. All I'm asking is that there be some thought put in to clarifying a CRL for one, and ensuring that GMLs don't read in to what isn't there as a second.

Well, it doesn't say the front tabs are needed either, but they are, right? I think this is just one of those items where like rounded corners, etc. that people follow the pictures, etc. e.g. a gap that we should address. It would seem to me worthwhile to spend a little time researching how common those rear tabs are/are not. Why? Because there are a lot of strange flubs in ANH that we don't allow like missing tube stripes, missing holsters, etc. and it would be best to put a little due diligence around this. FWIW, this is the first time I've ever seen an applicant slice off the rear tabs on an ANH approval. Maybe other GMLs do it differently?