CRL belt requirements ?

[DudeSidious]

Someone in my garrison pointed out that basic CRL belt requirements states that the Belt can be 3â€(75mm) to 3.5â€(90mm) wide.

 

really? 3.5" that seem's awfuly wide, and the width does'nt change for Expert Infantryman or Centurion either.

 

What gives?

[Locitus[Admin]]

The CRL's are all kinds of messed up IMO and not easily changed. There's little we can do but to educate and promote the proper measurements here at FISD.

[DudeSidious]

So does that mean people all around the world are getting basic approvel with 3.5" belts?

[Locitus[Admin]]

They are also getting basic approval with plastic belts.

[Tray[TK]]

3.5 inches would make my belt as wide as the armor part. Which is NEVER going to happen. The belt shouldn't be as wide as the armor part ever. I have no idea how wide other kits are. I guess the bigger kits have to have a wider one so it doesn't look small on big people.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Tray

[Locitus[Admin]]

The SDS plastic belt is as wide as the "armour" part. I'm pretty sure the FX is the same way.

[bjsavage7[TK]]

The CRL's are all kinds of messed up IMO and not easily changed. There's little we can do but to educate and promote the proper measurements here at FISD.

Actually, they aren't that hard to change as long as they are rational. Just propose the change to the LMO, have him bless the change, then change it if you have permissions.

The measurement of a belt seems like a pretty standard measurement on any accurate kit. The only reason I see for it to deviate would be if a trooper was very small and needed a bit of trimming down. Then that would be left up to the overall look of the belt while worn in respect to the trooper's size, which you can only trim so much without destroying needed details on the plastic.

[Locitus[Admin]]

Other CRL's might be easily changed. You have been around long enough to what double standard the TK is held against.

[gmrhodes13[Staff]]

There are quite a few things in the CRL which aren't completely accurate, but these things are and do get pointed out to people on their build journey, ie: like the belt if you trim the corners of the front plastic section correctly you would see that you end up with approx 75mm between the corners which should be the width of the belt, looks weird if your belt is bigger than the front plastic piece. The arguement is yes it would be easier to list all of the exact measurements and requirements but building your armor is a learning curve and I think that like putting in the extra work for EIB and centruion, learning all of these exact little quirks although annoying can be rewarding in the end, you know how hard it was to get there but it was well worth it in the end.

 

On a side note some are building to requirements that are not even in the CRL for EIB and Centruion, it all boils down to research and how far you are prepared to go on your building journey.

Edited February 26, 2013 by gmrhodes13

[DudeSidious]

There are quite a few things in the CRL which aren't completely accurate, but these things are and do get pointed out to people on their build journey

 

but thats no good because when these mistakes are pointed out and they can still say "this is allowed,it's within the requirements of the CRL's"?

Edited February 26, 2013 by DudeSidious

[TK bondservnt[501st]]

the CRL is the library we need to fix it! the research should be pointed out IN the freakin' CRL!

 

that's what it is FOR!

 

why do we have such reluctance to balance out the CRL?

[Dday[501st]]

I don't think it's our reluctance, it's the reluctance at a legion level to give the permission to make the changes.

 

As we know, we have voted and put up a slew of changes months ago and still haven't seen them implemented at the legion level.

[gmrhodes13[Staff]]

but thats no good because when these mistakes are pointed out and they can still say "this is allowed,it's within the requirements of the CRL's"?

I had things pointed out to me before, during and after my build it is how we learn, then it is our responsibility to pass on our knowledge to the next person. Don't get me wrong I would like everything printed in black and white but the question is would it have been as rewarding, to me no. As I had found out if you don't know something then research if you still can't find it then ask and best of all if you want the right answer then ask the DO directly,

[SolderMaster]

I believe my XO has that job now. He says he has to clean up the CRLs. I'll have him start with the TK. Maybe as early as this weekend. I'll see what I can do.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

They are also getting basic approval with plastic belts.

 

Really? This hasn't been the case in years - or is this local to your garrison?

[Daetrin[Admin]]

The reason for the variation in belt width is that not everyone is a perfect 5'10" skinny actor. There is the same problem on IOC with belts - the proper width on a 4'11" female will look all out of proportion on a 6'6" guy.

 

And FWIW, I think the CRL's are are in pretty darn good shape. Heck, some dets don't even have anything.

[DudeSidious]

OK I can understand that.But I know of someone in my garrison that just happends to be a skinny female, thats got a 3.5" belt, wont alter it because its in the CLR's and everyone in my garrison seems to be fine with it.

[Locitus[Admin]]

Personally I think the "proportion" argument about the belt is a lame excuse. If you're a big guy, then a 1/2" slimmer belt is the least of your proportional problems. Same thing with small guys (like me) and ladies too btw.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Well, it's you against most of the Legion then, my friend.

[carbonitekid]

Well, it's you against most of the Legion then, my friend.

 

I would have to disagree mate.

 

I think its him against a certain , perhaps geographically centered , part of the Legion.

 

I , in my time trooping over here, have seen troopers ranging in height from well over 6' down (sic) to 5'3 and varying in weight from 9 stone ish up to near 20. Not once have I seen them vary the width of their belt due to such variance.

[firebladejedi[TK]]

True..

[Tray[TK]]

I don't think it is a proportion of the big guy or the tiny girl wearing armor. It is the proportion of the armor itself. I know for a fact that some makers armor belt is 4" tall. Mine being a screen derived kit is only 3.5". So a 3.5" canvas belt on my 3.5" armor won't be correct. But my 3" belt on a 4" armor belt would look too thin. You should build the canvas belt to the proportion of your armor belt.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Personally I think the "proportion" argument about the belt is a lame excuse. If you're a big guy, then a 1/2" slimmer belt is the least of your proportional problems. Same thing with small guys (like me) and ladies too btw.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Tray

[Tray[TK]]

Just picking a measurement and going with it without thinking about the rest of the armor is just plain silly.

[Locitus[Admin]]

It should be obvious that any measurements are derived from screen accurate measurements. That being said, gov. issue rarely takes consideration to size of whom it's issued to. so if the empire makes 3" belts they should be issued to everyone. Just like in the real world.

[DudeSidious]

Going off the RS belt messurements its actually 2 & 3/4" not 3", so 3.5" is way over sized.

Edited March 1, 2013 by DudeSidious