Jump to content

TLJ / TROS CRL Update Work Flow

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the clarification Andrew and I agree.


So a little more research.


Looking at quite a few images from TLJ and TROS we know there are variants of F-11D blasters BUT some of these would be carry overs from TFA, the production images from TLJ/TROS show all white D rings, there are other differences too like the cocking lever slot on right side (not left), no cocking lever, 2 holes in top of barrel, mid mount picatinny rail, top slot on endcap, rounded rear sight and different shape endcap clip.









A good look at the cocking lever slot and extra top barrel holes (Interesting label "E11 Blaster")








Some TFA variant blasters from TROS, the talking FOTK's



TFA variants in TLJ





Also with the TROS standees the have the black D rings (TFA style), NOTE the angled rear sight, no cockling lever slot on right, picatinny mount further forward on barrel and no extra holes on top of barrel








So what it appears to be is that the promo images as well as speaking/up close role FOTK's appear to be using TFA variants (with of course the additional picatinny rail) most others are using the common white D ring blasters


Next I'll go through some more images checking the variants and when they are used.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can see variants all over the place here including the two TK’s in the corridor have charging levers.  Also you see the silver ring holder with the white ring as well as black ring.  The blasters I saw most had silver ring holders.  The rubber  ones that you can detect from the front site had white ring holders.  
My honest opinion regarding this is that you will see so so so many of them in TLJ without picatinny rails as well as stunr vs hero variants and all their options such as the thermal detonators that is mmmmmmm it is not worth upsetting so many FISD members.  I think on the armor I understand.  As well as what is available to each particular trooper such as axe for Executioner and riot baton and shield for others.  But I just want to be honest and say it here because you guys may not hear it directly.  Coming from someone that is as ocd as me, it might be a word of caution.  Even if it goes against what I do and strive to do.  It will upset a lot of people when you see variants and it will come across as FISD being unreasonable.  Most already think that FISD nit picks just to nit pick as opposed to keep up a standard.  And to hold someone back because of a minor issue on a blaster is going to not only discourage people from advancing in FISD but also hold resentment towards  FISD in general. 

I believe and follow the strict standards and do stuff that is not even listed or even required and there are things in my builds that even you guys don’t see.  But to go over d ring variants and fixate on one being acceptable snd the other not and forcing someone to rip off a charging handle or replace a ring, even I have to say makes me Just want to walk away from it and reject advancement.  On the armor absolutely.  On the blaster absolutely.  But to disregard its variants.  Well it seems like making things way too excessively hard almost out of spite.  

I’m just voicing what I hear in much larger numbers than you may not be aware of.


again let me see I am proud of my centurion awards and can not thank everyone enough for the unbelievable standards you’ve helped me achieve.  But reason and reasonable minds need to prevail.  We need to keep what makes us so flawless but at some point we are saying to people whet is Star Wars and what you see and Validate doesn’t  matter. 

Perhaps a range with some particular features.  For example forearms, or thermal detonators or blasters.  

sorry for the long message but I think it needs to be brought to everyone’s attention. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Building to as CRL should be easy, if it states something is green, I'd paint it green, if something shows an item is at a right angel then I would make it so, following the word and images of a CRL, descriptions an images help keep them as easy as possible, this is why we follow the most common and norm and  in some cases a stylized look to a costume.

Common or the norm keeps things easier not just for a member, but also for GML's and those that approve the higher levels.

These are the reasons why some things don't make a CRL.

If a member builds something and doesn't follow a CRL then that is the members choice with every possibility of a knock back, on any given CRL in the Legion.

Not to forget, Expert Infantry and Centurion are purely optional, there is no mandate for anyone to build past basic in any Detachment.

No weapons required at basic, which means the member can present a weapon if they wish as long as it is movies specific or represented by that charterer carrying that weapon.

Once a CRL is updated, the prior version is grandfathered. this means a new builder must use the current version, again there is no mandate for an existing member already approved at higher levels to re submit for approval. That is another personal choice.

You only ever earn these awards once, they go to the member for reaching a higher standard and stay with the member for life.


I'll bring this back to movie specific differentiation. This we need to even consider a new CRL, or an addition of another film to an existing one as we have just completed for TLJ by adding TroS

As the armour is shared and identical we are limited to other variations to differentiate the two, but we have managed to find some specifically in the weapons carry.

This is why we will continue to focus on the most seen as becoming the norm. It all comes back to what we see on the big screen, not what is behind the scenes nor any fantastic insight we do sometimes get from actors and the actual prop builders for the films.

The behind the scenes info helps us reinforce what we have seen or sometimes give us a better explanation, but it doesn't steer us away from what is available to all on screen.


In my honest opinion it isn't worth convoluting a CRL with a raft of variations making it more difficult and potentially creating confusion and the possibility of more errors with combinations that aren't seen at all in the movies.

Keeping it simple isn't making it more difficult, it is making it easier for anyone building to a CRL.


One thing we have all learnt over the years is there are 100's of opinions on any given subject when it comes to Star Wars, what detachments have to do is wade through all those opinions and come up with a happy medium that suits a majority.

That is no easy task, never has been, never will be. :)


  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Specific differences between TFA and TLJ/TROS (WIP)


TFA seen in TLJ/TROS                                   TLJ/TROS

Angular rear sight                                           Rounded rear sight

Cocking lever on right on left                         No cocking lever

Cocking lever slot on left                                Cocking lever slot on right

Picatinny further forward (if fitted)                 Picatinny mount mid barrel

Picatinny mount has 2 screws                        Picatinny mount has 2 screws

D ring silver/black/no ring                             White D ring

Silver D ring mount                                        White D ring mount

No holes in top of barrel                                2 holes in top of barrel

Full end cap                                                    Top front step missing end cap

End cap clip curved                                        End cap clip rectangle

Recessed groove on barrel behind counter   No recessed grove


Angular rear sight                                           Rounded rear sight

sighta.png.9b77b70a0ac729abbdb6a044a2b9778f.png                                         sightj.png.5d89e77ccb99e47097a1a946080f7b41.png


Cocking lever on left                                        No cocking lever

slot2.jpg.e8cf05ff74e8b60fe4e569046d897719.jpg          slot.jpg.628428faa3970e91c25bb593b3683692.jpg


Cocking lever slot on left                                Cocking lever slot on right

slot2.jpg.e8cf05ff74e8b60fe4e569046d897719.jpg              slot.jpg.628428faa3970e91c25bb593b3683692.jpg


Picatinny further forward (if fitted)                 Picatinny mount mid barrel

barpic.jpg.4af092d1ce08da3fa67c4bfb4ec231db.jpg                         barpic2.jpg.5bc751029a0b07365b914bfbb8d32e05.jpg


D ring silver/black/no ring                                White D ring

dsilver.jpg.f090755bcaa4adcafe783acc6205fe74.jpg dblack.jpg.e382870370413def67c5d89fb472ca24.jpg dno.jpg.2688dd15e1427462fc37d4b393f93675.jpg        dwhite.jpg.1fe064f2639228cb4b27bca640968bc3.jpg


Silver D ring mount                                        White D ring mount

dno.jpg.2688dd15e1427462fc37d4b393f93675.jpg                                                dwhite.jpg.1fe064f2639228cb4b27bca640968bc3.jpg


No holes in top of barrel                                2 holes in top of barrel

nohole.jpg.2d53894014985a2a1256b22ff721f47c.jpg                                               hole.jpg.53b65b476b00d742355b1cdecb9414b6.jpg


Full end cap                                                    Top front step missing end cap

cap1.jpg.20cedf0c8824bcb6b31b6ef4f318ca51.jpg                                               cap2.jpg.d751934fc352e5d79ef83b15a93b99ab.jpg


End cap clip curved                                        End cap clip rectangle

clip1.jpg.195544d21dc207ea54e8256ffac91569.jpg                                                        clip2.jpg.e183d75ec649493a91617ea4846006d0.jpg


Recessed groove on barrel behind counter   No recessed grove

bargro.jpg.7ae006a7221b7b1b4d211eca941e13ab.jpg                                     bargrono.jpg.af076bd97b0badc4357f9552a6bf54a8.jpg




  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

So I want to address the blaster issue again as I have held the actual blasters and saw variations.  So since we do want to set standards I want to make sure we are not limiting or forcing people to change things that are unnecessary.  While this is my approval thread, I want to keep this a public discussion vs a private one.  With regards to the blaster and we have had this discussion before and I am going to out the references to support this.  We shouldn’t be making differences on curtain costumes just to force changes and expenses on members.  These are The Rise if Skywalker samples.  Therefore, I not only ask for Grace all the way to the centurion level with this as I am exceptionally happy with my blaster but also to show that there are possibilities available to keep other members happy. I believe in the highest standards possible and have been an avid supporter of strict standards, but they have to come with some reason as well as purpose.  Not just for the sake of making things different for the sake of making it different.  

here we go 

General pride grabs the trooper blaster to kill Hux.  White ring base and not square but rounded shaped ring and round rear sight 



Troopers handling chewy Silver ring base and black more squares shaped ring also not round but angled rear sight 


Same troopers handling chewy wirh angled rear sight and silver ring base and black ring with charging handle 


Another angle of the above 


Another angle of the same group to show ring, charging handle and no picatinny rail



Angle of troopers engaging on Kajimi and silver back ring holder and no ring while trooper on left has silver and black set up 


Same troopers just different angle


famous TROS scene with blasters displaying different aspects.  Black small ring with silver ring base on left and charging handle on the right 


same troopers with charging handles clearly visible 



Troopers with Hux showing his with picatinny rail and the other without 



So this is just a set to display my point.  Also for what it is worth, I wore this costume, not in these scenes for something else.  I saw the blasters and held one and mine is modeled after what I wore.  

With regards to the future of what FISD is going to require.  Armor Differences are one thing, complete blaster differences and specifics are one thing.  But when it is on the show and it is displayed and it is clearly visible then we must allow these.  They are not anomalies but rather actual existing pieces.  So not only am I asking grace on this for my blaster, but I’m suggesting that on some things there may have to be tolerances.  Such as rings and ring caps or for example E-11 blasters with coils or without etc etc etc.


at some point of these considerations are possible when they are not only supported but also actually within the actual world of the movie, then even I will stop submitting for approvals and be discouraged from Advancing builds.  This particular blaster is a perfect example.  Or for that matter Rogue One armor and the mass variations in those E-11 blasters as I held many many many of those 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2023 at 8:41 AM, equuspolo said:

Troopers with Hux showing his with picatinny rail and the other without 




Actually they all have the picatinny rail in this scene, you can just make them out in the movie, I've lightened them below



No disrespect to your knowledge and hands on perspective but most of the community we don't have this access so we have to take what we see from reference material, two of these references are images of production F-11's made for both TFA and TLJ which have some pretty big differences, outlined in previous posts. 


We do know several different versions of blaster had been used in TLJ/TROS many references had been posted in this thread and discussed, BUT what we know for certain is production made for TLJ show white mounts and white D rings, which is why that has been used as the base for the CRL, other blasters were carries over from TFA and Stunt/Promo versions, as I posted previously, there are TFA version with TLJ pieces added to them as well (promo standees TROS)


TLJ Production



TFA Production



Just want to make sure everyone knows the reasoning behind only allowing certain items used as base for CRL's even though other variants had been seen and used, they weren't specially made for that particular movie.


I can't however speak on behalf of other GML's or the DO's as to whether variants could be allowed.


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glen no disrespect taken.  But I don’t understand this logic especially when there is so much evidence above.  I think it’s a pointless discussion and it makes it seem like we are just making things difficult for the sake of being difficult.  

This discussion to me is a bit overdone and I will say this, proves the frustrations that many have.  Everyone here knows I will go as far as I can to meet everyone’s suggestions here while still building what I know to be not only as accurate as possible but perhaps maybe even an upgrade. 

What I will say is even now I’m feeling like these may be my last submissions.  Even if I photographed the actual suit from the movie and submitted that, then it would be nit picked.  I actually took crl photos of a couple of the outfits I wore and I guarantee you if I submitted those they would be not picked as if they are accurate or not.  Including the rogue one and the clone.  

it’s not my personal experience that matters, it’s the fact that the photos above substantiate it.  It straight out shows what is in the movie.


I have a few of my own items, not ones I made I’ll say.  Undersuit, neck seal, gloves, boots and I can guarantee you that opinions will fly regardless of the fact. 

Here is what I will say.   I am a staunch supporter of FISD and always have been exceptionally grateful for all of the incredible and legit encouragement and help and support.  Always have promoted it and supported it amongst all the stormtroopers that contact me and believe me I believe in the high standards of rhe armor and props but also how people wear them and behave in them.  No damn blasters pointing in the air like rhe Disney parks.  

But even I have to say now that sometimes it just feels like people are just selecting something for the sake of it being different or making things difficult.  It’s not reflecting well on FISD.  I’m just putting this out there. 

With regards to the GML’s or DO’s wow awesome and always grateful.  Always.  And the suggestions and criticisms always productive and and welcome.  But when every little detail gets scrutinized to the point where even someone like me says, he I built this to what I saw and what I held and what I wore and have also built that on the experience I have gained by your guys vast knowledge and it still seems to get nit picked or in this case in my opinion a little irresponsibly regulated for the sake of regulating, it seems a bit much. 

I will accept all of your final judgments and at this point may not even take these to centurion level and the next suits I build will be just submitted for basic approval even though they may even be better and I won’t even submit them to FISD.  What’s the point? It just creates a headache that becomes pointless.  

So if these are just declined for EIB I am fine, and again I may decide against submitting for centurion anyway on these.  You’re telling me because of a validated over and over and over again D Ring that we are having this discussion which is clearly displayed that I am Being held up.  Ok.  So be it.  I respect that.  

I will be building the most accurate rogue one and clone kit out there.  Clone will go to clone detachment and rogue one may stay at basic level.  Then you guys can pick and choose what you want.  I have over 150 insane resources for that and it just makes no sense to get in to this reenactment discussion over every little detail.


let me make this clear because even now I have come to the conclusion that this is not about accuracy, it’s about a devious regardless of facts, that we are just going to make things difficult and just about a subjective opinion rather than an objective fact. 

Deeply sorry about this.  But I feel like it has to be stated.  It’s being stated loudly outside of the forums and with people.  I have and will continue to be a staunch supporter of FISD and accuracy to the max.  But why subject anyone to nit picking that deters people from attaining higher levels as opposed to encourage them to do so. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta side with Ardeshir on this one guys.


For two major reasons. For one, he has presented clear, legible, publicly-accessible screen grabs of production-made assets from the films that show that there was variation present. I'm a big fan of the word "ideally" in CRLs these days. We should give people a clear standard to build to that's outlined in our CRLs. Yea, that D-ring is probably "ideally" white for TLJ. Cool. But we also know that black ones appeared in the movie. Therefor, I'm a proponent of making either allowable at any level. Black, or ideally white. 


For number two... any guesses how many people have submitted for and received the Centurion award for FOTK armor in the last FIVE YEARS, other than Ardeshir...?


Three. The answer is three total. In five years. Glen was the last one before that and it's only gotten harder since.


To Ardeshir's point, what are we really looking to accomplish here if we make the rules so stringent that no one even tries anymore? I think this argument is indicative of a larger problem, particularly with the FOTK CRLs. I know and respect that the team has put a lot of work into researching, but has this process actually improved for our members as a result...? And I say this not as reflection on any of the DOs, who again, are phenomenal and only enforcing the CRLs as currently written.


And, idk, maybe I'm just tired, but actual rubber gaskets are dumb at any level too. /$0.02

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m all for the variant demands of each level as long as it coincides with what is on screen and not necessarily “I just decided this is yes and this is no.” It just makes no sense.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huge +1s to both Ardeshir and Justin on this one. These are clearly screen-visible variants. These aren't malfunctions or gaffer tape incidents. These are variants. It would be wonderful if the CRLs allowed for these.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently the CRL is the CRL, so if its not met, not that this actually has any bearing on the application because Ardeshirs is already approved with this costume to those levels,nothing will happen with CRL changes or continued discussions until after elections.

I am currently updating the members database which for a Det our size is a formidable task, so i wont be putting time into to this right now unfortunately.


Let me just say, we try to keep CRL's clear and easy, not just for members but also for GML's, and DCA's,

We will not be making any multiple versions with more confusing elements without a full membership poll on things like this, and then we will evaluate the results and consider a direction to take.


The word of the CRL is not an issue raised by anyone currently building because they simply build to the CRL. This is only under discussion because we are looking at or questioning the current CRL so there is no problem here as far as I and no doubt many many others see it.


  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheRascalKing said:


For number two... any guesses how many people have submitted for and received the Centurion award for FOTK armor in the last FIVE YEARS, other than Ardeshir...?


Three. The answer is three total. In five years. Glen was the last one before that and it's only gotten harder since.



Aside from the fact there has been a massive hole left from what anovos did to so many with First order armour, KB being very hit and miss with supply and members waiting lengthy times this is the obvious reason we haven't had as many FO TK's full stop.

All we have done with the FO CRL's is add better images and the correct shaped parts, armour is always first weapons as no basic requirement are second and we only just added a more accurate version. Again we aren't looking at the Hinze 57 varieties that have appeared, we were looking for some discerning differences, so again as I mentioned above this will be done properly, not on a whim.


  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew I agree with everything you said.  Absolutely agree.  But it still doesn’t address a few small issues.  It’s not even a huge deal to me.  Not at all.  I absolutely agree in the CRL. But if the crl is wrong or limited or just incomplete it should not deligitimise a build.  And if substantial sources are shown and clearly visible and show that it is not an anomaly but an actual substance and a tangible substance in the movie, then not only should Grace be applied but also part of the process.  When it is not, it comes across as either nit picky, being unnecessary barriers, or just straight out as stated by some jealousy or restrictive measures to stop advancement.  

I believe in the CRL 100 percent.  But the crl needs to believe in the build as well.  It’s not about compromising the standards to keep someone happy.  Not at all and even basic in my opinion should be a tiny bit more strict.  But rather it’s allowing the crl to breathe and be slightly open and evolving to a living standard when and only when it is substantiated and not compromising the quality of rhe build.  

Once again, me, who absolutely respects not only the crl but also the FISD teams that govern it, and have always followed the guidance and standards and have always complied respectfully; have you wondered why one simple Tiny D-Ring has become a principle I am standing on?  It’s easy to remove, paint and put back on or just have one that’s painted and put it on and take it off again.  Why?  

Because I forsee other issues arising if this isn’t governed with some reason or logic that is strictly my opinion.  It has to be something that has logic and reason that can be applied across the board.  Not I decided this is acceptable and this is not.  They will not sit with many.  

Next it will be the shape of the ring then the rear site and so in and so on.  That’s why I clearly showed a blaster with a ring that is shaped like mine but white.  

at some point it will come across as someone just arm chair quarterbacking something base in “Meet MY guidelines” and not Star Wars. 

we did this to be the most accurate costume group in the world.  Not cosplay not some fly by night thing.  We are a Star Wars costume group that takes pride in having movie accurate wardrobe, armor, costumes and props.  

this goes against it.  It say nope here nope there nope nope nope based on an opinion and not a fact or a clear cut goal. 

we strive for movie accurate costumes that have tiers of accuracy. 

tier one is movie accurate 

tier two is more accurate 

tier three is dead on accurate 


but most of us modify and make them BETTER than movie accurate.  That’s FISD and hell yea brothers and sisters.  

in the middle of that I just say, it sometimes come across offensive to members for someone to say, nope you don’t get that option or nope that doesn’t look right to me.  That’s wrong because if that’s the case then buddy types need to be taken in to consideration.  Just like they do for rhe movies.  And in my opinion that is correct for the movies and absolutely wrong for us.  Absolutely wrong.  

so a D-Rng that I am putting my foot down on is very simple but it says, why, why is something that is clearly not an anomaly, clearly a large and I mean a large part of the movie, just randomly being excluded.  

now someone is gonna make

me spend even more and more and more money to make something that is not even relevant an issue.  It’s not a red ring, it’s not a huge hoop and it’s not fabricated out of no where because I want it.  It’s a hard hard hard visible fact. 

I’m sorry but I think this needs to be made clear.


FISD is awesome and the team is awesome.  I just have warning lights that are telling me we may be going down a path like re-enactors do where one hyper opinionated way of thinking or people or path is taken which is completely detached from not only the actual mission but the actual guidelines. 

my opinion and anyone else’s opinion here or anywhere in the 501st is subordinate to what Star Wars has shown us.  It’s as simple as that. 

thank you guys again and I post this with utmost respect and tone of voice.  Much love for this group and its goal.  If there is an opinion that the ring is wrong, then it is my opinion and right to say, that opinion is wrong.  

with respect 


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do strive for movei accurate but not prop replication, that has never been the goal of the Legion or many detachments.

MEPD are the onlu ones I know of that have a level that isolates a particular trooper and you have to built it exact to that .

We have always had a standardised model to get as many looking and representing the same features as possible.

this isn't something new and still holds well legion wide.

We don't have a prop replication level. I even tried to bring up the subject of an additional level for FISD that did go that far but it was met with a resounding silence and no support. It was pretty clear it wasn't something wanted.


I think we should still focus on the most commonly seen elements for weapons, if that means some features are well represented and that creates a variation then that should be a discussion point for consideration.

What doesn't seem right is a variation seen only once on screen as an example, and I think it is probably more confusing trying to build CRL's with every variation possible seen on screen, that doesn't serve anyone well. 


How about we tally up the number of times you see each variation on screen for TLJ and separately for TroS, it seems both films have different clear set ups.

The variations that are seen most would be the ones that go into Polls to give us a better idea what path to take.

If that shows 2 main variants above the one timers then that makes sense that they would be commonly seen.


Perhaps we take stunt weapons out of the equation because we know they use different materials and are meant generally for safety so can omit certain features are cant use some materials. The Hero weapons are what we should aim for.


Lets see what kind of outcomes surface from that kind of deep dive.


  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they is well out and very reasonable and they had never been an issue of discussion and negotiation with me at all.  E-11 blaster have two main types and I’m not almond about anh or esb or rogue one but as you stated I am referring to stunt and hero.  Meaning all rubber that include cut outs and more detailed that have cut outs and metal parts and coils etc etc etc.  


With regards to blasters, pistols or rifle types, there are variants.  And I agree seem once or twice or even rare once meaning it’s just faded in my opinion doesn’t qualify it.  But with the F-11 it is easy to assume that it could very well be 50/50.  That they didn’t discard the other weapons but added to inventory.  Usually the remaining previous inventory is quite large.  Now with regards to TLJ and TROS there is pretty darn clear evidence that both sets of blasters are clearly visible and equally visible.  And to assume that in the vast numbers of guys standing around in TLJ in the hanger, that they are all holding one type  would be inaccurate.  

Also, it is clearly represented in major close up scenes and major characters which validates it without a doubt.  It means that it is not only, not an anomaly, but an actual premiere hero weapon.  

now with regards to MEPD and I have a Sandy, I don’t like they way it’s done there and I have voiced that they should do it more like FISD.  Have a fourth side option for specific characters.  FISD could do the same but I don’t see the need for it.  But it could every single absolute detail, even the cover strips and angles replicating a particular trooper.  Not some, it’s close to it, but exact.  Like no tube stripes.  He’s an awesome a character and a speaking part tier one character.  But I still don’t agree.  So I am on the same page as you on everything that you brought up. 

I just don’t see the point of taking away options when they are not anomalies or random props or even mistakes.  I am talking about items that are part of the mass production and representation.  That’s it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to sum up the main differences of F-11's per my research in this thread, as it's easy to pick what is what just by one or two details which are specific to each version. 


So there are 4 main versions of F-11's, we know the TLJ blaster had some significant upgrades from the TFA but there was also a TROS Promo version, it's a TFA with a TLJ picatinny rail added, although further forward than the standard TLJ but also there is a TFA with no picatinny rail. Differences between the TROS and TROS Promo/Stunt can be found here 


1: TFA production image - 2 versions below, with D ring and without



2: TLJ Production image - 2 extra holes top of barrel, cocking slot opposite side, different end cap, different end cap release, different rear sight now rounded not angular like TFA and added picatinny rail


TLJ pre filming - mainly new TLJ but a few TFA note you can tell this by the black D rings and silver mounts



3: TROS Promo - STD TFA with a picatinny rail added but further forward than TLJ



4: TROS - STD TFA with no picatinny rail (also seen with NO D ring version)

small.untitled24.jpg.3dcd5d8a153867b3566  876368826_tros28.png.e6b1a614679cb223dfa5c987d2c29269.png



F-11's seen in TROS


STD TLJ - TROS with these 3 troopers (with all the TLJ bells and whistles)


STD TFA - Speaking FOTK's


No picatinny rails



STD TFA - Guarding Chewie



STD TFA no D ring



STD TFA with TLJ update - TROS promo standees (picatinny rail further forward)



STD TFA with TLJ update - TROS picatinny rail



What I believe Ardeshir is aiming for in his TLJ EIB second version application would be what I call the "TROS Promo" version (STD TFA with a TLJ upgrade) like the TROS promo image.


Previously posed in his TLJ EIB app       Recently updated with picatinny rail now further forward



FYI Ardeshir was approved with a TLJ CRL version (STD TFA with picatinny rail) from his first TLJ Centurion Application


Then changed it to silver mount black D ring and moved the picatinny rail




  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this is correct and just saying they are all present.  That’s it.  They are present so excellent post Glen.  Thank you.  Just validated that all of these are present and should be acceptable.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I may have validated what was seen in TROS the question would still be what was consistently seen in TLJ and TROS, in many of the multiple trooper or main trooper images the most common blaster is the TLJ version, produced specifically for TLJ and carried over to TROS. I can agree not an issue for basic approval but for higher levels these items should be added.


Now I haven't been through how often a version is seen as I've already spent way too much time on this.


With that I would like to see the following TLJ specific items discussed/polled and added to the CRL at a time convenient to all of course, perhaps after incoming elections.

Thanks to Chris for collating the list, added a couple of things also.

  1. D ring mount painted white (already added)
  2. Rectangular D ring white (already added)
  3. No cocking lever (L3)
  4. Cocking lever channel has swapped sides, now on right (same side as Hengstler) (L3)
  5. End cap full cut out on top front edge, not just a recess. (L3)
  6. Additional holes on top of front barrel at front and rear ~11mm diameter (L2)
  7. Picatinny rail and mount bracket on front barrel right side approx. half way down. (already added L3)
  8. "Dipped" ring into rear barrel just behind Hengstler removed. (L2)
  9. End cap clip squared off at end cap end. (L3)
  10. Edit: front sight is painted black not silver
  11. Rear sight rounded not angled

I'll review the list again tomorrow to seeing if I've missed anything

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good, as long as we see some form of consistency.

The wording will need to be very straight forward and if say two items are going to be accepted then that must also be reflected clearly.

To support any of this we are going to need photos of all options, which also means if we don't have that, then it doesn't make a CRL until such a time as we do because we can't give a clear and built version.

This will make the F11D an much larger area on a CRL and i know its will confuse people if we don't have examples.

We don't use screen caps on CRL's  so someone is going to need to build all these separate pieces and paint them in the correct colours

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice again I don’t disagree with anything you guys are saying.  Only and literally only in when it excludes clearly visible and substantial elements that are not anomalies but rather actual parts of rhe movie and on FISD end limit people.  The consistency is to see that is is an actual visible item that is more than a one off.  Which by rhe way we have entire crls based on one off rare and barely seen things hahaha


Bery simple.  Blaster will have a rear cap that is white with a D-Rind holder that is either white or silver.  If the holder is silver the options are no d ring, black d ring or white d ring.  If the holder is white rhen no d ring or white d ring.  

and this is how it should be with regards to everything so that it gives people a possibility with regards to their armor and accessories.  It’s not a change or a lowering of tolerances.  It is just in certain areas options with regards to those variants.  

You guys want me to paint it white, I will.   Then quickly replace it after I submit.  It’s a lie and I don’t want that to be the case.  This is happening all the time.  

Anyway, just something for consideration.  I have made so so so so many changes and reshot sooooo many photos and even if this was not an issue I would have probably reshot more photos for centurion.  So why a D-Ring?  Once again, why would this guy make an issue on some hind as stupid as a D-Ring.  

Because I feel like we may go done a path that just will discourage people.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a couple of things to add.

1. I have a solution for variants that doesn't create a blown out confusing element to a CRL.

2.Some of the elements are obvious and for good reason and standards, like a member  cannot mix and match the variations as they see fit.

The weapon must have all the variations that particular blaster has when seen on screen, not just one.

If it is not seen on screen it is not permissible (standard CRL practice) to be fair to the majority.

It must be in the movie you are building the costume from and seen carried Seen on screen). Like everything that requires references you need to know how it looks overall, no wild guessing.

It would be up to the applicant to show the references in an application.

Blasters built for another movie would not be suitable example TFA vs TLJ, Tros may be the same armour but  it would be nice to see the effort that the blaster is seen in that film rather than a lazy approach. Centurion it is our highest level and standards should be upheld and separation from films should also remain a part of that.


I will look to work on the wording for the CRL to very clearly explain this so there is no gray areas and it is easy to understand.

Like all CRL amendments, there will be members Polls, we wont be making rapid changes and the majority responses from those polls will be the guide to the decisions made at the end of the day

As always we work on a democratic approach, this is not nor ever has been a one person decision.


Quick take aways


Standards should be upheld.

Wider offering on a blaster

Must be seen on screen

No mix and match must meet reference with the same variations, as an example if the screen reference has different coloured D ring and also shows a different sight, blaster must have both.








  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, equuspolo said:


You guys want me to paint it white, I will.   Then quickly replace it after I submit.  It’s a lie and I don’t want that to be the case.  This is happening all the time.  

Nobody is asking you to do anything Ardershir, you are already approved, you were approved as per the CRL originally with the correct match to that CRL.

It is up to members what they do with their armour after they meet approval. No one forces anyone to even look after their costumes and keep then looking in mint condition.

This was your choice alone to change the end cap colours. There is no additional approval as you are already approved in this costume and don't gain an additional award, because you already have it.

You or I cant change what anyone does to their costume post basic or any other level. Yes members change things all the time after approvals, that is legion wide, and we don't police that as we don't own the costume.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to prove to everyone how much of a principle this is for me.  I made more variations and here they are but I won’t be putting them on my blaster but they are here.  Easy enough to Mount them but then I feel like I would be compromising a much larger point that I am making that I feel will help better FISD and change this course that I feel I have been seeing and hearing from many that we are going down.   White with white, silver with black and silver with white 




Edited by equuspolo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t agree with this at all but here it is.  This is a bad path to go down.  My fair warning.  I believe in accuracy as much as everyone here.  But this is going down the path of selective re-enactor decision making process that I do not agree with. I have made my point very clear about this and will do so more often and I do it with respect to everyone.  But I will call it out.  The rejection of the live action HWT pissed off a lot of people and I heard it quite a bit.  I didn’t care.  But I will now revisit that on point of principle.  This one, one simple D-Ring was my straw. 

love this detachment, best detachment. Love this group of experts.  And I can’t even begin to state how grateful I am to everyone here.  But this is an error. 

But here is the change.  But in spite, respectful spite, here are the other variations as well.


white with white 




silver with white


silver with black



Edited by equuspolo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...