Centurion Requirements : ANH Hero Discussion

[Daetrin[Admin]]

OK troops! This thread is to discuss the proposed Centurion standards for the ANH Hero stormtrooper. You can find them at

http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-hero.html

 

I've updated this based on the recently passed ANH Stunt requirements here:

http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-stunt.html

 

For the most part this is an ANH Stunt trooper with but with Hero detailing. Since the CRL is separate between ANH Stunt and Hero, I tried to make Centurion requirements between stunt and hero more at about the same level by trying to pick out details we see on the hero suits, or at least the hero suits we see most prominently.

 

Some differences on the Hero that are worth considering:

 

1) Should we mandate that the neckseal have a bib on the front/back like Luke/Han had?

 

If a grappling hook/comlink should be worn in lieu of a thermal detonator...

2) Should we mandate that if a grappling hook be used, how it's connected to the belt box, and that the belt box should have a switch on the top?

3) Should we mandate that the grappling hook/box be mounted on the right side of the back and the comlink on the left front? Currently we don't make this note.

4) I added a few comments about the detailing of the comlink, are these fine?

 

Should we add any other distinctive items that are not called out already on the EI notes?

 

Thoughts/questions?

[carbonitekid]

OK troops! This thread is to discuss the proposed Centurion standards for the ANH Hero stormtrooper. You can find them at

http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-hero.html

 

I've updated this based on the recently passed ANH Stunt requirements here:

http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-stunt.html

 

For the most part this is an ANH Stunt trooper with but with Hero detailing. Since the CRL is separate between ANH Stunt and Hero, I tried to make Centurion requirements between stunt and hero more at about the same level by trying to pick out details we see on the hero suits, or at least the hero suits we see most prominently.

 

Some differences on the Hero that are worth considering:

 

1) Should we mandate that the neckseal have a bib on the front/back like Luke/Han had?

 

If a grappling hook/comlink should be worn in lieu of a thermal detonator...

2) Should we mandate that if a grappling hook be used, how it's connected to the belt box, and that the belt box should have a switch on the top?

3) Should we mandate that the grappling hook/box be mounted on the right side of the back and the comlink on the left front? Currently we don't make this note.

4) I added a few comments about the detailing of the comlink, are these fine?

 

Should we add any other distinctive items that are not called out already on the EI notes?

 

Thoughts/questions?

 

 

Yes. I would respectfully ask to see the results of the posted poll as last time I checked brads /dressed rivets for the sniper plates were receiving the thumbs up in the vote yet the current updated CRL reads:

 

18. Lower legs:

 

Greaves close in the back. The trapezoid knee plate is affixed to the left greave and may have two visible brads or rivets securing it to the greave.

Red to indicate centurion standard.Ideally there should be no visible rivets or brads used to secure the sniper plate to the left greave.

 

So which is it?

Edited April 7, 2011 by carbonitekid

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Poll approving the Centurion standard:

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14988

 

Two polls, one approving brads and the other approving rivets

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14989

 

The wording "ideally" means it's a "should have" and not a "must have" for Centurion. I'm open to an alternate wording to make it more clear that the lack of visible fasteners is a "should have" but not a requirement.

[carbonitekid]

Poll approving the Centurion standard:

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14988

 

Two polls, one approving brads and the other approving rivets

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14989

 

The wording "ideally" means it's a "should have" and not a "must have" for Centurion. I'm open to an alternate wording to make it more clear that the lack of visible fasteners is a "should have" but not a requirement.

 

 

Thats fine by me mate.

Ta for the clarification.

Just need to change my boots and trim out the excess on the forearms now.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Sweet! Are you going to be the first then? I have to add brads to my suit and do the forearms too, may not get to it before you.

[Rich330[TK]]

I was reviewing all the Centurian threads and guidelines again yesterday and I'm probably all set for ANH and ESB.

The ESB guidelines have not yet been finalized though, right? I couldn't find a discussion thread either. Is there one?

[firebladejedi[TK]]

I dont think the bell swoop needs to be written - either way should be fine

 

Reading the guidelines again - i still dont get why visible rivets for the thigh are in question. Every suit ive seen has this rivited on - only the sniper knee plate on the shin is glued?

 

 

[tkrestonva[TK]]

I tend to agree on this one - visible fasteners should be allowed on the thigh ammo belt without question. However, to maintain consistency with ANH Stunt (which of course has already been voted on), we may need to leave it as is.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

I was reviewing all the Centurian threads and guidelines again yesterday and I'm probably all set for ANH and ESB.

The ESB guidelines have not yet been finalized though, right? I couldn't find a discussion thread either. Is there one?

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=15210

[Daetrin[Admin]]

I dont think the bell swoop needs to be written - either way should be fine

 

Reading the guidelines again - i still dont get why visible rivets for the thigh are in question. Every suit ive seen has this rivited on - only the sniper knee plate on the shin is glued?

 

 

 

Whilst you can see it a wee bit in the promo pix if you zoom in, I went though well over 100 screen caps and if you look at them it's not visible at all, unlike the other fasterners on the kidney/ab plate and even the snaps on the butt plate.

 

I guess it's like the screws that were used on the underside of the chest plate - they were there but can you really see them without a high-def screen cap and zooming in?

 

Is there a difference between using a huge brad vs a small rivet that would be harder to see in terms of impression?

[Rich330[TK]]

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=15210

 

Thanks, Paul.

[john danter]

Has anyone got a shot of said thighs?

 

I think they were glued on as I'm sure I've seen a suit with the thigh box missing.

It wouldn't fall off and leave no marks if it riveted on surely?

[john danter]

Roll on BluRay

[firebladejedi[TK]]

Whilst you can see it a wee bit in the promo pix if you zoom in, I went though well over 100 screen caps and if you look at them it's not visible at all, unlike the other fasterners on the kidney/ab plate and even the snaps on the butt plate.

 

I guess it's like the screws that were used on the underside of the chest plate - they were there but can you really see them without a high-def screen cap and zooming in?

 

Is there a difference between using a huge brad vs a small rivet that would be harder to see in terms of impression?

 

 

The trouble with screen grabs and such is that they are usually showing troopers from the waist and higher - next to no up close screen shots of the lower legs. Couple this with the fact they are painted white makes it harder to see.

 

But by setting the bench mark asking for the thigh pack to be glued you are starting another untrue rumour of what is screen accurate.

 

We know they were riveted by looking at original armour archive pictures and so why not spread accurate infomation??

[pandatrooper[TK]]

I don't have the photo to post, but if you look on page 203 of the Making of SW book at the large photo of the TKs discovering 3po and R2 in the control room, you can see the TK pointing his blaster at 3po has his ammo strip attached with a small split rivet or brad of some kind.

 

Its clear there its not just glued on.

[firebladejedi[TK]]

I don't have the photo to post, but if you look on page 203 of the Making of SW book at the large photo of the TKs discovering 3po and R2 in the control room, you can see the TK pointing his blaster at 3po has his ammo strip attached with a small split rivet or brad of some kind.

 

Its clear there its not just glued on.

 

 

Photo similar to this one?

 

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Sounds good gents! I've removed the offending line off the Centurions then. Your eyes are far better than mine

 

Is there a preference between a rivet or a brad, or should we not split that hair for now?

 

Here are the screen caps I looked at on the Death Star:

 

http://s767.photobucket.com/albums/xx316/flyinghome/ANH%20TK%20Caps/Death%20Star/

 

And Tantive IV

 

http://s767.photobucket.com/albums/xx316/flyinghome/ANH%20TK%20Caps/Tantive%20IV/

[pandatrooper[TK]]

Yes thats the one.

 

You can see the small indent in this digital pic. In the printed photo in the book you can see a circle where the brad or split rivet would be. Its on the upper most corner of the thigh strip. Confirmed its there for sure.

[firebladejedi[TK]]

Rivets with solid capped heads should cover it.. and a photo..

 

[carbonitekid]

Sweet! Are you going to be the first then? I have to add brads to my suit and do the forearms too, may not get to it before you.

 

 

My bad . Read this as ANH Discussion, completley missed the "hero" part.

 

Must stop posting at gone 1 in the am.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Rivets with solid capped heads should cover it.. and a photo..

 

 

Got it. The ANH Stunt allows both. Are you proposing an across the board ammendment to change

 

"The thigh armor belt may be connected by brads/split rivets, but not by standard rivets."

 

to

 

"The thigh armor belt may be connected by two brads, split rivets, or solid capped head rivets, but not by standard rivets.

[firebladejedi[TK]]

I think for standard 501st and EIB pop rivets should surfice - for the new centurian programme solid head rivets only.

 

Is that what you mean?

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Not quite. For Centurion we currently allow brads which are actually rivets. Also, we specifly split rivets (which have solid heads). I guess it's more a matter of is having a split rivet important, or the fact that it's a solid head?

 

How about:

"The thigh armor belt will be connected by two visible fasteners at either end. These may be brads, flat head rivets (including split rivets), or cosmetic covering that emulates the look of a brad/flat head rivet".

 

I put in the last as what if someone actually does glue it or uses a pop rivet, but then glues on a cover that looks like a flat head rivet. Yes, may seem strange but I'm thinking about Gary, e.g. would we mandate that he has to remove the pop rivet and replace it with a brad/flat head rivet, or can he just glue on a cap that looks like a flat head was used?

[firebladejedi[TK]]

Right i see - you just need to confirm the style head.

 

Be it brads or bifurcated rivets, jeans rivets or whatever they all have solid heads. Pop rivets by their very nature have small holes in them. Thats all you need to specify - the difference between solid head or pop rivets. What you call them has little to no consequence imho.

[john danter]

I would like to see a clear photo of archive armour showing this

 

Job done, debate over

 

If you have them, please post one.

 

I find it weird they'd glue one side yet rivet the other