DarthAloha

Bob, Kalani et al,
 
Apologies for how long this has taken. I'm the only person to blame for that.
 
At this time this costume does not have enough references to be included in the 501st's roster. Specifically the back view is lacking.
 
Every LMO team has had to make this same determination for an uncountable number of costumes. It is not one that has ever been taken lightly. Our goal is for members to build the most accurate costumes possible. Having a clear view of front, back and sides of the screen used costume is one of the 501st's core tenets.
 
This is the second time around for this costume. Last year's LMO team came to the same conclusion. Sadly this was never documented since it allegedly occurred in an ephemeral Facebook chat. 
 
If I had to make a wild guess maybe development of this CRL continued after the previous team's ruling on this costume? I can't say because that was then this is now. It was a different LMO team and a different IOC command staff.
 
 
 
The comment was more about future costumes than this. The Sith Eternal Office ended up being a kerfuffle for sure and I'm hoping to prevent such things moving forward. 
 
I alluded to this in my previous post, but it is imperative that detachments reach out to the LMO team before CRL development, and certainly before a member decides to build a costume. We receive emails and messages from detachments asking this question on a regular basis. 
 
Some of the onus is on the LMO team to keep up with the ongoings on this forum. I intend to fix that part of it personally. What we want to prevent is detachments merely throwing a CRL over the wall at us for approval. My preference is for the LMO team to be involved in (or at a minimum aware of) the development of a new CRL. 
 
I intend to follow this forum and keep up with the goings on here on a regular basis. Along with the detachment leadership communicating with us as soon as about possible new CRLs I believe we can prevent what happened here in the future. 
 
In the coming days I'll look through these threads and attempt to compile a post with an up to date list of new CRLs or amendments to current ones. Then we can work the list together from there. 
 
Thanks again for your patience,
 
-Eric

 

Bob, Kalani et al,
 
Apologies for how long this has taken. I'm the only person to blame for that.
 
At this time this costume does not have enough references to be included in the 501st's roster. Specifically the back view is lacking.
 
Every LMO team has had to make this same determination for an uncountable number of costumes. It is not one that has ever been taken lightly. Our goal is for members to build the most accurate costumes possible. Having a clear view of front, back and sides of the screen used costume is one of the 501st's core tenets.
 
This is the second time around for this costume. Last year's LMO team came to the same conclusion. Sadly this was never documented since it allegedly occurred in an ephemeral Facebook chat. 
 
If I had to make a wild guess maybe development of this CRL continued after the previous team's ruling on this costume? I can't say because that was then this is now. It was a different LMO team and a different IOC command staff.
 
 
 
The comment was more about future costumes than this. The Sith Eternal Office ended up being a kerfuffle for sure and I'm hoping to prevent such things moving forward. 
 
I alluded to this in my previous post, but it is imperative that detachments reach out to the LMO team before CRL development, and certainly before a member decides to build a costume. We receive emails and messages from detachments asking this question on a regular basis. 
 
Some of the onus is on the LMO team to keep up with the ongoings on this forum. I intend to fix that part of it personally. What we want to prevent is detachments merely throwing a CRL over the wall at us for approval. My preference is for the LMO team to be involved in (or at a minimum aware of) the development of a new CRL. 
 
I intend to follow this forum and keep up with the goings on here on a regular basis. Along with the detachment leadership communicating with us as soon as about possible new CRLs I believe we can prevent what happened here in the future. 
 
In the coming days I'll look through these threads and attempt to compile a post with an up to date list of new CRLs or amendments to current ones. Then we can work the list together from there. 
 
Thanks again for your patience,
 
-Eric

 

Bob, Kalani et al,
 
Apologies for how long this has taken. I'm the only person to blame for that.
 
At this time this costume does not have enough references to be included in the 501st's roster. Specifically the back view is lacking.
 
Every LMO team has had to make this same determination for an uncountable number of costumes. It is not one that has ever been taken lightly. Our goal is for members to build the most accurate costumes possible. Having a clear view of front, back and sides of the screen used costume is one of the 501st's core tenets.
 
This is the second time around for this costume. Last year's LMO team came to the same conclusion. Sadly this was never documented since it allegedly occurred in an ephemeral Facebook chat. 
 
If I had to make a wild guess maybe development of this CRL continued after the previous team's ruling on this costume? I can't say because that was then this is now. It was a different LMO team and a different IOC command staff.
 
 
 
The comment was more about future costumes than this. The Sith Eternal Office ended up being a kerfuffle for sure and I'm hoping to prevent such things moving forward. 
 
I alluded to this in my previous post, but it is imperative that detachments reach out to the LMO team before CRL development, and certainly before a member decides to build a costume. We receive emails and messages from detachments asking this question on a regular basis. 
 
Some of the onus is on the LMO team to keep up with the ongoings on this forum. I intend to fix that part of it personally. What we want to prevent is detachments merely throwing a CRL over the wall at us for approval. My preference is for the LMO team to be involved in (or at a minimum aware of) the development of a new CRL. 
 
I intend to follow this forum and keep up with the goings on here on a regular basis. Along with the detachment leadership communicating with us as soon as about possible new CRLs I believe we can prevent what happened here in the future. 
 
In the coming days I'll look through these threads and attempt to compile a post with an up to date list of new CRLs or amendments to current ones. Then we can work the list together from there. 
 
Thanks again for your patience,
 
-Eric

 

Ok. Thanks!
 
Now that I’m home I’ll catch up with the rest of the team about it. Lately these decisions are voted on by all LMOs with no one LMO having more say than the other. 
 
What I’d like to work on is getting us involved earlier in the CRL creation process. It’s sort of broken that we tend to sit around and wait for a detachment to throw something over the wall to us to think about. That’s an internal LMO problem not something about the detachments or IOC. My hope is to spend more time on IOC this year to prevent that. 
 
Thanks for everyone’s patience. 
 
-Eric 

Hi folks. One of your LMOs here.
 
Apologies for the 11th hour question. I’ve been traveling for work and I’ve had my head down for too long. 
 
Is there any more reference for the back of this costume?

I promised Bob I would be more involved with new CRLs as they hit the IOC forums. Please allow me to start living up to that as of now. 
 
-Eric 

Hi. LMO here.
 
What is there to be suspicious about? I'm not sure you missed anything because things take time. Not only are we processing a ton of new CRLs there is getting over our hangovers from Celebration (honestly C8 stopped all legion work for a month or more). 
 
I admitted I made a mistake and posted in the wrong thread because I am an idiot. Went on to say there was no reason not to have a generic general. All IOC CRLs are generic. 
 
But if you have a conspiracy theory I'd love to hear it. It's been a while since I've been accused of something.
 
Troop on, 
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hi. LMO here.
 
What is there to be suspicious about? I'm not sure you missed anything because things take time. Not only are we processing a ton of new CRLs there is getting over our hangovers from Celebration (honestly C8 stopped all legion work for a month or more). 
 
I admitted I made a mistake and posted in the wrong thread because I am an idiot. Went on to say there was no reason not to have a generic general. All IOC CRLs are generic. 
 
But if you have a conspiracy theory I'd love to hear it. It's been a while since I've been accused of something.
 
Troop on, 
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hi. LMO here.
 
What is there to be suspicious about? I'm not sure you missed anything because things take time. Not only are we processing a ton of new CRLs there is getting over our hangovers from Celebration (honestly C8 stopped all legion work for a month or more). 
 
I admitted I made a mistake and posted in the wrong thread because I am an idiot. Went on to say there was no reason not to have a generic general. All IOC CRLs are generic. 
 
But if you have a conspiracy theory I'd love to hear it. It's been a while since I've been accused of something.
 
Troop on, 
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

Actually I never said that we can't have a generic FO general in the 501st. I see no reason not to. That's basically Hux without the ginger hair requirement no? 
 
I'm thinking maybe I posted my response in the wrong thread. I was posting about generic officers in general not generic generals. 
 

 
My point was that I've read a bunch here on IOC and there's been a lot of banter and back and forth about other FO officers but no one has produced any screen references to look at. Blurry photos of the starkiller base lineup during Hux's Hilter speech aren't good enough for me.
 
I'm sorry for the confusion. 
 
-Eric

Actually I never said that we can't have a generic FO general in the 501st. I see no reason not to. That's basically Hux without the ginger hair requirement no? 
 
I'm thinking maybe I posted my response in the wrong thread. I was posting about generic officers in general not generic generals. 
 

 
My point was that I've read a bunch here on IOC and there's been a lot of banter and back and forth about other FO officers but no one has produced any screen references to look at. Blurry photos of the starkiller base lineup during Hux's Hilter speech aren't good enough for me.
 
I'm sorry for the confusion. 
 
-Eric

Actually I never said that we can't have a generic FO general in the 501st. I see no reason not to. That's basically Hux without the ginger hair requirement no? 
 
I'm thinking maybe I posted my response in the wrong thread. I was posting about generic officers in general not generic generals. 
 

 
My point was that I've read a bunch here on IOC and there's been a lot of banter and back and forth about other FO officers but no one has produced any screen references to look at. Blurry photos of the starkiller base lineup during Hux's Hilter speech aren't good enough for me.
 
I'm sorry for the confusion. 
 
-Eric

Actually I never said that we can't have a generic FO general in the 501st. I see no reason not to. That's basically Hux without the ginger hair requirement no? 
 
I'm thinking maybe I posted my response in the wrong thread. I was posting about generic officers in general not generic generals. 
 

 
My point was that I've read a bunch here on IOC and there's been a lot of banter and back and forth about other FO officers but no one has produced any screen references to look at. Blurry photos of the starkiller base lineup during Hux's Hilter speech aren't good enough for me.
 
I'm sorry for the confusion. 
 
-Eric

Hi folks... LMO here. 
 
The rank or title is less important to me (general, lieutenant, sergeant, first class floor mopper) than screen references. The books are great as a backup reference but I'd like to see actual film screen captures of any costume that is proposed. Without screen references I'm loath to add it to our list of approved of costumes based on the front view in a book. 
 
Please post what images you have here for review. 
 
Here is the new costume approval wording: 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:CharacterApproval
 
-Eric
 

Hi folks... LMO here. 
 
The rank or title is less important to me (general, lieutenant, sergeant, first class floor mopper) than screen references. The books are great as a backup reference but I'd like to see actual film screen captures of any costume that is proposed. Without screen references I'm loath to add it to our list of approved of costumes based on the front view in a book. 
 
Please post what images you have here for review. 
 
Here is the new costume approval wording: 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:CharacterApproval
 
-Eric
 

Hi folks... LMO here. 
 
The rank or title is less important to me (general, lieutenant, sergeant, first class floor mopper) than screen references. The books are great as a backup reference but I'd like to see actual film screen captures of any costume that is proposed. Without screen references I'm loath to add it to our list of approved of costumes based on the front view in a book. 
 
Please post what images you have here for review. 
 
Here is the new costume approval wording: 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:CharacterApproval
 
-Eric
 

Hi folks... LMO here. 
 
The rank or title is less important to me (general, lieutenant, sergeant, first class floor mopper) than screen references. The books are great as a backup reference but I'd like to see actual film screen captures of any costume that is proposed. Without screen references I'm loath to add it to our list of approved of costumes based on the front view in a book. 
 
Please post what images you have here for review. 
 
Here is the new costume approval wording: 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:CharacterApproval
 
-Eric
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

So... this happened today....
 
http://databank.501st.com/databank/Costuming:IOC_CRL
 

 
Congrats to Michael for being the first approved and the CRL model.
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 

I used Scotch-Brite scuff pads to polish the face to a dull, brush finish. Just lay the buckle face down on the scuff pad and move it back and forth, horizontally, this is important to give the brush effect one direction instead of multiple scratch areas. Then I drilled a hole in the exact center of the buckle to mount the code disk that was aluminum with the center hole drilled and tapped out, it is mounted with a machine screw from the back side. You can glue it with a good grade of superglue, but they tend to be knocked off.
Another trick I did is to glue a small shim of leather to the back of the buckle at the pin to offset the distance from the belt due to the size of the mounting loop for the belt.

Dying!
 
-Eric