Detaleader

I've had pics on the CRL discussion thread featuring E-11, DLT-19 and also the flashlight. We'd also still have the headset to add, and I believe the helmet.

I'll have another look, but these were most relevant shots

Just grabbed a series of new screenshots off the Andor blu: https://imgur.com/a/4U3OCxp Just in case there may be any more interesting info here?

I've not been able to find any good reference, outside of the pictures already posted on the subforum here.

Considering that the originals aren't painted, but rather just cast in flat black, I'd hold off until adjustments are made (or just go for a black paint outright)

A new detail I spotted: You can see in the new behind the scenes clip, that the very first hole in the barrel shroud is shaped differently, as if it were to accommodate the hook of a Sterling stock. The stock is of course shorter (or the barrel longer in this case). The two blasters on the top of this pile seem to be "hero" blasters. They have holes in the barrel shroud. The blaster on the bottom right appears to be a stunt casting of sort. The holes are only hinted at. You can also see the front sling loop being present on only 1/4 guns. Imo this should lean towards making that sling loop an optional piece.

I went through all my screenshots and at no point do I see these guys with a 10.5? I see a single trooper with a non-flashlight R1 E-11.

Following. For a lot of TIE stuff, Jinta is easily the best. Would love to hear about his DT.

Two side views for the backpack (4k version linked): Interesting to note: The backgrounder seemingly has both Baton + Backpack together Though sadly I don't think these will be quite enough reference to build a good replica 😕

Looking at the footage, the boxes are neither matte, nor the same as R1 boxes. I'd wager they're the same as Aldhani's: Gunmetal. They're certainly more reflective than the armor. As discussed before, they're also smaller than R1 (this is solidified in the Aldhani CRL) Whether or not they're a major prop shouldn't really matter imo. A lack of reference on the other hand I can totally understand. I agree on the E-11 (which also still needs adding to the Aldhani text) That's great news, and exactly how it should be imo Thank you! The backpack frame is a Clansman GS, the pack itself appears to be built from components used on the Jedha Type 4 Pack or the Artillery pack. Screenshot is in 4K, so please right click and open to see the details!

Oh yeah, that's really cool! Looks like he has his flashlight still too

Only difference seems to be a picatinny rail to attach flashlights. The rail seems to be the same type used on the R1 E-11: https://www.whitearmor.net/forum/topic/41271-rogue-one-e-11-blaster-reference/ Unlike the E-11, the rail seems to be mounted over top the T-Track, rather than having a break in the T-Track. In that case, we should really add the Rogue One E-11, since it is used on Andor as well A case could probably be made for the R1 DLT-19 as well. For both, the M300 light gets replaced with the picatinny rail. The props are otherwise identical by the looks of it. I'm sure whoever provided the blasters for the Mudtrooper/R1TK CRLs would be okay to take one photo with the light removed, if we asked them?

As I've elaborated above, it certainly isn't navy boots I'll just post some more angles on the TIE boots, just for the hell of it. I think they're remarkably close, in shape of the boot's upper, heel placement, no-tread/subtle tread soles, shaft height, etc. Oh and one more thing: The flap with the adjustment strap? Not all of the Ferrix Troopers actually have that. Like all recent productions, whatever boots are available are used. Also what the hell is going on with this boot?

Sorry if I missed something here, but I'm not sure if this is quite the right approach. Ultimately, the jackboots used on TIE, crew, etc, should all be mid calf height anyway. They boots used here aren't higher or lower at all, especially when you take variety in actor height into consideration. To illustrate, here's a few OT era pics: Those boots aren't very tall, and if you were to strap shin armor onto that, it would have the same issues with straps as the guys on Andor would. You can also clearly see how the officer boots are much higher. The wording used on JRS CRLs reads: Boots must be mid-calf height, Officer height tall boots or similar are not acceptable. I would personally prefer keeping as much wording from that JRS read as possible. Nobody wants to go out and buy a new set of boots for what is effectively the same. To say we have a fundamentally different boot is wrong imo. X sewn into the pull tabs? Why would we specify a thing that only some replicas have, when it can't be found on actual jackboots. I also don't think these are German Navy boots at all. I'll show you two key features as to why I think this: 1) Drain holes. The top of Navy Boots features a set of drain holes. Why they have that, I cannot say, but I cannot see any of them at all on the references for Aldhani nor Ferrix. 2) Top Seam. You can see a seam running all the way along the circumference of the boot shaft near the height of the top buckle. This is where the drain holes would be too. I've taken liberty to highlight this seam. You will note it is most prominently visible on the third boot in the back. In German the Term "Knobelbecher" is colloquially used for all various kinds of marching boots that have a shaft and no laces. I don't think we need to replace that word necessarily. Heel height would be eliminated by that also. Personally, I don't think I'd specify tread type. We're not the RPF and frankly, if you are standing on your boots, nobody is gonna look at your tread. You are literally standing on it after all Here's what I think this all boils down to: Many CRLs at some point had "calf height" as requirement. And that was just never really correct in the first place. Some CRLs have since been corrected to mid-calf, but this has over time created a larger amount of people that have used too tall boots with their TIEs, Crew, etc. We obviously don't want to push that error forward. To say these are fundamentally different I would disagree however. I think we should just use the wording from the TIE CRL. It's spot on, describes the right features (ie, be lower, don't be an officer boot) and leaves people with the opportunity to reuse their boots (should they have the right height of course)

Bunch of screenshots, verbiage for weapon and holster, what type of Mauser used, etc in this thread: https://www.imperialofficer.com/forum/index.php?/topic/15786-isb-non-saga-imperial-military-officer-power-5-updates/