They are on today's review call. I have added the base-edge positions to the drawing and asked the tool supplier to bring the full gripper envelope.

Include the layer below. The gap is a relationship between layers

We did a similar review and everybody argued about the top layer while stores quietly supplied a different pallet. Can you put the pallet construction in that pack too? Boards and gaps, not just its footprint.

Yep, actual pallet variant. Not whichever model came free with the drawing software

Our simulated tool cleared until we added the already placed cartons. Include the full placement sequence and release positions; a single isolated carton can make a poor pattern look feasible

Especially the last placement before the layer changes

The supplier's image contains only the carton being placed. They will add neighbouring cartons and show the two layer transitions. We also have the actual pallet drawing now.

The printed end panel is tied to the packing orientation according to our work instruction. I have not checked whether production consistently follows that instruction.

Then put that on the review list as an observation needed from packing. The instruction tells you the intended relationship. Actual packed stock tells you whether you can rely on it today.

And don't claim reliability from the one sample sitting in the meeting room

Packaging wants to assess a revised pattern with fewer rotated positions. The tooling supplier says that changes its placement order. Neither is ready to approve the original layout.

That's useful even if the meeting feels less tidy now. Who updates the drawing both suppliers are using? Ours left with different versions and spent the next call disagreeing about a carton that had already moved.

Our project engineer owns the shared revision. I am listing support, incoming orientation and tool sequence as unresolved points against that one candidate pattern.

Mark any geometry assumptions in the model as well. The next reviewer should be able to distinguish measured packaging and tooling from provisional outlines without finding the meeting recording

Has the original approval request been withdrawn? People do click old attachments

Yes. I have replaced it with a review-required revision and a list of evidence still needed. Packed-stock checks and the revised sequence review will follow; nothing is cleared for production.

That's an honest status. Now the drawing and the unresolved questions agree