thibaultron

I think.. I hope... this is final test post of this review unless I do something really stupid or find some additional info somewhere.  I'll be glad to answer any questions, however and share any knowledge I've gleaned. 
 
The lens holder did have issues.  The hole down the middle was burred badly at the top (laser light input) and off-center at the bottom (laser light output to lens) which seems to be a common problem with Chinese made machines.  There were scorch marks on the burrs and on the inside indicating that it needed to re-machined and made perfectly round.  The unit is aluminum and about 2" inches long.   Ok... aggravation time.  After a some "calm down and focus" time, I chucked it into the lathe and fired it up.  Using a boring bar, I took off about 0.010 inch of material and got the inside perfectly round from top to bottom and the top was de-burred.   The beast was then reassembled and tested.
 
I noticed that the kerf is a bit narrower and that it's cutting deeper into the wood.  For example, what took a speed of 12, power level of 9mA, and 4 passes to cut some of Jason's fine euro boxwood that 3/32" thick, I managed to get up the speed to 16, keep the power the same, and only 1 pass.   Similar results on 3/16" thick Castello (not the euro) and for the first time, I managed 1/4" Castello.  Took 4 passes but it I was happy since previous tests, I gave up after 6 passes at a slower speed and higher power.
 
On a side note, Boxwood is the toughest wood to cut from what I've seen.  Euro box seems harder to cut than Castello with a laser.  Maybe in the next couple of weeks, I'll try some ebony which should be interesting to say the least.   BTW, basswood cuts like butter now.
 
Here's a picture to compare to the previous one at post #24.  Less charring and a cleaner cut.  I went for broke on the photo and using the super macro setting went for the biggest image I could get to challenge this fix.
 

 
 
Final Thoughts:
 
I'm still not recommending it.  There's only been two reviews out there.. this one and the one by Debbie over at Sawmillcreek.org.  I'll be adding mine there also.
 
If I had known the challenges I would be facing, I would have looked at a different machine AND a different company. 
 
Since my scale of choice is 1:64, I seriously doubt I'll have to cut 1/4" wood but 3/16 is very likely and doable.   If my Licorne and the ships I have planned are any indication, mostly it'll be 1/8" and thinner.  
 
If anything else pops up.. I'll post it.
 

Continuing the saga...
 
I discovered (from another webite... sawmillcreek I think it was) that the lens holder may have issues like the hole between the mirror and lens being too small or off center. It's too narrow or off-center (seems to be a common problem) then the beam hits the sides and power is dissipated and the beam distorted before hitting the lens.  Well... mine is off-center about 1/32" or so.  I'll be firing up the lathe and re-cutting the opening with boring bar. 
 
My late father-in-law who was doctor before he retired, used to say that a good challenge is excellent for keeping the mind sharp.  I'm now thinking he meant a "challenge on the golf course" instead of something like this.   
 
And for the record,  I got an answer back from MM...  no inference that they mislaid or ignored the first.... anyway, here it is.. verbatim.    I've found lenses on line if I suspect that's what I really need at this point and the water temp is doable without adding ice to the bucket..
 
There are no lens options available, only factory replacements of the stock lens that comes in the machine.
 
There is not a manual for the CorelLaser program.
 
The ideal water temperature is between 70 -75 degrees Fahrenheit. The temperature should not be allowed to go much over 78 degrees. Cool water can be slowly added into the bucket with the laser powered off and the pump still circulating.  To prevent thermal shock and damage to the laser tube be sure the water being added is within 10 degrees of the water temperature in the bucket.
 
Thank you for your feedback, I have passed your comments on regarding improvements to the LaserKnife manual and asked that our quality control check that the laser lenses are properly installed.
 
Micro-Mark Technical Service Department

Nigel,
 
I'm in agreement.  There's something strange about this.   I rechecked the items she ticked off... bed not level, moving parts not level, mirrors way out of alignment.  They're page where they explain things, discusses that these things are tested before shipping.  This makes me wonder if the carrier dropped it.
 
My stuff was off but it did work (although not well) out of the box.  My alignments, once I figured them out, have been minor in deviation but also pretty intense since you start at one end of the mirror chain and work your way through and then go back and re-check.
 
I'm still testing and feeding my curiousity on these.   I've seen aftermarket mirrors, lens assemblies, etc. but one just doesn't know about the quality.  I think tha's the killer.. is a $100 12mm, 50.8 focal lens actually better than it's $25 competitor? Are all laser tubes the same? 
 
There's one company who will remain nameless for now, who pulls down negative comments to their forum.  Word is that they will terminate your warranty for such comments.  What's surprising is that they've been reworking, manufacturing, and selling these products for several years.  
 
And yes.... safety is priority one when adjusting, testing, etc.   The MM has one advantage in the interlocks but I've been around electronics long enough to know parts fail and many times in the "closed" or operating position.   Every tool I own has 'bit' me but this is one tool that I'm not going to let that happen.  Power is off unless the lid is closed and I'm actually making a cut. 

Hi Mark,
 
I was thinking more about your issues as well as Debbie and Charles after re-reading latest posts. You both have faced the same basic issues but their level if anything seems more severe as they aren't matching your results, even after similar debug efforts. Not sure I can suggest much new, but thoughts below.
 
As the quality control on these tools can only be described as poor at best, I am wondering if your lasers have their reflectors and output couplers correctly aligned. I would expect these would be factory set and probably aren't user adjustable on a unit sold for use by even technically very aware buyers like yourselves. Net would be markedly lower output so even well aligned optics post laser could not compensate, leading to the use of much higher power settings. Could have been a bad production run so it may be worth asking for a replacement laser assembly to test this idea out as you seem to have have worked through every other likely alignment option. Check for a much later serial number on any new unit so you know the manufacturing dates are well separated.
 
I also know you will be doing your checks carefully, but please watch the material, power handling as well as the optical specs if you try different lenses. These lasers need careful matching to their optics given the power outputs.
 
As for MM, my thought is they are probably out of their depth and don't have the training yet to really support this tool. Working with you on this debug is a good way to learn and train their staff. They should be grabbing the chance...I know I would given the tools' potential.
 
Finally, I hope you don't take this amiss, but please be very careful as you debug things. I expect the tool is fully interlocked for safety, shutting off the laser as the tool is opened and so on, but like many tools, these lasers can be very dangerous. There is an old, but actually rather non-funny, joke on the wall in most labs I've worked in where lasers were used, especially in labs with open beams . "Do not look into the laser with your one remaining eye".
 
Stay safe!
 
Cheers,
 
Nigel.

Debbie and Charles,
 
And here I thought I was the first...    :D   I think, if you don't mind, we'll converse in the clear.. in public.  This site is indexed by Google and it might help someone on the fence buying this product.   Or...  it might push MM to step up and sort this mess out.
 
Thanks for your feedback.  It's been a bit of rough ride to say the least for me and it sounds like it's been hell for you.  And some might wonder why I don't recommend this product.    By nature, I'm a fiddler and tweaker so I don't usually give things a second thought that aren't perfect. 
 
I didn't have as many of the problems as you did but have had and am still having some.   I'm still testing but I think I'm almost dead on with the levels of the bed and arms.  The bed on mine needed a bit of shimming.  I haven't found nearly the misalignments you had.  If I had, it would have been back in the box in a New York second.    You probably should cut your losses and send it back. 
 
On the beam/mirror alignment.. I checked the bed and arm with a bubble level to get everything set up. That's what told met bed was off.  The link on the mirror alignment... the mirrors should be checked at upper left and at lower right at a minimum.  
 
Yes, this is a modified K40W laser.  They upgraded the Power Supply for 220 VAC which why the transformer is needed here in the states and also the mainboard so it would work with Corel.  The originals use 110 VAC in an unstable power supply and the mainboard is for MoshiDraw.   There are some upgrade parts out there, but the rest of the machine (alignments) have to be spot on and one of the things I'm looking for now is.. do they change?. 
 
In spite of the recommendation not to use an extender, I'm using one with no issues at this point other than it takes a bit longer for a large data file to move over to the cutter. 
 
Thanks for the tip on the water temp... I'll go freeze a jug of distilled water and put it in the bucket.   Crickey... 68 degrees max????  We keep ambient here in the house at 71 degrees.    Did tech tell you this or did you find it out on your own?
 
It's nice to know that I'm not the only one with an upside down lens.   I'm still looking for a better lens as I'm pretty much convinced that this is a cheaply made one.
 
I'm wondering if your laser tube is damaged or dying?  1/32" basswood should be a snap.  But if it's a big kerf with lots of charring, something is spreading the beam.  If it's not penetrating and kerf is thin and power setting is high, then tube is shot.  I'll test on some basswood in the couple of days.
 
I can currently manage up to 3/32" without a major headache and 1/8" with trial and error.  I'm using cherry and boxwood currently since boxwood is the tough nut to cut. The biggest problem is working out the power settings and speed and then number of passes. Once I sort out 1/8" to where I'm happy, I'll shoot for 3/16".  That may not be doable without an upgrade to the laser tube.  There is a 45 watt tube available but I'm still looking for specs on the power supply to see if it will run it.  It might work with the power supply and no increase of power out of the laser but give a longer life at a higher power than recommended for the 40W.
 
The work is passible for what I intend to do with it.  Knowing that I have to allow for kerf and not be in a rush is the key and then sand off the char.
 
If this goes back, I won't even deal with tech... I'm still on the fence...
 
Here's a picture of latest efforts.   The dime is there for scale.   The wood on top is 1/16" boxwood, the middle is 3/32" boxwood and the bottom is 1/8" boxwood.  Still a bit too much charring but I'm fiddling.  For me, this is a hobby and there's no pressure.
 

 
I really need to win the lottery... bigger workshop and 50W or 60W cutter would be great. 
 

Hi Mark, I was so glad to see that we weren't the ONLY ones on the planet that bought the Micro-Mark Laserknife 2525!
 
Sadly, our problems have been quite similar to yours, only we've been fighting the battle with it longer and still no real results.
 
You mentioned something about cooling- yes, it's important that the laser tube cooling water be between 62 degrees F and 68 degrees F to prolong the laser tube lifespan.  Since we live in Phoenix, AZ we have been using the gel ice packs in the bucket of distilled water to get the temp down. We installed an aquarium thermometer with an alarm and the probe goes in the bucket.
 
Anyway...We bought ours in April and it took awhile to get here because the main box sat lost on a dock in NM for a week or so until we made a lot of phone calls and they tracked it down.  We got the other 2 boxes with the extras right away.
 
While it is true that their return policy is 30 days, I asked specifically what the warranty was and Tech Support said 90 days. Since ours has never functioned properly since day 1, (and we have documented it with emails and photos) I feel we might have a little bit of recourse. That remains to be seen.
 
I called the credit card company that I used to buy it with today and explained it's a couple days past the credit card company's protest period (60 days) but since we've been working with Micro-Mark to try to fix the problem (s) they extended the time for us to protest the charge a bit in case Micro-Mark decides not to play fair.
 
The very first thing we discovered on day 1 was that the laser tube pointed so high on mirror 1 that it missed mirror 2 (going from 1 to 2) completely by 1/2"! Not even ON the mirror at all.  Micro-Mark's tech said we shouldn't even have to touch mirror 1.  Really? They did send us a MS-Word document on how to align mirrors but we found the same one you did on the internet.
 
We have adjusted mirrors, cleaned them, tried the lens both ways (ours was installed flat side up also), etc.  The gantry arm was not level front to back. On the left side it actually sloped down by 1mm & level on the right.  Micro-Mark told us how to fix that. The bed was badly out of level, too.  We had to shim it by 1/16" in the back on the right side and 3/32" on the front right to get it level.
 
The M-M tech said it should cut through 1/16" chipboard in 1 pass using 5mA power and speed of 20.  What a joke!  It barely engraved and trailed off to nothing (not even engraving) as it got to the lower right of the bed. We had tried it on 75% power and cutting speed of 25 and it took 12 passes and we got exactly 1 part out of 12 in the file cut through before it died off to nothing in the lower right. Of course they were well toasted with char and unuseable.
 
We have tried and tried and tried. It doesn't even cut 130# cardstock consistently.  We've tried bassword from 1/32" to 1/16", and the very thin chipboard they supplied and really have not had good results- ever. 
 
We seem to have a "sweet spot" of about 3"-4" square in the upper left of the bed where it cuts ok and the kerf is decent (although I'd like it thinner) and the further right and down you go, it starts trailing off to nothing or starts ghosting as if the laser beam is hitting the nozzle or something. We have aligned and re-aligned the mirrors for hours and hours and hours.  Yesterday we got them very closely aligned and it still did the same thing.
 
He took pictures every step of the way to prove the test firings in the alignments and that the mirrors were clean, and photos of levels everywhere.  He did notice today that the bracket that holds the nozzle assembly is itself NOT level left to right but, at this point we are so disgusted with it all we are not going to bother fixing that.  We will contact M-M's tech support one more time, armed with even more photos and info and tell them the ball is in their court.  If they don't play nice we will protest the charge with the credit card company.
 
We have Goggled for weeks trying to find a posting somewhere that someone else had actually bought one of these machines, but all we saw were people talking about it and finally my husband saw your posting a couple days ago.
 
If you want to compare notes with us, feel free to send me a Private Msg and I'll give you an email address. 
 
We have had years of experience creating the Corel files but always outsourced the cutting to others. We wanted the convenience of being able to pop in and test out a design and to control the process a bit better ourselves, so that's why we bought the Micro-Mark laser. We knew it wasn't going to be robust enough for big production runs, but probably fine for our needs for now.  The people we outsourced our cutting to had 25 watt lasers so we thought a 40 watt would be better- HA!   BTW, the laser cutter appears to be based off of a K40 Chinese machine, with a few things Micro-Mark added.
 
OK, I've ranted long enough.  We just were so excited to see another person that actually bought one. I swear we thought we were the only ones, with no reviews anywhere until yours.  THANK YOU for posting it!
 
Regards,
Debbie & Charles Jones
 
 

Part 06
 
Before I can continue with the hull and railing corrections, I need to make the new bowsprit, as the railings terminate on the spar.
 
As mentioned earlier, the kit supplied bowsprit is incorrect in many ways. It is a straight, round spar. On the skipjacks the bowsprit was curved down along its length, and except at the last ¼ or so of its length past the bow, was octagonal. As is typical with a plastic kit, the fittings are cast overly large.
 

 
The plans I have for the Carrie Price do not have much detail other than the length and general shape for this part. I used the bowsprit shown in the Willie Bennett plans as a start.
 

 
A portion of the Willie Bennett plans showing bowsprit details. Note how far out the octagonal section goes, and the downward curve.
 
The portion of the Carrie Price plans that show the bowsprit cover two pages in a book. When I scanned them, naturally there was a gap, and some distortion at the book spine area. I couldn’t just combine them using a photo program, because of the distortion. So I loaded both halves into my CAD program. I then drew as much of each side as I could, then superimposed the lines using the jib, and rigging as reference points. Shown below is the CAD of the bowsprit scan and drawing. The bowsprit is shown in green.
 

 
Redrawn Carrie Price bowsprit.
 
I resized the Bennett’s bowsprit and placed it on the drawing, rescaled to the same length (it was 202” the Carrie’s is 224”). Show below, again in green, is the Bennett bowsprit.
 

 
Bennett Bowsprit resized to about the same length as the Price’s
 
Here are the two superimposed. The Carrie’s in green, and the Bennett’s in red
 

 
As you can see I didn’t get the Bennett’s bowsprit quite as long as it should be, but I can see some differences, that mean I can’t just use the resized Bennett bowsprit drawing. It is a little too “fat” resized, and the end sits a little high. Note that both are relatively “straight” in overall shape, not with the sharp up angle on the kit part.
 
Using the Bennett drawing and the information in Roger’s book. I will make a new drawing for the Carrie Price bowsprit.

Part 05
 
I decided to create a different trailboard for the Carrie Price. Rather than use a modified Willie Bennett trailboard, and have the same type of design on two different models.
 
Here is my new design, it is based on the one shown on the drawings from the National Archives for the Kathryn. The Kathryn had a solid gold colored eagle head, but I chose to use coloring similar to that on the Nathan Dorchester (see photos Part 01).
 

Part 04
By the way here is what the sails should look when furled. Compare this to the box art in Part 01
 

 
Note the forward bow in the mast. This is shown in the drawings. I'll have to check on other skipjacks. My drawing of the Carrie Price shows a straight mast.

Part 03
 
After some more research I found that the chains attached to the bottom of the rudder are not safety chains to hold the rudder on. They are instead used to prevent the dredging cable from getting between the rudder and rudder post.
 
Here is more information on the dredging winches and oyster dredge.
 

 
From National Archives from archives for Skipjack Kathryn. The original picture was quite large, and a lot of clarity was lost when I reduced it to fit the forum requirements.
 

 
Here’s a close up to make the text easier to read
 

 
From National Archives from archives for Skipjack Kathryn. The original picture was quite large, and a lot of clarity was lost when I reduced it to fit the forum requirements.
 

 

 

 
More a close ups to make the text easier to read
 
I have been busy, and not much has been done on the skipjack, but some more progress will be posted later.
For those interested, I'm posting this build using Firefox. I was unable to post using my normal browser Internet Explorer.

Part 02
 
The first major concession to my skill level, is that I decided to leave the raised deck seams that came on the model. I was afraid I would scar the deck surface too much trying to remove them, and the plank width looks OK.
 
I assembled the hull, stem, stern post and deck, before looking closely enough at my plans. The detail on the stem area is not correct, and I had to remove it as detailed later, with everything together. If you are going to build this model, do those steps first!
 
I then filled the gaps at the joints with Tamiya putty, using shaped popsicle sticks to get into the tight spots. This putty sticks to skin well, so use gloves! Most of the filling was where the stem and stern posts meet the keel, as well as along the deck to hull seam.
 

Filled Gap at the stem keel gap
 

Filled gap at the stern post keel gap. You can also see where I will have to extend the rails to meet the transom.
 
I also cleaned up the wheel house and installed it and the cabin sides. These will all be painted white, so I figured why try assembling them after the individual parts were painted, then have to touch up the joints.
 
I had installed the railings when I discovered the problems in the bow area. Once again correcting them would have been easier before assembly.
 
The first minor problem is that while mostly correct, the stern railings need to extend further back, I’ll fix that a little later in the build.
 
Now to the modifications needed at the bow:
 

Plan Drawing of bow.
 

 
Assembly drawing from instructions
The model has the rails end at the, for lack of a better term, the knightheads. The large “H” shaped assembly that goes on either side of the bowsprit (5) butt. In the drawing they extend to the fore end of these (4). The “knightheads” as shown in the drawing (3), sit inside the hull, over the waterway area. There is a board that attaches between them over the top of the bowsprit butt.  On the model the knightheads are cast even with the outside of the hull, and the rails terminate at their aft edge (4). Additionally the bottom portion of the knightheads are cast on the hull and the tops and the cross piece are a separate casting that is to be glued on top of this (3A & 3B). With the draft necessary for the manufacture of each piece, this leaves them diamond shaped in cross section when done. Not flat. There is not enough “meat” on the parts to be able to shape them to look good, if I was willing to overlook the position error. Also you have to install the bowsprit before the top part can be installed. This makes fairing the two parts difficult, as the hull and bowsprit are different colors, and I plan to paint the hull before the bowsprit is installed. The bowsprit on the real skipjacks was varnished not painted, as simulated with tan paint on the cover art. The upper brace shown in the drawing (1) is cast poorly on the model. They are oversize, not straight, and one was broken on my model. I’ll have to make new ones. See the photo above of the Caleb Jones. The drawing, Bennett plans, and photos of other skipjacks show the trailboards as thin flat boards attached to the stem (2), with thin decorative trim along the top and bottom. On the model (2) these are deep ridges top and bottom, more like ribs (2). There is an additional board above the railings at the top of the knighthead (4), not quite as long as the knighthead. Below are photos of the bow after I had removed the stem brace and trailboard ribs, but before I had removed the cast knightheads.
 

Partially modified stem area.
 

Rails end too far aft, also a better view if the filled gap between the stem and keel
 

Hull trimmed flush at bow
 
I added one of the new knightheads, it still has to be trimmed for length and height
 

New port knighthead
 

New port knighthead
 
The kit transom had the name Carrie Price cast in raised letters. I figured that this was unlikely on a workboat. Tacked on wood letters would rot quickly, and as described earlier the Push Boat would probably damage them. The other option would be to have them carved into the transom. These too might be damaged over the life of the skipjack. Also the pictures I found had painted lettering, so I decided to go with decals. I filed and sanded the letters off.
 

Transom name E. C. Collier. Note the rudder safety chains at the base of the rudder, and the attachment for the steering gear.
 

Sanded transom
 
To be continued.

Part 01
 
This is a build of the Skipjack Carrie Price using the Pyro Chesapeake Skipjack Oyster Boat model kit.
After some research I found out that the Lindberg/Pyro kit is a model of the Carrie Price as recorded by Howard Chapelle. After I started the kit I found the name cast on the transom, but had not noticed it before I started my research. The Carrie Price is one of the projects in “American Ship Models and How to Build Them” by V. R. Grimwood and Howard I. Chapelle. I am using the plans in this book to build and update this kit. I am planning to depict her as build around 1895. I’m not going to make this a museum quality model, but will do my best to make it a good one. According to the Chapelle drawings the model comes as close as I could measure to 1/64th scale, the same as the book drawings.
This will be somewhat of a slow build, as I am also working to expand my shed/shop, and the finished section is a mess, with “stuff” from the unfinished portion (enclosed, but no insulation, electric, etc.) piled into the finished area and my work area. Also I decided to do this build log after I had partially assembled the hull, so I will have to describe some of what I have done so far, without the benefit of before and after photos, in the first parts. I also have the help of cats in writing this build, so have to take frequent “Look, I want attention, so I’m sitting/walking/sleeping on your keyboard.” breaks.
This is my first model in quite some time and my first build log ever, so please bear with me, if you decide to follow this along with me.
I do not know all the correct names for all the various parts of the boat, but will do my best.
Modeling suggestions and corrections to the names I use for the parts welcome!
I will be using information in the Grimwood book, information I found on line, the drawings for the Willie Bennett by Model Shipways, and the book “Model Boat Building: The Skipjack” by Steve Rogers.
 

Box Cover Art
 
The kit is fairly close to what is shown in the drawings, but does have several problems. Here is a list of those I have found so far:
Minor, but paint scheme shown on box wrong. The Chesapeake Boatmen were superstitious about painting blue on their boats, the exception being blue in the field of the American flag, or bunting. This was generally used only on the trailboard decoration. Also the decks were painted white, not left natural. Red copper paint was also the standard at the time for the anti-fouling paint. The cabin tops were generally green or a slate gray, from my research, still looking into this. The trailboards below the bowsprit were ornate, the kit has nothing decal or otherwise for them. I have no information on what the Carrie Price’s trailboards looked like, so I will use a modification of those detailed in the Willie Bennett kit. The Bennett trailboards have features that are common on examples I found of other trailboards. (besides I already redrew the Bennett’s trailboards for my own use). Additionally the drawings indicate a bird figurehead at the end of the trailboards. The Bennett has such a figurehead. I will use the same graphic as on the Bennett drawing on the end of these trailboards. I plan to print one on the end of the trailboard graphic, and then shape the profile of the stem to match. I will not try to crave a 3D figurehead.
Trailboard Ida May
 

Trailboard for Caleb W. Jones. Note the stem brace that is similar to the Carrie Prices.
 

Trailboard of the Nathan Dorchester
 

Port trailboard graphic I will be using for the Carrie Price. It will be about 2 inches long on the model.
 

Here is a roughly cut print of the port trailboard placed on the model to see what it would look like. The print is cut  too thin at the fore end to fit between the soon to be removed detail. Note also the original railing and knightheads. I have just started to remove the stem detailing at this point.
 
The numbering for the points below should have started with 4,5, etc. but somehow was reset when I copied the text to this post, and I can't seem to change it. Please bear with me as I learn.
As an interesting side note, if you look at the pictures of the Jones and Dorchester, the bowsprit does not rest on the stem much past the hull, on these two. I’ll have to look closer at the Bennett plans and the Rogers book. There are some major fit problems in the pieces, nothing that can’t be fixed with some putty, but they must be corrected for a good looking finished model. See the stem keel joint in the cover art picture. There is no oyster dredging equipment included in the model. This is actually a bonus for me, as she was built before the use of power dredging winches, and thus the deck casting has no marks where the winch parts might be attached. The down side is that I will have to build 2 hand powered winches, for which I have found some photos/drawings, but none with dimensions. The stem in the trailboard/rail/ bowsprit area is incorrect. I’ll explain when I get to that section. See the heavy detailing on the box top The railings in the bow and stern do not extend far enough. Rope coil castings in the deadeye and stern railing areas are terrible and incorrect, I will remove them. The mast is a little crude, but most importantly badly warped. I will have to make a new one. The boom is also warped, but I may be able to use it with modification. The casting is fairly straight side to side, but curved vertically fore and aft. The long booms on the real boats sagged, but my boom is curved up rather than down! I have not decided whether to make a new one (with or without sag), or remove the sail attachment detail from the top of the boom, invert it and remake that detail. I’m leaning toward making a new one, with detailing that matches the proportions of the ones on the mast I will have to make. The furled sails are just wrong! The jib is not too bad, in real life it would have been furled tighter, but this could pass. The main sail on the other hand angles in the opposite direction from the mast rake! The main sail is attached to the mast via mast hoops and thus the leading edge should always be close to the mast, it can’t pull away as shown in the model. I’ll make new sails, I have not decided whether furled or set. I can use the plans from my Willie Bennett kit for rigging, and sail construction. On the prototype skipjacks the bowsprit has made with a downward curved hog or bow. This was cut into the  shape of the bowsprit, it was not steamed in from a straight spar. On the model the bowsprit is a straight spare. Also, as is not atypical on plastic models, the fittings on this, the mast, and the boom are cast quite massively. The model part also has no round to octagonal to square transition area, as shown in the plans. The model overall though is accurate in dimension and overall shape, a good starting point.
As a note: The kit includes two ship’s boats, this is correct. The large boxes in interior are also correct. They are engine covers. Maryland law dictates that the skipjack itself may not have an engine, sail driven only. This is a measure to limit oyster harvesting in hopes of preventing overfishing. The auxiliary though is allowed an engine. If the wind is insufficient for dredging the boat, oddly enough called a “Push Boat” is lowered and used to push the skipjack. If the wind is good, the boat is not used. The second boat provided is the one used to get from the shore/dock, to a moored skipjack. The engines on the auxiliaries were generally automobile or similarly sized motors.
 

Push Boat drawing from Nation Archives. Note the lack of a rudder. The Push Boat direction is controlled by steering lines (see below).
 

Push Boat in operation. Note the rigging for controlling the direction of thrust, from Nation Archives.
 

Push Boat “Thrust Pad” on the E. C. Collier, from Nation Archives
 
I will show some small sections of the plans to illustrate where I will be making some of the modifications. Other than the hull/railing details above , most will be in the rigging area, so I will just show photos of my progress for that.

This question may be a bit "out there" but I am wanting to make a part on the boat I'm building that is a (approximately) 1mm diameter rod with threads on each end. I can't use all-thread for it because most of it needs to be unthreaded. I've searched around on the web and found any number of jeweler's tap and die sets in the 0.6mm & up range. That would work fine. But I was thinking to use some hex nuts from Scale Hardware. It occurred to me that I could wind up with a die that cut a different number of threads per inch than the hex nuts were tapped for. None of the suppliers I've found for dies mention the number of threads per inch - nor does Scale Hardware.
 
I sent an email to Scale Hardware and got a quick and helpful reply as follows:
 
"Metric threads are measured by pitch (the distance between two threads) rather than threads per inch.  I can say the .6mm thread is approximately 169 tpi and the 1.0mm thread is 102 tpi. "
 
I've sent an email to the Otto Frei company (one of the suppliers of jeweler's taps & dies) but haven't heard back from them so far. Since they are just a seller, not a manufacturer, they may not know the answer. So, I thought, just for grins, I'd ask if anyone here might have tried using a jeweler's die and matching it with nuts from Scale Hardware? It might seem like all metric dies are the same, but the Otto Frei page says "Jeweler's tap & dies sets have broader threads than watchmakers or machinist taps & dies, which have finer threads."  http://www.ottofrei.com/Swiss-Made-Colibri-Jewelers-Screwplate-With-Taps-Set.html
So I'm worried that the two could be different. Of course, I can, if forced into, struggle to make my own nuts, but I know they won't look as good as those from Scale Hardware.
 
Thanks in advance -
John

I can't answer the question but it may be possible to recut the threads in the nuts with the jewelers tap depending on what material the nuts are made of and how close you can get to matching the original thread.  I have done this with regular sized bolts and nuts when I could not get an exact match.  Can't guarantee it will work for you but it might be worth a try if all else fails.

Your .6MM thread is in reality 42.37 threads per inch and your 1MM thread is in reality 25.4 threads per inch. All threads have standard TPI or pitch per the machinist handbook, even sub 1MM threads. Chances are really good any nuts you buy will fit any external thread in the same class OD's. Unlike larger threads, where there may be a fine pitch and a course pitch, smaller threads only have 1 common pitch.
 
Paul

grsjax and Paul - thanks for your thoughts. The nuts would be brass, so maybe it would work to try to rethread them if necessary. Paul - the statement on the Otto Frei website about jeweler's threads being different from watchmaker or machinist threads is what worries me. If that's the case, it seems the thread pitch would be different even on the same size bolt for different types?
 
The other thing I've considered is faking it by buying slightly smaller nuts and drilling out the internal threads enough so they'd fit over the threads of the rod. I suspect no one could tell. But it would be nice to be able to say they were truly threaded, so that's what I'm shooting for.
 
Cheers -
John

Figured it out.
 
Man, this thing is a lifesaver. Thanks for the great idea.

Here  is an example of the Krylon Gold Foil paint on a whitte metal casting from the Steam Pumper that Ken Foran designed for Model Expo.  This was done with the rattle can.  The white metal casting was cleaned up a bit and then primed with Badger STYNLREZ white primer.  I can say with confidence that one can't tell this apart from a plated piece.
Kurt

Jerry,
 
You might want to have a look at the Krylon brand "foil" paints. I emphasise the "foil" in the name of the paint. They are a spray can.  Although i have recently acquired some, I have not used them yet myself, but fellow MSW member Ken Foran ("xken") has used them extensively in his exquisite brass model building (check out his book on this subject too). You will find a link to his book in his build log for Niagara. You might also wish to PM him for further advice.  Ken is also the kit designer for the Model Expo model of the Allerton Steam Pumper.
 
Hope this helps.

Jerry:
The Krylon foil paints are great - also got the tip to use them from Ken Foran.  I have decanted them from the spray can to use in my airbrushes and they are great that way too - better control than by the spray can.  I did use some decanted foil paint with a brush to touch up some small areas on a build and it worked OK for that too.  I don't know how it would be applied by brush to a larger area though.  One point on these paints - they are to be applied over a white primer undercoat.  I think it's more for the color than the sticking to the subject.
Kurt

It is a swivel blade. Sort of an Xacto on a shaft. They are used on vinyl cutters for example.

Today I made a light Box... or more correctly a light stand?
 
I read in TFFM that Greg uses a light box to inspect, mark and fine tune his joinery.
If it works for him I'm hoping it will help me.
 
This little project cost me next to nothing as I used scraps.
 
I taped, measured and laid out my cut lines and hole locations on the sheet of Plexiglas and onto the tape with a pencil.

 
Then I clamped the plexiglas down to my table and using my scroll saw and a plexiglas cutting blade I made my cuts.  You have to keep the saw moving or the plexiglas overheats and gums up. I cut about 1/8 inch outside the line.

 
I then clamped the plexiglas in my vise and using a very rough file I filed the cut edges down to the pencil line.

 
To diffuse the light shining from below I sanded the underside. Passed it quickly over my belt sanded.  Quickly so it doesn't overheat and make a mess.  Then I hand sanded in one direction with extremely rough sand paper. Finally I used 80 grit and sanded in four directions, one at a time.  First up and down, then across at 90 degrees, and finally diagonally (corner to corner). 

 
I drilled and counter drilled the plexiglas for the wood screws, cut two pieces of wood for the stands, marked off the screw holes using the plexiglas as the template and drilled pilot holes.  Screwed it all together.

 
I slide a LED puck light underneath and that was it... she was ready to use.

 
You can see it seems to do a great job of highlighting the imperfections.

 
Hope someone else finds this idea useful!

It is a swivel blade. Sort of an Xacto on a shaft. They are used on vinyl cutters for example.

For thin stock I found something that might be usable instead of a laser cutter. I just watched a video review of the new Circut "Explore" digital cutter. (unfortunately on a pay for viewing Model Railroading site, so I can't post a link). According to the video the modeler uses the new Cricut to cut up to 1/16" basswood for buildings for his layout with good accuracy and repeatability for multipule cuts. (to a few thousands)(press fit of the cutout back into the material). The new Ciricut can cut your design files, not just the caned routines that former models could. For say frames on small models and thin parts this might be a good machine. I found it for between $170 (used) and $230 (new) on the web. I'm downloading some YouTube videos, and will get back after viewing some of them.

For thin stock I found something that might be usable instead of a laser cutter. I just watched a video review of the new Circut "Explore" digital cutter. (unfortunately on a pay for viewing Model Railroading site, so I can't post a link). According to the video the modeler uses the new Cricut to cut up to 1/16" basswood for buildings for his layout with good accuracy and repeatability for multipule cuts. (to a few thousands)(press fit of the cutout back into the material). The new Ciricut can cut your design files, not just the caned routines that former models could. For say frames on small models and thin parts this might be a good machine. I found it for between $170 (used) and $230 (new) on the web. I'm downloading some YouTube videos, and will get back after viewing some of them.