Jaager

Another two widely separated schools of practice.
Old school - polyurethane is glossy plastic - too thick -  modern synthetic -   preferred universal primer and overcoat is:  shellac
New school - poly is the go to.
 
The CA to poly works because CA will bond to a smooth surface.  But the bond is only as strong as the poly to wood bond.  Pull on it and the poly layer will go with the CA side.
PVA to poly - no bond  -  poly is glassy smooth -  PVA needs tooth, pores, an irregular surface - something that its invasive chains can wrap around or bore into.

I would use it - Gorilla WOOD GLUE  is PVA   - white is just fine  -  the yellow is probably Titebond II  which is my choice  -  the yellow Ultimate is probably Titebond III.    I build static, not radio control that takes to water - so waterproof  is overkill.
 
too many varies with "Gorilla" to not be confusing  - first Gorilla product was the foaming stuff  - polyurethane - for patio furniture et al.  expands a joint - really really awful for small model type bonds.

Another two widely separated schools of practice.
Old school - polyurethane is glossy plastic - too thick -  modern synthetic -   preferred universal primer and overcoat is:  shellac
New school - poly is the go to.
 
The CA to poly works because CA will bond to a smooth surface.  But the bond is only as strong as the poly to wood bond.  Pull on it and the poly layer will go with the CA side.
PVA to poly - no bond  -  poly is glassy smooth -  PVA needs tooth, pores, an irregular surface - something that its invasive chains can wrap around or bore into.

I would use it - Gorilla WOOD GLUE  is PVA   - white is just fine  -  the yellow is probably Titebond II  which is my choice  -  the yellow Ultimate is probably Titebond III.    I build static, not radio control that takes to water - so waterproof  is overkill.
 
too many varies with "Gorilla" to not be confusing  - first Gorilla product was the foaming stuff  - polyurethane - for patio furniture et al.  expands a joint - really really awful for small model type bonds.

Gorilla glue  is about the worst brand name that you could present as far as determining exactly what type of glue is being discussed.  Given the wide range of products with the name Gorilla, and the probable toxic and hazardous chemical synthesis involved, my guess is that most of their stuff is from core chemical companies - packaged and sold under various brand names - Gorilla being one of them.
 
The original Gorilla glue - the foaming polyurethane is something to be absolutely avoided for a wood model.
I see three types of Gorilla brand PVA -
white -probably the same as Elmer's - and maybe Weldbond (really imaginative and enthusiastic ad copy writers)  dries clear
yellow wood glue - looks like Titebond II  water resistant  dries amber
yellow wood glue ultimate  -  looks like Titebond III yellow - water proof  dries amber  the original Titebond III is brown and dries darker
They sell various flavors of CA.  I do not use any type of CA  - but from from discussions here - quality of the brand is probably very important - economy or generic CA is a way to get a poor result and a lot of waste.
 
There seems to be two camps here as far as CA as using an adhesive.
1. Avoid at all costs - old school    toxic, perverse, very poor shelf life after opening  ----   wood to wood: PVA   wood to metal: two part epoxy   natural fiber rigging: bookbinders pH7 PVA 
2. Greatest thing available.
 
Then there is always one of the hide glues especially the hot pot flakes - if you wish to replicate 17th-19th century practice.
 

PVA will hold it  - Gorilla wood glue is PVA -  if it is not visible - scab one one or both sides.

PVA will hold it  - Gorilla wood glue is PVA -  if it is not visible - scab one one or both sides.

Gorilla glue  is about the worst brand name that you could present as far as determining exactly what type of glue is being discussed.  Given the wide range of products with the name Gorilla, and the probable toxic and hazardous chemical synthesis involved, my guess is that most of their stuff is from core chemical companies - packaged and sold under various brand names - Gorilla being one of them.
 
The original Gorilla glue - the foaming polyurethane is something to be absolutely avoided for a wood model.
I see three types of Gorilla brand PVA -
white -probably the same as Elmer's - and maybe Weldbond (really imaginative and enthusiastic ad copy writers)  dries clear
yellow wood glue - looks like Titebond II  water resistant  dries amber
yellow wood glue ultimate  -  looks like Titebond III yellow - water proof  dries amber  the original Titebond III is brown and dries darker
They sell various flavors of CA.  I do not use any type of CA  - but from from discussions here - quality of the brand is probably very important - economy or generic CA is a way to get a poor result and a lot of waste.
 
There seems to be two camps here as far as CA as using an adhesive.
1. Avoid at all costs - old school    toxic, perverse, very poor shelf life after opening  ----   wood to wood: PVA   wood to metal: two part epoxy   natural fiber rigging: bookbinders pH7 PVA 
2. Greatest thing available.
 
Then there is always one of the hide glues especially the hot pot flakes - if you wish to replicate 17th-19th century practice.
 

Here is what I have thru 1995  - my database program became obsolete and life changed - so nothing after 1995:
 
A METHOD OF TAKING THE LINES OFF SMALL BOATS
MACKEAN,RAY   
MODEL SHIPWRIGHT
1990
74
40-44
NA BOAT TECHNIQUE
 
TAKING OFF LINES
RUBIN,NORMAN N
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1971
18
16-18   
TIP NA  
 
A METHOD FOR TAKING THE LINES OFF A HALF-MODEL
SCHOCK,EDSON
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1971
18
225-228  
TECHNIQUE NA
 
AN EXPERIMENT IN TAKING OFF LINES
WEGNER,DANA M
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1974
20
149-155  
TIP TECHNIQUE NA
 
TAKING OFF HULL LINES
NEVARD,LANCE  
SHIPS IN SCALE  
1984
8  
29-31
NA TECHNIQUE
 
TAKING OFF BOAT LINES
HANCOCK,CLIFFORD H
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1981
27
195-203  
NA BOAT
 
TAKING LINES OFF AN EXISTING MODELS - A MEDIUM TECH SOLUTION   
PARISER,DANIEL
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1995
40
128-131  
17TH YACHT NA TIP TECHNIQUE
 
 

Here is what I have thru 1995  - my database program became obsolete and life changed - so nothing after 1995:
 
A METHOD OF TAKING THE LINES OFF SMALL BOATS
MACKEAN,RAY   
MODEL SHIPWRIGHT
1990
74
40-44
NA BOAT TECHNIQUE
 
TAKING OFF LINES
RUBIN,NORMAN N
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1971
18
16-18   
TIP NA  
 
A METHOD FOR TAKING THE LINES OFF A HALF-MODEL
SCHOCK,EDSON
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1971
18
225-228  
TECHNIQUE NA
 
AN EXPERIMENT IN TAKING OFF LINES
WEGNER,DANA M
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1974
20
149-155  
TIP TECHNIQUE NA
 
TAKING OFF HULL LINES
NEVARD,LANCE  
SHIPS IN SCALE  
1984
8  
29-31
NA TECHNIQUE
 
TAKING OFF BOAT LINES
HANCOCK,CLIFFORD H
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1981
27
195-203  
NA BOAT
 
TAKING LINES OFF AN EXISTING MODELS - A MEDIUM TECH SOLUTION   
PARISER,DANIEL
NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1995
40
128-131  
17TH YACHT NA TIP TECHNIQUE
 
 

You wrote "scanner".    Since you are only doing this the one time, I am suggesting that low tech and more time consuming may be a more practical option.
Now that I re-read what I wrote - maybe "L" shape is more accurate. The boat gets in the way of the inside leg of a "U".  Maybe just high enough to butt against the keel.
 
Look at a set of lines for any vessel.  Profile,  Plane (WL),  Body . 
Now, for traditional POF - the Body plan is almost irrelevant.  The most important is WL.   The profile has the buttock lines - which are only really useful at the ends.
 
The Body plan is the cross section at each station. *   The stations are the midline of a bend.  (A bend is a pair of frames with overlapping butts.)  A Hahn style framing (plot the outside shape of every other bend) does not need the shape at the midline.  A loft every frame method can use a station shape - but there are 200-400 shapes and maybe 24 station shapes - so only a little helpful.
 
For a boat, built using a mold plug,   The Body plan is 90% of what is needed.   You need to replicate the Body plan - using as many station intervals as you think that you will need. 
You need a jig to measure the cross section at every station.   A wooden X-Y graph.  Like a piece of graph paper- but 3D.   And able to move along the Z axis.    The keel is X=0  Y=0.     You need to measure X at Y=1',  Y=2' , Y=3'......     maybe at 6" intervals is you are compulsive.   You need a fixed, known distance Y  outside the widest part of the hull - so that the graph will fit.   The longer than a  yard stick (with a line level bubble) sits at Y=1' and how far it is from the keel is the X value there.  You could drive a fence post at every station interval, but a movable jig seems more practical.
 
 
* The mold loft used the Body plan.  They expanded the 1:48 drawing to a 1:1 chalk line on the floor of a barn sized room.  Made patterns from that shape and added marks for the lines of the frames between the stations.  200 patterns - one for each frame - would have been insane.  Besides, the shipwrights that actually shaped the frames would not have been pleased about being told how to do their jobs by the mold loft gang.  Now, when frames became iron and then steel, an adz does not work so well. (I use a method that mimics the mold loft.)
 

Micha,
 
Ask Rassy for a table of offsets.  - it is not an America's Cup candidate. 
 
High tech is not necessary.  A jig made from 2x4's  - A "U" shape (without the rounded corners)  to site the keel and be perp. and a sliding yard stick. 
Get the NRJ CD's and find the older articles on taking off lines from a half hull model.  Except getting a pantograph tracing of the cross section curve
would be too large (unless you figure a way to make an actual reducing pantograph of it).  Or, or .  do they make laser line levels that measure the distance?
Then it is just a matter of writing down some numbers show on a screen -  like the stick version without the interpolation.
 
In your place, I would just go to school on all this - making sure my bites were not too ambitious and then when I felt confident enough to scratch build a modern luxury yacht model, pick one that does have available lines.  Then show Magnus Rassy the celebration of his design that he missed.  If you have not caught an entirely different bug - after you have gotten a deeper view of the possibilities in all this. 

You wrote "scanner".    Since you are only doing this the one time, I am suggesting that low tech and more time consuming may be a more practical option.
Now that I re-read what I wrote - maybe "L" shape is more accurate. The boat gets in the way of the inside leg of a "U".  Maybe just high enough to butt against the keel.
 
Look at a set of lines for any vessel.  Profile,  Plane (WL),  Body . 
Now, for traditional POF - the Body plan is almost irrelevant.  The most important is WL.   The profile has the buttock lines - which are only really useful at the ends.
 
The Body plan is the cross section at each station. *   The stations are the midline of a bend.  (A bend is a pair of frames with overlapping butts.)  A Hahn style framing (plot the outside shape of every other bend) does not need the shape at the midline.  A loft every frame method can use a station shape - but there are 200-400 shapes and maybe 24 station shapes - so only a little helpful.
 
For a boat, built using a mold plug,   The Body plan is 90% of what is needed.   You need to replicate the Body plan - using as many station intervals as you think that you will need. 
You need a jig to measure the cross section at every station.   A wooden X-Y graph.  Like a piece of graph paper- but 3D.   And able to move along the Z axis.    The keel is X=0  Y=0.     You need to measure X at Y=1',  Y=2' , Y=3'......     maybe at 6" intervals is you are compulsive.   You need a fixed, known distance Y  outside the widest part of the hull - so that the graph will fit.   The longer than a  yard stick (with a line level bubble) sits at Y=1' and how far it is from the keel is the X value there.  You could drive a fence post at every station interval, but a movable jig seems more practical.
 
 
* The mold loft used the Body plan.  They expanded the 1:48 drawing to a 1:1 chalk line on the floor of a barn sized room.  Made patterns from that shape and added marks for the lines of the frames between the stations.  200 patterns - one for each frame - would have been insane.  Besides, the shipwrights that actually shaped the frames would not have been pleased about being told how to do their jobs by the mold loft gang.  Now, when frames became iron and then steel, an adz does not work so well. (I use a method that mimics the mold loft.)
 

I checked on Amazon.   AM Arrowmax  offers a small spectrum  of variations,  none of which intersect with my needs. Mostly it is mutually exclusive for the 50-80 wire gauge drill bit function.  Speeds and tool attachment are discordant. The models with a chuck that allows infinite diameter bits do not have the speeds that I require.  The ones with the speed have a fixed size insert.  There is even one with 10,000 to 30,000 RPM if burning a hole instead of drilling one is an aim.
 
The drill bit sets with a fixed size base are usually carbide - not HSS.  Most of what we do involves the possibility of "Parkinson-like" twitches.  HSS has flex, carbide does not.
 
Reading the reviews - red flags - lots of red flags - the quality of the materials and the gauges of the wires - I fear planned obsolescence and short term obsolescence at that.
 
 

Micha,
 
Ask Rassy for a table of offsets.  - it is not an America's Cup candidate. 
 
High tech is not necessary.  A jig made from 2x4's  - A "U" shape (without the rounded corners)  to site the keel and be perp. and a sliding yard stick. 
Get the NRJ CD's and find the older articles on taking off lines from a half hull model.  Except getting a pantograph tracing of the cross section curve
would be too large (unless you figure a way to make an actual reducing pantograph of it).  Or, or .  do they make laser line levels that measure the distance?
Then it is just a matter of writing down some numbers show on a screen -  like the stick version without the interpolation.
 
In your place, I would just go to school on all this - making sure my bites were not too ambitious and then when I felt confident enough to scratch build a modern luxury yacht model, pick one that does have available lines.  Then show Magnus Rassy the celebration of his design that he missed.  If you have not caught an entirely different bug - after you have gotten a deeper view of the possibilities in all this. 

I checked on Amazon.   AM Arrowmax  offers a small spectrum  of variations,  none of which intersect with my needs. Mostly it is mutually exclusive for the 50-80 wire gauge drill bit function.  Speeds and tool attachment are discordant. The models with a chuck that allows infinite diameter bits do not have the speeds that I require.  The ones with the speed have a fixed size insert.  There is even one with 10,000 to 30,000 RPM if burning a hole instead of drilling one is an aim.
 
The drill bit sets with a fixed size base are usually carbide - not HSS.  Most of what we do involves the possibility of "Parkinson-like" twitches.  HSS has flex, carbide does not.
 
Reading the reviews - red flags - lots of red flags - the quality of the materials and the gauges of the wires - I fear planned obsolescence and short term obsolescence at that.
 
 

@tom q vaxy  Do you have a power saw?  If so, why not use Pine?
2x4's are less expensive.  Home improvement and builder's supplies outlets have 1.5x3.5 studs (2x4)  and 0.75x3.5 (1x4) furring strips.
 
At Home Depot it could be Pine or Spruce or Fir  - go for Pine, no sap,  minimum knots
 
Pine does not roll, crush, or tear like Balsa

I checked on Amazon.   AM Arrowmax  offers a small spectrum  of variations,  none of which intersect with my needs. Mostly it is mutually exclusive for the 50-80 wire gauge drill bit function.  Speeds and tool attachment are discordant. The models with a chuck that allows infinite diameter bits do not have the speeds that I require.  The ones with the speed have a fixed size insert.  There is even one with 10,000 to 30,000 RPM if burning a hole instead of drilling one is an aim.
 
The drill bit sets with a fixed size base are usually carbide - not HSS.  Most of what we do involves the possibility of "Parkinson-like" twitches.  HSS has flex, carbide does not.
 
Reading the reviews - red flags - lots of red flags - the quality of the materials and the gauges of the wires - I fear planned obsolescence and short term obsolescence at that.
 
 

Where did the 3D model come from?
Can you contact the one in possession of it?
You want about 12  X-Y cross sections at known positions.  0 rotation
You want 1  X-Z   0 rotation
If you chose the more sane option of a plane view lift model
You want Y-Z slices at about 1/4"  intervals at your model's scale. 
 
If you go with a mold plug,  the 12 (or more) cross sections can be the exact plug shapes.
Hold the plug sections in place using Bamboo dowels and each can be removed individually when their job is done.
If you use a new cotton pillow case and Titebond III in multi layers as the hull - Saran Wrap over the plug will void the sticking problem,
 

@tom q vaxy  Do you have a power saw?  If so, why not use Pine?
2x4's are less expensive.  Home improvement and builder's supplies outlets have 1.5x3.5 studs (2x4)  and 0.75x3.5 (1x4) furring strips.
 
At Home Depot it could be Pine or Spruce or Fir  - go for Pine, no sap,  minimum knots
 
Pine does not roll, crush, or tear like Balsa

@tom q vaxy  Do you have a power saw?  If so, why not use Pine?
2x4's are less expensive.  Home improvement and builder's supplies outlets have 1.5x3.5 studs (2x4)  and 0.75x3.5 (1x4) furring strips.
 
At Home Depot it could be Pine or Spruce or Fir  - go for Pine, no sap,  minimum knots
 
Pine does not roll, crush, or tear like Balsa

It is also possible that knowledge and lessons learned give you the power and determination to persevere , when not having that chip would have lead to the easy path.
If you did it twice, that would be troubling.   At least you are not a song writer who signed over the rights to a song whose royalties could have supported you for the rest of your life.

The situation is probably even worse.  The veneer has a high probability of being rotary cut.  Think of a blade producing a continuous sheet of wood that resembles paper towels coming off of a roll.   The wood came from a curved environment and will always "want" to go back to that cupped conformation.  Wetting, pressing, ironing will just be a futile fight against Mother Nature.
Even at a distance, that hideous yellow stuff looks like crap.  It will likely not be the joy to work that an appropriate species is.
It appears that the ZHL episode was not the aberration that I was hoping it was.  

For what it's worth, I would never use basswood for anything but filler.  When I was working on the NRG planking half hull, I had alot of problems with the basswood planking.  I switched to yellow cedar and was much happier.  It is relatively inexpensive and soft like basswood, but slightly harder.  I find it works better than BW and finishes VERY nicely.

Sweet Cherry Prunus avium is more dense than Black Cherry Prunus serotina.
Only birds eat the fruit of Black Cherry as far as I know.  It is mostly the stone, so eating it would be more work than it is worth.  It is used to make wild cherry syrup - an old vehicle for compounded Rx liquids - mainly pediatric.  The syrup is made from the bark, not the fruit.
I do not consider Black Cherry wood to be significantly hard.  It is easy to work and serious sanding can get you into trouble much more quickly than with Hard Maple.
Black Cherry is not very far up my list of wood species for fine detail carving.