Jaager

A pin pusher is maybe theoretically a useful tool.  In practice, not so much for most of us.
 
For me, the tool that does exactly what you wish a pin pusher to do is:
 

Pin Insertion Plier
Item #: 85282
    Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
    Pin Insertion Plier
    Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
Pin Insertion Plier
Our Price $24.95
 
MM describes this as an exclusive product.

A pin pusher is maybe theoretically a useful tool.  In practice, not so much for most of us.
 
For me, the tool that does exactly what you wish a pin pusher to do is:
 

Pin Insertion Plier
Item #: 85282
    Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
    Pin Insertion Plier
    Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
Micro-Mark Pin Insertion Plier
Pin Insertion Plier
Our Price $24.95
 
MM describes this as an exclusive product.

Marcus,
Is your fleet going to be vessels from post 1860?  If they are not, A dark dark red brown may be closer to what standing rigging was like.
I just looked up the definition of Ecru -  essentially it is the color of unbleached linen.  This should pass for running rigging and dosing this with
a dark Walnut Rit dye (or similar product) for standing rigging.  This would simplify your inventory to just one color yarn (if linen) or thread if cotton.

You have something now, so if your carving never produces a satisfactory product, you can always use what you have.
As it is, you have a no lose opportunity to develop a new skill.  Buy several blocks of wood that are the appropriate species and carve.
It would be an inspiring way to begin scratch building - should that be your ultimate ambition.
 

Bill,
 
I strongly suggest that you avoid using the book illustration and order the plans from The Smithsonian.
The particulars for this specific vessel:
Page#               Plan#           Description                                        Cost
101                   HASS-18      US Revenue Cutter 1815  31 tons     10.00
 
The Processing                                                                                5.00
 
Processing  is for up to 12 sheets    I usually order  12 at one go   except that the last page is for 7 because I could not find another 5 that I wanted.
 
Smithsonian Ship Plans
P>O> Box 37012
NMAH/MRC
Washington, DC  20013
 
This vessel is a little boy.  Quicker and easier to build than some you might choose.
 
You have the spar dimensions.  Books and/or the NRJ  CD   will provide the diameter changes over distance from the mast.
 
The rigging would be standard for the time and the time is about as well documented as any.
There is even a post here that does a pretty good job of explaining schooner spars and rigging.

You have something now, so if your carving never produces a satisfactory product, you can always use what you have.
As it is, you have a no lose opportunity to develop a new skill.  Buy several blocks of wood that are the appropriate species and carve.
It would be an inspiring way to begin scratch building - should that be your ultimate ambition.
 

On my laptop the scroll bars at the right side of the screen are black and the slider and up/down buttons are dark gray - almost always nearly invisible against the black background.
 
Aside from being an asinine choice and extremely user hostile, this choice of colors makes it much more difficult to control  the movement of screen content up and down.
 
I have tried to eliminate this problem with the windows setup option - and other web pages don't have this problem, so I am guessing it was a deliberate choice of the person who designed the web pages.
 
Is there some way that we can defeat this extremely irritating color scheme and just get the web page to use the Windows default color scheme for the scroll bar?

There is a model of Centurion 1732 at the NMM that is also a solid hull that was painted as though it was Navy Board.  
It seems to me that the peak of actual Navy Board was ~1670.  The builders of the +/_ 1740  simulated Navy Board would likely have been 2 or 3 generations after the actual built up style was de rigueur.   The actual shops that built them were long gone?   The actual way to do it lost?   The sponsor was not willing to pay for the additional cost for the built up version?   The suppliers or supplies of the wood stock needed no longer existed?
 
In their Hay Day the framing style of Navy Board models probably reflected an artistic version of then then dominant (or a past and going out of style) of the actual framing of the ships they represented.   By the mid 18th century,  it was replaced by "modern" and "scientific" framing style of bends and filling frames ( with many variations on the theme ) that more or less continued until it was replaced by iron frames. 
Perhaps enough time had passed using the new framing for there to be allowed to develop a sense of nostalgia for the old and long defeated framing style?

John,
 
It looks like I completely missed what you were asking.  It did not occur to me that you wished to paint a metal casting to look like it was raw wood.   The only practical reason for a figurehead on a model to be raw wood at all, is if the builder had actually carved it from a block of wood - and wished to show that off.  As others have pointed out, in your situation pigmented covering layers should be used.    The other factors - water based paint vs oil based paint  - bright and garish vs subtle, subdued, and scale sensitive - is a matter of personal taste and you are the final arbiter of that.
 
To be glib,  I think the only way to get a convincing raw wood figurehead is to start with a block of wood and carve it yourself, using the casting as a guide.  For this sort of part,  there is a wide number of choices for wood, since among other sources pen turning stock can be used.   That stuff has a high cost per BF,  but fraction of a BF is small.

It is the tack that is important.  I bond my frame timbers using Titebond II - PVA - I shape my frames in station to station thick batches.  The station shape from the Body plan is all of the lofting I need for the outside shape.  I have a quick and simple method for getting the inside moulded shape.   I scroll cut the individual timbers - it is the least wasteful way.  Now comes the job of precisely aligning a thick section of stacked frame timers.  Vertical alignment lines in the same place on all timbers does this.  BUT, except at the dead flat no vertical line will connect the inside of all of the frames in a station to station thick section.  The bevel is usually too much.   Vertical lines outside the edges of the frame shape will do exactly what I want.  This additional width means that there is more wood to remove.  A station to station section of frame timbers is a thick layer of plywood.  It needs aggressive stock removal.   To keep the frames from being damaged and protect the edges at the spaces, I use temporary space fillers during the shaping process.  I use construction Pine now.   To keep these space fills in place during the wood removal process, I need an adhesive that will stand up to 60-80 grit sanding belt and drum force.  Then, when finished, I need it to release/ reverse so that I can punch out the filler Pine.  The solvent to remove it must not affect a PVA bond.  I tried Duco = acetone does not affect PVA.  Duco did not provide the shear hold strength that I needed.  I tried liquid hide glue - heat + EtOH totally denatures the protein.  It holds like a champ, but the frame thickness makes it almost impossible to get sufficient heat to the glue in the middle without cooking the actual frame timbers surface.   Scotch Perm Double Stick tape holds  and solvents weaken it enough to allow the Pine to be punched out.  To hold, it needs pressure.  This has residual adhesive staying with the frame timer surface.  It is a narrow gap.  It is a pain to get at.   For the hold needed, it helps to burnish one side of the tape down.  I now know that it is a bad idea to do the burnishing on the frame Maple instead of the spacer Pine.  My system had the tape burnished to the Maple on one side of the spacer and burnished to the Pine on the other.   The tape went with the burnished side.  The Maple is clean on one side and gummy on the other.  I also had to use a #11 blade to work the burnished tape off the Maple.  It was difficult to see the residual too.   Solvent and a scrapper eventually cleans it up.   It is just that there a whole lot of separate open spaces between the frames of a 60 gun ship's hull.  A gum rubbing crepe piece may do as well as a #11 scrapper but them's a tight space however I do it. 
This as been an unwelcome surprise and I just needed to vent.
I have not found a "magic" strong but instantly reversible adhesive so far.

I see the issue more clearly now. If you cut the crêpe rubber to the width of the openings between the frame elements or a whisker less, that should work.

The old General version had an end that was a tad larger, smoother edges and had less resistance to rotation.
The bean counters who made the design less expensive to manufacture were morons.

John,
 
It looks like I completely missed what you were asking.  It did not occur to me that you wished to paint a metal casting to look like it was raw wood.   The only practical reason for a figurehead on a model to be raw wood at all, is if the builder had actually carved it from a block of wood - and wished to show that off.  As others have pointed out, in your situation pigmented covering layers should be used.    The other factors - water based paint vs oil based paint  - bright and garish vs subtle, subdued, and scale sensitive - is a matter of personal taste and you are the final arbiter of that.
 
To be glib,  I think the only way to get a convincing raw wood figurehead is to start with a block of wood and carve it yourself, using the casting as a guide.  For this sort of part,  there is a wide number of choices for wood, since among other sources pen turning stock can be used.   That stuff has a high cost per BF,  but fraction of a BF is small.

John,
 
It looks like I completely missed what you were asking.  It did not occur to me that you wished to paint a metal casting to look like it was raw wood.   The only practical reason for a figurehead on a model to be raw wood at all, is if the builder had actually carved it from a block of wood - and wished to show that off.  As others have pointed out, in your situation pigmented covering layers should be used.    The other factors - water based paint vs oil based paint  - bright and garish vs subtle, subdued, and scale sensitive - is a matter of personal taste and you are the final arbiter of that.
 
To be glib,  I think the only way to get a convincing raw wood figurehead is to start with a block of wood and carve it yourself, using the casting as a guide.  For this sort of part,  there is a wide number of choices for wood, since among other sources pen turning stock can be used.   That stuff has a high cost per BF,  but fraction of a BF is small.

Would not the core calculation be: F = mVV? 
The surface area that the force acted on would be an absolute bear to determine.  It would also probably be dynamic, with the effective sail area adapting and changing with differences in force.  I can imagine that the complexity exceeds any practical utility for a formula in predicting a wind speed vs vessel speed.   Reverse calculations should work.  Measure the two speeds and the necessary force can be cranked out.
One factor that I keep overlooking is that a slight incremental change in wind speed can have a significant effect on vessel speed. Why the frantic and continuous changes in sail area and sail angle was necessary when wind speed was above a critical value.  And also why a sudden and unfortunate change in wind direction could roll a vessel with a poor design past the point where it could right itself.

I am still uncertain as to the way to construct the visible part of the gun ports. 
That is a ways off. 
 
I am taking a break because I can find no simple way to remove the Scotch Tape adhesive from the frame openings so that I can shellac them.  It resists Naphtha, Lacquer thinner,  Heptane,  EtOH,  IsopOH,  but Mineral Spirits seemed to do more than the others on a quick test.  I know now that I should have only burnished the tape on the Pine filler and not the Maple frames.   Now needs to return inspiration and determination - before I am seduced by another hull to frame..

I am still uncertain as to the way to construct the visible part of the gun ports. 
That is a ways off. 
 
I am taking a break because I can find no simple way to remove the Scotch Tape adhesive from the frame openings so that I can shellac them.  It resists Naphtha, Lacquer thinner,  Heptane,  EtOH,  IsopOH,  but Mineral Spirits seemed to do more than the others on a quick test.  I know now that I should have only burnished the tape on the Pine filler and not the Maple frames.   Now needs to return inspiration and determination - before I am seduced by another hull to frame..

Would not the core calculation be: F = mVV? 
The surface area that the force acted on would be an absolute bear to determine.  It would also probably be dynamic, with the effective sail area adapting and changing with differences in force.  I can imagine that the complexity exceeds any practical utility for a formula in predicting a wind speed vs vessel speed.   Reverse calculations should work.  Measure the two speeds and the necessary force can be cranked out.
One factor that I keep overlooking is that a slight incremental change in wind speed can have a significant effect on vessel speed. Why the frantic and continuous changes in sail area and sail angle was necessary when wind speed was above a critical value.  And also why a sudden and unfortunate change in wind direction could roll a vessel with a poor design past the point where it could right itself.

Would not the core calculation be: F = mVV? 
The surface area that the force acted on would be an absolute bear to determine.  It would also probably be dynamic, with the effective sail area adapting and changing with differences in force.  I can imagine that the complexity exceeds any practical utility for a formula in predicting a wind speed vs vessel speed.   Reverse calculations should work.  Measure the two speeds and the necessary force can be cranked out.
One factor that I keep overlooking is that a slight incremental change in wind speed can have a significant effect on vessel speed. Why the frantic and continuous changes in sail area and sail angle was necessary when wind speed was above a critical value.  And also why a sudden and unfortunate change in wind direction could roll a vessel with a poor design past the point where it could right itself.

There is always the option to build your own.
Were you in the US, I would say that this option would probably not be less expensive than a Byrnes sander when all factors are summed.
 
The key factors:
Go quality.
Use a large enough motor.   1/3 HP is the sweet spot. 1/2 HP tends to be heavy and bulky.
A reversible motor is NOT needed.  Unless you also want it to be a medieval siege engine. 
DO NOT enclose the motor!  Sanding is a lot of work for a motor.  Work = heat.  As much air flow as possible!
The drum holding the sanding medium needs to have a large enough diameter - somewhere around 3 inches - before the medium was available as continuous cloth backed rolls, the width of commercial sanding sheets set the diameter.
added:  The drum speed should be ~1700 rpm -  faster and the wood burns - slower is slower -
that is a common speed for 1/3 HP motors and 1:1 on pulleys is easy.
Having a mechanical grip on the roll is way more convenient than using an adhesive to hold the medium.
A dead flat table that stays that way is absolutely necessary.
A reliable and micro adjustable gap set and hold mechanism is a must.
A dust extraction hood is absolutely needed, but no big deal.  I made mine using three layers of Amazon box cardboard, liberal PVA between the layers, 1/4" square internal corner braces, and duct tape. 
A kludge sander will sort of work for a time, but will ultimately be a source of frustration.
 

There is always the option to build your own.
Were you in the US, I would say that this option would probably not be less expensive than a Byrnes sander when all factors are summed.
 
The key factors:
Go quality.
Use a large enough motor.   1/3 HP is the sweet spot. 1/2 HP tends to be heavy and bulky.
A reversible motor is NOT needed.  Unless you also want it to be a medieval siege engine. 
DO NOT enclose the motor!  Sanding is a lot of work for a motor.  Work = heat.  As much air flow as possible!
The drum holding the sanding medium needs to have a large enough diameter - somewhere around 3 inches - before the medium was available as continuous cloth backed rolls, the width of commercial sanding sheets set the diameter.
added:  The drum speed should be ~1700 rpm -  faster and the wood burns - slower is slower -
that is a common speed for 1/3 HP motors and 1:1 on pulleys is easy.
Having a mechanical grip on the roll is way more convenient than using an adhesive to hold the medium.
A dead flat table that stays that way is absolutely necessary.
A reliable and micro adjustable gap set and hold mechanism is a must.
A dust extraction hood is absolutely needed, but no big deal.  I made mine using three layers of Amazon box cardboard, liberal PVA between the layers, 1/4" square internal corner braces, and duct tape. 
A kludge sander will sort of work for a time, but will ultimately be a source of frustration.
 

There is always the option to build your own.
Were you in the US, I would say that this option would probably not be less expensive than a Byrnes sander when all factors are summed.
 
The key factors:
Go quality.
Use a large enough motor.   1/3 HP is the sweet spot. 1/2 HP tends to be heavy and bulky.
A reversible motor is NOT needed.  Unless you also want it to be a medieval siege engine. 
DO NOT enclose the motor!  Sanding is a lot of work for a motor.  Work = heat.  As much air flow as possible!
The drum holding the sanding medium needs to have a large enough diameter - somewhere around 3 inches - before the medium was available as continuous cloth backed rolls, the width of commercial sanding sheets set the diameter.
added:  The drum speed should be ~1700 rpm -  faster and the wood burns - slower is slower -
that is a common speed for 1/3 HP motors and 1:1 on pulleys is easy.
Having a mechanical grip on the roll is way more convenient than using an adhesive to hold the medium.
A dead flat table that stays that way is absolutely necessary.
A reliable and micro adjustable gap set and hold mechanism is a must.
A dust extraction hood is absolutely needed, but no big deal.  I made mine using three layers of Amazon box cardboard, liberal PVA between the layers, 1/4" square internal corner braces, and duct tape. 
A kludge sander will sort of work for a time, but will ultimately be a source of frustration.
 

As far as RN framing is concerned,  you could always "eat the mushrooms!" and use one of many stylized framing alternatives.  To my eye the actual RN framing  has almost zero artistic merit.  It was purely functional, based on necessity, was not intended to be seen and looks it.
 
The French and North Americans tended to frame using all bends and a minimal number of cant frames if any. 
 
Be very careful with Hermoine.  Especially if you use the individual bend/frame patterns in the monograph.  The author of that monograph often folds in problems in his lines and lofting work.   Fixed with a little or a lot of work - depending on the ship - Hermoine = minor   St. Philippe = major.   There are more attractive French frigates in the ANCRE inventory. 

There is always the option to build your own.
Were you in the US, I would say that this option would probably not be less expensive than a Byrnes sander when all factors are summed.
 
The key factors:
Go quality.
Use a large enough motor.   1/3 HP is the sweet spot. 1/2 HP tends to be heavy and bulky.
A reversible motor is NOT needed.  Unless you also want it to be a medieval siege engine. 
DO NOT enclose the motor!  Sanding is a lot of work for a motor.  Work = heat.  As much air flow as possible!
The drum holding the sanding medium needs to have a large enough diameter - somewhere around 3 inches - before the medium was available as continuous cloth backed rolls, the width of commercial sanding sheets set the diameter.
added:  The drum speed should be ~1700 rpm -  faster and the wood burns - slower is slower -
that is a common speed for 1/3 HP motors and 1:1 on pulleys is easy.
Having a mechanical grip on the roll is way more convenient than using an adhesive to hold the medium.
A dead flat table that stays that way is absolutely necessary.
A reliable and micro adjustable gap set and hold mechanism is a must.
A dust extraction hood is absolutely needed, but no big deal.  I made mine using three layers of Amazon box cardboard, liberal PVA between the layers, 1/4" square internal corner braces, and duct tape. 
A kludge sander will sort of work for a time, but will ultimately be a source of frustration.
 

I may well be totally wrong here, but:
Acrylics have looked to me like they have a sandy/dusty, pastel look to them.
Oil based paint seems to be more crisp with a more pure color look.
 
"fat over lean" means that oils can be used over the primer that you have.
I am not sure just how color alone can change a casting into a wood carving.
I wonder if the difference is that a casting is more rounded and smoother where two planes meet.
Perhaps actual carving with very sharp chisels done very lightly will produce a more angular look?
 
You would have to touch up the primer and the oil can be a bit transparent - and - for scale effect not at all glossy - a flatting agent.  Last month, Amazon was $10-15 less expensive than West Marine for their own flattening product.