Jaager

There is a video about blade tracking.  I am pretty sure that the link is here - somewhere.  The old school directions had the crown of the top wheel just behind the gullet.  This guy have the teeth at the crown.  I have had no wandering problems once I started tracking his way.   Well, at least no problem until the blade started getting dull.  I found that I may as well mount a new blade at that point and save wood because the blade is due to break.
 
An unfortunate factor with benchtop bandsaws is the limited choice in available blades,  If you have a choice, fewer teeth per inch is the way to go.  With the big saws I can get 3 or 4 TPI.  Resawing stock of any significant thickness will fill fine teeth quickly when the blade is not cutting but is burnishing - mostly bad things happen.  With no choice and too fine a blade, a slooooow feed is a way to get the teeth  out of the stock before they fill completely.
 
About the Orange farmer - I have a theory that I would try were I in a position to utilize it.  There are county ag. agents.  They may know most if not all of the farmers in their zone.  They may know who and where older non productive or recently downed trees can be found.  I would try to find old Apple trees that way.  Tree service companies may also be a source.  

Thus far this is an extraordinary effort and represents what must be a significant number of hours.
 
Looking at the three completed members of the lost fleet, it became clear to me that a great gift was given to the US Navy with their loss.  The liners and the frigates were obsolete.  They were too large and slow to be of real use for the functions needed for next four years  The crew and supplies would have been far more costly than any benefit they could provide.   The Germantown, Plymouth, and Dolphin were a real loss.  This way , instead of Congress being negative  about paying for replacements because the Navy have to scrap them, they got sympathy.  The Merrimack by having a engine was something of a loss, but her size versus the job - blockade and chasing smugglers was a bit too large.

Apologies!
 
http://www.veniceboats.com/it-pubblicazioni-catalogo-libri.htm
 

There is a video about blade tracking.  I am pretty sure that the link is here - somewhere.  The old school directions had the crown of the top wheel just behind the gullet.  This guy have the teeth at the crown.  I have had no wandering problems once I started tracking his way.   Well, at least no problem until the blade started getting dull.  I found that I may as well mount a new blade at that point and save wood because the blade is due to break.
 
An unfortunate factor with benchtop bandsaws is the limited choice in available blades,  If you have a choice, fewer teeth per inch is the way to go.  With the big saws I can get 3 or 4 TPI.  Resawing stock of any significant thickness will fill fine teeth quickly when the blade is not cutting but is burnishing - mostly bad things happen.  With no choice and too fine a blade, a slooooow feed is a way to get the teeth  out of the stock before they fill completely.
 
About the Orange farmer - I have a theory that I would try were I in a position to utilize it.  There are county ag. agents.  They may know most if not all of the farmers in their zone.  They may know who and where older non productive or recently downed trees can be found.  I would try to find old Apple trees that way.  Tree service companies may also be a source.  

Would it be possible that the link be provided?

There is a video about blade tracking.  I am pretty sure that the link is here - somewhere.  The old school directions had the crown of the top wheel just behind the gullet.  This guy have the teeth at the crown.  I have had no wandering problems once I started tracking his way.   Well, at least no problem until the blade started getting dull.  I found that I may as well mount a new blade at that point and save wood because the blade is due to break.
 
An unfortunate factor with benchtop bandsaws is the limited choice in available blades,  If you have a choice, fewer teeth per inch is the way to go.  With the big saws I can get 3 or 4 TPI.  Resawing stock of any significant thickness will fill fine teeth quickly when the blade is not cutting but is burnishing - mostly bad things happen.  With no choice and too fine a blade, a slooooow feed is a way to get the teeth  out of the stock before they fill completely.
 
About the Orange farmer - I have a theory that I would try were I in a position to utilize it.  There are county ag. agents.  They may know most if not all of the farmers in their zone.  They may know who and where older non productive or recently downed trees can be found.  I would try to find old Apple trees that way.  Tree service companies may also be a source.  

Would it be possible that the link be provided?

I doubt that it has any relevance for lower Florida,  but if I was back in central Kentucky, younger, and had the tools I have now, I would see about trying to accumulate a warehouse size supply of Apple billets.
 
Anthony,  That Castello is dear in both price and the vanishing prospect of obtaining more.  A thought - you might consider reserving it for making blocks and deck furniture - .
I suggest getting some Hard Maple to get practice on ripping.  It is as close as you are likely to come to being as hard as Castello,  you can get as much as you want and the cost is reasonable.  Get lots of practice using the Maple.  And who knows, you may come to like it.  Save the rare expensive wood for a magnum opus .

I doubt that it has any relevance for lower Florida,  but if I was back in central Kentucky, younger, and had the tools I have now, I would see about trying to accumulate a warehouse size supply of Apple billets.
 
Anthony,  That Castello is dear in both price and the vanishing prospect of obtaining more.  A thought - you might consider reserving it for making blocks and deck furniture - .
I suggest getting some Hard Maple to get practice on ripping.  It is as close as you are likely to come to being as hard as Castello,  you can get as much as you want and the cost is reasonable.  Get lots of practice using the Maple.  And who knows, you may come to like it.  Save the rare expensive wood for a magnum opus .

Mike, 
 
I have no problem at all with you disagreeing about this. 
You are offering an alternative to becoming a solo sawmill for Europe.   I have the hope that by waving the home sawmill red flag,  a similar alternative for North America will make an appearance and refute me. This is an often asked question, here.  I do not recall reading an easy answer to it.  I am expressing what I feel is a realistic view of what is involved with scratch POF - at least here in North America.  I totally support the ambition for scratch POF.  I wish the that the barrier into it was a low one.  I find the wiederholen Sie das , (or singing Kathlene over the ship's intercom) aspect of kits to be ....wearing.  
 
The whole solo sawmill option is really a distraction from our primary goal.   The advantages are an increase in the number of species of wood that can be used and that after several hulls, the investment in tools is recovered -  as long as you leave your man hours expended out of the equation. It also offers some comfort to those of us who are driven to be as self sufficient as is possible.  But, it is impossible to be compensated at an hourly rate that is commensurate with that for the necessary skill level to do this.  Including that factor would probably keep any recouping of expenditure impossible.  But, since the alternative use of that time would not likely be a money making activity, it probably should be excluded.
 
You have access to one of the first line species and in a form that is readily usable.  From some build logs  it seems that Pear is not difficult to source in Europe.  I trust that you appreciate your good fortune with that.  And also value those who do the work to mill it for you.  In North America, it is fast becoming a situation where it is rare to source any milled stock other than the totally awful Balsa or the merely terrible Basswood.  Its cousin Linden/Lime is about 100% better, but that is not really available here.  Pear in any form is difficult to find and the price is prohibitive.  

If you are starting with thick blanks of expensive wood (mine are 3/4" by 3" by 24"). and need to rip these down to more suitable thicknesses, I agree it is less wasteful to use a bandsaw, then use a thickness sander like the Byrnes to clean up.  Use a broad blade used for resawing, like the 1/2" Wood Mizer. I gang up feather blocks pressing against a fence for the entire width of the blank; keeps things parallel.
 
Using a table saw safely with these small pieces, in my experience, requires using a jointer to get a straight face to put against the fence, which is another source of waste. A bandsaw deals pretty well with a not perfect face against the fence, particularly if you are later thickness sanding. 
 
Mark

That is not an economical choice.
POF in scales 1:72 or larger will require stock of species that are almost never available precut.  The degree of waste is relatively high and thus expensive. The required thicknesses are often several or many different.  If you are doing it Hahn style - gluing up the frame stock, fixing the frame pattern to that and cutting a complete frame from that, the waste will exceed the fraction actually used.   The practical way is to be your own mill.
A quick search of your area found this example  Wood-Chip Marine Lumber & Supplies  They advertise three appropriate species  Black Cherry  4/4 and 8/4  Hard Maple  4/4 and 8/4 and for hidden or painted parts Yellow Poplar 4/4 and 8/4.   This is rough cut, so the yield is higher than finish planed.  You will need a Byrnes Thickness Sander (or equivalent). 
Getting from rough to something that the sander can use requires a saw.  A 14" bandsaw is much much better, safer and more efficient than a tablesaw -
If you do not have a big boy bandsaw, look for a cabinet shop, trade school, or local wood worker that has one and work a deal.  If it is a civilian, bring your own blades of the required size.  Lenox Diemaster 2 bimetal  1/2" 3 TPI are the sweet spot for blade life and quality of cut surface.
If you are doing miniature scales,  unless you luck into an affordable supply of Castillo or Pear,  you probably have to harvest your own stock.  Fortunately you are in citrus country.  Orange and probably Lemon should work well as also should Loquot.   

You might try setting your bandsaw up to rip this.  With a limited quantity of expensive wood, your going to lose at least 1/8in on each pass through your table saw.  There are tutorials on the web on using your bandsaw for ripping.

Mike, 
 
I have no problem at all with you disagreeing about this. 
You are offering an alternative to becoming a solo sawmill for Europe.   I have the hope that by waving the home sawmill red flag,  a similar alternative for North America will make an appearance and refute me. This is an often asked question, here.  I do not recall reading an easy answer to it.  I am expressing what I feel is a realistic view of what is involved with scratch POF - at least here in North America.  I totally support the ambition for scratch POF.  I wish the that the barrier into it was a low one.  I find the wiederholen Sie das , (or singing Kathlene over the ship's intercom) aspect of kits to be ....wearing.  
 
The whole solo sawmill option is really a distraction from our primary goal.   The advantages are an increase in the number of species of wood that can be used and that after several hulls, the investment in tools is recovered -  as long as you leave your man hours expended out of the equation. It also offers some comfort to those of us who are driven to be as self sufficient as is possible.  But, it is impossible to be compensated at an hourly rate that is commensurate with that for the necessary skill level to do this.  Including that factor would probably keep any recouping of expenditure impossible.  But, since the alternative use of that time would not likely be a money making activity, it probably should be excluded.
 
You have access to one of the first line species and in a form that is readily usable.  From some build logs  it seems that Pear is not difficult to source in Europe.  I trust that you appreciate your good fortune with that.  And also value those who do the work to mill it for you.  In North America, it is fast becoming a situation where it is rare to source any milled stock other than the totally awful Balsa or the merely terrible Basswood.  Its cousin Linden/Lime is about 100% better, but that is not really available here.  Pear in any form is difficult to find and the price is prohibitive.  

Thanks for the tip! I'll pass on the premixed hide glue.
 
Strongly agree on the drawbacks of PVA adhesives acidity, as does the National Park Service in their conservation standards. (See: https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/18-02.pdf )  I've repaired "lead bloom" issues by providing case ventilation and it seems to have worked, for the last 20 years or so, at least. At present, short of real hide glue, PVA adhesive seems to be a necessary evil. I expect minimizing PVA to small amounts used in model construction serves to minimize the problem. For that reason, I use clear shellac for stiffening lines and sail material, not thinned PVA adhesive. Case ventilation is essential and not just for lead oxidation prevention. The acid from whatever source slowly deteriorates everything, particularly fiber rigging and sail material.
 
While on the subject of acidic outgassing and display cases,  based on the professional literature, I only use UV-sheilding picture frame glass for display cases and avoid all plastics in case construction at all costs due to their potential acidic outgassing characteristics. High quality plastic glazing materials (e.g. Perspex, Plexiglas, Lucite) are reportedly inert, but I'm not taking any chances that what I'm getting is "the good stuff." (Besides, as a matter of taste, I prefer the more traditional look of a wooden or metal framed glass case.) (See: https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/08-05.pdf ; See also: https://ccaha.org/resources/selecting-materials-storage-and-display )

That is not an economical choice.
POF in scales 1:72 or larger will require stock of species that are almost never available precut.  The degree of waste is relatively high and thus expensive. The required thicknesses are often several or many different.  If you are doing it Hahn style - gluing up the frame stock, fixing the frame pattern to that and cutting a complete frame from that, the waste will exceed the fraction actually used.   The practical way is to be your own mill.
A quick search of your area found this example  Wood-Chip Marine Lumber & Supplies  They advertise three appropriate species  Black Cherry  4/4 and 8/4  Hard Maple  4/4 and 8/4 and for hidden or painted parts Yellow Poplar 4/4 and 8/4.   This is rough cut, so the yield is higher than finish planed.  You will need a Byrnes Thickness Sander (or equivalent). 
Getting from rough to something that the sander can use requires a saw.  A 14" bandsaw is much much better, safer and more efficient than a tablesaw -
If you do not have a big boy bandsaw, look for a cabinet shop, trade school, or local wood worker that has one and work a deal.  If it is a civilian, bring your own blades of the required size.  Lenox Diemaster 2 bimetal  1/2" 3 TPI are the sweet spot for blade life and quality of cut surface.
If you are doing miniature scales,  unless you luck into an affordable supply of Castillo or Pear,  you probably have to harvest your own stock.  Fortunately you are in citrus country.  Orange and probably Lemon should work well as also should Loquot.   

That is not an economical choice.
POF in scales 1:72 or larger will require stock of species that are almost never available precut.  The degree of waste is relatively high and thus expensive. The required thicknesses are often several or many different.  If you are doing it Hahn style - gluing up the frame stock, fixing the frame pattern to that and cutting a complete frame from that, the waste will exceed the fraction actually used.   The practical way is to be your own mill.
A quick search of your area found this example  Wood-Chip Marine Lumber & Supplies  They advertise three appropriate species  Black Cherry  4/4 and 8/4  Hard Maple  4/4 and 8/4 and for hidden or painted parts Yellow Poplar 4/4 and 8/4.   This is rough cut, so the yield is higher than finish planed.  You will need a Byrnes Thickness Sander (or equivalent). 
Getting from rough to something that the sander can use requires a saw.  A 14" bandsaw is much much better, safer and more efficient than a tablesaw -
If you do not have a big boy bandsaw, look for a cabinet shop, trade school, or local wood worker that has one and work a deal.  If it is a civilian, bring your own blades of the required size.  Lenox Diemaster 2 bimetal  1/2" 3 TPI are the sweet spot for blade life and quality of cut surface.
If you are doing miniature scales,  unless you luck into an affordable supply of Castillo or Pear,  you probably have to harvest your own stock.  Fortunately you are in citrus country.  Orange and probably Lemon should work well as also should Loquot.   

You could check The Wood Database.  The factor that is pertinent is: shrinkage.   Ambient air changes in moisture content are probably only a small fraction of what the moisture concentration would need to be to match what green wood would have to be.  For the most part, change in length is too small to be significant.  A house framing involves intermittent timbers with nothing to push against. Any plywood or OSB sheathing has any length or width changes subject to being cancelled out because of the alternate orientation of layers.  The thickness does probably change with the environment.
 
As for planking in a model, I am thinking that planking size changes would be subject to some restraint if any tangential increase due to increased moisture was met by a resistance force that was greater than the force that internal water can exert.  Side by side planks pushing against each other may keep a limit on how much water could enter.  It may not move as a unit.  In POF, the frames that the planks are bonded to  are longitudinal to the direction that the planks "want" to move.  This would resist any movement.  Edge glue between planks may be subject to being squeezing, but a tight bond would have very little glue to be squeezed.  
 
It was a material used well before my time, but would hot pot hide glue not be an even more archival favorable bonding material than even PVA?  I suspect that it is way more trouble to use than any advantages it would offer.  It is easily reversible by exposing the bond to hot ethanol.  The protein that forms the bond is it not dissolved.  It is completely denatured, forming small balls that are easily removed.
 
I consider CA to be a completely no go material because along with its chemically toxic vapor, questionable half life, and weakness at resisting sheer forces - in my very limited experience with it,  I found that once opened, a bottle quickly dried out.
 
I am also somewhat dismayed by the apparent popularity and enthusiasm for wipe-on poly.  To my eye, it is too plastic looking as well as tending to produce a layer that is too thick.

Bob,
I remember reading a negative review of the Franklin (Titebond) Liquid Hide Glue here.  A different product Old Brown Glue got higher marks.  A problem with a premixed hide glue is the relatively high water concentration.  I used the Franklin product as a temporary bonding agent, but it did not do what I wished.  It was mostly because of the way I applied it.  I was too through with the application.  It held too well.  Spot application probably would have held. I totally covered both surfaces with a thin layer - the same as I do with PVA.  A wicking spacer of newspaper to allow the ethanol debonder to penetrate the frame thickness probably would have helped. 
 
Charles,
Hot hide glue is probably the wise choice for an archival case.  
 
PVA is very acidic.  I think it is a strong acetic acid solution.  The acid concentration is higher in the water resistant bond product.  It is high still in the waterproof bond product. 
The agent forming the bond is poly vinyl acetate.  When the polymer bond forms, acetic acid is released. As the water evaporates, liquid acetic acid is left behind.  It has a degree of volatility at room temp, it is just much less than water.  The polymerization reaction probably continues over time - possibly years.  That is probably part of the source of its continuous outgassing of acetic acid.  I think this means that the bond gets marginally stronger over time but it also probably becomes more rigid as the degree of crosslinking increases.   This means that a properly made ship model case needs adequate ventilation to evacuate the acetic acid gas as well keeping it from becoming an oven.  It also means that castings with any lead content are doomed with a PVA bonded model.

I think all of the mechanical ratline tools get a "useless junk" rating.
Better is a thick paper background with the line spacing on it.  Also a square cross section batten that is the dimension of the spacing and has a bubble level is a sort of idiot proof method of keeping spacing across uniform.   Jumping around - up/down/middle will help counter the inevitable accumulative/ creeping  error if you work from the bottom up or top down.
 

Bob,
I remember reading a negative review of the Franklin (Titebond) Liquid Hide Glue here.  A different product Old Brown Glue got higher marks.  A problem with a premixed hide glue is the relatively high water concentration.  I used the Franklin product as a temporary bonding agent, but it did not do what I wished.  It was mostly because of the way I applied it.  I was too through with the application.  It held too well.  Spot application probably would have held. I totally covered both surfaces with a thin layer - the same as I do with PVA.  A wicking spacer of newspaper to allow the ethanol debonder to penetrate the frame thickness probably would have helped. 
 
Charles,
Hot hide glue is probably the wise choice for an archival case.  
 
PVA is very acidic.  I think it is a strong acetic acid solution.  The acid concentration is higher in the water resistant bond product.  It is high still in the waterproof bond product. 
The agent forming the bond is poly vinyl acetate.  When the polymer bond forms, acetic acid is released. As the water evaporates, liquid acetic acid is left behind.  It has a degree of volatility at room temp, it is just much less than water.  The polymerization reaction probably continues over time - possibly years.  That is probably part of the source of its continuous outgassing of acetic acid.  I think this means that the bond gets marginally stronger over time but it also probably becomes more rigid as the degree of crosslinking increases.   This means that a properly made ship model case needs adequate ventilation to evacuate the acetic acid gas as well keeping it from becoming an oven.  It also means that castings with any lead content are doomed with a PVA bonded model.

You could check The Wood Database.  The factor that is pertinent is: shrinkage.   Ambient air changes in moisture content are probably only a small fraction of what the moisture concentration would need to be to match what green wood would have to be.  For the most part, change in length is too small to be significant.  A house framing involves intermittent timbers with nothing to push against. Any plywood or OSB sheathing has any length or width changes subject to being cancelled out because of the alternate orientation of layers.  The thickness does probably change with the environment.
 
As for planking in a model, I am thinking that planking size changes would be subject to some restraint if any tangential increase due to increased moisture was met by a resistance force that was greater than the force that internal water can exert.  Side by side planks pushing against each other may keep a limit on how much water could enter.  It may not move as a unit.  In POF, the frames that the planks are bonded to  are longitudinal to the direction that the planks "want" to move.  This would resist any movement.  Edge glue between planks may be subject to being squeezing, but a tight bond would have very little glue to be squeezed.  
 
It was a material used well before my time, but would hot pot hide glue not be an even more archival favorable bonding material than even PVA?  I suspect that it is way more trouble to use than any advantages it would offer.  It is easily reversible by exposing the bond to hot ethanol.  The protein that forms the bond is it not dissolved.  It is completely denatured, forming small balls that are easily removed.
 
I consider CA to be a completely no go material because along with its chemically toxic vapor, questionable half life, and weakness at resisting sheer forces - in my very limited experience with it,  I found that once opened, a bottle quickly dried out.
 
I am also somewhat dismayed by the apparent popularity and enthusiasm for wipe-on poly.  To my eye, it is too plastic looking as well as tending to produce a layer that is too thick.

You could check The Wood Database.  The factor that is pertinent is: shrinkage.   Ambient air changes in moisture content are probably only a small fraction of what the moisture concentration would need to be to match what green wood would have to be.  For the most part, change in length is too small to be significant.  A house framing involves intermittent timbers with nothing to push against. Any plywood or OSB sheathing has any length or width changes subject to being cancelled out because of the alternate orientation of layers.  The thickness does probably change with the environment.
 
As for planking in a model, I am thinking that planking size changes would be subject to some restraint if any tangential increase due to increased moisture was met by a resistance force that was greater than the force that internal water can exert.  Side by side planks pushing against each other may keep a limit on how much water could enter.  It may not move as a unit.  In POF, the frames that the planks are bonded to  are longitudinal to the direction that the planks "want" to move.  This would resist any movement.  Edge glue between planks may be subject to being squeezing, but a tight bond would have very little glue to be squeezed.  
 
It was a material used well before my time, but would hot pot hide glue not be an even more archival favorable bonding material than even PVA?  I suspect that it is way more trouble to use than any advantages it would offer.  It is easily reversible by exposing the bond to hot ethanol.  The protein that forms the bond is it not dissolved.  It is completely denatured, forming small balls that are easily removed.
 
I consider CA to be a completely no go material because along with its chemically toxic vapor, questionable half life, and weakness at resisting sheer forces - in my very limited experience with it,  I found that once opened, a bottle quickly dried out.
 
I am also somewhat dismayed by the apparent popularity and enthusiasm for wipe-on poly.  To my eye, it is too plastic looking as well as tending to produce a layer that is too thick.

Well, I think the main reason people don't add "in my opinion" disclaimers to their answers to direct questions is because they realize nobody's much interested in anybody else's opinion. Facts, yes. Opinions, no. Everybody already has opinions. They don't need any more. If somebody disagrees with someone else's statement of fact, they are free to offer evidence to the contrary, and should. That's the problem with the internet. Any fool can pontificate about anything they know nothing about and most do. (Can you say, "herd immunity?")
 
For example:
 
1. "CA is the best choice for planking a hull using Chuck’s method." That's an opinion. It needs facts to back it up. The majority of people who've used CA are adverse to its use for many sound reasons beginning with the difficulty of working with it, the fact that it soaks into wood and affects subsequent finishing results, it is not a recognized archival material, has a relatively short "working time" before it sets up, is much more difficult to un-bond than PVA, has a relatively short shelf life and a relatively high price, and so on. Your mileage may vary. At the end of the day, "best practices" dictate that all parts of a model to the extent possible should be mechanically fastened, not just glued, anyway. 
 
2.  "I have models over 25 years old done with CA that are just fine and look great." The fact that you have models done with CA that are over 25 years old is a fact. That they are just fine and look great is an opinion, or, at best, an unproven fact. It's too early to call. Let us know how they are holding up in another 75 years. The "industry standard" is a model that properly cared for should last 100 years without exhibiting any deterioration. At present, CA hasn't been around long enough to know if it lasts that well.
 
3.  "I don’t think any well built ship model survives dropping to the floor, it’s best not to do that." Now, that's a fact. Don't ask me how I know this.
 
3. (Again) "Edge gluing is not only totally unnecessary it’s also detrimental to the look of the hull." That's a fact, not an opinion. 
 
4.   "I doubt the humidity variance in most first world homes creates an issue."  Whether it does or doesn't depends upon many variables in every instance, but "first world homes" isn't one of them.   It's a fact that humidity is a factor to be considered in any fine woodworking. Frolich addresses a substantial problem he encountered with wood shrinkage in his fine book, The Art of Ship Modeling. One ignores it at their peril. It's sort of like Covid in that respect. 
 
5.  I’ll put up my nine models as examples of using CA for hulls any time." Not to worry. I don't think anybody doubts you built them with CA adhesive and they are still sticking together. See No. 2. above.
 
Many don't offer what they have to say as "just their opinion" because they have little interest in expressing their opinions. They are only interested in sharing what they know to be true. If somebody prefers to offer opinions, they should go to FaceBook.   Preferences are largely irrelevant. There's a right way and a wrong way to do most things, and then there are "preferences," which, more often than not are just excuses for doing it the wrong way.  My wife insists that loading a toilet paper roll so the paper end hangs down the back of the roll, between the roll and the wall, instead of off the front of the roll like you've probably seen in every hotel you've ever been in, is her "preference." She was not convinced when I showed her the original patent for the toilet paper roll which clearly shows the roll coming off the front and not the back. That's obviously the way it's supposed to work. So, she has her own "preference," and i have my own bathroom.  

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#