Jaager

In my imagination
Speed and cargo capacity would be the primary objectives.
Guns are heavy, expensive, and are in the way until needed. They are a negative price point.  I see no percentage in shooting it out with the RN or revenue service.
Who would they need the guns for and what would be the minimum needed to discourage that opponent.
Once these questions are answered, then the equipment should match.
  

In my imagination
Speed and cargo capacity would be the primary objectives.
Guns are heavy, expensive, and are in the way until needed. They are a negative price point.  I see no percentage in shooting it out with the RN or revenue service.
Who would they need the guns for and what would be the minimum needed to discourage that opponent.
Once these questions are answered, then the equipment should match.
  

To add to this:  if you are a chainsaw harvester,  even if you own a wood lot with Hard Maple or Black Cherry or Black Walnut,  it is highly probable that it is better to buy the rough sawn and kiln dried product from a hardwood mill or dealer.  Better to sell it to  the industry and buy it back processed.  Seasoning takes time and the wood may not play nice as it dries.  The work of a lumber jack is more than a little dangerous and most of them do it full time and know what is hazardous as a matter of experience.  For non commercially available species, this is about the only way, and if extreme care is taken , should work out OK.  But if you can get it another way, it is very false economy to play lumber jack.

Gaetan,
 
My evaluation of your list:
Not good choices, because of obvious and out of scale grain and pores   - 
Ash - all three
Hickory
Oak - both      editorial comment: is really awful  in how it looks in scale - hits you between the eyes.
 
For framing
Not good choices, because it is soft,  blunt (not crisp) edges,  fibers roll  - 
Aspen - both     ed.  a trash wood put in service for economic reasons
Basswood
Maple, soft/ especially silver
Poplar, balsam   ed.  a trash wood put in service for economic reasons
Sycamore, American  -  "lacewood"  I hate it.  When I started with this I bought a large supply because of what Underhill wrote about Sycamore.  Turns out - what the English know as Sycamore is actually a Maple that is a bit softer than Hard Maple, but close enough.  The North American Sycamore ( Platanus occidentalis  ) is different - it is similar to Black Cherry in hardness and looks close enough to Hard Maple in color to be difficult to isolate.  The fibers roll, it fuzzes when sanded or cut, it stinks when cut.  It has flecks in the grain - the "lace".
 
From what is left.
Elm, white  - I do not know
Elm, rock  -  I think I have some.  I bought what I thought was Black Cherry from a picker who got it in an estate sale.
                    it is very hard, not as unobtrusive in grain as I would wish, but acceptable.  Dulls blades.  Color is similar to aged Black Cherry
 
Elm, red  -   got a "deal" for a couple of planks from a cabinet maker in Lexington, turns out - he shed it because it was too cupped  to plane to a reasonable thickness.  I do not need it in a 4 or 8 foot length, so I salvaged more processing shorter lengths.  I advise giving cupped boards a pass if you can.  The wood is similar to Black Cherry in hardness.  Too much grain.
 
Sassafras   - way too much grain - got some with the Red Elm -  the way the grain presents, I think it will make an interesting base board, especially if dyed blue or green - it looks like ocean waves.
 
Beech,  American  -  similar to Hard Maple  except for a grain peculiarity - visible but not obvious "dashes"
Beech,  European  -  similar to Hard Maple - just a bit darker
Birch,  Yellow  -   similar to Hard Maple
 
Yellow Poplar   -  Tulip Poplar  ( Liriodendron tulipifera )  soft, easy to work, sharp edges, no visible pores,  can get really large boards  not expensive -  the problem is the color - it is streaky - nice yellow to green  to  a color that reminds me of a treated pier piling.   If you can select  out the yellow, it is great.
 
Black Cherry  -   Excellent - hard enough - has grain, but it is not obtrusive -  it will oxidize to a darker color over time - similar to steamed Pear.   it is softer than Pear  I harvested some Sweet Cherry - the wood is near identical in grain and hardness, but the color is yellow green.   Black Cherry has small inedible  fruit,  but Black Cherry syrup - pharmacy compounding - is made from the bark.  If you want darker but beautiful frames, this wood is the champion.  What you get from a lumber yard now will be light pink - color development takes time.
 
Hard Maple  -  (sugar)   about twice as hard as Black Cherry.  The closest in a commercial domestic wood to Buxus.  Not near as hard, but hard enough.  Color is similar to Buxus, but more blonde than yellow.
                       The Maple that I buy is plane cut.   I like two inch unplanned.  I slice off frame thickness boards for my thickness sander from this.  Maple has peculiar grain characteristics.  The plane cut surface has the normal faint oval pattern.  A slice perpendicular to this can yield a variety of faint patterns.  From the desired scale parallel layers, to flame, to tiger striped  -  it all depends on the distance from the pith.
The flame and tiger on the face of a frame timber is certainly not scale, but it is not bluntly obvious.  I think it adds interest.  Hard Maple is strong, holds a crisp edge,  is hard enough to keep your from getting into trouble when doing aggressive shaping. 
 
I think both Hard Maple and Black Cherry will serve your purposes excellently.  I can get either for less than $10 bf - maybe half that for Cherry, but  I sense that there is a covert inflation in play - from my increase in food costs.   I mill my own wood and I find rough, unplanned stock provides more wood - even if it does not sit against a saw fence as sweetly as planned stock.  If you like it, buy more than you think you will need.   I remember getting already dark red, clear Black Cherry from Homer Gregory Mill for $1 bf way back when.  Both the quality and cost are long gone. 

A close reading of the information supplied by the link indicates that this is a genus whose wood would not be all that useful for scale model work.
The required effort, I would spend on harvesting fruit wood.   The various citrus species possibly available should yield much better stock.  If the desert
allows for, any of the street side ornamental Pear species produce worthwhile wood stock.  If small parts such as blocks are a target,  Briar and Boxwood and Hawthorn
repay any effort spent on their harvest.

A close reading of the information supplied by the link indicates that this is a genus whose wood would not be all that useful for scale model work.
The required effort, I would spend on harvesting fruit wood.   The various citrus species possibly available should yield much better stock.  If the desert
allows for, any of the street side ornamental Pear species produce worthwhile wood stock.  If small parts such as blocks are a target,  Briar and Boxwood and Hawthorn
repay any effort spent on their harvest.

It's sure not very well known, but that doesn't mean it's not good for modeling. Backyard ornamentals can produce some great modeling wood, too small for commercial purposes, but still great for small stuff. 
 
It's basically a climbing fig and part of the large ficus family. It's not in the wood database online.  This may be of some interest::
 
https://uses.plantnet-project.org/en/Ficus_(PROSEA_Timbers)

Smugglers tended to use any craft that was fast. In the latter half of the 18th century, cutters were a common choice, and Vanguard Models has a very good kit of one in 1/64 scale. Their banner is on our home page.

Well, you're doing it the hard way. Doweling is readily available, but often it's not of a suitable wood species. Also, dowels are often not perfectly straight, nor inclined to stay that way. That's not a big problem for short lengths for pegs and such, but for a long spar, not so much.
 
What you need is a spar gauge. You can then take any size square piece of straight grained wood without any grain runout and taper it on all four sides on your table saw, or with a plane, and then use the gauge to mark the lines to plane to yield a perfectly octagonal tapered stick. After that, sanding it round is a cinch. The only catch is that it's a lot easier on a full-size spar than on a scale-size one because of the dimensions, but a modeler shouldn't have too much problem making a miniature spar gauge to suit the task. full size spar gauges use pencils to mark the lines on tapered spar stock. A modeler's spar gauge does better with sharpened nails which scribe the lines instead of penciling them on.  This web page tells you everything you need to know about making perfectly tapered round spars using a plane and sandpaper: https://www.pettigrews.org.uk/lm/page030a.htm
 

The negative reviews in regards to the Byrnes saw attachment are not a reflection on its function or how well it does it.  For the most part, they are in response to questions about which attachments to buy.  These questions generally come from relative beginners, who do not have bottomless sources of funds.  They are seeking to economize and find shipment costs more favorable when everything is all in a single shipment.   The need for an angle cut for components of a scratch ship model is not one that presents very often.  It is therefore a "yacht" type situation.
That is, if you do not know for sure that you will have a serious need for angled cut stock, then you probably will not use it enough to warrant the expense. Or, if you have to ask, then you probably do not need it. 
The ironic aspect is that it is pretty much the only accessory that is not in the "must have" category.  The sliding table is too exquisite to bye pass, although self fabrication of a more simple version is easy enough.  The oversize top is a specialist's part.  I do wish there was a digital electronic depth of cut gauge; old eyes having the need.   Also, super handy would be a version of the sliding table with a short enough right side that it would allow the fence to remain in place.

Jaager,
 
Thanks for the tip regarding specialized arbor hole adaptors.  It looks like it is time to spend some money with Jim.  I bought my saw before he offered the higher fence so I would like to add this.  The saw also needs an all round tune up.
 
Roger

Roger,
Jim sells custom made bushings that allow arbors larger than 1/2" to fit. With one of them, I can use the 1" key way slitting blades that I bought long ago.
You just have to arrange the specs with him.

The negative reviews in regards to the Byrnes saw attachment are not a reflection on its function or how well it does it.  For the most part, they are in response to questions about which attachments to buy.  These questions generally come from relative beginners, who do not have bottomless sources of funds.  They are seeking to economize and find shipment costs more favorable when everything is all in a single shipment.   The need for an angle cut for components of a scratch ship model is not one that presents very often.  It is therefore a "yacht" type situation.
That is, if you do not know for sure that you will have a serious need for angled cut stock, then you probably will not use it enough to warrant the expense. Or, if you have to ask, then you probably do not need it. 
The ironic aspect is that it is pretty much the only accessory that is not in the "must have" category.  The sliding table is too exquisite to bye pass, although self fabrication of a more simple version is easy enough.  The oversize top is a specialist's part.  I do wish there was a digital electronic depth of cut gauge; old eyes having the need.   Also, super handy would be a version of the sliding table with a short enough right side that it would allow the fence to remain in place.

Roger,
Jim sells custom made bushings that allow arbors larger than 1/2" to fit. With one of them, I can use the 1" key way slitting blades that I bought long ago.
You just have to arrange the specs with him.

The negative reviews in regards to the Byrnes saw attachment are not a reflection on its function or how well it does it.  For the most part, they are in response to questions about which attachments to buy.  These questions generally come from relative beginners, who do not have bottomless sources of funds.  They are seeking to economize and find shipment costs more favorable when everything is all in a single shipment.   The need for an angle cut for components of a scratch ship model is not one that presents very often.  It is therefore a "yacht" type situation.
That is, if you do not know for sure that you will have a serious need for angled cut stock, then you probably will not use it enough to warrant the expense. Or, if you have to ask, then you probably do not need it. 
The ironic aspect is that it is pretty much the only accessory that is not in the "must have" category.  The sliding table is too exquisite to bye pass, although self fabrication of a more simple version is easy enough.  The oversize top is a specialist's part.  I do wish there was a digital electronic depth of cut gauge; old eyes having the need.   Also, super handy would be a version of the sliding table with a short enough right side that it would allow the fence to remain in place.

The negative reviews in regards to the Byrnes saw attachment are not a reflection on its function or how well it does it.  For the most part, they are in response to questions about which attachments to buy.  These questions generally come from relative beginners, who do not have bottomless sources of funds.  They are seeking to economize and find shipment costs more favorable when everything is all in a single shipment.   The need for an angle cut for components of a scratch ship model is not one that presents very often.  It is therefore a "yacht" type situation.
That is, if you do not know for sure that you will have a serious need for angled cut stock, then you probably will not use it enough to warrant the expense. Or, if you have to ask, then you probably do not need it. 
The ironic aspect is that it is pretty much the only accessory that is not in the "must have" category.  The sliding table is too exquisite to bye pass, although self fabrication of a more simple version is easy enough.  The oversize top is a specialist's part.  I do wish there was a digital electronic depth of cut gauge; old eyes having the need.   Also, super handy would be a version of the sliding table with a short enough right side that it would allow the fence to remain in place.

I suspect That Ebony is the subject of more misleading substitution than is Boxwood.   In any case, there is not the profit or social status with ship models as there is with guitars as far as the decoration.
My bias suggests that using one of the Ebony group on a kit upgrade is like doing a high class upgrade in a trailer park.  The quality is evident, but the environment makes the effort a misplaced one.
 
For a substitute, Holly is appropriate,  but the Wood Database lists other species that accept dyes.
This is a situation where slang shorthand can lead to misunderstandings.
A stain - the noun - is a form of semi transparent paint - surface only.  It is pore filling and this makes the product a problem with PVA bonding.  Actual black paint may as well be used.
To stain - the verb - includes the use of the semi transparent paint and also the effect of a dye.
Wood dyes are available from wood working vendors - there are two types - alcohol and water.  The alcohol does not raise the grain,  It also does not penetrate as deeply as water based dyes.
For black, I would think that two treatments should work, with a sanding step after the first treatment to repair the raised grain.  The dye can be used on the loose plank and it will PVA bond as well as if it were not treated.
I have it in mind to try a technique used by a traditional Carolina furniture makes (PBS).  He dissolved a steel wool pad in a quart of vinegar (5% acetic acid) .  He then wet pieces of Maple with a solution of tannic acid and
sanded /scraped the raised grain and then coated it with the iron acetate solution.  The effect was a dense black. 

For the numbered bits, there are gauges  sold under the General company name #61-80  and  #60 - #1(?) .  These are handy for to identify loose bits.
As Roger writes - the circular holder - a Roger's style holder is a handy dispenser.  
A block of dense foam will hold any frequently used bits-   just write the number next to the hole in the foam.
As for when bits go bad - they pretty much tell you by breaking or bending.  
My most common use is for trunnels - these are limited to 1" - 2" in scale  so for most  common modeling scales this is in the #70 and higher (smaller) range.
For dowels that join two pieces of wood -I usually go with #50 +/-. 
 

I agree with everybody above. The most commonly used for ship modelling are the smaller numbered bits 61 to 80. The only thing I would add is that when you decide on a size for say trunnels  or other frequently used application where drilling is required to buy in bulk. You can buy them by the pack on Amazon or other retailer and they are inexpensive. I use  #72  for trunnels and because of the small size, I break them fairly routinely.

For the numbered bits, there are gauges  sold under the General company name #61-80  and  #60 - #1(?) .  These are handy for to identify loose bits.
As Roger writes - the circular holder - a Roger's style holder is a handy dispenser.  
A block of dense foam will hold any frequently used bits-   just write the number next to the hole in the foam.
As for when bits go bad - they pretty much tell you by breaking or bending.  
My most common use is for trunnels - these are limited to 1" - 2" in scale  so for most  common modeling scales this is in the #70 and higher (smaller) range.
For dowels that join two pieces of wood -I usually go with #50 +/-. 
 

For the numbered bits, there are gauges  sold under the General company name #61-80  and  #60 - #1(?) .  These are handy for to identify loose bits.
As Roger writes - the circular holder - a Roger's style holder is a handy dispenser.  
A block of dense foam will hold any frequently used bits-   just write the number next to the hole in the foam.
As for when bits go bad - they pretty much tell you by breaking or bending.  
My most common use is for trunnels - these are limited to 1" - 2" in scale  so for most  common modeling scales this is in the #70 and higher (smaller) range.
For dowels that join two pieces of wood -I usually go with #50 +/-. 
 

It would help to know where you live as the US uses a different system than the rest of the World.
 
Here in the US there are several series of drill bits.  The most common are graduated in 1/64th fractions of an inch.  In outfitting a shop I would start by buying a set of high speed steel bits from 1/16 thru 1/4in.  Well taken care of these should last a long time and if you break one it will be easily replaced at any hardware or home improvement store.  Bits larger than 1/4in are can be added as needed.
 
The second system are numbered bits 1-80 (I think). These are useful as many sizes are required to drill holes for US NC and NF threads.  Again buy sizes 60 and above when and if needed.
 
For ship model building you will need a set of drills under 1/16in.  Model suppliers, jewelers suppliers, and Amazon sell sets of #80 thru #61 in a circular drill stand.  You can also buy very small carbide resharpened bits inexpensively and some modelers like them but they are very brittle and break easily.
 
There are also lettered sizes; A, B, C, etc.  I have never run into a project that has required these and am unfamiliar with them.
 
Roger

The RN was kind of unique and particular as well as as being more difficult to replicate. 
The frames were sided in the lower hull (floors and futtock 1/crosspiece/half floor) being almost all wood.  The sided dimensions of fut2 / fut 3/ etc. were diminished.  The higher they were, the less thick their sided dimension was.  It was a step function.  The moulded dimension also decreased, but that was a smooth curve.
 
Modeler's conventions help -  uniform frame sided dimension  until the LWL/main wale.  Plank everything above this and the interior and the frame sides are hidden.  Their actual thickness does not matter.   
 

Jonathan,
 
The best that you can probably do is a reconstruction. 
Seaways did a 2 sheet 4 plan of a Manila galleon of about 1575.  It would be a hundred year later off spring but it would carry echos.
If you look carefully, the heavy footprint of Roman merchant bulk carriers can be seen in Medieval seagoing vessels. 
We have had several threads going here on this period.  Do a search for Louie da fly for a view of what we know.
The series of volumes covering the Red Bay wreck gets close.  There is the AOTS volume  doing a guess about Columbus' vessels.
Texas AM has some data.  Get to know what is in the Subjects built Up to and including 1500 AD forum.
What you seek will not be a simple one off fire and forget.  It will involve serious academic immersion in speculative and arcane subjects.
It will involve drafting and lofting.  It will involve scratch building - tools and wood.  It will be a whole world of its own to do correctly. 
You will do the work that would earn you an advanced academic degree in most other fields,  but there will be no robes, diploma, or accolades for the effort.

I own the ANCRE monograph of Le Cerf.  I worked on lofting the frames for POF.   When I encountered the notches in the frames for the planks, the idea of doing that was more than I cared to attempt.  The framing style displayed in the monograph is unique to say the least.  I find the hull too small to offer much viewing joy if left unplanked.  Starting with base of a fully planked hull,  I opted to develop my theoretical plan of construction with all bends and scantlings that match a hull of that size in that era.  The traditional method of clinker assembly has the lands cut from the planks.   I speculate that full scale framing timbers would be a bit thick for a laser cutter to cut the notches.  I would not attempt to cut the notches in the timbers of 100 frames by hand.
 
Your work has shown me several things:
The efficiency of using a laser cutter to produce the proper notches in the moulds on a POB build.
That there is a method to the madness of the original builders in choosing the cut the lands into the much thicker framing instead of the thin planks.
As long as the notches are done correctly, the actual planking is idiot proof.  It is much more difficult to misplace a strake run.
That the planking went much more quickly for you using notches suggests that it was also faster for the full size builders. Even if they did not have the glue setup time as a factor.
Cutting the lands into each plank probably required more skill and experience as well as more time on the part of the shipwrights.
 
I thank you for running the experiment.  It was edifying and useful.  I expect that it was unintended and frustrating on your part, but it was valuable for those of us who can learn from it.
 
And,  if the results of my searches have been anywhere close for what is available,  you will find that Pear is a lot more difficult to find and expensive and Hornbeam near impossible on this side of the Atlantic.