Jaager

Kris,
 
Long ago, there were plans for a DIY thickness sander sold by the guild.  I built a machine using the plans.
It had a Maple drum.  I paid a wood turner to make it.  The blocks of Maple were glued with a 1/2" steel rod in the center.
The final size was 11" long with a circumference just at 9".   The sanding media available then was 9x11"  paper sheets.
I never mastered a technique to have a mechanical paper attachment, so it was a chemical adhesive. 
 
Things about it that I would do differently -
 Drum = Make it 12" long -  there is cloth backed media here that is 4" wide. I could have 4" 80 grit, 4" 220 grit, 4" 120 grit.  With mine, I had to trim 1" off of the 120 grit.  I had trouble finding a practical adhesive.  Contact cement holds well, but is difficult to undo.  I think that using what I use for my 5" disc sander would do - rubber cement.
Motor =  use a 1/2 hp instead of 1/3 hp motor.  Still make it 1700 rpm for the drum.  Faster burns the wood.  I see no advantage in it being slower
House =  Never enclose the motor.  I did and having the motor in an oven is a poor design.  Have as much air circulation as possible.
The Table =  here I did OK -- 3/4"  AA hardwood plywood.  All 4 edges have Aluminum right angle attached with more than a few, longer length screws - recessed heads.  Longer on the front and on the back is a good thing.
 
Now, the most important component -  These machines can generate impressive amounts of wood flour.  The size is small enough to float in the air and is readily inhaled.
 
I made a five sided box  to sit over the drum.  It is made by glueing three layers of Amazon box cardboard together using libral amounts of yellow PVA for each side. The inside corners are strengthened with a 1/4"x1/4" Pine stick  - 8 sticks .  The top has an female attachment for a 2 1/2" shop vac hose.  The inside of the top has Pine stick glued to accept the screws holding on the vac attachment. 
The outside is covered with high quality duct tape.  The cheap stuff has poor adhesion.
If you think that you do not need a cyclone in line trap between your machines and the vac motor filter,  while that may fly for most machines, this one is in its own class.
The volume of saw dust is not to be believed.  Without the trap, much time will be spent clearing the vac filter.  The 5 gal cyclone catch chamber will need checking more often than is imagined.
 
Because of these machines, having a N-95 mask was no problem for me.  A cousin who is a house carpenter,  had to have surgery to remover a sawdust bezoar from his sinuses.  He avoided
using a mask because it fogged his glasses.  Real world saws have TPI  that produce comparatively large sized dust.   So even the relatively coarse sawdust that does not get to alveoli can cause a problem.  220 grit can get down deep.  ---finer than 220 grit is not a good idea anyway for stock wood surfacing.  Too fine a surface and PVA has no tooth to bond to.

Kris,
 
Long ago, there were plans for a DIY thickness sander sold by the guild.  I built a machine using the plans.
It had a Maple drum.  I paid a wood turner to make it.  The blocks of Maple were glued with a 1/2" steel rod in the center.
The final size was 11" long with a circumference just at 9".   The sanding media available then was 9x11"  paper sheets.
I never mastered a technique to have a mechanical paper attachment, so it was a chemical adhesive. 
 
Things about it that I would do differently -
 Drum = Make it 12" long -  there is cloth backed media here that is 4" wide. I could have 4" 80 grit, 4" 220 grit, 4" 120 grit.  With mine, I had to trim 1" off of the 120 grit.  I had trouble finding a practical adhesive.  Contact cement holds well, but is difficult to undo.  I think that using what I use for my 5" disc sander would do - rubber cement.
Motor =  use a 1/2 hp instead of 1/3 hp motor.  Still make it 1700 rpm for the drum.  Faster burns the wood.  I see no advantage in it being slower
House =  Never enclose the motor.  I did and having the motor in an oven is a poor design.  Have as much air circulation as possible.
The Table =  here I did OK -- 3/4"  AA hardwood plywood.  All 4 edges have Aluminum right angle attached with more than a few, longer length screws - recessed heads.  Longer on the front and on the back is a good thing.
 
Now, the most important component -  These machines can generate impressive amounts of wood flour.  The size is small enough to float in the air and is readily inhaled.
 
I made a five sided box  to sit over the drum.  It is made by glueing three layers of Amazon box cardboard together using libral amounts of yellow PVA for each side. The inside corners are strengthened with a 1/4"x1/4" Pine stick  - 8 sticks .  The top has an female attachment for a 2 1/2" shop vac hose.  The inside of the top has Pine stick glued to accept the screws holding on the vac attachment. 
The outside is covered with high quality duct tape.  The cheap stuff has poor adhesion.
If you think that you do not need a cyclone in line trap between your machines and the vac motor filter,  while that may fly for most machines, this one is in its own class.
The volume of saw dust is not to be believed.  Without the trap, much time will be spent clearing the vac filter.  The 5 gal cyclone catch chamber will need checking more often than is imagined.
 
Because of these machines, having a N-95 mask was no problem for me.  A cousin who is a house carpenter,  had to have surgery to remover a sawdust bezoar from his sinuses.  He avoided
using a mask because it fogged his glasses.  Real world saws have TPI  that produce comparatively large sized dust.   So even the relatively coarse sawdust that does not get to alveoli can cause a problem.  220 grit can get down deep.  ---finer than 220 grit is not a good idea anyway for stock wood surfacing.  Too fine a surface and PVA has no tooth to bond to.

Kris,
 
Long ago, there were plans for a DIY thickness sander sold by the guild.  I built a machine using the plans.
It had a Maple drum.  I paid a wood turner to make it.  The blocks of Maple were glued with a 1/2" steel rod in the center.
The final size was 11" long with a circumference just at 9".   The sanding media available then was 9x11"  paper sheets.
I never mastered a technique to have a mechanical paper attachment, so it was a chemical adhesive. 
 
Things about it that I would do differently -
 Drum = Make it 12" long -  there is cloth backed media here that is 4" wide. I could have 4" 80 grit, 4" 220 grit, 4" 120 grit.  With mine, I had to trim 1" off of the 120 grit.  I had trouble finding a practical adhesive.  Contact cement holds well, but is difficult to undo.  I think that using what I use for my 5" disc sander would do - rubber cement.
Motor =  use a 1/2 hp instead of 1/3 hp motor.  Still make it 1700 rpm for the drum.  Faster burns the wood.  I see no advantage in it being slower
House =  Never enclose the motor.  I did and having the motor in an oven is a poor design.  Have as much air circulation as possible.
The Table =  here I did OK -- 3/4"  AA hardwood plywood.  All 4 edges have Aluminum right angle attached with more than a few, longer length screws - recessed heads.  Longer on the front and on the back is a good thing.
 
Now, the most important component -  These machines can generate impressive amounts of wood flour.  The size is small enough to float in the air and is readily inhaled.
 
I made a five sided box  to sit over the drum.  It is made by glueing three layers of Amazon box cardboard together using libral amounts of yellow PVA for each side. The inside corners are strengthened with a 1/4"x1/4" Pine stick  - 8 sticks .  The top has an female attachment for a 2 1/2" shop vac hose.  The inside of the top has Pine stick glued to accept the screws holding on the vac attachment. 
The outside is covered with high quality duct tape.  The cheap stuff has poor adhesion.
If you think that you do not need a cyclone in line trap between your machines and the vac motor filter,  while that may fly for most machines, this one is in its own class.
The volume of saw dust is not to be believed.  Without the trap, much time will be spent clearing the vac filter.  The 5 gal cyclone catch chamber will need checking more often than is imagined.
 
Because of these machines, having a N-95 mask was no problem for me.  A cousin who is a house carpenter,  had to have surgery to remover a sawdust bezoar from his sinuses.  He avoided
using a mask because it fogged his glasses.  Real world saws have TPI  that produce comparatively large sized dust.   So even the relatively coarse sawdust that does not get to alveoli can cause a problem.  220 grit can get down deep.  ---finer than 220 grit is not a good idea anyway for stock wood surfacing.  Too fine a surface and PVA has no tooth to bond to.

Kris,
 
Long ago, there were plans for a DIY thickness sander sold by the guild.  I built a machine using the plans.
It had a Maple drum.  I paid a wood turner to make it.  The blocks of Maple were glued with a 1/2" steel rod in the center.
The final size was 11" long with a circumference just at 9".   The sanding media available then was 9x11"  paper sheets.
I never mastered a technique to have a mechanical paper attachment, so it was a chemical adhesive. 
 
Things about it that I would do differently -
 Drum = Make it 12" long -  there is cloth backed media here that is 4" wide. I could have 4" 80 grit, 4" 220 grit, 4" 120 grit.  With mine, I had to trim 1" off of the 120 grit.  I had trouble finding a practical adhesive.  Contact cement holds well, but is difficult to undo.  I think that using what I use for my 5" disc sander would do - rubber cement.
Motor =  use a 1/2 hp instead of 1/3 hp motor.  Still make it 1700 rpm for the drum.  Faster burns the wood.  I see no advantage in it being slower
House =  Never enclose the motor.  I did and having the motor in an oven is a poor design.  Have as much air circulation as possible.
The Table =  here I did OK -- 3/4"  AA hardwood plywood.  All 4 edges have Aluminum right angle attached with more than a few, longer length screws - recessed heads.  Longer on the front and on the back is a good thing.
 
Now, the most important component -  These machines can generate impressive amounts of wood flour.  The size is small enough to float in the air and is readily inhaled.
 
I made a five sided box  to sit over the drum.  It is made by glueing three layers of Amazon box cardboard together using libral amounts of yellow PVA for each side. The inside corners are strengthened with a 1/4"x1/4" Pine stick  - 8 sticks .  The top has an female attachment for a 2 1/2" shop vac hose.  The inside of the top has Pine stick glued to accept the screws holding on the vac attachment. 
The outside is covered with high quality duct tape.  The cheap stuff has poor adhesion.
If you think that you do not need a cyclone in line trap between your machines and the vac motor filter,  while that may fly for most machines, this one is in its own class.
The volume of saw dust is not to be believed.  Without the trap, much time will be spent clearing the vac filter.  The 5 gal cyclone catch chamber will need checking more often than is imagined.
 
Because of these machines, having a N-95 mask was no problem for me.  A cousin who is a house carpenter,  had to have surgery to remover a sawdust bezoar from his sinuses.  He avoided
using a mask because it fogged his glasses.  Real world saws have TPI  that produce comparatively large sized dust.   So even the relatively coarse sawdust that does not get to alveoli can cause a problem.  220 grit can get down deep.  ---finer than 220 grit is not a good idea anyway for stock wood surfacing.  Too fine a surface and PVA has no tooth to bond to.

Far be it from me to rain on anybody's parade, but...
 
There are a very few specialty suppliers that do sell finish-quality dimensioned scale lumber and they are becoming fewer every day. The economics of the business are such that the market really isn't sufficiently strong for anybody to be supplying dimensioned scale lumber in any species other than balsa or basswood and perhaps thin birch plywood, none of which are prime finish woods for modeling. Add to that problem the fact that there aren't a lot of straight lines on a ship and the reality becomes apparent: those who are working with fine woods aren't buying their wood pre-milled. If you're lucky, you may find some cherry stripwood, but that's about it. Everything you see used by the really good modelers on the forum is being milled from larger billets by the modelers themselves. The silver lining to this cloud is that there's a lot of very interesting and suitable wood out there that's going for amazingly inexpensive prices because nobody wants to mill it commercially. A modeler doesn't have to limit themselves to boxwood or pear, although it's very nice if one can afford caviar. The municipal dump piles are full of exotic species in sizes one can throw in the trunk of the car for free, if you mill it yourself.  That does require an investment in power tools. Sometimes a local cabinet shop will oblige on a custom order basis. Other times the local trade school wood shop ma be open for adult school projects and tools are available there. Bottom line, though, if you are looking for fine woodworking species suitable for modeling, you will have to mill it yourself these days and that will require more than a drill. 

Here are some fine tuning points, that I am being reminded of as I assemble the hull of Vincennes:
It was an early and transitional development stage.  I milled the stock, arranged the patterns, scroll cut the timbers, used a disc sander to set the butt joints,  assembled the timbers into frame pairs (bends) using pins - to check for butt joins that were too fat, and disassembled and stored each sandwich in a multi compartment storage box. 
Now it is over 5 years later. The Black Cherry has darkened nicely.  but it also reminds me of things that I now do a better way.
Four pin locations are better for each timber.  The points being two at each far end.  The points not being too close to the pattern line.
 
I was using a 4 point Ariel Black lower case letter "o".  It is round in the center. The area is close to a #70 drill bit hole.
The wall is thin and guessing where - how far out to place each one - is tedious - having to decide for each. 
My solution is to make a new letter.  It is a 7 point "o" merged over a 4 point "o".  I saved the layer and have lots of copies.  The hole is a precise size and the wall is thick enough that if I just kiss the pattern line, it is far enough out that the hole does not mar the face of the timber.  The wall is thick enough that by staying outside it when scroll cutting, The hole is not cut into and made useless. 
( I loft at 1:48 and reduce the patterns 80% to get 1:60,  I place the locator points on the 1:60 - the final size.)   Placing the points and then reducing is not a good idea.
With this idiot proof construct, now the main "be careful" is to make sure the locators are inside the butt lines at the end and are not sanded into when the butt lines are sanded.
A model where all of the locators are inside the timbers will avoid most of these problems.  
 
One suggestion.  more points than you need is better than not enough.  It just costs a few seconds when lofting to place a point, and if you do not need it just do not use it.  If you do not have enough, it is too late once the timber has been isolated. It is actually too late after the pattern has been printed out.
 
For the floors, a really wide line to sand to is a difficult task to do precisely.   The butt of the floor with futt 2 is better done if it is above the inside moulded line of the floor.  
It is also easier to disc sand if it is an angle . higher on the inside and sloping down to the outside line.
For POF,  I have gotten better at disc sanding exactly to the butt lines than I was 5 years ago.  Too fat and it is back to the sander, so that the assembly works.  Too much off, and there is an ugly gap.  This is not the best look for POF with visible frames.  Wood flour in PVA fixes small gaps, thin shims fix larger ones.  For a solid hull, that is sealed and painted,  precision at the butts is not so important. Wood flour in PVA will fill and paint will hide. 
 
For the lofting -  
When importing a scanned plan into the drawing program.
Adjust the change in scale that most every scanner will do.  It is different for each scanner, but is constant for each one.
After the scale is repaired, set a large, but not too large sensitivity range for the magic wand,  click on the background, CUT
The layer should now only have the desired lines and be otherwise transparent.
Now adjust the rotation to get vertical to a vertical and horizontal background.
Lock the layer, duplicate it.  Clean up the junk using CUT on the duplicate,  lock, and duplicate this clean one. Unless you like repeating work, only make changes to duplicates
When you add something new, do it on a new layer.
Layers are your friend.  The only limit on the number of layers is in how large the drawing program will let a file size become before it gets squirrely and or adds artifacts.
Backup often  -   
Large hulls may require more than one file.  At 1:48, a frigate requires two files.  A 74 requires even more.  I really fear what the Pennsylvania will require.

John,
 
I have zero experience acrylic paint, but I think there are two major classes of color coatings:  paint and washes.
A wash - pigment in a solvent.  The wash applied, the solvent evaporates, the pigment just sits on the surface.  A dried up can of wash just needs more solvent to reconstitute it.
An applied pigment has nothing to hold it on the surface if exposed to external forces - rain,  splash, abrassion,...
A paint is pigment, a binder, and a solvent.   Paint applied,  the solvent evaporates,  the binder undergoes a chemical reaction as exposure to Oxygen increases.  A larger, more complex polymer is formed.  It sticks to the surface and keeps the pigment in place.
 
 
I think that dried acrylic has a different chemistry.  You may be able to mechanically shatter the plastic of the polymerized binder, but it will not work as a binder when this new gemisch is applied as a paint, even if you can make the mess into small enough bits to suspend in the solvent.  It is now a wash.
 
Another factor,  pigments have interesting chemical names,  cadmium, titanium,  heavy metal type elements.  Not really healthy to breathe.  Thinking about it, it probably a good idea to wear a mask or work in a hood when sanding dried paint.
 
If you are paid a reasonable wage,  the time spent recovering the dried mess,  even if it were not a fruitless exercise, is likely more costly than new paint.

That’s a Contarini galley (the blue and yellow is indeed their arms) - Contarini was based in Venice and ran charter tours to Jerusalem for pilgrims. I believe he had a more or less a monopoly when Konrad went, so I guess Konrad travelled with him. 
 
The town on the last image is Ragusa (Dubrovnik) by the way.

I do not know if I addressed this before,  but one factor to defend against with a multilayer build technique is  error creep. 
When each pair of overlapping frames is glued up,  it will be strong and stand up to sanding.   I remove the pattern and rub it on a sheet of 220 grit sandpaper on a 12" x 18" piece of tempered plate glass.  There should be no difference in thickness at each butt.  The thickness at the rail should be the same as that at the keel.  The pattern on the two end frames of a sandwich should not be removed now,  Once the station sandwich is a single unit and it has been shaped, then the pattern is removed and those two face sanded on the glass surface.  Measure the thickness at the rail and keel for the sandwich.   
When the build gets beyond this, it is difficult to get accurate thickness measurements.  As the sandwiches are joined together, the key  control is to make sure the keel is dead flat. 
If the top is off, it can be shimmed or sanded to get  things right.  I was remiss in measuring with Marseilles.  It is a first rate and has a lot of upper works.  I built the fore half as a single unit and the aft half as a single unit and joined them at the middle.  With a flat keel, there is a 1/4" gap at the rail - right in the middle.  I can shim it and it will be planked over anyway,  but that taught me to start the joining in the middle and work to each end,  Any error creep is much easier to fix.

Mike,
 
If your question is about my presentation,  yes, ~ 1/8" +/-   would work just as well.   I kinda jumped the description to a thickness that - to me - is about the max as far as stock thickness for reasonable ease of cutting ( ~1/4").   I do not know the dimensions that you will be working with,  but if 1/8" x 8-10 layers or less does the job, you are where I am with the hulls that I build.   If it required 20 or so layers, I would go thicker.  If you go with Pine, the cutting and shaping will be fast work.   
Right now,  I am fighting with the different bonding required for the spaces next to the room for USS Vincennes (1825).  La Renommee was a bit of a flyer in that I built it with all room.  All room, which is what I suggested for you, is much easier and faster.  And even less work on pesky details, your ship has no gun ports to worry about. 

I do not know if I addressed this before,  but one factor to defend against with a multilayer build technique is  error creep. 
When each pair of overlapping frames is glued up,  it will be strong and stand up to sanding.   I remove the pattern and rub it on a sheet of 220 grit sandpaper on a 12" x 18" piece of tempered plate glass.  There should be no difference in thickness at each butt.  The thickness at the rail should be the same as that at the keel.  The pattern on the two end frames of a sandwich should not be removed now,  Once the station sandwich is a single unit and it has been shaped, then the pattern is removed and those two face sanded on the glass surface.  Measure the thickness at the rail and keel for the sandwich.   
When the build gets beyond this, it is difficult to get accurate thickness measurements.  As the sandwiches are joined together, the key  control is to make sure the keel is dead flat. 
If the top is off, it can be shimmed or sanded to get  things right.  I was remiss in measuring with Marseilles.  It is a first rate and has a lot of upper works.  I built the fore half as a single unit and the aft half as a single unit and joined them at the middle.  With a flat keel, there is a 1/4" gap at the rail - right in the middle.  I can shim it and it will be planked over anyway,  but that taught me to start the joining in the middle and work to each end,  Any error creep is much easier to fix.

Mike,
 
If your question is about my presentation,  yes, ~ 1/8" +/-   would work just as well.   I kinda jumped the description to a thickness that - to me - is about the max as far as stock thickness for reasonable ease of cutting ( ~1/4").   I do not know the dimensions that you will be working with,  but if 1/8" x 8-10 layers or less does the job, you are where I am with the hulls that I build.   If it required 20 or so layers, I would go thicker.  If you go with Pine, the cutting and shaping will be fast work.   
Right now,  I am fighting with the different bonding required for the spaces next to the room for USS Vincennes (1825).  La Renommee was a bit of a flyer in that I built it with all room.  All room, which is what I suggested for you, is much easier and faster.  And even less work on pesky details, your ship has no gun ports to worry about. 

Two different types of adhesive is Gorilla Glue  and Gorilla Wood Glue.
 
Gorilla Wood is just another brand of yellow carpenters PVA.
 
Gorilla Glue  is a brand of polyurethane glue.   Like CA it is water activated.  But unlike CA, exposure to water causes it to triple its volume.  I guess in applications where having a waterproof bond is important and the joinery is so Jack leg that a joint filling glue is a good thing, this is a useful material.  For a ship model, the joinery should be so tight that any expanding glue would be a disaster.
 
I would imagine that the parent Corporation for Gorilla now wishes that the marketing department had done a better job in  naming their first product.  With no type of glue differentiation in its name, there is now confusion with other products in their line.

Two different types of adhesive is Gorilla Glue  and Gorilla Wood Glue.
 
Gorilla Wood is just another brand of yellow carpenters PVA.
 
Gorilla Glue  is a brand of polyurethane glue.   Like CA it is water activated.  But unlike CA, exposure to water causes it to triple its volume.  I guess in applications where having a waterproof bond is important and the joinery is so Jack leg that a joint filling glue is a good thing, this is a useful material.  For a ship model, the joinery should be so tight that any expanding glue would be a disaster.
 
I would imagine that the parent Corporation for Gorilla now wishes that the marketing department had done a better job in  naming their first product.  With no type of glue differentiation in its name, there is now confusion with other products in their line.

Two different types of adhesive is Gorilla Glue  and Gorilla Wood Glue.
 
Gorilla Wood is just another brand of yellow carpenters PVA.
 
Gorilla Glue  is a brand of polyurethane glue.   Like CA it is water activated.  But unlike CA, exposure to water causes it to triple its volume.  I guess in applications where having a waterproof bond is important and the joinery is so Jack leg that a joint filling glue is a good thing, this is a useful material.  For a ship model, the joinery should be so tight that any expanding glue would be a disaster.
 
I would imagine that the parent Corporation for Gorilla now wishes that the marketing department had done a better job in  naming their first product.  With no type of glue differentiation in its name, there is now confusion with other products in their line.

Silverman,
That planking technique is unique or seems to be.  The illustration clarifies the what and how.  This craft may well be a "missing link" in the transition from shell first to frame first.  
I wonder if that particular planking joinery may have left something to be desired as far as stability and reliability?  The result of that experiment being the reason it was where it could be found far in its future instead of joining the fate of its fellows? 
I can see how for everyday full size projects, Fir vs Oak is a choice to consider.  In the scale model world, I recommend forgetting that Oak even exists.
Oak is hard, but it is also pug ugly at most any model scale.  It may be useful for totally hidden structures.  But a negative factor for even this is that in some species of Oak, the fibers, being coarse, do not hold together at shape edges and the way out of scale pores could be at the edges and leave dips.  They are awful enough on the surface.
One of my preferred species of wood is a Maple that is fractionally harder than White Oak.  It is no problem as long as tools are sharp, motors are powerful, and for bulling away a bulk of it - 60 or 80 grit sandpaper.  I find that the resistance to being able to easily overdo its removal to be a plus.
All the more power to you, but the fuzzy nature of a true Fir would have me wanting to act out in frustration.  I find this is much more fun when the species of wood being used works with me, and rewards me in how it looks when replicating something its miniature in scale.

Chuck,
I completely agree about the three carvel strakes and then clinker possibility.  
It is this interpretation  that I am having a question about.   The same plank going from carvel to clinker along its length?  I can only see it as being one or the other.  If I am right, it saves a lot of work.
 
There are a couple of clinker projects that are active now.  When I looked up a question on the strake lap transition at the bow and stern rabbets, in a modern text,  (John Leather)  I also checked how the fittings were done.  Were there spikes that just went thru the plank overlap and were clinched on the lower strake's inside face?  It looks like the spikes were only at the frames and went thru the two planks and also the frame and was clinched on the inside face of the frame.  Were there any spikes that went thru one plank and then thru the frame?  No.  It appears that it was only at the overlap.  
 
My problem with the garboard description was because I have never seen any reference to a garboard having fittings at the rabbet at the keel and thru the plank into the keel.  My question is, why mention the absence of something that was not done in most any situation anyway? 
 
Thinking about why this would be the situation:
That seam is the most troublesome of all of them.  It is at the place  where two different planes meet, with different dimensional flexing,  I would guess that spikes could impair garboard reactive movement.  The stress could generate a split along the row of spike holes and turn the garboard from one board into two boards producing a fatal leak.  This happening when the sea was particularly lively.   I recall an illustration a ship suspended between two oncoming waves.  One was holding up the bow and one was holding up the stern, with the middle hanging in the air.  I believe it was about hogging and what could cause it.  
 
 
 

Two different types of adhesive is Gorilla Glue  and Gorilla Wood Glue.
 
Gorilla Wood is just another brand of yellow carpenters PVA.
 
Gorilla Glue  is a brand of polyurethane glue.   Like CA it is water activated.  But unlike CA, exposure to water causes it to triple its volume.  I guess in applications where having a waterproof bond is important and the joinery is so Jack leg that a joint filling glue is a good thing, this is a useful material.  For a ship model, the joinery should be so tight that any expanding glue would be a disaster.
 
I would imagine that the parent Corporation for Gorilla now wishes that the marketing department had done a better job in  naming their first product.  With no type of glue differentiation in its name, there is now confusion with other products in their line.

Silverman,
That planking technique is unique or seems to be.  The illustration clarifies the what and how.  This craft may well be a "missing link" in the transition from shell first to frame first.  
I wonder if that particular planking joinery may have left something to be desired as far as stability and reliability?  The result of that experiment being the reason it was where it could be found far in its future instead of joining the fate of its fellows? 
I can see how for everyday full size projects, Fir vs Oak is a choice to consider.  In the scale model world, I recommend forgetting that Oak even exists.
Oak is hard, but it is also pug ugly at most any model scale.  It may be useful for totally hidden structures.  But a negative factor for even this is that in some species of Oak, the fibers, being coarse, do not hold together at shape edges and the way out of scale pores could be at the edges and leave dips.  They are awful enough on the surface.
One of my preferred species of wood is a Maple that is fractionally harder than White Oak.  It is no problem as long as tools are sharp, motors are powerful, and for bulling away a bulk of it - 60 or 80 grit sandpaper.  I find that the resistance to being able to easily overdo its removal to be a plus.
All the more power to you, but the fuzzy nature of a true Fir would have me wanting to act out in frustration.  I find this is much more fun when the species of wood being used works with me, and rewards me in how it looks when replicating something its miniature in scale.

I'd tend to think it wouldn't work because, even if you ground up the hardened paint very finely, you'd have a bunch of dried binder mixed in with the pigment and when you tried to reconstitute that,  you'd run into problems. Once an oil binder polymerizes, or an acrylic binder cures, I don't think that process can be reversed.

The description in the thesis is clear as mud to me.  It does not read as though it was written by someone who understands hull construction.
You could correspond with him and further define just what he means by:
"lay flush"  
"were not fastened to one another" - as opposed to?
"stakes overlapped"  a picture of what exactly he means
"the central......garboard....not connected to it."   apart from Med very ancient blind mortise and tenon plank to plank - the attachment is plank to internal structure - the between is for waterproofing material
"the bottom and bilge strakes..."   is he describing carvel planking where the planks would grind in a beach?  There was a time of transition from clinker to carvel - but I imagined it was between strakes and not within one.  The hull having a carvel planked bottom and lapstrake sides up to the rail. 
 
About the plug.   The trick is to fix each plank to its final curve before it is attached.  Pre-bent as it were.  This way, they stay were you fixed them.
 
Plank bending 101
The lignin that holds wood fibers together is not soluble in water. 
Heat loosens its bond and allows for bending while hot and staying in its new position when back to room temp.
Steam transfers heat better than dry air . Wetting wood before bending is to provide steam.  The time of immersion need not be long.
Different species of wood have very different reactions to being bent.  Some are pliable and some would rather break.
Lignin is soluble in ammonia.   But it is the anhydrous ammonia that was used for commercial refrigeration and is liable to explode.  The active part of cleaning ammonia solution as far as bending is the water that it is in.  The ammonia there just ruins the surface of the wood and makes it an ugly color.
There are many ways to provide the heat.  The trick is to choose a way the does not cook you in the process.  Does not char the wood.  Does not dent the wood while bending it.
 
Your homemade draw plate = 
to cut/shave the wood,  hard steel = good. 
stoning and honing a crisp cutting edge at the hole and holding it  hard steel = good
drilling the hole to begin with  hard steel = not so easy
 
For draw plate trunnels - bamboo is pretty much it  getting something to draw from wood is too much work and too much is wasted.
For short - just for show trunnels  you can find examples here of   steel medical needles --  tip ground to be like a lab cork borer -  drill press - stock is a block of wood and boring it on an end grain face.   
If you drill thru the block, the trunnel is longer, but stays in the bore.  I do not know if boring the next open will push the earlier one up the bore of the needle or just stop the process.  If it moves on up, I guess the quill center could fill with trunnels.  If it does not move, pulling the needle , and ramming the trunnel out for each one would get tedious real fast.  
The other way is to bore part way and when as many as can be got are bored, the distant end is cut off at the intersection at the depth of cut.

Chuck,
I completely agree about the three carvel strakes and then clinker possibility.  
It is this interpretation  that I am having a question about.   The same plank going from carvel to clinker along its length?  I can only see it as being one or the other.  If I am right, it saves a lot of work.
 
There are a couple of clinker projects that are active now.  When I looked up a question on the strake lap transition at the bow and stern rabbets, in a modern text,  (John Leather)  I also checked how the fittings were done.  Were there spikes that just went thru the plank overlap and were clinched on the lower strake's inside face?  It looks like the spikes were only at the frames and went thru the two planks and also the frame and was clinched on the inside face of the frame.  Were there any spikes that went thru one plank and then thru the frame?  No.  It appears that it was only at the overlap.  
 
My problem with the garboard description was because I have never seen any reference to a garboard having fittings at the rabbet at the keel and thru the plank into the keel.  My question is, why mention the absence of something that was not done in most any situation anyway? 
 
Thinking about why this would be the situation:
That seam is the most troublesome of all of them.  It is at the place  where two different planes meet, with different dimensional flexing,  I would guess that spikes could impair garboard reactive movement.  The stress could generate a split along the row of spike holes and turn the garboard from one board into two boards producing a fatal leak.  This happening when the sea was particularly lively.   I recall an illustration a ship suspended between two oncoming waves.  One was holding up the bow and one was holding up the stern, with the middle hanging in the air.  I believe it was about hogging and what could cause it.  
 
 
 

Mike,
I am without doubt obsessed with the method and this vessel is far more recent than my eras of focus.  If your plans include a complete Body plan with delineation of each of the stations shown above, The Station Sandwich Method would get you a hull. 
How I would approach it =
I would use clear Pine sliced from framing 2x4.  No thicker than 1/4" ,  but it is easier and less open to mistakes if the sum of the thicknesses is an exact match to the distance between each station.
The interior of the hull is not of much interest so a solid hull is possible.  I would still make it somewhat hollow.   The moulded dimension would be enough to encompass any bevel that is between each pair of station lines.  I would not shape the inside.  It would be horizontal above the floor and vertical at the sides.  It saves on lofting time.
Rather than cutting each of the layers as a single piece,  I would use a rough version of wooden ship framing.  Do it at the first step as  a pair of layers with overlapping butts. 
One of the pair would be three timbers - a full "floor" and a "2nd futtock" on each side that extended to the deck.
The other would be four pieces -  two "1st futtock"s  that butt at the centerline and go beyond the floor/2nd futt join.  And two "3rd futtock"s that extend to the deck.
The smaller pieces are easier to scroll cut.  there will be no cross grain.  The butt line of the "1st futt" provide an easy way to locate where the keel is.
The  lofting process can be done easily using a drawing program.  The plans provide the precise outside shape.  Connect the dot straight lines define the inside shape.
Each piece has a pattern rubber cemented to it.  When the layers between two stations are all glued together, the pattern is left on the "frame" at each end.   Because of the locators. the patterns on each end are in precise alignment.  The bevel will be correct.
 
Locator points and the lofting of them:
On a wooden hull sailing ship, where the inside shape is important and relatively narrow,  a perpendicular locator to position two frames, much less the series of them between two stations,  will not go thru the actual body of more than one frame.  This starts to happen when you get much beyond the middle of a ship.  I solved this by placing my locators outside the actual frame.  It makes for extra wood for each timber and for more wood to remove when getting the final shape for each frame sandwich assembly.
This is not a factor with your hull. The thickness of each frame sandwich would be wide enough that an inside perpendicular would work as a locator.
You would need 3 sets of locators.
1 - to align the timbers of each pair.
2 - to align each of the pairs into the sandwich of layers between two stations
3 - to mate the two sandwiches that meet at each station.
For  #1  I would use  the 1.75" long steel quilters pins  they are #73 wire gauge and #70 hole is close without being difficult to remove after the glue has set.
For #2 and #3  I would use off the shelf bamboo skewers.  Measure the gauge and buy a few bits that are close enough not to wobble, are a push fit,  but no not need a hammer.
Glue in the bamboo.
 
The assembly method would be 
scroll cut the timbers  -  no need to get too close to the pattern line -   A good hand fretsaw would get your there,  a scroll saw if you have one,  I use an 1/8" blade with a Carter Stabilizer on a 9" benchtop bandsaw.
Join and glue up the "frame" pairs. 
Assemble and glue up all of the pairs in a station sandwich.
Using a sanding drum, shape the near outside shape and do the bevel for the sandwich.
Join pairs of sandwiches and fine tune the transition by sanding.
Starting from the middle and going to each end,  join the pairs of sandwiches to the whole and fare those transitions.
The bow and stern build and shaping are a different challenge.  I would use a buttock dimension series of layers there.
 
Pine is relatively inexpensive and readily available.  It is easy to work.
Worse comes to worst, the hull can be the subject of a serious sealing and undercoating.  With a good final coat of paint, it should look metal.  If you wish the metal plates to be hinted at, rectangles of paper can be glued to the hull before sealing.  Things like bilge keels - parts needing to be glued to the hull - mask the glue area before sealing.
 
Anyway,  here is an alternate method that breaks the hull shaping process into smaller and more manageable sub assemblies.    
 
 
 

It sounds to me like he is describing carvel planked (flush) and clinker/lapstrake (overlap).  The first three strakes (garboard, broad and #3) were carvel and the rest clinker.  The sources I have read do indicate that in estuaries and such, the cog could/would settle onto the river bottom.  The flush planking would facilitate that.
 
'The garboard strake lays flush to the keel and were not connected to it'.  Might that mean 'not physically nailed or bolted to the keel, but fitted into a rabbet'?
 
I know with viking longships and I believe with cogs, the floor frames were attached to the keel and the lower strakes attached to the floor.  After that (in this case strake #4 and above) were attached to the strake below it clinker style and only after the shell was complete were the first and second futtocks added.

The description in the thesis is clear as mud to me.  It does not read as though it was written by someone who understands hull construction.
You could correspond with him and further define just what he means by:
"lay flush"  
"were not fastened to one another" - as opposed to?
"stakes overlapped"  a picture of what exactly he means
"the central......garboard....not connected to it."   apart from Med very ancient blind mortise and tenon plank to plank - the attachment is plank to internal structure - the between is for waterproofing material
"the bottom and bilge strakes..."   is he describing carvel planking where the planks would grind in a beach?  There was a time of transition from clinker to carvel - but I imagined it was between strakes and not within one.  The hull having a carvel planked bottom and lapstrake sides up to the rail. 
 
About the plug.   The trick is to fix each plank to its final curve before it is attached.  Pre-bent as it were.  This way, they stay were you fixed them.
 
Plank bending 101
The lignin that holds wood fibers together is not soluble in water. 
Heat loosens its bond and allows for bending while hot and staying in its new position when back to room temp.
Steam transfers heat better than dry air . Wetting wood before bending is to provide steam.  The time of immersion need not be long.
Different species of wood have very different reactions to being bent.  Some are pliable and some would rather break.
Lignin is soluble in ammonia.   But it is the anhydrous ammonia that was used for commercial refrigeration and is liable to explode.  The active part of cleaning ammonia solution as far as bending is the water that it is in.  The ammonia there just ruins the surface of the wood and makes it an ugly color.
There are many ways to provide the heat.  The trick is to choose a way the does not cook you in the process.  Does not char the wood.  Does not dent the wood while bending it.
 
Your homemade draw plate = 
to cut/shave the wood,  hard steel = good. 
stoning and honing a crisp cutting edge at the hole and holding it  hard steel = good
drilling the hole to begin with  hard steel = not so easy
 
For draw plate trunnels - bamboo is pretty much it  getting something to draw from wood is too much work and too much is wasted.
For short - just for show trunnels  you can find examples here of   steel medical needles --  tip ground to be like a lab cork borer -  drill press - stock is a block of wood and boring it on an end grain face.   
If you drill thru the block, the trunnel is longer, but stays in the bore.  I do not know if boring the next open will push the earlier one up the bore of the needle or just stop the process.  If it moves on up, I guess the quill center could fill with trunnels.  If it does not move, pulling the needle , and ramming the trunnel out for each one would get tedious real fast.  
The other way is to bore part way and when as many as can be got are bored, the distant end is cut off at the intersection at the depth of cut.