Jaager

I just flashed on this:  there are razor saws that are thin enough and with a large number of teeth and minimal set.  With a carbide cutoff wheel,  a blade might be reshaped into a dagger conformation and do the job.  It would be messy to cut and kinda ugly, but it may do. 
 
example = Zona 35-050 Ultra Thin Razor Saw, 52 TPI.008-Inch Kerf, Blade Length 4-1/2-Inch    It would cost you $12 and some time to find out.

Ed,
Before I left 3DCG and returned to wood, I had Blender on my look into list, being free.  It has polygon and NURBS modelers.  I do not see any purpose in adding a program like CAD into your process.  I suspect that CAD has a steeper learning curve for modeling.  I am betting that any additional precision that CAD offers will be lost when translated into something that Blender uses.   The rendering and lighting will be a whole nuther thing.  I suspect that actual physical modeling may be a faster process, especially if a wood model does not involve the hidden innards. 
 

I use 9x11 sheet sandpaper.  Use the disk as a template for a knife.   Coat the disk and the back of the paper with rubber cement. I use Besttest, but Elmer's should do.  It holds just fine and rubs off the disk with your thumb when a new disk is needed.  The rubber cement precludes using 10X sandpaper.  The 10X has a no-slip coating that is not compatible with rubber cement. The 3X paper is plain paper.  There is a cloth backed that comes in 5" wide rolls from Klingspor.  My local Woodcraft sells it by the foot - I think the 5 1/8" may be part of their stock.  It is a bit more robust than I need.

I thought the space was a requirement.  True, it might have been very small at some point but it was there for ventilation to let moisture out and prevent rot.   

Mark,
I completely agree.  Following the Dutch methods as they evolved shell first to frame first construction shows how the framing style evolved.  The timber ventilation problem could have been somewhat abated by using 1"-2" chocks to produce a space.  I have seen RN plans where the bends had a gap.  But it is not something I would care to replicate in a model.  There is another possible reason that the overlapping floor and first futtock style was abandoned.  In investigating  framing Le Saint Philippe using the Navy Board pattern,  I found that both the floor timbers and the first futtocks would have been impossibly long.  The arc that each described would require that the stock be unrealistically wide.  Oaks do not generally have 15-20 foot diameter trunks.  (The monograph shows a modern framing style using bends.  I suspect she was an experiment.  But, in an attempt to solve a strength problem that did not require a solution, the designer doomed the ship to accelerated fungal rot. The timbers did not just meet at the mid line, there is an alternating table joint.)

Mark,
I completely agree.  Following the Dutch methods as they evolved shell first to frame first construction shows how the framing style evolved.  The timber ventilation problem could have been somewhat abated by using 1"-2" chocks to produce a space.  I have seen RN plans where the bends had a gap.  But it is not something I would care to replicate in a model.  There is another possible reason that the overlapping floor and first futtock style was abandoned.  In investigating  framing Le Saint Philippe using the Navy Board pattern,  I found that both the floor timbers and the first futtocks would have been impossibly long.  The arc that each described would require that the stock be unrealistically wide.  Oaks do not generally have 15-20 foot diameter trunks.  (The monograph shows a modern framing style using bends.  I suspect she was an experiment.  But, in an attempt to solve a strength problem that did not require a solution, the designer doomed the ship to accelerated fungal rot. The timbers did not just meet at the mid line, there is an alternating table joint.)

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
A model with stylised frames would indeed be a good way of building a framed model in an instance where the true framing pattern is unknown, and would follow on from a long tradition.
 
I would like to make one comment on the Navy Board pattern of framing models, though. Which is that the most common method of construction depicted in such models does actually represent a technique used in full-size practice in the early 1600s, and perhaps earlier, and was not as stylised as many authors have stated. Construction using interlocking timbers is documented archaeologically, and is specifically demanded in some early ship-building contracts. Interlocking floors and first futtocks continued into the early 1700s in some instances. 
 
A frame produced using interlocking timbers is actually very strong structurally, but was discontinued, I believe, for three reasons: firstly, the need to use relatively thick futtocks to maintain contact between adjacent timbers, which became harder to satisfy as timber shortages began to bite (this is already being complained of in the mid 1600s) Secondly, the fact that the relatively large spaces between the timbers (outside the areas of interlocking, which were obviously very strong) provided no protection against cannon-shot penetrating the ships' hulls. Lastly, the close contact between timbers encouraged dampness, which led to the onset of rot.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Ummm.....  did not the guys who essentially started all this in the 17th C.  often build models with exposed frames,  with framing that was highly stylized ? 
It all comes down to what is your purpose for a particular build.  It may be satisfying to produce an academic model,  but the museums that would appreciate the effort do not seem to be very interested in models.
A fictional Lexington would be a poor choice in any instance.  An obviously stylized POF effort using a plans documented subject, should not confuse a distant future historian.  I see no problem with duplicating what is known and filling in the blanks with what is probable based on available evidence and adding a bit of art as regards the framing.  The open framing of an actual ship was likely very ugly and irregular.
 
About Davis,  to repeat myself,  I think he represented a building method that was heavily influenced by the methods needed for iron and steel hulls.  The chain of knowledge for all wood construction of master to apprentice was broken about 1860.  The old methods were lost.

Ummm.....  did not the guys who essentially started all this in the 17th C.  often build models with exposed frames,  with framing that was highly stylized ? 
It all comes down to what is your purpose for a particular build.  It may be satisfying to produce an academic model,  but the museums that would appreciate the effort do not seem to be very interested in models.
A fictional Lexington would be a poor choice in any instance.  An obviously stylized POF effort using a plans documented subject, should not confuse a distant future historian.  I see no problem with duplicating what is known and filling in the blanks with what is probable based on available evidence and adding a bit of art as regards the framing.  The open framing of an actual ship was likely very ugly and irregular.
 
About Davis,  to repeat myself,  I think he represented a building method that was heavily influenced by the methods needed for iron and steel hulls.  The chain of knowledge for all wood construction of master to apprentice was broken about 1860.  The old methods were lost.

I use 9x11 sheet sandpaper.  Use the disk as a template for a knife.   Coat the disk and the back of the paper with rubber cement. I use Besttest, but Elmer's should do.  It holds just fine and rubs off the disk with your thumb when a new disk is needed.  The rubber cement precludes using 10X sandpaper.  The 10X has a no-slip coating that is not compatible with rubber cement. The 3X paper is plain paper.  There is a cloth backed that comes in 5" wide rolls from Klingspor.  My local Woodcraft sells it by the foot - I think the 5 1/8" may be part of their stock.  It is a bit more robust than I need.

I use 9x11 sheet sandpaper.  Use the disk as a template for a knife.   Coat the disk and the back of the paper with rubber cement. I use Besttest, but Elmer's should do.  It holds just fine and rubs off the disk with your thumb when a new disk is needed.  The rubber cement precludes using 10X sandpaper.  The 10X has a no-slip coating that is not compatible with rubber cement. The 3X paper is plain paper.  There is a cloth backed that comes in 5" wide rolls from Klingspor.  My local Woodcraft sells it by the foot - I think the 5 1/8" may be part of their stock.  It is a bit more robust than I need.

I have been collecting data for a while.  My attitude towards this is - close enough is good enough -  I will take a sword to this Gordian Knot rather than let usually insignificant detail deter me from undertaking a project.  The material in question is wood.  There are limitations on strength vs load and the dimensions needed to obtain that strength that have not changed.  Unless you are building a cross section model,  it is very difficult to see minor differences in moulded dimensions.
Sided dimensions - in the usual situation where the numbers are not available,  I use tables of scantlings that as close in time as I can get.  
If you have room and space (R&S) - those are the outside limits.  This usually a bend (two frames) and the open area to the next bend.  The scantlings usually give you the sided dimension for a frame. R&S minus 2xframe = space.  Worst comes to worst and you do not have R&S,  the distance between stations is an integral of R&S.  That integral varies with the style of the designer of the vessel.  I have seen that integral go from R&S x 2 to R&S x 8.   (HIC copied what the original draftsman provided and I feel that the original draftsman for USS Falmouth was lazy.  For the plans for that ship, the stations are too widely spaced.)
 
1670  - DEANE'S DOCTRINE OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE
18th C.  Yedlinsky's collection   -  Mungo Murray
19th  C.  Richard Meade's Treatise
              American Bureau of Shipping Rules  I have 1870, 1885, 1903
              John Griffiths   Ship-Builder's Manual

I use 9x11 sheet sandpaper.  Use the disk as a template for a knife.   Coat the disk and the back of the paper with rubber cement. I use Besttest, but Elmer's should do.  It holds just fine and rubs off the disk with your thumb when a new disk is needed.  The rubber cement precludes using 10X sandpaper.  The 10X has a no-slip coating that is not compatible with rubber cement. The 3X paper is plain paper.  There is a cloth backed that comes in 5" wide rolls from Klingspor.  My local Woodcraft sells it by the foot - I think the 5 1/8" may be part of their stock.  It is a bit more robust than I need.

An efficient way would be to scab on pieces of wood veneer and sand it to shape.
A question that I have from time to time = If it is a first layer of planking on a POB built and the gaps being filled are between planks, Why even use a filler?  The real planking will cover the gaps.  If there is a significant hollow,  the molds being too widely spaced, scabbing wood there would provide a more secure surface for the real planks.

An efficient way would be to scab on pieces of wood veneer and sand it to shape.
A question that I have from time to time = If it is a first layer of planking on a POB built and the gaps being filled are between planks, Why even use a filler?  The real planking will cover the gaps.  If there is a significant hollow,  the molds being too widely spaced, scabbing wood there would provide a more secure surface for the real planks.

An efficient way would be to scab on pieces of wood veneer and sand it to shape.
A question that I have from time to time = If it is a first layer of planking on a POB built and the gaps being filled are between planks, Why even use a filler?  The real planking will cover the gaps.  If there is a significant hollow,  the molds being too widely spaced, scabbing wood there would provide a more secure surface for the real planks.

To confuse the situation,  digital calipers and electronic calculators allow the choice of scale that is not limited to integrals of the Imperial scale.
Facing your same dilemma,  I looked at the model as a 3D object.  I also like the level of detail possible with museum scale (1:48).  I also wish to have my "fleet" all at the same scale. Ships of the line tend to of an imposing size at 1:48.  I did some back of the envelope calculations, using 1:48 as the baseline.
1:60 = 50% of the volume
1:70 = 33%
1:76 = 25%
1:96 = 12.5%
I chose 1:60 in the hope that the level of detail would be close, with a less imposing size.
I framed the 118 gun Le Commerce de Marseille wishing to do both proof of concept for my method and see the size.  I admit, the size still has me a bit addlepated.

Bob,
The super peachy keen aspect of the video loop was the digital readout.  If only there was a way to get that for the Byrnes saw....  the physical scratches on the micrometer defeat my eyes.

I looked into Madrone as a framing wood.  I am on the wrong side of the continent for the cost to be reasonable - the shipping cost is absurd.
I found a source that has solved the drying problem and uses kiln settings that produces usable timber:  Sustainable Northwest Wood
If I lived near Portland OR  I would pay them a visit and pick over their stock for the color and grain.  They have 4x4 and 8x4 by 8' on hand. 
They sell it for flooring and furniture use. 
The Wood Database information for Madrone reads like it would be excellent for hull fabrication.

Bob,
The super peachy keen aspect of the video loop was the digital readout.  If only there was a way to get that for the Byrnes saw....  the physical scratches on the micrometer defeat my eyes.

Bob,
The super peachy keen aspect of the video loop was the digital readout.  If only there was a way to get that for the Byrnes saw....  the physical scratches on the micrometer defeat my eyes.

Hello, here's a link to an easy-to-set high precision fence that I made for my cabinet saw.  I think the concept may be adapted to smaller saws, and done with a less complicated locking scheme.
 
It employs parallel (identical) wedge with a 1:4 pitch.  Thus, a 1/32nd inch displacement fore/aft results in a port-starboard displacement of 1/128th of and inch.  The wedges were made from clear pine, with blue aluminum t-track screwed to the edges.   For ease of adjustment, It could be fitted with a linear scale graduated in inches, mm, or fractional inches, or a digital instrument could be used as well.
 
Note: the camera view is from the side of the saw, with the front of the table to the right in the view.
 
https://youtu.be/vXyb3p7TNcY

To stir this pot a bit more and endanger the tongues poking in cheeks a bit more:
Ductile (can be drawn into wires)  , one of the characteristics of a metal, = something I had to memorize for some early science class and got stuck in my head ever since.
A jewelers draw plate is a way to do it.  I am imagining that a commercial mill heats the metal a bit when doing this.  Doing it cold is a whole lot of work,  Theoretically, one could start with a thick wire and draw any gauge that is needed.  Cooper and brass kinda offer resistance to this, making it not so much fun.
Jim's plate is not designed to draw metal.   I have Jim's plate and a couple of jewelers plates.  The tools that I use most often are a couple of drill gauges:

I can sharpen the cutting edge by rubbing the side opposite the lettering on a whetstone.  
A significant factor is the species of bamboo that the skewer people use.  Some of it is really hard, some is soft, and some like to split under stress.

Worst comes to worst, Historic Ship Models,  Mondfeld  has a fine print page and a half of Italian to English (Spanish, French, German) at the back.  This should cover most all the parts and the book is nice to have.

To stir this pot a bit more and endanger the tongues poking in cheeks a bit more:
Ductile (can be drawn into wires)  , one of the characteristics of a metal, = something I had to memorize for some early science class and got stuck in my head ever since.
A jewelers draw plate is a way to do it.  I am imagining that a commercial mill heats the metal a bit when doing this.  Doing it cold is a whole lot of work,  Theoretically, one could start with a thick wire and draw any gauge that is needed.  Cooper and brass kinda offer resistance to this, making it not so much fun.
Jim's plate is not designed to draw metal.   I have Jim's plate and a couple of jewelers plates.  The tools that I use most often are a couple of drill gauges:

I can sharpen the cutting edge by rubbing the side opposite the lettering on a whetstone.  
A significant factor is the species of bamboo that the skewer people use.  Some of it is really hard, some is soft, and some like to split under stress.