Jaager

Unless I am mis remembering
 
PLANK ON FRAME MODELS  VOL.1 & 2 1958                               
UNDERHILL,HAROLD A                                              
BROWN, SON & FERGISON   
 
He shows how to form up for soldering and removing the alignment surplus
 

AMERICAN FISHING SCHOONERS 1825-1935, THE                        
CHAPELLE,H I                                                     
W W NORTON CO   NEW YORK   1973
 
Has drawings of the actual hardware  in the appendix
 
only guesses for a general how to.  The following are from my Amazon wish list  from recommendations here
 

Model Building with Brass Hardcover – March 27, 2012
by Kenneth C. Foran  
Jewelry: Fundamentals of Metalsmithing (Jewelry Crafts) Hardcover – September 15, 1997
by Tim Mccreight
The Complete Metalsmith: An Illustrated Handbook Spiral-bound – December 31, 1991
by Tim McCreight 

Unless I am mis remembering
 
PLANK ON FRAME MODELS  VOL.1 & 2 1958                               
UNDERHILL,HAROLD A                                              
BROWN, SON & FERGISON   
 
He shows how to form up for soldering and removing the alignment surplus
 

AMERICAN FISHING SCHOONERS 1825-1935, THE                        
CHAPELLE,H I                                                     
W W NORTON CO   NEW YORK   1973
 
Has drawings of the actual hardware  in the appendix
 
only guesses for a general how to.  The following are from my Amazon wish list  from recommendations here
 

Model Building with Brass Hardcover – March 27, 2012
by Kenneth C. Foran  
Jewelry: Fundamentals of Metalsmithing (Jewelry Crafts) Hardcover – September 15, 1997
by Tim Mccreight
The Complete Metalsmith: An Illustrated Handbook Spiral-bound – December 31, 1991
by Tim McCreight 

Unless I am mis remembering
 
PLANK ON FRAME MODELS  VOL.1 & 2 1958                               
UNDERHILL,HAROLD A                                              
BROWN, SON & FERGISON   
 
He shows how to form up for soldering and removing the alignment surplus
 

AMERICAN FISHING SCHOONERS 1825-1935, THE                        
CHAPELLE,H I                                                     
W W NORTON CO   NEW YORK   1973
 
Has drawings of the actual hardware  in the appendix
 
only guesses for a general how to.  The following are from my Amazon wish list  from recommendations here
 

Model Building with Brass Hardcover – March 27, 2012
by Kenneth C. Foran  
Jewelry: Fundamentals of Metalsmithing (Jewelry Crafts) Hardcover – September 15, 1997
by Tim Mccreight
The Complete Metalsmith: An Illustrated Handbook Spiral-bound – December 31, 1991
by Tim McCreight 

Robert,
It is my experience that a bandsaw is more useful and safer than a table saw. Your 4" table saw should suffice for anything specific to that type of tool.
A 10" table saw is ready to eat your fingers given the least chance.  My 10" Ryobi table saw has a larger foot print than my 14" Rikon band saw, so no
advantage there.  You do want 220V for a band saw and $60 bimetal or $200 Resawking for the blade necessary for resawing - ouch!
 
Rather than weighing,  Amazon has inexpensive moisture meters.  Unless you open a saw mill, close enough should do for accuracy.
 

Robert,
Your wax covered - hope that the moisture level when hermetically sealed was below what a fungus requires.  Unlike Holly, the fungus that eats Apple really turns it into poop.
I am guessing that pen blanks are about as costly per board foot for a source of wood as can be had.  Turning blanks could be just behind.
 
2" of a relatively hard wood like Apple would be a chore for a 10" table saw.  A Byrnes saw can come close to 1" - depending on the blade.
Cutting thick stock would likely require several passes even before you flip it.  The blade - low number of teeth and carbide tips with enough
offset to produce a cost inefficient kerf. 
( Your location is a fairly populous one, no?  You should be able to find someone with a 14" or larger bandsaw - with a resaw blade [carbide or bimetal] - the kerf will be as narrow as can be had and the speed with a 12" long billet will make you cry after the experience with a small table saw.)
 
Apple - for me - is right at the top of desirable species for POF.  Be mindful that there are many varieties,  so there will be variations.  I think the grandfather root stock and heirloom varieties are good ones. 
It is not as difficult to source as the unicorn Buxus sempervirens, but it is difficult.  Apple trees transport a lot of sugars and while drying,  a fungus can rot the wood,  if you unlucky and the stock being dried is too thick.   I apologize for not remembering the attribution, but one of us provided a link to a significant source for Apple - Hearne Hardwoods https://www.hearnehardwoods.com/apple-american-lumber/  I thank him for this.  Found him -  Gregory - thanks again.
 
 
Now about rapid drying -  a commercial kiln - controlled by someone who knows the necessary time and temp is best.   If you like to gamble - you can build an inexpensive drying box.
 
Six sides - length width depth your choice - material  pink or blue Styrofoam house sheathing insulation  (I used 1" with foil on one surface.) - comes 4 x 8 but Home Depot sells smaller craft size pieces -  push fit - air leaks wanted.
Heat source - 200W -300W incandescent light bulbs  -  Al foil and  air gape between the bulb and the easily charred foam.  A thermometer and a dimmer switch gives some control.   I kept the temp under 120 degrees F.
Ventilation -  in a hole a one end - a surplus muffin computer cooling fan - most are low cost - the trick is the power source.
 
I used it to dry Holly and beat the Blue Mold to the wood without significant twisting or checking.
 

For gun ports,  not only is the height of the sills determined by the position of the deck, the slope of the sills is determined by the slope of the deck.
Endeavor was a collier?   The USS Maine demonstrated the danger of poorly vented coal,  Would that cargo not want venting?
 
Flat plans + curved surface - do not match.  I would pick a landmark as close to the port as possible and gauge from that - going from each side and interpolating any difference.
The port dimensions are all the same,  but on the profile plan the bow port would appear smaller on the X dimension.

What works for me is a good quality rubber cement - Best Test is what I prefer.  The trick is to use a very liberal and full coverage coat on both surfaces.
Let it dry a bit and then stick.  this method does not favor further adjustment, so a careful aim is needed. The solvent is volatile and the cement can get
too thick, so I have a quart of the solvent Bestine (n-hepane) and use a pipette to add small volumes to keep the cement at the correct viscosity. 
I work from a 120ml applicator cap bottle, but buy it in quarts.
I cut out the frame timbers for USS Vincennes in 2015 and the patterns are still stuck fast to the pieces - waiting for assembly into frames.

What works for me is a good quality rubber cement - Best Test is what I prefer.  The trick is to use a very liberal and full coverage coat on both surfaces.
Let it dry a bit and then stick.  this method does not favor further adjustment, so a careful aim is needed. The solvent is volatile and the cement can get
too thick, so I have a quart of the solvent Bestine (n-hepane) and use a pipette to add small volumes to keep the cement at the correct viscosity. 
I work from a 120ml applicator cap bottle, but buy it in quarts.
I cut out the frame timbers for USS Vincennes in 2015 and the patterns are still stuck fast to the pieces - waiting for assembly into frames.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

If you are really doing POF, since you wrote "cutting frames",  depending on your scale and the size of the vessel, 
The timbers for a first rate liner @  1:48 can easily exceed 1/4" in thickness.  Madness as a choice to be sure, since
when the hull is assembled, you have to decide who gets the house, you or it.   I wonder if this tool is up to the job.
I suspect that control is better with a fixed blade and a moving piece of stock.  My crystal ball foresees heart ache and
frustration,  given the hundreds of frames timbers needed for one hull.   If you miss typed and it is plywood molds for 
POB that needs cutting,  this may help reduce the work.  A fixed blade would still be easier.  The motor and blade mount
will limit your ability to see the cut.
 
The time that a high end scroll saw saves in dressing with a disk or drum sander may not be enough to justify the expenditure.
I get the job done with a generic 9" band saw - a 1/4" blade - and a Carter Stabilizer.  The always down cutting force of a band saw
eliminates the stock jumping up problem, the Carter add on allows very tight curves.   It helps to choose a saw with a blade length
that is commonly available.

What works for me is a good quality rubber cement - Best Test is what I prefer.  The trick is to use a very liberal and full coverage coat on both surfaces.
Let it dry a bit and then stick.  this method does not favor further adjustment, so a careful aim is needed. The solvent is volatile and the cement can get
too thick, so I have a quart of the solvent Bestine (n-hepane) and use a pipette to add small volumes to keep the cement at the correct viscosity. 
I work from a 120ml applicator cap bottle, but buy it in quarts.
I cut out the frame timbers for USS Vincennes in 2015 and the patterns are still stuck fast to the pieces - waiting for assembly into frames.

Drafting gun ports must be boring,  subject to lapses in precision, and more than a few plans have some of them as inconsistent in their pattern.
 
When lofting, I pick a port at midship and develop a gauge/jig for the the distance of the sill and lentil from the underside of deck planking/top of deck beams.  I add the thickness of the sill and lentil timbers to size the opening.  I use this gauge for the rest of the ports, rather than using the profile to determine gun port height,.  Transferring the data to a card and installing the beams before finishing the ports gets the slope of the sill parallel to the deck for each.
 
 

I wonder if a tool edge would last longer with frequent stropping using gold or green or even rouge compd. on scrap leather instead of visiting a stone as often to keep it as close to a mono layer as can be had?

Given the large number of abandoned logs - at least in the scratch forum - I have been wondering if following the method that my dissertation director attributed to Albert Szent-Györgyi might be a good way to go.  He supposedly completed an experiment but did not publish it right away.  He made a grant proposal based on that finished experiment and used the funds for the next experiment.  Sort of gives a 100% success rate for proposed experiments.
Finish a model,  photo document each step.  Publish it as a log, post serially over a period of time.  The interval determined by how efficient you wish to appear to be.
This sort of like the logs recreated after the 2013 crash., except that they were not posted as a sequence over time.  
This precludes getting outside help as you go, but is that a frequent occurrence anyway?
You could do that now and who could tell the difference?
 
(sorry for the confused verb tenses.)

Given the large number of abandoned logs - at least in the scratch forum - I have been wondering if following the method that my dissertation director attributed to Albert Szent-Györgyi might be a good way to go.  He supposedly completed an experiment but did not publish it right away.  He made a grant proposal based on that finished experiment and used the funds for the next experiment.  Sort of gives a 100% success rate for proposed experiments.
Finish a model,  photo document each step.  Publish it as a log, post serially over a period of time.  The interval determined by how efficient you wish to appear to be.
This sort of like the logs recreated after the 2013 crash., except that they were not posted as a sequence over time.  
This precludes getting outside help as you go, but is that a frequent occurrence anyway?
You could do that now and who could tell the difference?
 
(sorry for the confused verb tenses.)

As an alternative HIC (Smithsonian) drafted a class of schooners - Morris is the lead.  He drew one alternative bow similar to what you seem to want = Hamilton.
The subject is not an impossible one for a first scratch build.  An uncomplicated hull and rig,  it is closer to something hanging from the davits on
a liner than a consort for one.

Drafting gun ports must be boring,  subject to lapses in precision, and more than a few plans have some of them as inconsistent in their pattern.
 
When lofting, I pick a port at midship and develop a gauge/jig for the the distance of the sill and lentil from the underside of deck planking/top of deck beams.  I add the thickness of the sill and lentil timbers to size the opening.  I use this gauge for the rest of the ports, rather than using the profile to determine gun port height,.  Transferring the data to a card and installing the beams before finishing the ports gets the slope of the sill parallel to the deck for each.
 
 

Might that depend on how long the plates had been kept after delivery from the rolling mill?  Our "just in time" system is a very recent development.
The mills were probably lower in rate of production,  delivery time and weight per load,  the inverse of now.

Might that depend on how long the plates had been kept after delivery from the rolling mill?  Our "just in time" system is a very recent development.
The mills were probably lower in rate of production,  delivery time and weight per load,  the inverse of now.

Alder should work.  A species near the plywood hardness  makes shaping it more work to no real advantage.
Going all the way inside the hull gives a base that is firm enough for one layer of planking - if two layers is the design.
If the below the waterline hull is to be coppered, adding the plank thickness to the filler dimension and scabing that layer
to the face of the molds (bulkheads) = no planking needed in the way of the copper.
No - to using it as a deck underlayment.  Trim the inside of the filler to be  a bit thicker than the frames would be.  They do not
need faring - rough and staggered at that face is sufficient. 

Alder should work.  A species near the plywood hardness  makes shaping it more work to no real advantage.
Going all the way inside the hull gives a base that is firm enough for one layer of planking - if two layers is the design.
If the below the waterline hull is to be coppered, adding the plank thickness to the filler dimension and scabing that layer
to the face of the molds (bulkheads) = no planking needed in the way of the copper.
No - to using it as a deck underlayment.  Trim the inside of the filler to be  a bit thicker than the frames would be.  They do not
need faring - rough and staggered at that face is sufficient.