Jaager

Wood that seems to be too brittle or splinters is probably because an unsuitable species was chosen by the kit company to begin with.
Living in a World of short lived manufactured items and plastics that either oxidize or continue to polymerize to brittleness over a short time span,
it is easy to forget that when harvested, some wood was already several hundred years old on the hoof. The rapid growing species are often too soft, or coarse, 
or contrasty, or easily split to be appropriate.  An exception seems to be various ornamental Pear. But their size and branch habits do not lend them
to commercial interest. They are essentially DIY.
The goal of seasoning is to get wood into a hydrated equilibrium with its ambient atmosphere. It can't get any dryer than that. 
If the kit has been stored in a humid environment, it could have been invaded by fungus and ruined, but the box would have all but disintegrated too.
Some members here have been on builds a lot longer than the 12 years your kit has been around.

Wood that seems to be too brittle or splinters is probably because an unsuitable species was chosen by the kit company to begin with.
Living in a World of short lived manufactured items and plastics that either oxidize or continue to polymerize to brittleness over a short time span,
it is easy to forget that when harvested, some wood was already several hundred years old on the hoof. The rapid growing species are often too soft, or coarse, 
or contrasty, or easily split to be appropriate.  An exception seems to be various ornamental Pear. But their size and branch habits do not lend them
to commercial interest. They are essentially DIY.
The goal of seasoning is to get wood into a hydrated equilibrium with its ambient atmosphere. It can't get any dryer than that. 
If the kit has been stored in a humid environment, it could have been invaded by fungus and ruined, but the box would have all but disintegrated too.
Some members here have been on builds a lot longer than the 12 years your kit has been around.

Since the source is in Europe, my guess is that the wood is
English Walnut - Juglans regia  rather than Black Walnut - Juglans nigra
For full size use Black Walnut is and has been highly prized.  English
Walnut is slightly less dark and rich in color, but still excellent.
The grain is not real high contrast, it is hard, has tight grain,
and holds a sharp edge.  It has one negative factor for model use =
open pores.  To get a smooth finish, they will need to be filled.
For really sweet wood, you should seek out Pear, Plum, or Apple.
 
But back to your question:
Seasoning ( air drying ) 1 year per inch of thickness.
I would remove the bark - a wide straight chisel or draw knife does this job quickly.
Seal the cut ends and any side branch ends.  The open pores
will loose water more quickly and there will be dimensional stress.
This can produce checking and splitting.
You have a lot of options for a sealant.  Hot paraffin, varnish,
shellac, left over house paint, latex or spirit will work.  Add additional
coats over time if any checking starts.  Sticker the pieces so that there is
good air flow at all surfaces.
 
What with your power tools' capacity, try to get the wood into 1 inch billets.  At 1:64 you should only need
pieces wider than 1 inch for floors at the ends of a large frigate or larger warship
or a large merchant vessel if you avoid cant framing and stay perpendicular until
you get to hawse timbers and stern framing.

Since the source is in Europe, my guess is that the wood is
English Walnut - Juglans regia  rather than Black Walnut - Juglans nigra
For full size use Black Walnut is and has been highly prized.  English
Walnut is slightly less dark and rich in color, but still excellent.
The grain is not real high contrast, it is hard, has tight grain,
and holds a sharp edge.  It has one negative factor for model use =
open pores.  To get a smooth finish, they will need to be filled.
For really sweet wood, you should seek out Pear, Plum, or Apple.
 
But back to your question:
Seasoning ( air drying ) 1 year per inch of thickness.
I would remove the bark - a wide straight chisel or draw knife does this job quickly.
Seal the cut ends and any side branch ends.  The open pores
will loose water more quickly and there will be dimensional stress.
This can produce checking and splitting.
You have a lot of options for a sealant.  Hot paraffin, varnish,
shellac, left over house paint, latex or spirit will work.  Add additional
coats over time if any checking starts.  Sticker the pieces so that there is
good air flow at all surfaces.
 
What with your power tools' capacity, try to get the wood into 1 inch billets.  At 1:64 you should only need
pieces wider than 1 inch for floors at the ends of a large frigate or larger warship
or a large merchant vessel if you avoid cant framing and stay perpendicular until
you get to hawse timbers and stern framing.

Since the source is in Europe, my guess is that the wood is
English Walnut - Juglans regia  rather than Black Walnut - Juglans nigra
For full size use Black Walnut is and has been highly prized.  English
Walnut is slightly less dark and rich in color, but still excellent.
The grain is not real high contrast, it is hard, has tight grain,
and holds a sharp edge.  It has one negative factor for model use =
open pores.  To get a smooth finish, they will need to be filled.
For really sweet wood, you should seek out Pear, Plum, or Apple.
 
But back to your question:
Seasoning ( air drying ) 1 year per inch of thickness.
I would remove the bark - a wide straight chisel or draw knife does this job quickly.
Seal the cut ends and any side branch ends.  The open pores
will loose water more quickly and there will be dimensional stress.
This can produce checking and splitting.
You have a lot of options for a sealant.  Hot paraffin, varnish,
shellac, left over house paint, latex or spirit will work.  Add additional
coats over time if any checking starts.  Sticker the pieces so that there is
good air flow at all surfaces.
 
What with your power tools' capacity, try to get the wood into 1 inch billets.  At 1:64 you should only need
pieces wider than 1 inch for floors at the ends of a large frigate or larger warship
or a large merchant vessel if you avoid cant framing and stay perpendicular until
you get to hawse timbers and stern framing.

Since the source is in Europe, my guess is that the wood is
English Walnut - Juglans regia  rather than Black Walnut - Juglans nigra
For full size use Black Walnut is and has been highly prized.  English
Walnut is slightly less dark and rich in color, but still excellent.
The grain is not real high contrast, it is hard, has tight grain,
and holds a sharp edge.  It has one negative factor for model use =
open pores.  To get a smooth finish, they will need to be filled.
For really sweet wood, you should seek out Pear, Plum, or Apple.
 
But back to your question:
Seasoning ( air drying ) 1 year per inch of thickness.
I would remove the bark - a wide straight chisel or draw knife does this job quickly.
Seal the cut ends and any side branch ends.  The open pores
will loose water more quickly and there will be dimensional stress.
This can produce checking and splitting.
You have a lot of options for a sealant.  Hot paraffin, varnish,
shellac, left over house paint, latex or spirit will work.  Add additional
coats over time if any checking starts.  Sticker the pieces so that there is
good air flow at all surfaces.
 
What with your power tools' capacity, try to get the wood into 1 inch billets.  At 1:64 you should only need
pieces wider than 1 inch for floors at the ends of a large frigate or larger warship
or a large merchant vessel if you avoid cant framing and stay perpendicular until
you get to hawse timbers and stern framing.

Wefalck,
 
The tool making was the reason for precluding metal work from my comment.
Way back when, because I could not find the Universal Midget machine from
Longridge, I bought the closest substitute - a Unimat SL 1000. 
I have found that  I have substituted the wood working attachments with
dedicated single purpose machines - table saw, drill press, drum sander, jig/scroll saw,
disk sander.   Each has repaid its cost in function and convenience - except the scroll
saw - I prefer my 9" bandsaw with a Carter scroll attachment and 1/8" blade.
 
I have used the milling and lathe functions for metal working to make my own tool
attachments. For metal work, a quality lathe, and vertical mill can not be replaced. 
For me, the Unimat is quality enough.
If wood work was my only focus and money was a factor, I could not
convince myself that a vertical mill would return its investment. Neither would a lathe -
unless I was producing cannon - a lot of cannon.  The limits on bed length are impediments
to full use of a lathe for masts and yards.

My apology if this comes across as impertinent -
leaving aside any metal working function and focusing on
just wood working,  apart from using it as a drill press,
and milling lands for carlings and knees in deck beams,
what other jobs would a vertical mill be used for?

My apology if this comes across as impertinent -
leaving aside any metal working function and focusing on
just wood working,  apart from using it as a drill press,
and milling lands for carlings and knees in deck beams,
what other jobs would a vertical mill be used for?

My apology if this comes across as impertinent -
leaving aside any metal working function and focusing on
just wood working,  apart from using it as a drill press,
and milling lands for carlings and knees in deck beams,
what other jobs would a vertical mill be used for?

The basic factor here is matching the blade to the job.
A thin fine tooth blade SEEMS like it would save wood -
by having less kerf and a smoother surface. 
The problem is that the gullet of the teeth fill with saw dust
early in the cut and the wood is being removed more by
friction than mechanical slicing.  Even more heat is produced
by forcing the blade.  Being thin, it gets hotter and flexes.
 
The rule/goal for a band saw blade is, I think, 3 teeth in contact thru
the stock thickness.  Our choice of blade is a balance.  More set =
rougher cut surface, faster and less heat.  Fewer larger teeth,
thicker blade - more kerf, rougher surface, less heat,  faster.
Really thin stock is affected by the chopping force, so large
teeth can move or split the wood.
 
Blade #128 / 0.1  is a metal slitting blade.  Try it on really thin veneer
( but a #11 blade and a straight edge may be more efficient ) or
cutting slots for hatch gratings.

The basic factor here is matching the blade to the job.
A thin fine tooth blade SEEMS like it would save wood -
by having less kerf and a smoother surface. 
The problem is that the gullet of the teeth fill with saw dust
early in the cut and the wood is being removed more by
friction than mechanical slicing.  Even more heat is produced
by forcing the blade.  Being thin, it gets hotter and flexes.
 
The rule/goal for a band saw blade is, I think, 3 teeth in contact thru
the stock thickness.  Our choice of blade is a balance.  More set =
rougher cut surface, faster and less heat.  Fewer larger teeth,
thicker blade - more kerf, rougher surface, less heat,  faster.
Really thin stock is affected by the chopping force, so large
teeth can move or split the wood.
 
Blade #128 / 0.1  is a metal slitting blade.  Try it on really thin veneer
( but a #11 blade and a straight edge may be more efficient ) or
cutting slots for hatch gratings.

If you can't find it anywhere else,  Amazon   200ml ~ $20    65ml ~ $14  It is also great at protecting  tools from rust.
 
Re: incandescent -  have heat lamp bulbs been proscribed also?

My theory:
country sawmills sell for less - given retail markup - maybe half.
The rough - pre planed lumber is thicker and if you band saw
resaw, the yield can be greater.
The downside is that if it is an active concern, the stock is green.
If it is a relaxed operation, there may be old air dried stock in ricks.
 
Edensaw does have Madrone and Yellow Cedar  but > $10/BF
It does look like you can get Hard Maple for about what I can
and it is a reasonable substitute for Boxwood - for everything but
carving. - i.e. timbers, planking, beams, knees

Jim,
given where you are,  I wonder if you can access a local
country sawmill and find a supply of two species from
your region that have a more suitable grain, are both closed pore,
low contrast, tight grained and between the two have a color
contrast:
Madrone
Yellow Cedar
 
Though seriously expensive for we easterners, it could be
$5 /BF or less for you.

Wood flour of the planking species mixed with PVA ( Titebond II for me).

The Byrnes will work 6 inch stock.  The medium mounts as sheets.
The clamps come shown as two 3 inch pieces.  This allows one to be
replaced - leaving the other alone - if two 3 inch sheets are used.
Standard sandpaper sheets look like they would fit - but their duration of use
may not be practical.   There are cloth backed media - as continuous rolls -
cut to fit for length and they come as 3", 4", 6"  widths -  variety of grits -
Norton and Klingspor are two.  I get Klingspor from my local WoodCraft,
but  i do not see this on the chain website 
It holds up well and is essentially the same as what makes up the sleeves.
 
In my view, the Micromark is more of a toy when compared to the Byrnes.
 
220 grit may be as fine as should be finished for working stock - wood pore
blockage and reduced PVA bonding may be a side effect of a finer finish.

The Byrnes will work 6 inch stock.  The medium mounts as sheets.
The clamps come shown as two 3 inch pieces.  This allows one to be
replaced - leaving the other alone - if two 3 inch sheets are used.
Standard sandpaper sheets look like they would fit - but their duration of use
may not be practical.   There are cloth backed media - as continuous rolls -
cut to fit for length and they come as 3", 4", 6"  widths -  variety of grits -
Norton and Klingspor are two.  I get Klingspor from my local WoodCraft,
but  i do not see this on the chain website 
It holds up well and is essentially the same as what makes up the sleeves.
 
In my view, the Micromark is more of a toy when compared to the Byrnes.
 
220 grit may be as fine as should be finished for working stock - wood pore
blockage and reduced PVA bonding may be a side effect of a finer finish.

The Byrnes will work 6 inch stock.  The medium mounts as sheets.
The clamps come shown as two 3 inch pieces.  This allows one to be
replaced - leaving the other alone - if two 3 inch sheets are used.
Standard sandpaper sheets look like they would fit - but their duration of use
may not be practical.   There are cloth backed media - as continuous rolls -
cut to fit for length and they come as 3", 4", 6"  widths -  variety of grits -
Norton and Klingspor are two.  I get Klingspor from my local WoodCraft,
but  i do not see this on the chain website 
It holds up well and is essentially the same as what makes up the sleeves.
 
In my view, the Micromark is more of a toy when compared to the Byrnes.
 
220 grit may be as fine as should be finished for working stock - wood pore
blockage and reduced PVA bonding may be a side effect of a finer finish.

For me: the first fix is to remove the set scars from the bandsaw blade on
both surfaces. 
Mine is an under powered 3 wheel bandsaw and my skill in resawing could be better.
Two inch hardwood - especiaaly Hard Maple - strains the 3/4 HP motor and 
dulls the blade more quickly than I like.
My sander is home made using plans from NRG  from years ago - the drum is 11 inches
and the circumference is 8.5 inches - for standard sanding sheets - now I would make it
12 inches - so that I could fit 3 grits of 4 inch cloth backed sanding medium  Klingspor  80/150/220
For the thickness sander =
The goal is to start with a stock thickness that allows a clean
220 finish on both sides - without having to waste much wood to get the
target thickness.
I flip and rotate end to end.  This is using 80 grit.
When I have a clean surface, i sand one side down to 220 and use it as the
table contact.
The other side gets 80 grit passes - with end to end rotation until close to target 
then finish to final with 220.

Two of the variables
width of the piece
grit of the sanding medium

For me: the first fix is to remove the set scars from the bandsaw blade on
both surfaces. 
Mine is an under powered 3 wheel bandsaw and my skill in resawing could be better.
Two inch hardwood - especiaaly Hard Maple - strains the 3/4 HP motor and 
dulls the blade more quickly than I like.
My sander is home made using plans from NRG  from years ago - the drum is 11 inches
and the circumference is 8.5 inches - for standard sanding sheets - now I would make it
12 inches - so that I could fit 3 grits of 4 inch cloth backed sanding medium  Klingspor  80/150/220
For the thickness sander =
The goal is to start with a stock thickness that allows a clean
220 finish on both sides - without having to waste much wood to get the
target thickness.
I flip and rotate end to end.  This is using 80 grit.
When I have a clean surface, i sand one side down to 220 and use it as the
table contact.
The other side gets 80 grit passes - with end to end rotation until close to target 
then finish to final with 220.

For me: the first fix is to remove the set scars from the bandsaw blade on
both surfaces. 
Mine is an under powered 3 wheel bandsaw and my skill in resawing could be better.
Two inch hardwood - especiaaly Hard Maple - strains the 3/4 HP motor and 
dulls the blade more quickly than I like.
My sander is home made using plans from NRG  from years ago - the drum is 11 inches
and the circumference is 8.5 inches - for standard sanding sheets - now I would make it
12 inches - so that I could fit 3 grits of 4 inch cloth backed sanding medium  Klingspor  80/150/220
For the thickness sander =
The goal is to start with a stock thickness that allows a clean
220 finish on both sides - without having to waste much wood to get the
target thickness.
I flip and rotate end to end.  This is using 80 grit.
When I have a clean surface, i sand one side down to 220 and use it as the
table contact.
The other side gets 80 grit passes - with end to end rotation until close to target 
then finish to final with 220.

Take a look at PaintShop Pro - it is less than $50 US.  You can do all this using a computer.
I use a different draw/paint program (Painter ) but it is way more feature rich in paint
and graphic alteration - all that is needed are basic functions: line draw, scale, rotate,
layers,  a polygonal selector tool, paint bucket fill. - lots of layers.  Painter is too expensive for just this - still, it will crash if I do too much
in a session.  As i said, you will not be designing Endeavor, just reproducing it. CAD is by
definition about design.  Crisp lines and perfect curves are nice, but unnecessary to develop
frame patterns. 
I have done it using the same method as you are intending.  The computer is a faster and
more accurate tool in my hands.  You can also color the frame lines - it is easier to know which
line to sand to when shaping and beveling the frames.  You also only have to do half the frame - Copy - Flip Horizontal - line it up and you have a precise mirror and the full frame.
 
The key preliminary steps:
1) Use a canvas/document size that your printer will not "adjust" when printing
for me =  2197 x 1701 pixels  8 1/2 x 11   2796 x 1701 pixels  8 1/2 x 14  and deselect  the "Fit to borders" option.
2) Determine how much scale distortion your scanner produces   - I have to scale up by 102.5% to get identity with the original.
3) Get a clear plastic 15 cm ruler to scan and print out to make sure the print out is accurate.  (I find metric easier to calculate a scale factor.)
4) I model at 1:60,  but work in the computer at 1:48.  The PrintableRuler site has a 1:48 ruler that is useful.
     -- I adjusted its scale in Painter until a printout of it matched my 1/4 inch architect's triangle ruler.
5)  For the ruler and ship plans in the paint program - the magic wand tool is your friend.  With tolerance ~100% and noncontinuous options , when the white background
      of a scan is selected and Cut - just the lines are on the layer - otherwise transparent.
6)  The thinnest line I can get in Painter is 1 pixel wide.  I did use TurboCAD 18 to make a thinner line to import for a base center line and baseline to line everything up.
7)  Scanning - 200x200 pixels is usually sufficient  - Your monitor is probably fixed at 72 pixels so scans with more pixel density just makes for larger files that you have to scale down.  ( Unless the source is a small sized graphic and has poor resolution.
 
Now you can scan in plans - from the book - or from Underhill and plot your points.   Were I to use the book plans, since the Profile and Waterlines cross a seam, I would buy a 2nd used copy of the book and remove the pages to get a flat scan.  And with Underhill - if your copy is like the Brig 12 gun 1840 is the faded blueprint that I scanner in a couple of weeks ago, a color scan instead B/W was necessary.  Removing the background is more complicated.

Thru the 17 C. the shape of the key frame stations was defined using a formula based on  the arc.  For small craft at least -  this became a process 
= whole moulding.   I am not sure how far into the 18 C this continued for ships.  The shape produced is distinctive and to my eye, Endeavor does
not show those characteristics - so even if an equation for the arc system could be found, it is unlikely to apply to Endeavor.  Her shape at mid ship
fairly close to being a rectangle - with rounded lower corners.  It is probably efficient for maximizing cargo capacity - when speed is not  at a premium.
 
Since the shape is already defined - ( not doing a new design ) -  the points of the curve are predetermined - Even if the key Station curves are defined by 
some formula, the intermediate bends that transition between them do not.  I had guessed for a long time that a spline would connect the
points with the least introduction of artifact.  The curves were probably originally drawn at the Stations using actual wooden splines.  The traditional
method for lofting a POF model involves two or three curves for each paired frame (bend). There are as you say about 50 bends in the average ship -
or about 150 complex curves with essentially no two being identical. If you do the final shaping  on a glued up pair then you are down to 100 curves. 
This makes the published Station curves as being of no help for bend shaping. By using a program  with layers the bends can be stacked and outlaying
points be seen and corrected.  With the station lines are part of the data, they can be used as a guide to see where errors are being introduced.
( The Stations are generally every other bend in a small ship but are often every third or fourth in the middle of a larger ships and I have seen as many as eight .)
 
With enough points you can get by using a straight line connect the points tool.  Any slight faceted effect on the frame pattern will not survive the sanding anyway. 
Use a drawing program with the ability to handle a lot of layers and large files...   Scan in the Body plan, Profile, Waterlines, and Buttock lines.  Use them as a
background layer to define the points.  This removes a source of error when the points are measured and transferred.