Jaager

First:  this is not a frame. It is a mold.  The first Italian POB mfg used a term that translated as "bulkhead".  Those parts are not bulkheads.  Western wooden ships did not have bulkheads. Chinese seagoing junks did have actual bulkheads.  But with POB there are no actual frames.  There are no parts that should be called "frames".
 
That the grain for a mold has to support a curve covering as much as 210 degrees is the reason that plywood was first used to make them.  From an esthetic point of view, plywood is a wood product, but not actually wood.  Now another semi synthetic  material: MDF is used by some mfg.  
 
For actual POF, the frame should be made up of timbers.  The timbers should have grain that matched the line of the shape where it lives.    The original builders used compass timbers where there were curves.  This is not really practical for a scale model.  It can be done, but it a lot of work, a lot of luck, and a lot of waste.   An end grain to end grain bond has almost no strength.  A single frame is a breakup waiting to happen.  A pair of frames with timbers that half lap the butt joint of the partner and glue bonded together is very strong.  This is what a 'bend' is.
 

First:  this is not a frame. It is a mold.  The first Italian POB mfg used a term that translated as "bulkhead".  Those parts are not bulkheads.  Western wooden ships did not have bulkheads. Chinese seagoing junks did have actual bulkheads.  But with POB there are no actual frames.  There are no parts that should be called "frames".
 
That the grain for a mold has to support a curve covering as much as 210 degrees is the reason that plywood was first used to make them.  From an esthetic point of view, plywood is a wood product, but not actually wood.  Now another semi synthetic  material: MDF is used by some mfg.  
 
For actual POF, the frame should be made up of timbers.  The timbers should have grain that matched the line of the shape where it lives.    The original builders used compass timbers where there were curves.  This is not really practical for a scale model.  It can be done, but it a lot of work, a lot of luck, and a lot of waste.   An end grain to end grain bond has almost no strength.  A single frame is a breakup waiting to happen.  A pair of frames with timbers that half lap the butt joint of the partner and glue bonded together is very strong.  This is what a 'bend' is.
 

There is such a thing as sawn frame POF and I guess what you have drawn could be considered to be that.  As fat as you have it drawn, it does not meet the spirit of what POF is though.  You are not after a hull that represents what POF is intended to show anyway, so dealing with definitions  is not relevant.
If you scroll cut that pattern from a Pine plank, it should do what you are after.  If you use a plank of 1/2 the thickness and cut twice as many "frames" but with half if them having an opposite grain orientation, when glue bonded in pairs, it may greatly reduce any breakage.
 
If you use a pattern with alignment holes,  doing it as pairs -  one of the pair could be two pieces - Vertical grain - meeting at the "Y" axis in the center of the keel - two pieces for that frame.  The other be two boards meeting at the "X" axis about halfway up.  The result would be three pieces for that frame.  It would be much easier to cut out the pieces.   Bamboo skewers as dowels = idiot proof orientation if you plan it well.
 
 
That is essentially the Hahn method.  It may be overkill for a hull meant to float.

First:  this is not a frame. It is a mold.  The first Italian POB mfg used a term that translated as "bulkhead".  Those parts are not bulkheads.  Western wooden ships did not have bulkheads. Chinese seagoing junks did have actual bulkheads.  But with POB there are no actual frames.  There are no parts that should be called "frames".
 
That the grain for a mold has to support a curve covering as much as 210 degrees is the reason that plywood was first used to make them.  From an esthetic point of view, plywood is a wood product, but not actually wood.  Now another semi synthetic  material: MDF is used by some mfg.  
 
For actual POF, the frame should be made up of timbers.  The timbers should have grain that matched the line of the shape where it lives.    The original builders used compass timbers where there were curves.  This is not really practical for a scale model.  It can be done, but it a lot of work, a lot of luck, and a lot of waste.   An end grain to end grain bond has almost no strength.  A single frame is a breakup waiting to happen.  A pair of frames with timbers that half lap the butt joint of the partner and glue bonded together is very strong.  This is what a 'bend' is.
 

It sounds like a problem with the distance between the blade and the fence at the rear.
Are you using the new accessory?    Guild Product   Thin Strip Saw Jig
 
Thinking on it, I am guessing that if the rear of the fence is pushing the stock back into the blade, the jig will not remedy that.

To enforce the advice already offered,  both machines will pay back more than what they cost IF you scratch build.
For kits alone, either will be a machine in search of a job.  They will be expensive door stops.
 
For any machine:  do not anticipate!   Wait until you have a job to do that a machine will facilitate and buy a quality machine to do it - IF it is a job likely to come up repeatedly.  Hand tools will perform any duty that we need to do.  It just takes more time. 
 
Are you going to build scratch models for sale?  (To make this worth you investment in time and materials, you will need a gimmick - a shortcut.)
Do you have a major project in mind?
 
If you have an unlimited budget: go wild.

For POF,  Pine is a low cost wood to use for frames that will be hidden.  It works as well as is needed.
I dislike Basswood and its tendency to be fuzzy and for the fibers to roll make it a poor choice for frames from my perspective.
 
For POB, either Pine or Basswood will do.  For reasons that seem good but really are not,  Balsa is favored by many.  It is certainly soft and seems like it would be easy to remove what is not wanted.  But Balsa is ugly to work.  It does not plane, rasp, file, or sand nicely.  It is fibrous and wants to tear.  A sharp edge will want to dig in and stop a cut.
 
Most POB modelers who do fill all of the gaps between molds use a horizontal orientation for the filling wood.   A disk sander makes it easy to get a tight fit between molds.  The down side is that the shaping is done in situ.  Major wood removal is done on the whole hull. 
I recommend  the filling be done with the wood mimicking actual frames in orientation.  The inside can be left fat enough for Bamboo skewers to be used to join and orient a stack of layers.
The mold shapes can be used as the pattern and a disk sander can be used for shaping the individual slices.  Then joined using the Bamboo and final shaped .  Then slud into the gap between their molds.  A throw away end piece can be used to make up the difference in thickness for the mold with the pattern on the other side.  The holes for the Bamboo dowels make orientation easy, so the identical pattern can be on both ends.  If the sum of the layer thicknesses come up a bit short, poster board can be used to shim the difference.

My experience with yellow PVA  (Titebond II) is that it has as long of an open time as I need.
 
Theory only:   If the POB molds are plywood, would priming the open edge with an insertion of PVA  and letting it dry long before the planking stage, to fill the gaps provide a better bonding surface?
 
For standard POB, I don't see that racing thru the planking stage is practical.
 
POF or POB with Pine or Basswood fillers the whole way,  if the planking is clamped using brass pins with hitch clocks can be done as quickly as tolerated.  Pins in plywood end grain is mostly a wasted effort.  Drilling the holes to match the proper pattern adds a significant time factor though.  It replaces a racing engine with a lawnmower engine.  The pins nipped and filed or pulled and replaced with Bamboo trunnels, adds a different look. Many more of them are needed for the finished look than required for just holding down a plank.   The resulting look is a modelers convention.  Except for the largest scales, pins and trunnels that are the proper scale diameter are all but impossible.
 

It sounds like a problem with the distance between the blade and the fence at the rear.
Are you using the new accessory?    Guild Product   Thin Strip Saw Jig
 
Thinking on it, I am guessing that if the rear of the fence is pushing the stock back into the blade, the jig will not remedy that.

To enforce the advice already offered,  both machines will pay back more than what they cost IF you scratch build.
For kits alone, either will be a machine in search of a job.  They will be expensive door stops.
 
For any machine:  do not anticipate!   Wait until you have a job to do that a machine will facilitate and buy a quality machine to do it - IF it is a job likely to come up repeatedly.  Hand tools will perform any duty that we need to do.  It just takes more time. 
 
Are you going to build scratch models for sale?  (To make this worth you investment in time and materials, you will need a gimmick - a shortcut.)
Do you have a major project in mind?
 
If you have an unlimited budget: go wild.

My experience with yellow PVA  (Titebond II) is that it has as long of an open time as I need.
 
Theory only:   If the POB molds are plywood, would priming the open edge with an insertion of PVA  and letting it dry long before the planking stage, to fill the gaps provide a better bonding surface?
 
For standard POB, I don't see that racing thru the planking stage is practical.
 
POF or POB with Pine or Basswood fillers the whole way,  if the planking is clamped using brass pins with hitch clocks can be done as quickly as tolerated.  Pins in plywood end grain is mostly a wasted effort.  Drilling the holes to match the proper pattern adds a significant time factor though.  It replaces a racing engine with a lawnmower engine.  The pins nipped and filed or pulled and replaced with Bamboo trunnels, adds a different look. Many more of them are needed for the finished look than required for just holding down a plank.   The resulting look is a modelers convention.  Except for the largest scales, pins and trunnels that are the proper scale diameter are all but impossible.
 

To enforce the advice already offered,  both machines will pay back more than what they cost IF you scratch build.
For kits alone, either will be a machine in search of a job.  They will be expensive door stops.
 
For any machine:  do not anticipate!   Wait until you have a job to do that a machine will facilitate and buy a quality machine to do it - IF it is a job likely to come up repeatedly.  Hand tools will perform any duty that we need to do.  It just takes more time. 
 
Are you going to build scratch models for sale?  (To make this worth you investment in time and materials, you will need a gimmick - a shortcut.)
Do you have a major project in mind?
 
If you have an unlimited budget: go wild.

My experience with yellow PVA  (Titebond II) is that it has as long of an open time as I need.
 
Theory only:   If the POB molds are plywood, would priming the open edge with an insertion of PVA  and letting it dry long before the planking stage, to fill the gaps provide a better bonding surface?
 
For standard POB, I don't see that racing thru the planking stage is practical.
 
POF or POB with Pine or Basswood fillers the whole way,  if the planking is clamped using brass pins with hitch clocks can be done as quickly as tolerated.  Pins in plywood end grain is mostly a wasted effort.  Drilling the holes to match the proper pattern adds a significant time factor though.  It replaces a racing engine with a lawnmower engine.  The pins nipped and filed or pulled and replaced with Bamboo trunnels, adds a different look. Many more of them are needed for the finished look than required for just holding down a plank.   The resulting look is a modelers convention.  Except for the largest scales, pins and trunnels that are the proper scale diameter are all but impossible.
 

To enforce the advice already offered,  both machines will pay back more than what they cost IF you scratch build.
For kits alone, either will be a machine in search of a job.  They will be expensive door stops.
 
For any machine:  do not anticipate!   Wait until you have a job to do that a machine will facilitate and buy a quality machine to do it - IF it is a job likely to come up repeatedly.  Hand tools will perform any duty that we need to do.  It just takes more time. 
 
Are you going to build scratch models for sale?  (To make this worth you investment in time and materials, you will need a gimmick - a shortcut.)
Do you have a major project in mind?
 
If you have an unlimited budget: go wild.

To enforce the advice already offered,  both machines will pay back more than what they cost IF you scratch build.
For kits alone, either will be a machine in search of a job.  They will be expensive door stops.
 
For any machine:  do not anticipate!   Wait until you have a job to do that a machine will facilitate and buy a quality machine to do it - IF it is a job likely to come up repeatedly.  Hand tools will perform any duty that we need to do.  It just takes more time. 
 
Are you going to build scratch models for sale?  (To make this worth you investment in time and materials, you will need a gimmick - a shortcut.)
Do you have a major project in mind?
 
If you have an unlimited budget: go wild.

I do not think that I would care to control the speed by foot pressure on a floor switch.  I have a one dial bench switch.  The speed dial is also the On/Off.  If I find a power level that I like, I have to keep finding it.  That is easier than a continuously random foot pressure control and enduring fatigue or a cramp if it is a long job.   Foredom sells a bench control with two switches.  On/Off plus a speed dial in series, so that a favored speed can be retained.   It is no problem to add a foot controlled On/Off in line.   I use a momentary foot switch with my drill press - because I want the bit in place in the starter divit before it starts cutting. 
 
The bale will run you about $6.   I advise making up a big - all at once - order from Foredom.  Whoever they are using for shipping right now seems to have the goal of getting as rich as possible as quickly as possible.  If their level of shipping costs is the future, local brick and mortar businesses will have the possibility of a major comeback.

Now the budget fun begins:
How much wear has the flex shaft had?  Is adding lube enough or is a new one needed?
Speed control -  table or foot pedal - on/off  or rheostat  - 
Hand pieces - chuck and/or collet?    
Accessories -  right angle (bulky) - drill press - router - router table - vise held block (anchor) for a hand piece mount - even a hammer chisel hand piece and a belt sander

You are very likely correct.   I just prefer using a sanding belt/drum with coarse grit on a small assembly.  A large board cut using a chisel or hand plane does not appeal to me.   It is also not a lot different than the work needed to loft a lot of moulds for single layer POB.  Traditional WL based bread and butter needs a change in perspective.
 
The main factor for me is my obsession with POF.   For me, the lofting is the same whether I build with spaces or no spaces,  show the framing or plank over it,  use stylized framing,  use NA or French all bends,  or  (the Fates forbid) use the furkopfta English framing.  By that, I mean decreasing timber siding in the upper works, single filling frames between the bends, shifting out of line top timbers to frame ports.
 
I am much more comfortable with the pattern intervals of Station to Station as opposed to WL to WL.

I do not think that I would care to control the speed by foot pressure on a floor switch.  I have a one dial bench switch.  The speed dial is also the On/Off.  If I find a power level that I like, I have to keep finding it.  That is easier than a continuously random foot pressure control and enduring fatigue or a cramp if it is a long job.   Foredom sells a bench control with two switches.  On/Off plus a speed dial in series, so that a favored speed can be retained.   It is no problem to add a foot controlled On/Off in line.   I use a momentary foot switch with my drill press - because I want the bit in place in the starter divit before it starts cutting. 
 
The bale will run you about $6.   I advise making up a big - all at once - order from Foredom.  Whoever they are using for shipping right now seems to have the goal of getting as rich as possible as quickly as possible.  If their level of shipping costs is the future, local brick and mortar businesses will have the possibility of a major comeback.

Now the budget fun begins:
How much wear has the flex shaft had?  Is adding lube enough or is a new one needed?
Speed control -  table or foot pedal - on/off  or rheostat  - 
Hand pieces - chuck and/or collet?    
Accessories -  right angle (bulky) - drill press - router - router table - vise held block (anchor) for a hand piece mount - even a hammer chisel hand piece and a belt sander

I do not think that I would care to control the speed by foot pressure on a floor switch.  I have a one dial bench switch.  The speed dial is also the On/Off.  If I find a power level that I like, I have to keep finding it.  That is easier than a continuously random foot pressure control and enduring fatigue or a cramp if it is a long job.   Foredom sells a bench control with two switches.  On/Off plus a speed dial in series, so that a favored speed can be retained.   It is no problem to add a foot controlled On/Off in line.   I use a momentary foot switch with my drill press - because I want the bit in place in the starter divit before it starts cutting. 
 
The bale will run you about $6.   I advise making up a big - all at once - order from Foredom.  Whoever they are using for shipping right now seems to have the goal of getting as rich as possible as quickly as possible.  If their level of shipping costs is the future, local brick and mortar businesses will have the possibility of a major comeback.

I hear you on that score, but I think that's just because we're used to dancing with the girl we brought. I was just thinking that this guy is planning to build an R/C model and an old school "bread and butter" lifts hull would probably be a lot easier and stronger than anything else. If the waterlines are cut carefully, it's quite easy to fair up the hull by simply "knocking off the corners" using a chisel, plane, spokeshave, and/or a disk sander and sanding board. 

You are very likely correct.   I just prefer using a sanding belt/drum with coarse grit on a small assembly.  A large board cut using a chisel or hand plane does not appeal to me.   It is also not a lot different than the work needed to loft a lot of moulds for single layer POB.  Traditional WL based bread and butter needs a change in perspective.
 
The main factor for me is my obsession with POF.   For me, the lofting is the same whether I build with spaces or no spaces,  show the framing or plank over it,  use stylized framing,  use NA or French all bends,  or  (the Fates forbid) use the furkopfta English framing.  By that, I mean decreasing timber siding in the upper works, single filling frames between the bends, shifting out of line top timbers to frame ports.
 
I am much more comfortable with the pattern intervals of Station to Station as opposed to WL to WL.

For UK, I have to amend my suggestions:
Yellow Poplar is  an Eastern US native species.  It is about as hard as Lime, but the colors of the wood is harlequin like.
It is best hidden or painted and has no features that would make it worth paying import prices to use.
Poplar is also a name given to wood from members of the Cottonwood family.  Most of the wood from these species is best used as mulch or pulp for paper.  You do not want to mess with it.
Basswood is a brother to Lime/Linden.  It is not near as good as Lime and is about half as hard and more fuzzy.
 
For your interior supports -  1/4" Pine would be strong, but easier to scroll cut.   As Roger suggests, maybe use 1/8" stock, paired and done as timbers with the butt joints overlapping laterally:  do true frames as 1/4" bends -  make it 1/4" frame and 1.4" space.  With a base of 50% wood for the planking, a single layer would be enough.
The moulded dimension can be wider than the frame of a wooden ship would be.   It can be stair like,  but leave a hollow inside for a motor, batteries and a RF receiver as well as ballast.
 
Even more water immersion friendly would be a hull with no spaces between frames. 
Think a sliced loaf of bread - bread and butter  rather than a sliced hoggie roll bread and butter.
 

Now the budget fun begins:
How much wear has the flex shaft had?  Is adding lube enough or is a new one needed?
Speed control -  table or foot pedal - on/off  or rheostat  - 
Hand pieces - chuck and/or collet?    
Accessories -  right angle (bulky) - drill press - router - router table - vise held block (anchor) for a hand piece mount - even a hammer chisel hand piece and a belt sander