Jaager

Druxey was not referencing not doing a model version of the prototype, for historical reasons.  There have been at least two 18th or 19th or even 20th century models that used iron and that are subjects of recent journal articles.  These articles showed that the iron was gone and the wood around the holes where they were is black.   Our atmosphere contains enough water that when combined with the organic acids in wood works relentlessly oxidize the iron.  "Rusting never sleeps."
 
I have decided to place the deck clamps,  then use a jig to determine the top of each sill and the bottom of each lintel.  This way both are sloped to follow the deck camber at each port.  If you intend to plank the topside out and in - an oversize hole in the frames will be hidden.

I use super blonde flakes.  A fresh batch dissolves fairly quickly.   Old flakes have a residue (a translucent gel) that never dissolves for me. 
 
Ethanol has a special affinity for water.  It is 95%:5% ethanol to water.  The bond is not covalent,  but it requires much more energy and effort to break than is possible with distillation.  One way is to distill from benzene.  Doing this in a closed atmosphere WILL yield 100% ethanol.  BUT, as soon as it is exposed to our atmosphere, it will pull water vapor in until it becomes 95:5 again.  I have not read anything to indicate that it will continue to pull in water beyond that concentration.  The ethanol will go to its gas phase if left in an open container.
 

Topic drift here....  but I remember from Physiology that at a certain point - the brain will go into sleep mode - neither conscious or conscientious effort will be able to stop it.   It seems perverse and ineffective to punish for sleeping on guard duty if the individual was not allowed a nap before that duty.

Druxey was not referencing not doing a model version of the prototype, for historical reasons.  There have been at least two 18th or 19th or even 20th century models that used iron and that are subjects of recent journal articles.  These articles showed that the iron was gone and the wood around the holes where they were is black.   Our atmosphere contains enough water that when combined with the organic acids in wood works relentlessly oxidize the iron.  "Rusting never sleeps."
 
I have decided to place the deck clamps,  then use a jig to determine the top of each sill and the bottom of each lintel.  This way both are sloped to follow the deck camber at each port.  If you intend to plank the topside out and in - an oversize hole in the frames will be hidden.

The bound sets do have a number of photographs-- not likely all taken by researchers, but they are well-curated. There is also updated (ca. 1980s) information and background on most of the boats included. Another very nice feature of the bound volumes is the introductory sections which include the history of the HAMMS program as well as retrospectives by a number of people involved.  A very nice surprise is the artistic and full-color plates made by some of the researchers-- there's an entire "artwork" appendix in one of the volumes.  I haven't seen sets listed for $3,000 in recent years, but have for around half that; it's actually an incredible bargain when one considers ordering all the plans individually from the Smithsonian. 
 
Here's a jot I wrote about these Volumes recently, for any interested: 
 

The Historic American Merchant Marine Survey
 
In the midst of the Great Depression, the Works Progress Administration had many projects designed to employ workers laid off from various trades.  The short-lived Federal Project No. 6 employed shipwrights, marine surveyors, and naval architects to document ships and boats around the United States.  Despite its formal name (Historic American Merchant Marine Survey), many of the vessels surveyed were more common or anonymous than historic; a number of recreational craft and foreign-builds are also included.  During the year-and-a-half they were active (1936-1937), they recorded over 350 vessels.  Some consist of lines lifted from half-models in museums and shipyards, while others were on-site documentation of full-size vessels—some derelict, some still active.  The presentation consists of the common three-view scale drawing of a vessel’s lines, and often numerous pages of construction details, machinery details, and sail and rigging plans. 
 
These drawings, while available individually from the Smithsonian Institution for many years, had not been assembled into publication until 1983, when the Ayer Publishing Co. of New Hampshire turned these into a large seven volume set, complete with an introduction on the project, retrospectives by those involved, and new introductory information on each recorded vessel.  Further, the volumes include photographs of many vessels during documentation, as well as full-color and monochrome watercolor sketches made by the surveyors. The beauty of this edition is astonishing—and every drawing in it was hand inked by gifted experts, each with their own style, precision, and artfulness. The size—23-1/2” x 18-1/2” is a very worthy size for the quality of the illustrations, and many pages are foldouts. Very few libraries hold these volumes; I haven’t been able to find how many were printed.  According to WorldCat, only 11 sets are in U.S. Libraries, only 2 of which are on the West Coast.  
 
The range of documented watercraft is astounding.  Some of the older recorded vessels are from the 1820s, while others were just a few years old.  The survey includes dugout canoes from Nicaragua, a U.S. Revenue Cutter, sharpies, scows, schooners, barks, full-rigged iron ships, sponge fishing craft, tug boats, steamships, stern- and side-wheelers, and even two Polar exploration vessels (Peary’s S.S. Roosevelt, and what may be the only larger vessel from the survey still in existence: Roald Amundsen’s Gjöa).  Small inshore fishing craft of many designs and lineages are also represented.  
 
The West Coast is well represented for some areas, but in the Retrospective, a contributor expresses regret at not getting the program into and up the Columbia River.  Columbia River watercraft have since received attention and documentation, courtesy of the Historic American Engineering Record, established by the National Park Service in 1969.  The closest-to-Astoria vessel in the HAMMS set is the Steam Schooner Willapa, built in Raymond, Washington in 1908. The Willapa is masterfully recorded in over 17 sheets of drawings.  The volumes include a number of vessels of this type as well as other lumber carriers, including sailing vessels built in the Puget Sound—no doubt many serviced ports on the Columbia River. 
 
That this project was ever created is a bit of a miracle; its success is perhaps even more miraculous given the necessary organization and its brief existence.  At one point, the director of the project (Eric J. Steinlein) was faced with an overwhelming backlog of work the very day before the official termination of the project.  He penned a letter that afternoon beginning “Dear Mr. Roosevelt…” which bought them six more months to work. 
 
That this was the right project at the right time cannot be understated. A collapsed economy and widespread poverty spelled a quick end to many already aged wooden vessels. The age of working sail was effectively over, and steel was becoming the material of choice for smaller and smaller craft—eventually fiberglass would replace the smallest of wooden work boats. During the Great Depression, the older relics had not yet rotted completely away, and they were ripe for documentation.  These volumes provide a glimpse of what was—a diverse fleet no longer in existence, captured in its twilight. Also captured in these volumes are the mastery of draftsmen trained by hand, shipbuilders trained by eye, and the ever-pressing urgency of historical documentation. 
 
 

Benjamin,
Playing the numbers, knowing nothing about your real situation, 
at 15 you are likely entering a time of brain development that will only be complete when age ~22 is reached. 
Your interests may change significantly as this proceeds.  Making major capital outlays for tools now, based on a focus that may change significantly,  may leave you with tools that you have no use for.   Returns from the second hand tool market are decidedly in a buyers favor. 
 
If the buyer of your current model is family or pseudo family then you are assured of a return.  If you intend to sell to a stranger,  I believe that the experience with most who do  is that the selling price is pretty close to what was paid for the kit.   I think for most of us, getting a return that is equal to materials plus hours spent x $15  is an opium dream.
 
Check some recent threads here about adapting an electric drill to act as a lathe.  A corded electric drill is a tool that will be useful for your whole life.  A cordless rechargeable drill is more convenient but the batteries have a shelf life and buying a replacement in the future - may be difficult due to tech changes or companies being companies, or cost more than it is worth.
 
 
 

I use super blonde flakes.  A fresh batch dissolves fairly quickly.   Old flakes have a residue (a translucent gel) that never dissolves for me. 
 
Ethanol has a special affinity for water.  It is 95%:5% ethanol to water.  The bond is not covalent,  but it requires much more energy and effort to break than is possible with distillation.  One way is to distill from benzene.  Doing this in a closed atmosphere WILL yield 100% ethanol.  BUT, as soon as it is exposed to our atmosphere, it will pull water vapor in until it becomes 95:5 again.  I have not read anything to indicate that it will continue to pull in water beyond that concentration.  The ethanol will go to its gas phase if left in an open container.
 

Benjamin,
Playing the numbers, knowing nothing about your real situation, 
at 15 you are likely entering a time of brain development that will only be complete when age ~22 is reached. 
Your interests may change significantly as this proceeds.  Making major capital outlays for tools now, based on a focus that may change significantly,  may leave you with tools that you have no use for.   Returns from the second hand tool market are decidedly in a buyers favor. 
 
If the buyer of your current model is family or pseudo family then you are assured of a return.  If you intend to sell to a stranger,  I believe that the experience with most who do  is that the selling price is pretty close to what was paid for the kit.   I think for most of us, getting a return that is equal to materials plus hours spent x $15  is an opium dream.
 
Check some recent threads here about adapting an electric drill to act as a lathe.  A corded electric drill is a tool that will be useful for your whole life.  A cordless rechargeable drill is more convenient but the batteries have a shelf life and buying a replacement in the future - may be difficult due to tech changes or companies being companies, or cost more than it is worth.
 
 
 

This is an unsolved problem for me, too.
 
I need a bonding agent that will survive significant shear force and will readily release without affecting the PVA bonds next to it.
 
Duco is a cellulose nitrate adhesive that releases with acetone.  PVA is unaffected by acetone.  But Duco as poor shear strength in my experience.
 
Fish glue is a hide glue -  they are protein based adhesives.  The protein is totally denatured in the presence of ethanol and heat.   It is a strong adhesive that has a long history of competence. 
The traditional form of hide glue is from a hot pot.  This avoids needing a solvent, but is complex and time consuming.  More work is needed than squeezing out a blob.
I assume that the solvent in Seccotine is water.   Franklin makes a liquid hide glue, but the water content is significant.  Old Brown glue is supposed to be better quality, but still water.
I use it for temporary timbers filling the spaces between or within frames.  It is better to have a solid hull when shaping, faring, and sanding.  No movement of timbers and the edges are crisp after it is done.
I could not avoid using too much hide glue, so even the timbers of a pilot schooner were too thick to get a bond release without the heat gun cooking the Maple frame timbers.
I suppose I should have used dots of glue.  Also, if a layer of newspaper or similar loose fiber paper was a part of each layer, the ethanol would wick in more readily, but glue would be needed on each side of the paper and I want quick and dirty.
 
I next tried Scotch perm double sided tape.  Ethanol affects it.  It has good enough shear strength most of the time.  But to increase the strength, I burnished the first side.  It increases the hold.  Too much.  It releases well enough, but the burnished side lease the adhesive behind.  I can find no solvent for it, so it is a mechanical removal process, between frames.  It is maybe 200 or more gaps.  HMS Centurion is still waiting for me to recharge my initiative to tackle that tedium.
 
My current thought is to use rubber cement.   Apply a layer on each surface.  Left it dry.  Stick the two together.
The solvent is N-heptane.   It does not affect PVA bonds.  I suppose that using it as a solvent instead the a rubber cement thinner wants it being done where there is excellent ventilation and no chance of ignition.

No.   It may not be available.  My search points to it being another protein based adhesive.
 
I suggest that you give Old Brown glue a test, but use dots.   Try a layer of wedding gift tissue paper along with it.
It should mechanically separate.  Hot ethanol will have it roll up into little balls.
 
StewMac has this really neato seam separator knife:
 

This is an unsolved problem for me, too.
 
I need a bonding agent that will survive significant shear force and will readily release without affecting the PVA bonds next to it.
 
Duco is a cellulose nitrate adhesive that releases with acetone.  PVA is unaffected by acetone.  But Duco as poor shear strength in my experience.
 
Fish glue is a hide glue -  they are protein based adhesives.  The protein is totally denatured in the presence of ethanol and heat.   It is a strong adhesive that has a long history of competence. 
The traditional form of hide glue is from a hot pot.  This avoids needing a solvent, but is complex and time consuming.  More work is needed than squeezing out a blob.
I assume that the solvent in Seccotine is water.   Franklin makes a liquid hide glue, but the water content is significant.  Old Brown glue is supposed to be better quality, but still water.
I use it for temporary timbers filling the spaces between or within frames.  It is better to have a solid hull when shaping, faring, and sanding.  No movement of timbers and the edges are crisp after it is done.
I could not avoid using too much hide glue, so even the timbers of a pilot schooner were too thick to get a bond release without the heat gun cooking the Maple frame timbers.
I suppose I should have used dots of glue.  Also, if a layer of newspaper or similar loose fiber paper was a part of each layer, the ethanol would wick in more readily, but glue would be needed on each side of the paper and I want quick and dirty.
 
I next tried Scotch perm double sided tape.  Ethanol affects it.  It has good enough shear strength most of the time.  But to increase the strength, I burnished the first side.  It increases the hold.  Too much.  It releases well enough, but the burnished side lease the adhesive behind.  I can find no solvent for it, so it is a mechanical removal process, between frames.  It is maybe 200 or more gaps.  HMS Centurion is still waiting for me to recharge my initiative to tackle that tedium.
 
My current thought is to use rubber cement.   Apply a layer on each surface.  Left it dry.  Stick the two together.
The solvent is N-heptane.   It does not affect PVA bonds.  I suppose that using it as a solvent instead the a rubber cement thinner wants it being done where there is excellent ventilation and no chance of ignition.

No.   It may not be available.  My search points to it being another protein based adhesive.
 
I suggest that you give Old Brown glue a test, but use dots.   Try a layer of wedding gift tissue paper along with it.
It should mechanically separate.  Hot ethanol will have it roll up into little balls.
 
StewMac has this really neato seam separator knife:
 

Draque,
 
I have given answers to questions that you probably did not know you had to formulate. 
 
You already have as much information as is really needed or can be expected for most vessels that are unique. 
In my shop, I could build the hull,  POF  with what you have.  I favor framing that is close to prototype as far as scantlings, yet with a style that is has artistic interest.  My inspiration is from the Navy Board models.  They are not an engineer's model.
 
A troublesome problem for me is that the location and run of the wale has to be guessed.  The wale is where I change from open framing to complete planking.
 
You should probably totally plank the deck.  A plan of a near contemporary vessel that has a deck beam layout will have to be found and a ratio and proportion adaptation made to get beam location and interval as well as hatches and other openings.   Just be sure to label the model as a reconstruction instead of an exact representation.  The difference would only make a difference to a handful of historians.

I will confess that I have zero interest in the internals.  I consider the framing above the wale to be about as interesting as looking at 2x4 framing of a single family dwelling.   My focus is the curves of the swimming body. 
Ignoring my bias and its non-support of your ambition,  for a first effort at scratch POF, I suspect that not taking too big of a bite is prudent.  Going with the outside only helps make a task that can be overwhelming easier to complete.  
Then, when you gain the confidence - you can worry about the internals.  The biggest challenge with it is how to display it - otherwise, why bother?   Even more challenging, how do you display it without making a hash of the outside?   A practical way is to do a half hull.
 
 
I see that structure as the planksheer.  I would mark the top as being also the top of the waterway. 
That means that it is the line to use to define the run of the deck clamp, once waterway thickness and deck beam thickness is added to the gauge.
 
 
To repeat what Druxey wrote.   If you have the rabbet, then the lines are inside the planking.  Ideal for POF.
 
Where there is no internal planking, the stanchions may or may not be extensions of the frames, In any case, they are just addons.  The serious part of the frames would end at the underside of the waterway.  The original would be stronger if the heels of the stanchions were in the spaces.  It is likely that the stanchion spacing was its own individual thing.   It would be easier for you to make the waterway wider and extend it over the top of the frame heads.  The stanchions can then sit on top of the waterway.  No need to cut notches.  After it is put together, it is almost impossible to tell which dimension has the break.  A tight notch with no gaps is difficult to pull off  - especially which as many replications as must be done.
 
Also, since this will be a whole hull and not a section model, it is pointless to bother with butt chocks.   They make frame assembly much more difficult, take much longer and would take a fiber optic scope to even see.  
I think most North American yards did a simple butt joint and depended on the partner timber side scarphed at the join to provide the strength.  It is both stronger, less expensive, and less fiddly.   For the real answer, I guess it comes down to whether the Australian builders went around Carter's barn like the English, or cut to the chase like the North Americans.😉   

Find an Architectural Scale Ruler, Imperial   not only is there a 1/4":1' scale, there is a 1/2":1'  with an inch section.
 
 

You can still do POF.   It would be unfortunate if you let an unrealistic requirement drive out the GOOD.
 
This is an excellent size vessel for a first POF.   Concede that you are making a model and not a definitive demonstration of colonial shipbuilding practice in 1870.
 
An attractive frame display should be the objective, not the actual vessel shrunken down.  
 
Given when and where this vessel was built, all bends is probable.  
 
No war, no critical timber shortage, reduced siding of the frame timbers is not probable.  Being a schooner, the area of the framing between the keel and the wale is fairly small anyway.  
 
The physics of wood - the engineering strength of the material  is a constant - time does not change that.  I find a table of scantlings for a close enough time and fly with that.
 
Your stations are at 3 bend intervals.  That is 6 frames - in pairs with over laping timbers.
A 100 tonnage vessel - American Bureau of Shipping 1870 - (a marine insurance standards) -  floors sided 8"
Measure the distance between the stations = D
D - 8x6 =  space x 3
If that number   is in the 1" - 2" range - it may not be esthetic to bother showing the frames.   During the 200-250 years of the golden age of wood and sail, the builders - especially merchantmen - seemed to keep cycling back to Frame = Frame = Space.   So 8" would be my guess for the answer to the equation.  
 
The all bends and space = room is an invention of about 1900 on.   The old guys who knew how to build large wooden vessels were long dead and school taught engineers had taken over.
 
Some realistic scantlings  (ABS  1870 - 1885 - 1903)  For a 100 ton merchant vessel.
 
 
  Part                               sided     moulded
keel                                  10          11
keelson/riders                  10         11
Stem/sternpost                 9            11
Transom                            10          10
Floor timbers                    8            10
Top timbers plankshr         5            5
Bilgestrakes                                     3.5
Ceiling  flat of floor                        2
Ceiling  above bilge strk                 3
Clamps                                 4         11
Strakes below clamps          3         11
Main rail                              5          11
Waterways                          6            8
Garboard           thick                        4
Planks to wale                                  2.5
Wales                                               3
Topside planking                            2.5
Planksheer                                      3
Deck planks                                    2.5
Rudder stock  dia                           12
rudder pintles                                  1.5
Deck Beams      ln            8      ln  22 ft
Floor timbers at midship =  60% of beam         18.5'  x .6 =  ~11'
Half floors                                                                                   5.5'
 
Lap >= 1/8 Beam            18.5' / 8 =  2.3  ~ 2.5    so F1 should be 5' or more
 
F2    also 5'    
 
For the other timbers, they will mostly be above the wale.   Since they will be hidden their length does not matter.
 
I fill the spaces above the wale with the same wood that I use for the frames.  
I do the same for the spaces between the keel and keelson.   This makes for a strong hull and makes bend placement and orientation more less idiot proof.
It also saves having to notch the keel and keelson.
 
 

No.   It may not be available.  My search points to it being another protein based adhesive.
 
I suggest that you give Old Brown glue a test, but use dots.   Try a layer of wedding gift tissue paper along with it.
It should mechanically separate.  Hot ethanol will have it roll up into little balls.
 
StewMac has this really neato seam separator knife:
 

This is an unsolved problem for me, too.
 
I need a bonding agent that will survive significant shear force and will readily release without affecting the PVA bonds next to it.
 
Duco is a cellulose nitrate adhesive that releases with acetone.  PVA is unaffected by acetone.  But Duco as poor shear strength in my experience.
 
Fish glue is a hide glue -  they are protein based adhesives.  The protein is totally denatured in the presence of ethanol and heat.   It is a strong adhesive that has a long history of competence. 
The traditional form of hide glue is from a hot pot.  This avoids needing a solvent, but is complex and time consuming.  More work is needed than squeezing out a blob.
I assume that the solvent in Seccotine is water.   Franklin makes a liquid hide glue, but the water content is significant.  Old Brown glue is supposed to be better quality, but still water.
I use it for temporary timbers filling the spaces between or within frames.  It is better to have a solid hull when shaping, faring, and sanding.  No movement of timbers and the edges are crisp after it is done.
I could not avoid using too much hide glue, so even the timbers of a pilot schooner were too thick to get a bond release without the heat gun cooking the Maple frame timbers.
I suppose I should have used dots of glue.  Also, if a layer of newspaper or similar loose fiber paper was a part of each layer, the ethanol would wick in more readily, but glue would be needed on each side of the paper and I want quick and dirty.
 
I next tried Scotch perm double sided tape.  Ethanol affects it.  It has good enough shear strength most of the time.  But to increase the strength, I burnished the first side.  It increases the hold.  Too much.  It releases well enough, but the burnished side lease the adhesive behind.  I can find no solvent for it, so it is a mechanical removal process, between frames.  It is maybe 200 or more gaps.  HMS Centurion is still waiting for me to recharge my initiative to tackle that tedium.
 
My current thought is to use rubber cement.   Apply a layer on each surface.  Left it dry.  Stick the two together.
The solvent is N-heptane.   It does not affect PVA bonds.  I suppose that using it as a solvent instead the a rubber cement thinner wants it being done where there is excellent ventilation and no chance of ignition.

This is an unsolved problem for me, too.
 
I need a bonding agent that will survive significant shear force and will readily release without affecting the PVA bonds next to it.
 
Duco is a cellulose nitrate adhesive that releases with acetone.  PVA is unaffected by acetone.  But Duco as poor shear strength in my experience.
 
Fish glue is a hide glue -  they are protein based adhesives.  The protein is totally denatured in the presence of ethanol and heat.   It is a strong adhesive that has a long history of competence. 
The traditional form of hide glue is from a hot pot.  This avoids needing a solvent, but is complex and time consuming.  More work is needed than squeezing out a blob.
I assume that the solvent in Seccotine is water.   Franklin makes a liquid hide glue, but the water content is significant.  Old Brown glue is supposed to be better quality, but still water.
I use it for temporary timbers filling the spaces between or within frames.  It is better to have a solid hull when shaping, faring, and sanding.  No movement of timbers and the edges are crisp after it is done.
I could not avoid using too much hide glue, so even the timbers of a pilot schooner were too thick to get a bond release without the heat gun cooking the Maple frame timbers.
I suppose I should have used dots of glue.  Also, if a layer of newspaper or similar loose fiber paper was a part of each layer, the ethanol would wick in more readily, but glue would be needed on each side of the paper and I want quick and dirty.
 
I next tried Scotch perm double sided tape.  Ethanol affects it.  It has good enough shear strength most of the time.  But to increase the strength, I burnished the first side.  It increases the hold.  Too much.  It releases well enough, but the burnished side lease the adhesive behind.  I can find no solvent for it, so it is a mechanical removal process, between frames.  It is maybe 200 or more gaps.  HMS Centurion is still waiting for me to recharge my initiative to tackle that tedium.
 
My current thought is to use rubber cement.   Apply a layer on each surface.  Left it dry.  Stick the two together.
The solvent is N-heptane.   It does not affect PVA bonds.  I suppose that using it as a solvent instead the a rubber cement thinner wants it being done where there is excellent ventilation and no chance of ignition.

You already speak "wood", which puts you ahead,  but wooden vessels involve learning an entirely new language. 
The rate of attrition is very high with enthusiastic beginners.  To gift yourself with an optimistic chance of sticking with it, level 1 is still the path to do it.   If you are US based,  something like a Bluejacket beginner's kit is worth consideration.  Small open boats are not as sexy as a large vessel with multiple masts, but they are elegant in their own way and their brothers are a part of the big boys, so the skills translate as well as does the language.
Steel - if that is what is meant by Navy battleship - involves a whole lot of different skills and a different focus. 
Even here, because of size a BB has a ton more of repetitive detail that a YTB or a YMS or even a DE.

You already speak "wood", which puts you ahead,  but wooden vessels involve learning an entirely new language. 
The rate of attrition is very high with enthusiastic beginners.  To gift yourself with an optimistic chance of sticking with it, level 1 is still the path to do it.   If you are US based,  something like a Bluejacket beginner's kit is worth consideration.  Small open boats are not as sexy as a large vessel with multiple masts, but they are elegant in their own way and their brothers are a part of the big boys, so the skills translate as well as does the language.
Steel - if that is what is meant by Navy battleship - involves a whole lot of different skills and a different focus. 
Even here, because of size a BB has a ton more of repetitive detail that a YTB or a YMS or even a DE.

I have an old Aeropiccola Torino plank bender -  it works well on thin Maple.
I do not see that a curling iron is any different in technology.  I would give a dry heat curved surface and then a damp version of the same a long intense effort before devolving to something meant for full size like a steam chamber,  ..... or a microwave - which has a good possibility of doing serious harm to the unseen interior. 
With the plank bender, I learned that wearing a pair of cotton or Kevlar carving gloves will save on blisters and unwanted notification that fingers not holding the wood are where they should not be.
 
The real keys to success are probably:
using the correct species of wood to begin with  -  most if not all of the species provided with mass market kits are probably species that resist bending.
the thickness
if the stock is thin and wide - bending across the thick dimension is never going to go well,
 
 
 

Amazon for a wide variety of options. 
 
I found a Hobby King site - US and OZ  - selling covering irons - something that may better suit.
 
Wood is not water soluble.  The lignin binder that holds wood fibers together is not water soluble either. 
Heat does loosen lignin bonding.
Water plus heat = steam ( which transfers heat more efficiently than air ) is useful if the wood needing bending is so thick that the surface begins to char before the interior heats up enough.   For planks, most are probably thin enough  not to need a steam assist, dry heat should be sufficient.
If it is edge bending, give serious thought to spilling instead.

You already speak "wood", which puts you ahead,  but wooden vessels involve learning an entirely new language. 
The rate of attrition is very high with enthusiastic beginners.  To gift yourself with an optimistic chance of sticking with it, level 1 is still the path to do it.   If you are US based,  something like a Bluejacket beginner's kit is worth consideration.  Small open boats are not as sexy as a large vessel with multiple masts, but they are elegant in their own way and their brothers are a part of the big boys, so the skills translate as well as does the language.
Steel - if that is what is meant by Navy battleship - involves a whole lot of different skills and a different focus. 
Even here, because of size a BB has a ton more of repetitive detail that a YTB or a YMS or even a DE.

A good quality hand fret or coping saw with one of those gangplank "V" opening base would not take up much room.  For the first time, the slow and up close and personal aspect is fun.  
I prefer using my 9" bench top bandsaw for scroll cutting.  With the Carter products blade guide, it will twist and turn as much as I need.  Eats thru 1/4" Hard Maple quickly - just as long as I keep small scrap from jamming the blade.  The blades have too much set to get more than sorta close to the line.  My purpose built scroll saw is junk and the up-down chatter was too irritating. 
 
Backing up and redoing - it allows you the opportunity to see just how close full on scratch building is.  Doing the step into scratch opens up a magnitude larger world of possibilities.  The intimidating virtuoso projects in our scratch forum are the exceptions.  They are way more complex than it needs to be.  I wonder if Jean Boudriot had any idea what he was unleashing with the publication of his 74 gun series?

OK,  if you have not started, go back to this initial step it replace these components with something that is waterproof.  I would skip any plywood replacement and go straight to hardwood.
For the price and ease of cutting Yellow Poplar is difficult to better.  You can even use thicker material for the molds and center spine.  The outside keel can be a separate timber if the spine is thicker than the actual keel.
 
Valente Lumber in Averill Park looks to have what you would need, and probably can or knows who can do the necessary resawing.  It looks like there is a possible valuable resource there.  There is probably a local woodworkers club in your region and those guys are good at being helpful - especially to a weird duck like a ship model builder.
 
I suspect that Roger's suggestions bear very close attention.