Jaager

The cross chock that this plan uses is one of roughly four methods of dealing with the butt of F1 port and F1 stb over the keel.   The French often used a more complicated chock system.   A half floor is strong and is easy.  It is more timber expensive.  A long arm F1 meeting a short arm F1 was used on later 19th century merchantmen.  Which was the long arm alternated bend to bend.
The butting of F1 to F1 over the keel was almost universally forbidden.  It would be interesting to know how far back that this was discovered to be a very bad practice and how long it took to figure it out.
Your disc sander   will be useful for the timber butts.  It will be difficult to impossible for a lot of the outside bevels.  It will be essentially useless for the inside bevels.
A sanding drum is the tool.  There are sleeve drums.  The drums are rubber.  The sleeves are fitted by squishing the rubber.  The outward expansion is not always uniform, There is often an out of round situation.  The sleeves have to be bought and are not low cost.  The grit choices are limited.
Sleeveless drums use standard 9x11 sandpaper sheets with a range of grits.  There is a 3inch diameter drum that is 6 inches long.  There are a variety of 3 inch long drum diameters -  3 inch down to 1/2" (if the pad layer is removed.  This helps with inside bevels.  
For POF a table for the drum is mostly in the way.  Almost none of it is 90 degrees.
The machine needed is a 1/3HP or 1/2HP motor with a 1/2" shaft.   The amount of dust generated is impressive.  An open motor runs the risk of becoming dust filled and burning up.
A low cost standard drill press will work.  It would be especially useful if the motor will rotate 180 degrees.   Working with nothing but the stock above the drum is most convenient.  The line being sanded to is easier to illuminate and see.  
A piece of 12" x 12" Masonite with a 1/2" hole in the middle that is placed on the motor shaft right where it exits the motor keeps dust from the motor.
I made mine using a 1/3 HP TEFC 1700 RPM motor.  For sanding wood, 1700 RPM is about as fast as is functional.  Used steel braces and brackets from Home Depot as an Erector Set type motor mount.   Most of my effort was spent adding a table that has not been needed.
A used motor would be a cost efficient way to gain this tool, but a quality new motor  would probably cost more than a mass market spindle sander.  A major negative to a spindle sander is that the motors seem to come with proprietary shaft mounts .  There are a wide variety of cutting, grinding and sanding tools that use a standard 1.2" shaft attachment,
Dust collection and not breathing it will be a challenge and you will want a stage 4 hazmat suit and no matter what you do, your environment will drip with sawdust.   Even in my garage, if I lived with a female, I would face summary execution for the amount and area of dust spread.
 
Looking at my La Renommee build log may help show what I an describing.  It was intended to be a basic methods demonstration.  It is a pseudo carved hull  but it is POF without the spaces.   Dealing with the spaces about doubles the work.  This project was about quick and dirty.

Once you have the timbers scroll cut and rough shaped,  the problem is how it assemble them to get the accurate shape.
The POF literature has several methods that attempt to solve this problem
Long quilters pins are useful for this.  
Where to place the pins?
The pattern needs to get into a computer graphics program.  Adjustment of the scale of the printed output is a necessary task.   A raster based program will work well enough.  All that is needed is very basic tools,  
PS in the cloud is quick and dirty, but potentially expensive.
Inside the timbers does not work for many of them when the bevel gets interesting.  There is no inside that is common at either outside face.  The holes need repair.  Dowels are difficult and are fragile at scale.
I solved this by placing the pin locations outside the shape of the bends.  
I use 4 for each timber.  At each corner but not too far.  Sanding the butts will remove sites that are too far.  Close to the pattern lines but not too close.  The holes can mar the sides of the frames.
Rather than guess each site, I made a jig.  It is a 7point Ariel Black "o" merged with a 4 point Ariel Black "o".  The lower case letter o is mostly round.  The inside of the 4 pt is small enough to leave no guessing and the outside of the 7 pt is far enough out if it just kisses the pattern line.
The timbers are a bit wider.  The additional waste is only interesting at the last 2 or 3 stations at either end.
An additional advantage is that there can be an identical pattern on either face of the bend.  This means that all 4 lines are available instead of 3 and guessing the 4th.
You are using plans that already have the bends patterns extrapolated.  I use lines plans and derive my own timber patterns.  I found that extracting three outside and three inside patterns for 60 - 100 bends was beyond tedious and took a long time.   I only use the existing station lines for the outside and made a jig in Painter to quickly draw the inside moulded shape.  I shape each station section of bends as a unit.
It is way way quicker.
A part that needs practice is the timber to timber butt join.  If I try to sand to the middle of the line - that is usually too much.  There is a gap.  I use a 1.5 or 2 pixel line.  I just kiss the line - no white.  This usually produces a tight joint.  It will take practice.
 

The NRG saw jig is a small device that sits in a slot on the saw table.  Its function is to allow you use the side of the blade opposite the fence as the area where the finished slices are generated.  The small slices do not get bound between the blade and the fence and turned into a missile shot back at you - kickback.   The downside is that the fence has to be moved toward the blade after every slice.
 
Bob Cleek suggests using the eraser end of an old style wooden pencil as a push stick.  It does have a better friction hold.  I do say that a metal push stick is a very bad ideal.  I had to pay to have a carbide tooth welded back on to a Freud blade  because I used one.
 
As for a bandsaw,  - turning a large piece of lumber or a log section into rough stock thickness slices is termed 'resawing'.  Any 9" or 10" bench top bandsaw will be too under powered to be a serious resawing machine.  It takes a big boy floor model saw.  Going low end is false economy.  A machine that has enough power to drive the blade thru a thick piece of wood and engineered to keep the blade from moving while doing the work you ask of it is what is wanted.  If you have such a machine and the blade starts wandering or canting,  it is likely because the blade has become dull.
 
AP - after perpendicular
FP   fore perpenducular
These define the part of the hull that contains the frames.   Short hand naval architecture terms.
 
Scratch POF pretty much requires serious knowledge of basic naval architecture.  Serious scratch POF uses a lot of wood for the frames.  It is much less expensive than kits if you do more than a few hulls and you have the machinery to be your own saw mill.   It helps to be young, but harvesting your own lumber from near by trees really cuts down on the cost of wood.  It also gives access to wood species that are not commercially available  like Apple - the king.  
 
The bleeding from a table saw accident is probably the least of it.  The parts that have been amputated is worse.  I don't think we have access to a Niven autodoc to fix that.

Your patterns indicate where  the timbers are for each of the pair of frames.
This means that with multiple short segments,  you do not need frame stock that is all that wide.  
The way you are proposing to do this is probably not sustainable.   It just will not work for bends at the midship.  This is most of the bends.
When it is broken down into timbers,  the stock width problem is solved.

       I prefer 1:60.  It is close to museum scale which allows for detail.  It is 0.8 less in any one dimension, but the product of the three yields a hull that has 50% of the volume.   Stock that is 2" wide works for any hull for me - even a first rate.  I find that 2 foot long stock is my sweet stock for bench top handling.
I hate cants.  I will not use them.  I use full bends all the way to the FP and AP.  The bevel gets really interesting at the ends.  The keystone shape of the floor timber - being very deep and sometimes wider that 2" of a large  hull means that for some liner hulls 4" stock is necessary.  This is inconvenient.
After years of experimenting, I have found that the optimal method is to use a 14" bandsaw to slice the 2" wide stock from my piece of lumber.  How much extra to set the slice thickness is a continuous challenge..
Too thick and there is waste and tedious extra passes thru the thickness sander.  Too little and the bandsaw blade scars are not removed.  It becomes stock for the next smaller hull.
A poor quality bandsaw can produce cuts with blade deviation.  Wedge shaped slices are difficult to rescue and are never going to work for this hull.
The efficiency of a bandsaw for this makes renting time on one from someone who has one worth it.  I have addressed which type blade more economical in other posts.
 

I wrote this before you wrote that this was not a serious beginning of a scratch hull using POF.
 
 
I will start this photo by photo.
Photo 1 and  2:
 Get a digital caliper.  Precision is more important than accuracy.  You only need to be internally consistent and reproducible.  A steel ruler is only really good for length and eyeball estimate.
Photo 3 and 4:
The NRG saw jig will be a big help.  Use a push stick and or covering board.  The Byrens saw will not bit as deeply as a 10 inch saw but a mistake can ruin your whole day.  The primary job of a table saw is to eat your fingers if you give it a chance.
 

The rest of the photos:
The patterns are for bends
A bend is a pair of frames that each side strengthen the butt joins of its partner..
A major advantage of POF is that frames are built up using timbers.
The timbers are intended to be as straight a section as possible.
In full size, there are limitations on the size of the stock that a tree can provide.
Timbers tended to be 5-8 feet long.  The tops where the moulded dimension not wide and were not as heavy could sustain a much longer piece.
The butts of the timbers  of one frame meet in the middle of its partner frame timber.  The overlap makes for a strong join.
Your frame should two layers.  Your stock is twice as thick as it should be.   You do not even have the most important timber = the floor timber.
Photo 19:
The wood where the floor timber and F1 would be as well as the (twice as wide as it should be) cross chock all have cross grain.  Cross grain is just wrong.
 

I will digress a bit before I start.   These two kits are Amati POB kits and they are Italian as the primary plans language, even if translated.
 
POB and POF are two entirely different methods of hull construction. 
Once a POB hull is planked and decked - there is essentially no difference from POF in what you do after.
Unless fillers are used between every mold, the POB hull, before it is planked, is about as attractive as a mud fence.
Even the most basic POF hull tends to be elegant.
 
Pegasus is a 6th rate,  a 3 masted man of war.  It may appear small and easy but it is not.
Vanguard is a 3rd rate,  a 74.  This is a formidable beast.   A 120 gun 1st rate at first seems twice as large,  but it is generally just more tedious.  There are more decks and more guns - but that is just more repetition of the same thing - over and over. 
 
Prior experience with plastic kits is probably more of a hindrance than a help for building a wooden ship model kit.  The primary reason is that it tends to lead to unrealistic expectations are far as what the kit instructions provide.  Pegasus will come at you with expectation that you have an in depth background in the basic skills and techniques.  The instructions for large vessels tend to start from this point.
 
You may well be one of the ~5% exceptions who finish when starting at a very advanced project.  But with every project,  even the most experienced of us hit patches where we get frustrated, weary, lose inspiration, and take a break.   Those who find themselves in deeper water than they had imagined when enthusiasm was dominant,  tend not to come back when they hit this patch.
 
You might should consider delaying these two projects.  Give a thought to "going to school" on the basics.  While not the only way by any means,  the MS Model Shipwright series is a safer way to gain experience.  There will be plenty of help here. 

The cross chock that this plan uses is one of roughly four methods of dealing with the butt of F1 port and F1 stb over the keel.   The French often used a more complicated chock system.   A half floor is strong and is easy.  It is more timber expensive.  A long arm F1 meeting a short arm F1 was used on later 19th century merchantmen.  Which was the long arm alternated bend to bend.
The butting of F1 to F1 over the keel was almost universally forbidden.  It would be interesting to know how far back that this was discovered to be a very bad practice and how long it took to figure it out.
Your disc sander   will be useful for the timber butts.  It will be difficult to impossible for a lot of the outside bevels.  It will be essentially useless for the inside bevels.
A sanding drum is the tool.  There are sleeve drums.  The drums are rubber.  The sleeves are fitted by squishing the rubber.  The outward expansion is not always uniform, There is often an out of round situation.  The sleeves have to be bought and are not low cost.  The grit choices are limited.
Sleeveless drums use standard 9x11 sandpaper sheets with a range of grits.  There is a 3inch diameter drum that is 6 inches long.  There are a variety of 3 inch long drum diameters -  3 inch down to 1/2" (if the pad layer is removed.  This helps with inside bevels.  
For POF a table for the drum is mostly in the way.  Almost none of it is 90 degrees.
The machine needed is a 1/3HP or 1/2HP motor with a 1/2" shaft.   The amount of dust generated is impressive.  An open motor runs the risk of becoming dust filled and burning up.
A low cost standard drill press will work.  It would be especially useful if the motor will rotate 180 degrees.   Working with nothing but the stock above the drum is most convenient.  The line being sanded to is easier to illuminate and see.  
A piece of 12" x 12" Masonite with a 1/2" hole in the middle that is placed on the motor shaft right where it exits the motor keeps dust from the motor.
I made mine using a 1/3 HP TEFC 1700 RPM motor.  For sanding wood, 1700 RPM is about as fast as is functional.  Used steel braces and brackets from Home Depot as an Erector Set type motor mount.   Most of my effort was spent adding a table that has not been needed.
A used motor would be a cost efficient way to gain this tool, but a quality new motor  would probably cost more than a mass market spindle sander.  A major negative to a spindle sander is that the motors seem to come with proprietary shaft mounts .  There are a wide variety of cutting, grinding and sanding tools that use a standard 1.2" shaft attachment,
Dust collection and not breathing it will be a challenge and you will want a stage 4 hazmat suit and no matter what you do, your environment will drip with sawdust.   Even in my garage, if I lived with a female, I would face summary execution for the amount and area of dust spread.
 
Looking at my La Renommee build log may help show what I an describing.  It was intended to be a basic methods demonstration.  It is a pseudo carved hull  but it is POF without the spaces.   Dealing with the spaces about doubles the work.  This project was about quick and dirty.

Once you have the timbers scroll cut and rough shaped,  the problem is how it assemble them to get the accurate shape.
The POF literature has several methods that attempt to solve this problem
Long quilters pins are useful for this.  
Where to place the pins?
The pattern needs to get into a computer graphics program.  Adjustment of the scale of the printed output is a necessary task.   A raster based program will work well enough.  All that is needed is very basic tools,  
PS in the cloud is quick and dirty, but potentially expensive.
Inside the timbers does not work for many of them when the bevel gets interesting.  There is no inside that is common at either outside face.  The holes need repair.  Dowels are difficult and are fragile at scale.
I solved this by placing the pin locations outside the shape of the bends.  
I use 4 for each timber.  At each corner but not too far.  Sanding the butts will remove sites that are too far.  Close to the pattern lines but not too close.  The holes can mar the sides of the frames.
Rather than guess each site, I made a jig.  It is a 7point Ariel Black "o" merged with a 4 point Ariel Black "o".  The lower case letter o is mostly round.  The inside of the 4 pt is small enough to leave no guessing and the outside of the 7 pt is far enough out if it just kisses the pattern line.
The timbers are a bit wider.  The additional waste is only interesting at the last 2 or 3 stations at either end.
An additional advantage is that there can be an identical pattern on either face of the bend.  This means that all 4 lines are available instead of 3 and guessing the 4th.
You are using plans that already have the bends patterns extrapolated.  I use lines plans and derive my own timber patterns.  I found that extracting three outside and three inside patterns for 60 - 100 bends was beyond tedious and took a long time.   I only use the existing station lines for the outside and made a jig in Painter to quickly draw the inside moulded shape.  I shape each station section of bends as a unit.
It is way way quicker.
A part that needs practice is the timber to timber butt join.  If I try to sand to the middle of the line - that is usually too much.  There is a gap.  I use a 1.5 or 2 pixel line.  I just kiss the line - no white.  This usually produces a tight joint.  It will take practice.
 

Your patterns indicate where  the timbers are for each of the pair of frames.
This means that with multiple short segments,  you do not need frame stock that is all that wide.  
The way you are proposing to do this is probably not sustainable.   It just will not work for bends at the midship.  This is most of the bends.
When it is broken down into timbers,  the stock width problem is solved.

       I prefer 1:60.  It is close to museum scale which allows for detail.  It is 0.8 less in any one dimension, but the product of the three yields a hull that has 50% of the volume.   Stock that is 2" wide works for any hull for me - even a first rate.  I find that 2 foot long stock is my sweet stock for bench top handling.
I hate cants.  I will not use them.  I use full bends all the way to the FP and AP.  The bevel gets really interesting at the ends.  The keystone shape of the floor timber - being very deep and sometimes wider that 2" of a large  hull means that for some liner hulls 4" stock is necessary.  This is inconvenient.
After years of experimenting, I have found that the optimal method is to use a 14" bandsaw to slice the 2" wide stock from my piece of lumber.  How much extra to set the slice thickness is a continuous challenge..
Too thick and there is waste and tedious extra passes thru the thickness sander.  Too little and the bandsaw blade scars are not removed.  It becomes stock for the next smaller hull.
A poor quality bandsaw can produce cuts with blade deviation.  Wedge shaped slices are difficult to rescue and are never going to work for this hull.
The efficiency of a bandsaw for this makes renting time on one from someone who has one worth it.  I have addressed which type blade more economical in other posts.
 

I wrote this before you wrote that this was not a serious beginning of a scratch hull using POF.
 
 
I will start this photo by photo.
Photo 1 and  2:
 Get a digital caliper.  Precision is more important than accuracy.  You only need to be internally consistent and reproducible.  A steel ruler is only really good for length and eyeball estimate.
Photo 3 and 4:
The NRG saw jig will be a big help.  Use a push stick and or covering board.  The Byrens saw will not bit as deeply as a 10 inch saw but a mistake can ruin your whole day.  The primary job of a table saw is to eat your fingers if you give it a chance.
 

The rest of the photos:
The patterns are for bends
A bend is a pair of frames that each side strengthen the butt joins of its partner..
A major advantage of POF is that frames are built up using timbers.
The timbers are intended to be as straight a section as possible.
In full size, there are limitations on the size of the stock that a tree can provide.
Timbers tended to be 5-8 feet long.  The tops where the moulded dimension not wide and were not as heavy could sustain a much longer piece.
The butts of the timbers  of one frame meet in the middle of its partner frame timber.  The overlap makes for a strong join.
Your frame should two layers.  Your stock is twice as thick as it should be.   You do not even have the most important timber = the floor timber.
Photo 19:
The wood where the floor timber and F1 would be as well as the (twice as wide as it should be) cross chock all have cross grain.  Cross grain is just wrong.
 

The cross chock that this plan uses is one of roughly four methods of dealing with the butt of F1 port and F1 stb over the keel.   The French often used a more complicated chock system.   A half floor is strong and is easy.  It is more timber expensive.  A long arm F1 meeting a short arm F1 was used on later 19th century merchantmen.  Which was the long arm alternated bend to bend.
The butting of F1 to F1 over the keel was almost universally forbidden.  It would be interesting to know how far back that this was discovered to be a very bad practice and how long it took to figure it out.
Your disc sander   will be useful for the timber butts.  It will be difficult to impossible for a lot of the outside bevels.  It will be essentially useless for the inside bevels.
A sanding drum is the tool.  There are sleeve drums.  The drums are rubber.  The sleeves are fitted by squishing the rubber.  The outward expansion is not always uniform, There is often an out of round situation.  The sleeves have to be bought and are not low cost.  The grit choices are limited.
Sleeveless drums use standard 9x11 sandpaper sheets with a range of grits.  There is a 3inch diameter drum that is 6 inches long.  There are a variety of 3 inch long drum diameters -  3 inch down to 1/2" (if the pad layer is removed.  This helps with inside bevels.  
For POF a table for the drum is mostly in the way.  Almost none of it is 90 degrees.
The machine needed is a 1/3HP or 1/2HP motor with a 1/2" shaft.   The amount of dust generated is impressive.  An open motor runs the risk of becoming dust filled and burning up.
A low cost standard drill press will work.  It would be especially useful if the motor will rotate 180 degrees.   Working with nothing but the stock above the drum is most convenient.  The line being sanded to is easier to illuminate and see.  
A piece of 12" x 12" Masonite with a 1/2" hole in the middle that is placed on the motor shaft right where it exits the motor keeps dust from the motor.
I made mine using a 1/3 HP TEFC 1700 RPM motor.  For sanding wood, 1700 RPM is about as fast as is functional.  Used steel braces and brackets from Home Depot as an Erector Set type motor mount.   Most of my effort was spent adding a table that has not been needed.
A used motor would be a cost efficient way to gain this tool, but a quality new motor  would probably cost more than a mass market spindle sander.  A major negative to a spindle sander is that the motors seem to come with proprietary shaft mounts .  There are a wide variety of cutting, grinding and sanding tools that use a standard 1.2" shaft attachment,
Dust collection and not breathing it will be a challenge and you will want a stage 4 hazmat suit and no matter what you do, your environment will drip with sawdust.   Even in my garage, if I lived with a female, I would face summary execution for the amount and area of dust spread.
 
Looking at my La Renommee build log may help show what I an describing.  It was intended to be a basic methods demonstration.  It is a pseudo carved hull  but it is POF without the spaces.   Dealing with the spaces about doubles the work.  This project was about quick and dirty.

I will digress a bit before I start.   These two kits are Amati POB kits and they are Italian as the primary plans language, even if translated.
 
POB and POF are two entirely different methods of hull construction. 
Once a POB hull is planked and decked - there is essentially no difference from POF in what you do after.
Unless fillers are used between every mold, the POB hull, before it is planked, is about as attractive as a mud fence.
Even the most basic POF hull tends to be elegant.
 
Pegasus is a 6th rate,  a 3 masted man of war.  It may appear small and easy but it is not.
Vanguard is a 3rd rate,  a 74.  This is a formidable beast.   A 120 gun 1st rate at first seems twice as large,  but it is generally just more tedious.  There are more decks and more guns - but that is just more repetition of the same thing - over and over. 
 
Prior experience with plastic kits is probably more of a hindrance than a help for building a wooden ship model kit.  The primary reason is that it tends to lead to unrealistic expectations are far as what the kit instructions provide.  Pegasus will come at you with expectation that you have an in depth background in the basic skills and techniques.  The instructions for large vessels tend to start from this point.
 
You may well be one of the ~5% exceptions who finish when starting at a very advanced project.  But with every project,  even the most experienced of us hit patches where we get frustrated, weary, lose inspiration, and take a break.   Those who find themselves in deeper water than they had imagined when enthusiasm was dominant,  tend not to come back when they hit this patch.
 
You might should consider delaying these two projects.  Give a thought to "going to school" on the basics.  While not the only way by any means,  the MS Model Shipwright series is a safer way to gain experience.  There will be plenty of help here. 

The general way that you did this is OK for a cant frame - because a cant frame is usually a single isolated frame that meets the deadwood at less than 90 degrees. The port side frame is separate from the starboard.
 
I suggest that you give serious consideration to a species that is a lot harder than Basswood.  The only positive characteristics are that it has no visible grain and has no pores. 
The fibers are easy to crush.  They tend to roll.  It is difficult to keep a crisp edge.
I strongly advise that you use a domestic species that is commercially available.  I am unfamiliar with which domestic species are sold on your continent.   Using the positive characteristics of Basswood grain and pore,  try to find something that is as close as possible.  The  "no visible pores" is the most important characteristic.  A darker color is probably going to be impossible to avoid.   Climate change is probably going to have an adverse effect on availability and cost.  This along with inflation will probably make anyone's imports from anywhere to anywhere economically painful.
 
I did this with my first POF scratch build.  There is a much easier way.   The water in the PVA can affect the paper.  It takes a day to dry.  The pattern will certainly stand up to any abuse while scroll cutting, drum sanding, and fairing.  But boy is it a lot of work to remove.  Doing it also has an affect on the final thickness of the frames.
I find that rubber cement does an adequate job.  I use a quality brand.  One 4oz bottle with a brush applicator in the cap and a Pint or quart stock bottle to keep it filled.  A stock bottle of the solvent -n-heptane and a bulb pipette to add the ~5ml / 120 ml needed to keep a proper consistency is pretty much necessary.  Apply a serious layer to both the pattern and the wood stock.  When dry (5-15 min) place the pattern.  be careful because no adjustment is possible.  Burnish.  I use a single edge razor blade to get under the pattern to remove it.  The residual on the wood will roll up under your thumb.  A scraper gets it really clean.  Another single edge is a good enough tool for this.
 
If you are interested, I will address the problems that I see with your frame fabrication in a subsequent post.

The general way that you did this is OK for a cant frame - because a cant frame is usually a single isolated frame that meets the deadwood at less than 90 degrees. The port side frame is separate from the starboard.
 
I suggest that you give serious consideration to a species that is a lot harder than Basswood.  The only positive characteristics are that it has no visible grain and has no pores. 
The fibers are easy to crush.  They tend to roll.  It is difficult to keep a crisp edge.
I strongly advise that you use a domestic species that is commercially available.  I am unfamiliar with which domestic species are sold on your continent.   Using the positive characteristics of Basswood grain and pore,  try to find something that is as close as possible.  The  "no visible pores" is the most important characteristic.  A darker color is probably going to be impossible to avoid.   Climate change is probably going to have an adverse effect on availability and cost.  This along with inflation will probably make anyone's imports from anywhere to anywhere economically painful.
 
I did this with my first POF scratch build.  There is a much easier way.   The water in the PVA can affect the paper.  It takes a day to dry.  The pattern will certainly stand up to any abuse while scroll cutting, drum sanding, and fairing.  But boy is it a lot of work to remove.  Doing it also has an affect on the final thickness of the frames.
I find that rubber cement does an adequate job.  I use a quality brand.  One 4oz bottle with a brush applicator in the cap and a Pint or quart stock bottle to keep it filled.  A stock bottle of the solvent -n-heptane and a bulb pipette to add the ~5ml / 120 ml needed to keep a proper consistency is pretty much necessary.  Apply a serious layer to both the pattern and the wood stock.  When dry (5-15 min) place the pattern.  be careful because no adjustment is possible.  Burnish.  I use a single edge razor blade to get under the pattern to remove it.  The residual on the wood will roll up under your thumb.  A scraper gets it really clean.  Another single edge is a good enough tool for this.
 
If you are interested, I will address the problems that I see with your frame fabrication in a subsequent post.

The general way that you did this is OK for a cant frame - because a cant frame is usually a single isolated frame that meets the deadwood at less than 90 degrees. The port side frame is separate from the starboard.
 
I suggest that you give serious consideration to a species that is a lot harder than Basswood.  The only positive characteristics are that it has no visible grain and has no pores. 
The fibers are easy to crush.  They tend to roll.  It is difficult to keep a crisp edge.
I strongly advise that you use a domestic species that is commercially available.  I am unfamiliar with which domestic species are sold on your continent.   Using the positive characteristics of Basswood grain and pore,  try to find something that is as close as possible.  The  "no visible pores" is the most important characteristic.  A darker color is probably going to be impossible to avoid.   Climate change is probably going to have an adverse effect on availability and cost.  This along with inflation will probably make anyone's imports from anywhere to anywhere economically painful.
 
I did this with my first POF scratch build.  There is a much easier way.   The water in the PVA can affect the paper.  It takes a day to dry.  The pattern will certainly stand up to any abuse while scroll cutting, drum sanding, and fairing.  But boy is it a lot of work to remove.  Doing it also has an affect on the final thickness of the frames.
I find that rubber cement does an adequate job.  I use a quality brand.  One 4oz bottle with a brush applicator in the cap and a Pint or quart stock bottle to keep it filled.  A stock bottle of the solvent -n-heptane and a bulb pipette to add the ~5ml / 120 ml needed to keep a proper consistency is pretty much necessary.  Apply a serious layer to both the pattern and the wood stock.  When dry (5-15 min) place the pattern.  be careful because no adjustment is possible.  Burnish.  I use a single edge razor blade to get under the pattern to remove it.  The residual on the wood will roll up under your thumb.  A scraper gets it really clean.  Another single edge is a good enough tool for this.
 
If you are interested, I will address the problems that I see with your frame fabrication in a subsequent post.

It is in the Wood Database. 
It is not yet an endangered species but may be getting close.  It comes from the Congo region.
Only an estimate of its hardness puts it about equal to Hard Maple.
The photo does not show that it has open pores, or obvious grain.
 
My read of it
Probably meets our requirements
It is likely to be a one off situation as far as being able to depend on continuing to source it, if you like it.
It sort of puts one in a dilemma. 
     Buy one plank and immediately process it for look at scale.  Then hope it is still available for a larger order.
     Gamble with a ~> 100 BF first order and hope that is not something that you only use for hidden areas, jigs.
     Get enough for a project or two, then in a few years not be able to get any more.
 
My perspective on how much is needed per hull is for POF -framing stock - at near museum scale  - 10-20 BF per hull - a lot going to sawdust or scroll cut waste.

It is in the Wood Database. 
It is not yet an endangered species but may be getting close.  It comes from the Congo region.
Only an estimate of its hardness puts it about equal to Hard Maple.
The photo does not show that it has open pores, or obvious grain.
 
My read of it
Probably meets our requirements
It is likely to be a one off situation as far as being able to depend on continuing to source it, if you like it.
It sort of puts one in a dilemma. 
     Buy one plank and immediately process it for look at scale.  Then hope it is still available for a larger order.
     Gamble with a ~> 100 BF first order and hope that is not something that you only use for hidden areas, jigs.
     Get enough for a project or two, then in a few years not be able to get any more.
 
My perspective on how much is needed per hull is for POF -framing stock - at near museum scale  - 10-20 BF per hull - a lot going to sawdust or scroll cut waste.

It is in the Wood Database. 
It is not yet an endangered species but may be getting close.  It comes from the Congo region.
Only an estimate of its hardness puts it about equal to Hard Maple.
The photo does not show that it has open pores, or obvious grain.
 
My read of it
Probably meets our requirements
It is likely to be a one off situation as far as being able to depend on continuing to source it, if you like it.
It sort of puts one in a dilemma. 
     Buy one plank and immediately process it for look at scale.  Then hope it is still available for a larger order.
     Gamble with a ~> 100 BF first order and hope that is not something that you only use for hidden areas, jigs.
     Get enough for a project or two, then in a few years not be able to get any more.
 
My perspective on how much is needed per hull is for POF -framing stock - at near museum scale  - 10-20 BF per hull - a lot going to sawdust or scroll cut waste.

Kevin,
 
There seems to be two questions here:
 
1.  Can you produce an accurately shaped hull using just the information on the drawing that you posted?
 
Answer-  No you cannot.  The drawing does not provide enough information.  In addition to the shape of the midships section, you need more hull sections both fore and aft.
 
2.  How to design a series of ships’ boats to allow scaling up and down as needed.
 
Answer-  Difficult.  First of all what you want to do is highly dependent on period. The hull shape of a boat for Cutty Sark is much different from that of 100 years earlier.  For that reason Whole Moulding is inappropriate for a late Nineteenth Century vessel.
 
It might be possible to design a series of “Lifeboats.”  Only one boat in the photo that you posted, the double ended one is a lifeboat.  As I posted above these boats were designed to meet Board of Trade Rules, and post Titanic SOLAS rules.  The starting point was human capacity, specified to be 10 cubic feet per person.   The overall dimensions of the boat were then determined using the formula:  (L*(4A+2B+G))/12
L= Length In feet
A= Area of forward quarter length section
B= Area of midship section
G= Area of aft quarter length section
This formula provides the boat’s available capacity in cubic feet.  This capacity must be greater or equal to the number of people X 10 cu ft per person.
 
This still does not determine the shape of the boat and this is not entirely up to the designer.  The book,  Ships’ Boats by Ernest W. Blocksidge c1920 provides additional rules for hull shape, stability, and strength.
 
You need to solve a Naval Architecture problem, not a computer problem.
 
Roger

Ron,
 
You might give a look at this recent discussion - it veered into bench top ( DRL3000 ) fairly quickly.
The solutions involving Dremel machines you should discount if any of them are not already dismissed out of hand.
I have Foredom flex with the 1/3 HP motor - lower speed high torque motor and bought the drill press accessory - it is surprisingly sturdy - so if you have a Foredom, it is worth a look although I have not tried it yet -  my DRL3000 has worked well enough  and my framing method requires 100's if not 1000's of holes that must be exact and 100% perpendicular.
 
https://modelshipworld.com/topic/32788-does-anybody-have-experience-with-vanda-lay-industries-tools-for-the-dremel/
 

Allan.
I place a windlass in a disposable category.  Being on the deck, it would not be all that difficult to add, remove, or replace.  Is it possible that its presence on construction plans would mean that the yard was expected to provide it?   For as built,  if the captain had to pay for it,  when missing,  it may suggest that the current captain cared more for his purse than his crew.  
If a windlass is missing on the contemporary data and it was not a subject of comment,  I would think that for a modeler to add one of leave it off either choice would be correct provided that the style was correct for the era.
 
 
Most POB fillers that I have seen use horizontal pieces of wood.  Doing it that way allows for an easy fitting of the pieces between the molds.  It is easy to do with a Byrens saw or a disk sander.  I see that as false economy.  Getting the contour when fixed between the molds is a lot of work - especially from a balk state.
 
Think vertical layers between the molds-  a loaf of sliced bread,   You already have the shape.  It is the stations.  Two consecutive stations on the same pattern.  Because the station interval also includes a mold thickness,  a temporary sacrificial layer that is the thickness of a mold is needed for off the hull shaping.  I would use a white Pine construction timber as the filler.  I would make the thickest Pine stock be ~1/4".  Use however many slices are needed to fill the interval.   The yellow Pine that you use as topside fillers would work if it is not sappy.  The white Pine family is just sweet to work.   The moulded dimension of the filler just needs to be wide enough that bamboo skewers (two or three)  can keep the filler layers aligned - so a hollow can be as much as you wish.  If your stock layers come up a bit short  on the sum needed to fill the gap, a piece of poster board would work, if you are not up for a lot of custom thickness sander work.   Most all of the contour shaping can be done off the hull using a sanding drum.  Leave just enough for final fairing using the molds in place. 
If you had planed for vertical fillers before the first mold was placed,  the alignment holes could be a part of and drilled into the molds so that the fitting would be idiot-proof. 
 
It looks like your central spine and the molds define the top of the rabbet.  I think that I would find it a nightmare to place the garboard and plank ends on the hull and the try to slip a keel with a rabbet into the gap.  I would want the keel and stem and sternpost in place before I started planking.   
As for planking, wale first.   then garboard.  Probably two gores  outer strakes working in.  use the planking fan for each strake.   If a gore is 6 strakes, pre planing for all 6 strakes at the beginning - at all goes out the window after the first strake. 
 
 

Allan.
I place a windlass in a disposable category.  Being on the deck, it would not be all that difficult to add, remove, or replace.  Is it possible that its presence on construction plans would mean that the yard was expected to provide it?   For as built,  if the captain had to pay for it,  when missing,  it may suggest that the current captain cared more for his purse than his crew.  
If a windlass is missing on the contemporary data and it was not a subject of comment,  I would think that for a modeler to add one of leave it off either choice would be correct provided that the style was correct for the era.
 
 
Most POB fillers that I have seen use horizontal pieces of wood.  Doing it that way allows for an easy fitting of the pieces between the molds.  It is easy to do with a Byrens saw or a disk sander.  I see that as false economy.  Getting the contour when fixed between the molds is a lot of work - especially from a balk state.
 
Think vertical layers between the molds-  a loaf of sliced bread,   You already have the shape.  It is the stations.  Two consecutive stations on the same pattern.  Because the station interval also includes a mold thickness,  a temporary sacrificial layer that is the thickness of a mold is needed for off the hull shaping.  I would use a white Pine construction timber as the filler.  I would make the thickest Pine stock be ~1/4".  Use however many slices are needed to fill the interval.   The yellow Pine that you use as topside fillers would work if it is not sappy.  The white Pine family is just sweet to work.   The moulded dimension of the filler just needs to be wide enough that bamboo skewers (two or three)  can keep the filler layers aligned - so a hollow can be as much as you wish.  If your stock layers come up a bit short  on the sum needed to fill the gap, a piece of poster board would work, if you are not up for a lot of custom thickness sander work.   Most all of the contour shaping can be done off the hull using a sanding drum.  Leave just enough for final fairing using the molds in place. 
If you had planed for vertical fillers before the first mold was placed,  the alignment holes could be a part of and drilled into the molds so that the fitting would be idiot-proof. 
 
It looks like your central spine and the molds define the top of the rabbet.  I think that I would find it a nightmare to place the garboard and plank ends on the hull and the try to slip a keel with a rabbet into the gap.  I would want the keel and stem and sternpost in place before I started planking.   
As for planking, wale first.   then garboard.  Probably two gores  outer strakes working in.  use the planking fan for each strake.   If a gore is 6 strakes, pre planing for all 6 strakes at the beginning - at all goes out the window after the first strake. 
 
 

Allan.
I place a windlass in a disposable category.  Being on the deck, it would not be all that difficult to add, remove, or replace.  Is it possible that its presence on construction plans would mean that the yard was expected to provide it?   For as built,  if the captain had to pay for it,  when missing,  it may suggest that the current captain cared more for his purse than his crew.  
If a windlass is missing on the contemporary data and it was not a subject of comment,  I would think that for a modeler to add one of leave it off either choice would be correct provided that the style was correct for the era.
 
 
Most POB fillers that I have seen use horizontal pieces of wood.  Doing it that way allows for an easy fitting of the pieces between the molds.  It is easy to do with a Byrens saw or a disk sander.  I see that as false economy.  Getting the contour when fixed between the molds is a lot of work - especially from a balk state.
 
Think vertical layers between the molds-  a loaf of sliced bread,   You already have the shape.  It is the stations.  Two consecutive stations on the same pattern.  Because the station interval also includes a mold thickness,  a temporary sacrificial layer that is the thickness of a mold is needed for off the hull shaping.  I would use a white Pine construction timber as the filler.  I would make the thickest Pine stock be ~1/4".  Use however many slices are needed to fill the interval.   The yellow Pine that you use as topside fillers would work if it is not sappy.  The white Pine family is just sweet to work.   The moulded dimension of the filler just needs to be wide enough that bamboo skewers (two or three)  can keep the filler layers aligned - so a hollow can be as much as you wish.  If your stock layers come up a bit short  on the sum needed to fill the gap, a piece of poster board would work, if you are not up for a lot of custom thickness sander work.   Most all of the contour shaping can be done off the hull using a sanding drum.  Leave just enough for final fairing using the molds in place. 
If you had planed for vertical fillers before the first mold was placed,  the alignment holes could be a part of and drilled into the molds so that the fitting would be idiot-proof. 
 
It looks like your central spine and the molds define the top of the rabbet.  I think that I would find it a nightmare to place the garboard and plank ends on the hull and the try to slip a keel with a rabbet into the gap.  I would want the keel and stem and sternpost in place before I started planking.   
As for planking, wale first.   then garboard.  Probably two gores  outer strakes working in.  use the planking fan for each strake.   If a gore is 6 strakes, pre planing for all 6 strakes at the beginning - at all goes out the window after the first strake. 
 
 

Ron,
 
You might give a look at this recent discussion - it veered into bench top ( DRL3000 ) fairly quickly.
The solutions involving Dremel machines you should discount if any of them are not already dismissed out of hand.
I have Foredom flex with the 1/3 HP motor - lower speed high torque motor and bought the drill press accessory - it is surprisingly sturdy - so if you have a Foredom, it is worth a look although I have not tried it yet -  my DRL3000 has worked well enough  and my framing method requires 100's if not 1000's of holes that must be exact and 100% perpendicular.
 
https://modelshipworld.com/topic/32788-does-anybody-have-experience-with-vanda-lay-industries-tools-for-the-dremel/
 

The basic tool is what I have been using and it has done the job.  I got mine from Otto Frei.  I would suggest looking at brand name jeweler's supply sites because although all of the units may come from the same shop in China, the QA on the machines going to brand sites is probably better, with economy sites getting the just so units.
I added an XY table.  For a while, I kicked myself for paying MM for a table that cost about as much as the drill.  There are low cost ones at AliExpress, but there is the same QA issue and a low cost unit probably has loose tolerances.  I had to drill a hole in the base to mount the table.
I mostly use the XY table to hold a piece of 3/4" AA Birch ply as the work surface.
You also will want a momentary foot switch.
HSS bits.
I am fairly confident that my unit will serve as a wood mill - as long as the passes are light and the tools are SHARP.
For metal - especially steel, you will want an actual mill -  this becomes a factor if you make your own tools.
It has been as good a drill press as I have needed.
 
For wood or brass, you will want to use a sharp awl tip to make a starter hole so that the drill bit does not dance.  You want to pull the drill tip to the surface at the pilot hole before you engage the foot switch.  Sock foot for feel - switch fixed to a piece of scrap flooring.