Jaager

Mark,
I will take on the role of curmudgeon for this. and advise this:
 
Take good care of and store your collection carefully.  You may wind up selling off many of them.
 
Two of the camps here are
1) kits as a gateway to scratch building (a small group)
2) kits as an end in themselves 
If you catch bug number 1  ....
If you are one for whom what is popular or sticking to the well trod paths are things to be avoided......
 
The OcCre kit is probably best kept for last.  Not up to the quality of the others  and a full set of 3 masts and all that rigging plus lots of guns.
 
The MS Flying Fish is a 1850's era large clipper,  The kit is 1:96 scale.  There is a lot of detailed rigging and a scale that requires art and finesse to do well.  It is a real challenge to do well.
 
The hull of the whaleboat is  just a step beyond what you are doing.  This kit is about the equipment details.  There is a small book by a former NRJ editor.  There are articles in the CDs in probably all three journals that are for sale here.
 
For the fishing vessels,  HIC wrote a book that provides graduate level details.
 
For the solid hulls,  check out StewMac for good quality rasps.  I doubt that a POB kit mold is sturdy enough  for a rasp.
 
If you want your expenditure to pay off, try to avoid the historian,  topic specialization, and explore new paths bugs.
 
 

Mark,
I will take on the role of curmudgeon for this. and advise this:
 
Take good care of and store your collection carefully.  You may wind up selling off many of them.
 
Two of the camps here are
1) kits as a gateway to scratch building (a small group)
2) kits as an end in themselves 
If you catch bug number 1  ....
If you are one for whom what is popular or sticking to the well trod paths are things to be avoided......
 
The OcCre kit is probably best kept for last.  Not up to the quality of the others  and a full set of 3 masts and all that rigging plus lots of guns.
 
The MS Flying Fish is a 1850's era large clipper,  The kit is 1:96 scale.  There is a lot of detailed rigging and a scale that requires art and finesse to do well.  It is a real challenge to do well.
 
The hull of the whaleboat is  just a step beyond what you are doing.  This kit is about the equipment details.  There is a small book by a former NRJ editor.  There are articles in the CDs in probably all three journals that are for sale here.
 
For the fishing vessels,  HIC wrote a book that provides graduate level details.
 
For the solid hulls,  check out StewMac for good quality rasps.  I doubt that a POB kit mold is sturdy enough  for a rasp.
 
If you want your expenditure to pay off, try to avoid the historian,  topic specialization, and explore new paths bugs.
 
 

Mark,
I will take on the role of curmudgeon for this. and advise this:
 
Take good care of and store your collection carefully.  You may wind up selling off many of them.
 
Two of the camps here are
1) kits as a gateway to scratch building (a small group)
2) kits as an end in themselves 
If you catch bug number 1  ....
If you are one for whom what is popular or sticking to the well trod paths are things to be avoided......
 
The OcCre kit is probably best kept for last.  Not up to the quality of the others  and a full set of 3 masts and all that rigging plus lots of guns.
 
The MS Flying Fish is a 1850's era large clipper,  The kit is 1:96 scale.  There is a lot of detailed rigging and a scale that requires art and finesse to do well.  It is a real challenge to do well.
 
The hull of the whaleboat is  just a step beyond what you are doing.  This kit is about the equipment details.  There is a small book by a former NRJ editor.  There are articles in the CDs in probably all three journals that are for sale here.
 
For the fishing vessels,  HIC wrote a book that provides graduate level details.
 
For the solid hulls,  check out StewMac for good quality rasps.  I doubt that a POB kit mold is sturdy enough  for a rasp.
 
If you want your expenditure to pay off, try to avoid the historian,  topic specialization, and explore new paths bugs.
 
 

Mark,
I will take on the role of curmudgeon for this. and advise this:
 
Take good care of and store your collection carefully.  You may wind up selling off many of them.
 
Two of the camps here are
1) kits as a gateway to scratch building (a small group)
2) kits as an end in themselves 
If you catch bug number 1  ....
If you are one for whom what is popular or sticking to the well trod paths are things to be avoided......
 
The OcCre kit is probably best kept for last.  Not up to the quality of the others  and a full set of 3 masts and all that rigging plus lots of guns.
 
The MS Flying Fish is a 1850's era large clipper,  The kit is 1:96 scale.  There is a lot of detailed rigging and a scale that requires art and finesse to do well.  It is a real challenge to do well.
 
The hull of the whaleboat is  just a step beyond what you are doing.  This kit is about the equipment details.  There is a small book by a former NRJ editor.  There are articles in the CDs in probably all three journals that are for sale here.
 
For the fishing vessels,  HIC wrote a book that provides graduate level details.
 
For the solid hulls,  check out StewMac for good quality rasps.  I doubt that a POB kit mold is sturdy enough  for a rasp.
 
If you want your expenditure to pay off, try to avoid the historian,  topic specialization, and explore new paths bugs.
 
 

Maple, Beech, Birch, Holly*.  White Pine
 
Lime is really pushing it, but Basswood is too soft and fuzzy to provide a crisp look.
 
* I saw in the Wood Database that there is a European Holly.  This Holly is not the snow white color of American Holly.  It is actually a similar golden as is the first three above.  So, the use of the white Holly for deck planking is actually a misunderstanding.

By precut, do you mean 8x4, 4x4, 3/4" lumber?
A bandsaw will get you close to final thickness, but even the finest bandsaw blade will leave a surface that needs additional treatment.
A thickness sander does that and the Byrnes model is the best.
 
A 9" or 10" bench top bandsaw is a source of frustration for serious resawing.
An under powered 14" bandsaw with unreliable tracking and low quality guides is something you do not want.  

Dave,
What you write indicates that you intend to build POB.  That is an absolute 11 footer for me, but I offer the following:
 
Long ago I bought the MM low end scroll saw.  I found it unacceptable from the beginning.  It is under powered, the blade clamps do not hold all that well,  The up/down cutting action has the stock wanting to chatter.  It just takes up shelf space and collects dust. 
IF you buy a powered scroll saw, going as high a quality as you can afford will save you endless frustration.
I do significant scroll cutting of frame timbers, but a rough close enough is good enough is all that I need. What I cut is often 1/4" Hard Maple.  There is no way the MM scroll saw could handle that.  I use a generic 9" bandsaw with a Carter Stabilizer..  That saw is adequate for that job, but not much else.  
For POB and having to cut out a central spine and molds every couple of years or so,  you may be better served using a high quality Knew Concepts hand scroll saw.
 
I find the combo 1" belt sander/5" disk sander to be mostly junk.
Unless you are going to sand plastic , the Byrnes disk sander is as good as it gets.
 
If you have to ask, a 10" table saw is probably a bad idea.  It is the least efficient and most dangerous way to mill scale timber from lumber.
For getting planks and deck furniture from scale thickness stock,  a Byrnes table saw is a magnitude better than its nearest compare.

I think you are basically screwed if you get CA on a visible surface.   If you using it on a surface that is too large for the whole to be treated before placement without the first part setting up, it is the wrong glue.   If you are determined to use CA, see if you can find a flavor with a longer open time.
 
I mostly use a single edge razor blade or #11 blade to remove PVA squeeze out.
 
 
Franklin Hide Glue has a LOT of water.  For planking that is veneer thickness, it is probably too much water.  For a permanent  bond, I would use Old Brown Glue.  For veneer thickness, I would probably use flake in a hot pot.  
PVA is so much more convenient,  I have to make a compromise with what was 17th century material.   
 
Hide glue is a protein.  Hot ethanol will completely denature it.  Zero bond.
I tried using it as a reversible bond.  Even on a pilot schooner @ 1:60 the depth of the bond on the moulded dimension face of the frames is too deep for hot ethanol to work without the blast area also affecting the PVA bonds ho;ding the actual frames together.  I know that I could have used newspaper and or spots instead of a double coat of hide glue.  The paper part is too many additional steps for me and the spots - well I am a bit compulsive and pre-programmed. 
I am not happy with Scotch Double Sided tape as a frame spacer reversible bonder,  because of how difficult the residue is to remove from those tight spaces - why HMS Centurion is still on the stocks.   A next hull will probably be done using rubber cement. The debonder - n-heptane - does not affect PVA or wood.

By precut, do you mean 8x4, 4x4, 3/4" lumber?
A bandsaw will get you close to final thickness, but even the finest bandsaw blade will leave a surface that needs additional treatment.
A thickness sander does that and the Byrnes model is the best.
 
A 9" or 10" bench top bandsaw is a source of frustration for serious resawing.
An under powered 14" bandsaw with unreliable tracking and low quality guides is something you do not want.  

Dave,
What you write indicates that you intend to build POB.  That is an absolute 11 footer for me, but I offer the following:
 
Long ago I bought the MM low end scroll saw.  I found it unacceptable from the beginning.  It is under powered, the blade clamps do not hold all that well,  The up/down cutting action has the stock wanting to chatter.  It just takes up shelf space and collects dust. 
IF you buy a powered scroll saw, going as high a quality as you can afford will save you endless frustration.
I do significant scroll cutting of frame timbers, but a rough close enough is good enough is all that I need. What I cut is often 1/4" Hard Maple.  There is no way the MM scroll saw could handle that.  I use a generic 9" bandsaw with a Carter Stabilizer..  That saw is adequate for that job, but not much else.  
For POB and having to cut out a central spine and molds every couple of years or so,  you may be better served using a high quality Knew Concepts hand scroll saw.
 
I find the combo 1" belt sander/5" disk sander to be mostly junk.
Unless you are going to sand plastic , the Byrnes disk sander is as good as it gets.
 
If you have to ask, a 10" table saw is probably a bad idea.  It is the least efficient and most dangerous way to mill scale timber from lumber.
For getting planks and deck furniture from scale thickness stock,  a Byrnes table saw is a magnitude better than its nearest compare.

Dave,
What you write indicates that you intend to build POB.  That is an absolute 11 footer for me, but I offer the following:
 
Long ago I bought the MM low end scroll saw.  I found it unacceptable from the beginning.  It is under powered, the blade clamps do not hold all that well,  The up/down cutting action has the stock wanting to chatter.  It just takes up shelf space and collects dust. 
IF you buy a powered scroll saw, going as high a quality as you can afford will save you endless frustration.
I do significant scroll cutting of frame timbers, but a rough close enough is good enough is all that I need. What I cut is often 1/4" Hard Maple.  There is no way the MM scroll saw could handle that.  I use a generic 9" bandsaw with a Carter Stabilizer..  That saw is adequate for that job, but not much else.  
For POB and having to cut out a central spine and molds every couple of years or so,  you may be better served using a high quality Knew Concepts hand scroll saw.
 
I find the combo 1" belt sander/5" disk sander to be mostly junk.
Unless you are going to sand plastic , the Byrnes disk sander is as good as it gets.
 
If you have to ask, a 10" table saw is probably a bad idea.  It is the least efficient and most dangerous way to mill scale timber from lumber.
For getting planks and deck furniture from scale thickness stock,  a Byrnes table saw is a magnitude better than its nearest compare.

Something to consider:
PVA requires some 'tooth' at the surface of a wood-wood bond.  220 grit is right at the smoothness limit for a reliable bond.  120-150 grit is probably better, but my compulsion decrees 220.  For a display surface very fine grit is personal taste.
 
I very well may be off base with this, but there may factors at play with grit size that are not as benign as they seem.  A Dennis Moore moment as it were.

There is a sort of Catch 22 involved.
Anyone interested would already have their own library. Buying duplicates, especially at near retail?
A beginner?,  not unless they are foolishly rich.
Books of the sort in question are not an investment.
 
When my number comes up, I figure that a bequest that my library is kept as a whole will also require a substantial trust be included to maintain it as such. 

Something to consider:
PVA requires some 'tooth' at the surface of a wood-wood bond.  220 grit is right at the smoothness limit for a reliable bond.  120-150 grit is probably better, but my compulsion decrees 220.  For a display surface very fine grit is personal taste.
 
I very well may be off base with this, but there may factors at play with grit size that are not as benign as they seem.  A Dennis Moore moment as it were.

Something to consider:
PVA requires some 'tooth' at the surface of a wood-wood bond.  220 grit is right at the smoothness limit for a reliable bond.  120-150 grit is probably better, but my compulsion decrees 220.  For a display surface very fine grit is personal taste.
 
I very well may be off base with this, but there may factors at play with grit size that are not as benign as they seem.  A Dennis Moore moment as it were.

It depends of your style of build.  POF?  POB?  Carved?
If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it  - it makes a big difference.
The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done.
The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

It depends of your style of build.  POF?  POB?  Carved?
If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it  - it makes a big difference.
The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done.
The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

It depends of your style of build.  POF?  POB?  Carved?
If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it  - it makes a big difference.
The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done.
The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

There is a sort of Catch 22 involved.
Anyone interested would already have their own library. Buying duplicates, especially at near retail?
A beginner?,  not unless they are foolishly rich.
Books of the sort in question are not an investment.
 
When my number comes up, I figure that a bequest that my library is kept as a whole will also require a substantial trust be included to maintain it as such. 

It depends of your style of build.  POF?  POB?  Carved?
If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it  - it makes a big difference.
The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done.
The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

It depends of your style of build.  POF?  POB?  Carved?
If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it  - it makes a big difference.
The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done.
The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

I may be way off with this, but I think the only people who could produce a 4.5" slice and survive the economic cost would be an individual with a bandsaw at home.  My money is on rotary cut and the curl is the equilibrium.
 
Press apply being a problem, old school may be an answer.
Scab lateral supports to the sides of the beams. Maple or a similar species.
Use hitch chocks instead of clamps. 
Brass pins - drill holes in the deck layer and in the beams.   Have small blocks of scrap between the head of the pin and the deck to provide a pressure surface.  Thru drilling the beams is probably the best. 
When the PVA has cured, chip out the blocks and pull the pins. 
If the pins are small enough, the hole can be water treated to swell it closed.  If too large, PVA/ wood flower can fill it.
Real old school - push in a bamboo dowel.  But that means a full pattern on every beam, angled and all  that.
As for plank length, my yard would use full deck length boards - no butts.

I may be way off with this, but I think the only people who could produce a 4.5" slice and survive the economic cost would be an individual with a bandsaw at home.  My money is on rotary cut and the curl is the equilibrium.
 
Press apply being a problem, old school may be an answer.
Scab lateral supports to the sides of the beams. Maple or a similar species.
Use hitch chocks instead of clamps. 
Brass pins - drill holes in the deck layer and in the beams.   Have small blocks of scrap between the head of the pin and the deck to provide a pressure surface.  Thru drilling the beams is probably the best. 
When the PVA has cured, chip out the blocks and pull the pins. 
If the pins are small enough, the hole can be water treated to swell it closed.  If too large, PVA/ wood flower can fill it.
Real old school - push in a bamboo dowel.  But that means a full pattern on every beam, angled and all  that.
As for plank length, my yard would use full deck length boards - no butts.

Is it a single continuous sheet?
Does the grain look like a plane cut or a rotary veneer cut.
The shape that the sheet wants to take looks like a rotary veneer cut and it is going back to it shape on the log.
Is there a problem with what it will glue to? 
Is it a minimal surface with few contact points?
Is there a problem with clamping it with enough pressure to get a strong bond?
This is the natural conformation of the sheet.  Any mitigation that you do before bonding will be a temporary fix.  Mother Nature will fight you.  Titebond II will hold it if done correctly, because that bond is stronger than the lignin bond holding the wood fibers together.

I may be way off with this, but I think the only people who could produce a 4.5" slice and survive the economic cost would be an individual with a bandsaw at home.  My money is on rotary cut and the curl is the equilibrium.
 
Press apply being a problem, old school may be an answer.
Scab lateral supports to the sides of the beams. Maple or a similar species.
Use hitch chocks instead of clamps. 
Brass pins - drill holes in the deck layer and in the beams.   Have small blocks of scrap between the head of the pin and the deck to provide a pressure surface.  Thru drilling the beams is probably the best. 
When the PVA has cured, chip out the blocks and pull the pins. 
If the pins are small enough, the hole can be water treated to swell it closed.  If too large, PVA/ wood flower can fill it.
Real old school - push in a bamboo dowel.  But that means a full pattern on every beam, angled and all  that.
As for plank length, my yard would use full deck length boards - no butts.