Jaager

A really poor bit of instruction!    PVA should have been used.  It is not instant grab and clamping can be a challenge.  Unlike a contact adhesive, PVA will last.  PVA can be made to be like a contact adhesive.  A thin coat on both surfaces - let dry - join - apply enough, but not too much heat with an iron.  The bond will not be as strong as wet to wet PVA, but will probably be stronger than DAP. 
 
I have found no solvent that dissolved DAP contact cement.  It losses its bond and makes sticky balls when rubbed with Naphtha or Mineral Spirits.  It is a real mess to undo.  It makes for a bond that lasts maybe 10 - 20 years.  Time and probably 02 , make it become brittle.  A painful learning experience?
 
 
A single coat of 1:1 diluted shellac  (1 part shellac to 1 part 95% ethanol (shellac thinner)) ( Even if you could get 100% ethanol - which requires distillation from Benzene - as soon as it is exposed to air, it sucks in water from the atmosphere and quickly becomes 95%.).
If you are compulsive - a follow-on coat of full strength shellac.  Buff with a ScotchBrite pad - wipe clean and use any sort of paint.
 
 

A really poor bit of instruction!    PVA should have been used.  It is not instant grab and clamping can be a challenge.  Unlike a contact adhesive, PVA will last.  PVA can be made to be like a contact adhesive.  A thin coat on both surfaces - let dry - join - apply enough, but not too much heat with an iron.  The bond will not be as strong as wet to wet PVA, but will probably be stronger than DAP. 
 
I have found no solvent that dissolved DAP contact cement.  It losses its bond and makes sticky balls when rubbed with Naphtha or Mineral Spirits.  It is a real mess to undo.  It makes for a bond that lasts maybe 10 - 20 years.  Time and probably 02 , make it become brittle.  A painful learning experience?
 
 
A single coat of 1:1 diluted shellac  (1 part shellac to 1 part 95% ethanol (shellac thinner)) ( Even if you could get 100% ethanol - which requires distillation from Benzene - as soon as it is exposed to air, it sucks in water from the atmosphere and quickly becomes 95%.).
If you are compulsive - a follow-on coat of full strength shellac.  Buff with a ScotchBrite pad - wipe clean and use any sort of paint.
 
 

Bashing does seem to be a common term used here when a kit is improved, upgraded, partially scratch built,etc. 
I first saw the term kit bashing in a plastic model magazine.  There it described the combination of two or more kits of wildly different subjects. A plastic brig with DC3 wings and 1960's 5" destroyer gun  and tank tracks sort of thing.  Based on what what kit bashing originally described, using it to describe what is done here on a kit is being a bit hyperbolic.  Especially if the goal is a model that is an exact opposite of an anachronism.

I own the ANCRE monograph of Le Cerf.  I worked on lofting the frames for POF.   When I encountered the notches in the frames for the planks, the idea of doing that was more than I cared to attempt.  The framing style displayed in the monograph is unique to say the least.  I find the hull too small to offer much viewing joy if left unplanked.  Starting with base of a fully planked hull,  I opted to develop my theoretical plan of construction with all bends and scantlings that match a hull of that size in that era.  The traditional method of clinker assembly has the lands cut from the planks.   I speculate that full scale framing timbers would be a bit thick for a laser cutter to cut the notches.  I would not attempt to cut the notches in the timbers of 100 frames by hand.
 
Your work has shown me several things:
The efficiency of using a laser cutter to produce the proper notches in the moulds on a POB build.
That there is a method to the madness of the original builders in choosing the cut the lands into the much thicker framing instead of the thin planks.
As long as the notches are done correctly, the actual planking is idiot proof.  It is much more difficult to misplace a strake run.
That the planking went much more quickly for you using notches suggests that it was also faster for the full size builders. Even if they did not have the glue setup time as a factor.
Cutting the lands into each plank probably required more skill and experience as well as more time on the part of the shipwrights.
 
I thank you for running the experiment.  It was edifying and useful.  I expect that it was unintended and frustrating on your part, but it was valuable for those of us who can learn from it.
 
And,  if the results of my searches have been anywhere close for what is available,  you will find that Pear is a lot more difficult to find and expensive and Hornbeam near impossible on this side of the Atlantic.

Kevin,
Same idea for the same reason:
I opted for the long gooseneck LED - with an  ON/OFF magnetic base.  It is not low cost, but it is bright, the magnet is a strong one, and it can get close but  not in the way.

I see!  So it is the zone where top timbers and half tops reside.   A hardwood scab on the front and/or the back would make it even stronger.

I see!  So it is the zone where top timbers and half tops reside.   A hardwood scab on the front and/or the back would make it even stronger.

I see!  So it is the zone where top timbers and half tops reside.   A hardwood scab on the front and/or the back would make it even stronger.

For POF trunnels can add significant hold strength.   There are many contemporary models that use either brass or wood and some with both.  The diameter is out of scale.  No reference to support this, but I think that the choice of glue then was hide glue.  It would likely have been either a home made extract or a cottage made product - no QA.   Both English and French built models have doweling.  The patterns and numbers match full size requirements.   My money is on there being method behind most everything the old guys did.  It was a professional and shop built operation back then.
 
Pins and trunnels can be effective clamps also.  Although using bamboo trunnels to hold wet planks down can be tricky.  Some species of bamboo are strong and hold up to push pressure.  Some species are not so strong.  They bend  and crack.  The perverse aspect is that the softer species are much easier to pull and have a higher yield.  A high speed electric drill with industrial HSS bits of standardized diameters probably makes this much easier for us.    

It is my guess, but perhaps Franklin was first on the market with yellow PVA and it gained enough of the market attract competitors.  Effective advertising and placement in how-to magazines did the rest.
 
As for the rubber cement - Over time the bond will fail. No surface treatment is likely to save it.
Bamboo dowels may, but there is not much backing support for them.  The wood species makes it more decorator than historical, so even brass pins could enhance the presentation. There is still the problem of not enough support thickness.
 
A more permanent  solution may be to number each plank.  Treat the hull with n-Hepane to solubilize the rubber cement.  Remove the planking.  Clean all surfaces of cement.  Then reapply the planking using PVA.
 
The re-application processes is a lot like the kit coming with pre-cut and pre-bent planking. Except that instead of a computer guided laser, it is a human guided tool.

I have had excellent results using rubber cement.  I use a high quality brand - BestTest.  I apply a healthy coat to both surfaces - let it dry for ~15 min - then apply.  This is an instant grab- no adjustment version.  It will hold for a long time.  It just takes rubbing with your thumb to completely remove it.   I have a bottle of n-heptane - the solvent.   adding it to the cement bottle when it gets too thick to brush easily.
 
Plain paper can be a bit of work to get started to curl up - it will tear - the edge is a challenge to get under.  To make my patterns easier to remove, mostly immune from the effects of humidity, and protected from dirt and smudges - I brush a thick layer of brushing lacquer on the sheets. 
The solvent is fierce enough when brushed outside, I would never consider any spray version.  I overlap all four edges with 1/4" crepe masking tape because if the lacquer sneaks under the pattern and dries the patterns stick to the butcher paper they are taped onto.

For POF trunnels can add significant hold strength.   There are many contemporary models that use either brass or wood and some with both.  The diameter is out of scale.  No reference to support this, but I think that the choice of glue then was hide glue.  It would likely have been either a home made extract or a cottage made product - no QA.   Both English and French built models have doweling.  The patterns and numbers match full size requirements.   My money is on there being method behind most everything the old guys did.  It was a professional and shop built operation back then.
 
Pins and trunnels can be effective clamps also.  Although using bamboo trunnels to hold wet planks down can be tricky.  Some species of bamboo are strong and hold up to push pressure.  Some species are not so strong.  They bend  and crack.  The perverse aspect is that the softer species are much easier to pull and have a higher yield.  A high speed electric drill with industrial HSS bits of standardized diameters probably makes this much easier for us.    

It is my guess, but perhaps Franklin was first on the market with yellow PVA and it gained enough of the market attract competitors.  Effective advertising and placement in how-to magazines did the rest.
 
As for the rubber cement - Over time the bond will fail. No surface treatment is likely to save it.
Bamboo dowels may, but there is not much backing support for them.  The wood species makes it more decorator than historical, so even brass pins could enhance the presentation. There is still the problem of not enough support thickness.
 
A more permanent  solution may be to number each plank.  Treat the hull with n-Hepane to solubilize the rubber cement.  Remove the planking.  Clean all surfaces of cement.  Then reapply the planking using PVA.
 
The re-application processes is a lot like the kit coming with pre-cut and pre-bent planking. Except that instead of a computer guided laser, it is a human guided tool.

For POF trunnels can add significant hold strength.   There are many contemporary models that use either brass or wood and some with both.  The diameter is out of scale.  No reference to support this, but I think that the choice of glue then was hide glue.  It would likely have been either a home made extract or a cottage made product - no QA.   Both English and French built models have doweling.  The patterns and numbers match full size requirements.   My money is on there being method behind most everything the old guys did.  It was a professional and shop built operation back then.
 
Pins and trunnels can be effective clamps also.  Although using bamboo trunnels to hold wet planks down can be tricky.  Some species of bamboo are strong and hold up to push pressure.  Some species are not so strong.  They bend  and crack.  The perverse aspect is that the softer species are much easier to pull and have a higher yield.  A high speed electric drill with industrial HSS bits of standardized diameters probably makes this much easier for us.    

It is my guess, but perhaps Franklin was first on the market with yellow PVA and it gained enough of the market attract competitors.  Effective advertising and placement in how-to magazines did the rest.
 
As for the rubber cement - Over time the bond will fail. No surface treatment is likely to save it.
Bamboo dowels may, but there is not much backing support for them.  The wood species makes it more decorator than historical, so even brass pins could enhance the presentation. There is still the problem of not enough support thickness.
 
A more permanent  solution may be to number each plank.  Treat the hull with n-Hepane to solubilize the rubber cement.  Remove the planking.  Clean all surfaces of cement.  Then reapply the planking using PVA.
 
The re-application processes is a lot like the kit coming with pre-cut and pre-bent planking. Except that instead of a computer guided laser, it is a human guided tool.

It is my guess, but perhaps Franklin was first on the market with yellow PVA and it gained enough of the market attract competitors.  Effective advertising and placement in how-to magazines did the rest.
 
As for the rubber cement - Over time the bond will fail. No surface treatment is likely to save it.
Bamboo dowels may, but there is not much backing support for them.  The wood species makes it more decorator than historical, so even brass pins could enhance the presentation. There is still the problem of not enough support thickness.
 
A more permanent  solution may be to number each plank.  Treat the hull with n-Hepane to solubilize the rubber cement.  Remove the planking.  Clean all surfaces of cement.  Then reapply the planking using PVA.
 
The re-application processes is a lot like the kit coming with pre-cut and pre-bent planking. Except that instead of a computer guided laser, it is a human guided tool.

I put these in my garage / workshop and the amount of light is significant.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=led+garage+lights&ref=nb_sb_noss
Maury

The timber efficient way on the original ship would probably have used six pieces of timber to make the rail.
It would still require spilling from wider stock and five scarphs.   Three hook scraphs - but for the two "v's"  I can't think of anything but a straight butt.
Given the mfg and the year of origin, the wood species that you are calling walnut is probably actually of African origin.  It is probably in the Mahogany family, open pore and brittle.   It probably does not want to bend thru the thin dimension, never mind bending thru the thick dimension - which also never goes well with any  species.  This one will probably split if you try to bend it in that plane.
Since you are going to need to obtain wider stock, why not use an appropriate species for the rail?   If you like the Walnut color - which would not be the color of the original, a dye can do it.  For a stain, Walnut is probably the most common shade.  You do not want to use a stain though,
 
On your JPEG #1 -  the pattern of the deck butts indicates that the designer of the kit was beyond incompetent.  The deck plank butt patterns in the 17th century may have been less regimented, but a butt on the same beam for every other strake is just wrong and ugly.

The timber efficient way on the original ship would probably have used six pieces of timber to make the rail.
It would still require spilling from wider stock and five scarphs.   Three hook scraphs - but for the two "v's"  I can't think of anything but a straight butt.
Given the mfg and the year of origin, the wood species that you are calling walnut is probably actually of African origin.  It is probably in the Mahogany family, open pore and brittle.   It probably does not want to bend thru the thin dimension, never mind bending thru the thick dimension - which also never goes well with any  species.  This one will probably split if you try to bend it in that plane.
Since you are going to need to obtain wider stock, why not use an appropriate species for the rail?   If you like the Walnut color - which would not be the color of the original, a dye can do it.  For a stain, Walnut is probably the most common shade.  You do not want to use a stain though,
 
On your JPEG #1 -  the pattern of the deck butts indicates that the designer of the kit was beyond incompetent.  The deck plank butt patterns in the 17th century may have been less regimented, but a butt on the same beam for every other strake is just wrong and ugly.

Rather than have the wood friction turn at the brass bars, the bars could hold a ball bearing race. They come in a wide range of ID and OD.

If you are only going to use it for spars and are not content to use the hand tool - square to octagon etc. method,  all that is needed is a motor to turn the stock.  If working the stock directly without a tool post or tool rest, a 1/2" drill will turn the stock.
Just build a jig to hold the drill on its back.  Another jig to hold an upright stick with a ball bearing race can support the distant end.
Unlike the sort of small lathe that you are evaluating, which will have a way that is shorter than most masts, a drill jig can have any length of one piece way up to 8 feet.  Ball bearing races come in a wide variety of ID  and shims can make up the difference.

This vessel was 1872.   Drake's first well was ~1860.  So it is entirely possible that petrol based tar was in use, so actual black for standing rigging may be appropriate.  The running rigging -a dark straw - likely hemp.  This was a privately owned two master, so I doubt that steel was even considered.
But as Gregory says:  you can do much better for the line that you rig with.

I have the plans from AAMM.  When I look at the plans, my evaluation is that there sure are a lot of guns!
It is kinda busy looking.  Given the year that it was built,  I think the design was based on an obsolete concept.   I think they are mostly close range shotgun type cannon.  anyone foolish enough to get close could get hurt. However,  not too long after, there would be very large caliber rifled shell guns on tracks at the mid line.  A corvette with two or three of those - -  smaller, faster, less expensive - and in a few more years add steam and this frigate may as well be a towed target.

https://boutique.aamm.fr/monographies/plan-belle-poule
 
Is this what you want?

The physics - the engineering characteristics - the strength - of wood has not changed over the last 2500 years.  The hull volume and length would determine most of it.  The warships would have to factor in the mass of the guns and the stresses produced by discharging them.  There were fads -  because they did not practice real Science for their inquiries and did not have any instruments that could measure the data anyway.  So from 1650 to 1860 at least - any variation in scantlings relative to and within a class of vessel size is probably difficult to observe - at 1:48 and smaller.  
 
Personal philosophy:
It is easy and probably natural to become hung up on what are insignificant differences.  A tendency toward obsession over minor details comes with this territory.  Letting a search for the Perfect become a blocking force field for getting to the Good - can be counterproductive and discouraging of an otherwise worthy project.  I am happy to have finally found my way out of that mental wilderness.