Bob Cleek

Wipe on polyurethane is simply thinned polyurethane varnish or "clear coating," if you will. It's marketed for folks who don't want to go to the trouble of mixing their own and for that convenience they pay the price of polyurethane varnish for a can half full of far less expensive thinner.   The same result can be achieved using a mixture of half boiled linseed oil and half turpentine. Either way, the "preferred technique" is getting it on the wood however works for you, and then wiping off the excess before it starts to dry. It's really no different than any other oiled wood finish, save for the chemical components of the coating itself. As the man says, "Follow the directions on the can."
 
How many coats to apply and whether you feel the need to sand or not are matters of personal taste. As with all finish and wood species combinations with which the user is not completely familiar,  one should always test the application on a piece of scrap wood of the same species (and preferably the same color, if colors vary in the species) to ensure the result desired. Nothing's worse than ruining a work piece with a botched finish!
 
 
 

Well, I think the main reason people don't add "in my opinion" disclaimers to their answers to direct questions is because they realize nobody's much interested in anybody else's opinion. Facts, yes. Opinions, no. Everybody already has opinions. They don't need any more. If somebody disagrees with someone else's statement of fact, they are free to offer evidence to the contrary, and should. That's the problem with the internet. Any fool can pontificate about anything they know nothing about and most do. (Can you say, "herd immunity?")
 
For example:
 
1. "CA is the best choice for planking a hull using Chuck’s method." That's an opinion. It needs facts to back it up. The majority of people who've used CA are adverse to its use for many sound reasons beginning with the difficulty of working with it, the fact that it soaks into wood and affects subsequent finishing results, it is not a recognized archival material, has a relatively short "working time" before it sets up, is much more difficult to un-bond than PVA, has a relatively short shelf life and a relatively high price, and so on. Your mileage may vary. At the end of the day, "best practices" dictate that all parts of a model to the extent possible should be mechanically fastened, not just glued, anyway. 
 
2.  "I have models over 25 years old done with CA that are just fine and look great." The fact that you have models done with CA that are over 25 years old is a fact. That they are just fine and look great is an opinion, or, at best, an unproven fact. It's too early to call. Let us know how they are holding up in another 75 years. The "industry standard" is a model that properly cared for should last 100 years without exhibiting any deterioration. At present, CA hasn't been around long enough to know if it lasts that well.
 
3.  "I don’t think any well built ship model survives dropping to the floor, it’s best not to do that." Now, that's a fact. Don't ask me how I know this.
 
3. (Again) "Edge gluing is not only totally unnecessary it’s also detrimental to the look of the hull." That's a fact, not an opinion. 
 
4.   "I doubt the humidity variance in most first world homes creates an issue."  Whether it does or doesn't depends upon many variables in every instance, but "first world homes" isn't one of them.   It's a fact that humidity is a factor to be considered in any fine woodworking. Frolich addresses a substantial problem he encountered with wood shrinkage in his fine book, The Art of Ship Modeling. One ignores it at their peril. It's sort of like Covid in that respect. 
 
5.  I’ll put up my nine models as examples of using CA for hulls any time." Not to worry. I don't think anybody doubts you built them with CA adhesive and they are still sticking together. See No. 2. above.
 
Many don't offer what they have to say as "just their opinion" because they have little interest in expressing their opinions. They are only interested in sharing what they know to be true. If somebody prefers to offer opinions, they should go to FaceBook.   Preferences are largely irrelevant. There's a right way and a wrong way to do most things, and then there are "preferences," which, more often than not are just excuses for doing it the wrong way.  My wife insists that loading a toilet paper roll so the paper end hangs down the back of the roll, between the roll and the wall, instead of off the front of the roll like you've probably seen in every hotel you've ever been in, is her "preference." She was not convinced when I showed her the original patent for the toilet paper roll which clearly shows the roll coming off the front and not the back. That's obviously the way it's supposed to work. So, she has her own "preference," and i have my own bathroom.  

One should carefully consider the downside risks of gluing planking seams, whether by application of adhesive to the seams, or by coating the inside of a hull with epoxy resin adhesive which soaks into the seams from inside. As noted correctly, wood moves with changes in the ambient humidity levels of the environment it's in. This movement is primarily across the grain and its amount varies depending upon the wood species and, within the same species, even the location where the wood is grown. This is called tangential movement. Most woods will shrink tangentially six to ten percent when dried and will swell back depending upon the moisture content absorbed. The amount of movement is relatively small, assuming properly dried wood being used to begin with, but can still be considerable if the distance you are dealing with is relatively large. 
 
So, if you are building a model using vertical grain stock, as one should, the tangential (cross grain) side of its planked hull can easily total six inches. That's six inches of grain to shrink tangentially and even at a rate of movement of one percent, you are getting close to a sixteenth of an inch, which would be a quite noticeable crack in a model's topsides. If the planks are not fastened to each other, each will shrink individually and if you have maybe 24 1/4" planks, that shrinkage will only amount to 1/24th of a sixteenth of an inch. (You can do the math to get an exact fraction... a good example of the advantages of metric measurements!) That amount of movement isn't going to be noticeable at all and most coatings will allow for such movement without cracking at the seams. However, if the seams are all glued together, they all move as one, and the "weakest link law" takes over. In that case, a sixteenth of an inch crack along the weakest glued seam... or a crack in the wood itself... is going to occur at the weakest point. Conversely, swelling will push the glued sheet of planking for that sixteenth of an inch against everything it butts up against, again potentially causing a structural failure at the weakest point, or tend to buckle the "planking sheet" outward, breaking the glue bonds... or the wood... at the frames. 
 
Now, with prime wood species which have low movement factors and with relatively stable humidity, you may not run into any problems at all, but theoretically, the potential is there and I've seen its results in more than one model I've restored. More often than not, parts, cap rails, for example, start popping off and nobody knows why.
 
Monocoque wood hull construction is tricky. For my money, I prefer to give the wood as much opportunity to move on its own as possible without concentrating swelling and shrinking stresses within the structure.
 
Others' mileage may vary, of course.
 

Well, I think the main reason people don't add "in my opinion" disclaimers to their answers to direct questions is because they realize nobody's much interested in anybody else's opinion. Facts, yes. Opinions, no. Everybody already has opinions. They don't need any more. If somebody disagrees with someone else's statement of fact, they are free to offer evidence to the contrary, and should. That's the problem with the internet. Any fool can pontificate about anything they know nothing about and most do. (Can you say, "herd immunity?")
 
For example:
 
1. "CA is the best choice for planking a hull using Chuck’s method." That's an opinion. It needs facts to back it up. The majority of people who've used CA are adverse to its use for many sound reasons beginning with the difficulty of working with it, the fact that it soaks into wood and affects subsequent finishing results, it is not a recognized archival material, has a relatively short "working time" before it sets up, is much more difficult to un-bond than PVA, has a relatively short shelf life and a relatively high price, and so on. Your mileage may vary. At the end of the day, "best practices" dictate that all parts of a model to the extent possible should be mechanically fastened, not just glued, anyway. 
 
2.  "I have models over 25 years old done with CA that are just fine and look great." The fact that you have models done with CA that are over 25 years old is a fact. That they are just fine and look great is an opinion, or, at best, an unproven fact. It's too early to call. Let us know how they are holding up in another 75 years. The "industry standard" is a model that properly cared for should last 100 years without exhibiting any deterioration. At present, CA hasn't been around long enough to know if it lasts that well.
 
3.  "I don’t think any well built ship model survives dropping to the floor, it’s best not to do that." Now, that's a fact. Don't ask me how I know this.
 
3. (Again) "Edge gluing is not only totally unnecessary it’s also detrimental to the look of the hull." That's a fact, not an opinion. 
 
4.   "I doubt the humidity variance in most first world homes creates an issue."  Whether it does or doesn't depends upon many variables in every instance, but "first world homes" isn't one of them.   It's a fact that humidity is a factor to be considered in any fine woodworking. Frolich addresses a substantial problem he encountered with wood shrinkage in his fine book, The Art of Ship Modeling. One ignores it at their peril. It's sort of like Covid in that respect. 
 
5.  I’ll put up my nine models as examples of using CA for hulls any time." Not to worry. I don't think anybody doubts you built them with CA adhesive and they are still sticking together. See No. 2. above.
 
Many don't offer what they have to say as "just their opinion" because they have little interest in expressing their opinions. They are only interested in sharing what they know to be true. If somebody prefers to offer opinions, they should go to FaceBook.   Preferences are largely irrelevant. There's a right way and a wrong way to do most things, and then there are "preferences," which, more often than not are just excuses for doing it the wrong way.  My wife insists that loading a toilet paper roll so the paper end hangs down the back of the roll, between the roll and the wall, instead of off the front of the roll like you've probably seen in every hotel you've ever been in, is her "preference." She was not convinced when I showed her the original patent for the toilet paper roll which clearly shows the roll coming off the front and not the back. That's obviously the way it's supposed to work. So, she has her own "preference," and i have my own bathroom.  

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#
 
 
 
 

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#
 
 
 
 

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#
 
 
 
 

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#
 
 
 
 

I've been keeping my powder dry, but now that It's been said before, I'll pile on. Start simple. Those who provide you with such advice usually have decades of highly involved interest in ship modeling and all have the experience to verify that modeling is a craft, and indeed an art, in which one's skill and ability always increases in the doing of it. This forum is probably the premier ship-modeling forum in the world. There are some amazing artists and craftsmen posting build logs here and the concentration of master modelers in this forum may mislead the beginner into thinking such work is the norm. Their work certainly isn't commonplace and it definitely isn't easy. 
 
Others certainly have more experience with kits than I do, but I am familiar with what has hit the market in close to the last fifty years and I feel confident in saying that I know of no kit model of any fully-rigged Seventeenth Century vessel of the type you are contemplating that I would consider suitable for any but the most highly-experienced kit-builder to undertake. I know there are those who have done so and succeeded to one degree or another, but they are rare exceptions indeed. A beginning modeler is well-advised to select a kit suitable for beginners. These less complex kits are capable of producing every bit as elegant a model when done well as are the "monster" kits. I wouldn't advise a beginner to attempt to build any planked kit other than the high quality ones of recent vintage which provide laser-cut planks. A beginner has enough of a learning curve to deal with besides doing their own lining off and spiling the shapes of the planks and, it should also be mentioned that the shape of a hull in large measure determines the difficulty involved in planking it. A transom-sterned longboat is much easier to plank than an apple-bowed and counter-sterned warship. The beginner is also well-advised to steer clear of square-rigged vessels until they have two or three fore-and-aft-rigged kits under their belt. The increase in the complexity of square rig is exponential. The way to success is first "Do the common thing uncommonly well."
 
Read up as much as possible on any specific kit you are considering. This forum has extensive kit review data available. Be aware that many kits are wholly incapable of producing model in the color glossy picture on its box's cover. That model was built by a highly experienced modeler who almost certainly did not limit themselves to the parts and materials contained in the kit and honest kit manufacturers will disclose that in the fine print somewhere. Most experienced kit modelers who have not "gone over to the dark side" and abandoned kits entirely routinely at least replace all the kit-supplied planking wood and rigging blocks and line because they are simply not up to their standards. (The after-market for such materials and fittings is testimony to the shortcomings of many kits!)
 
A last bit of advice to a beginning kit builder is to select a kit that has been well-covered in the build logs section of this forum. They will provide a very valuable source of instruction as a new builder builds the same kit. Others' mistakes can be almost as instructional as our own! You don't have to re-invent the wheel.
 
While I doubt there's any reliable data available on the subject, I believe most experienced modelers would agree that the percentage of kit models completed is but a small fraction of those purchased, which is pretty remarkable considering the price of many of the more complex kits. There's no point in encouraging the undertaking of a project which is beyond the abilities of the builder. The whole point of the exercise is to enjoy doing it.
 
If you want to get an idea of what a top of the line kit suitable for a "determined beginner's," first and second builds, I'd recommend you check these two out. Their entire "how to build it" monographs are accessible from their websites. The longboat also has a "group build" project posted on this forum and linked from the webpage.
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/medway-longboat-1742.php
 
https://syrenshipmodelcompany.com/revenue-cutter-cheerful-1806.php#
 
 
 
 

Yes. I would not advise using CA adhesives at all, although there are a few applications for it when nothing else will do. One big advantage of PVA adhesives is that they can be softened and "unstuck" with isopropyl alcohol. 

Look at some of the very detailed construction manuals like the one Chuck did for the MS Confederacy.  Probably one of the best resources for folks fairly new to the hobby.

Buy a simple kit, read the instructions, make sawdust and finish the model warts and all.  Experience is the best teacher.

Thanks, Roger. I am grateful for your guidance Since I am focusing on plank on bulkhead models, would it be wise to read up on Underhill’s books Vol 1 and 2, as those seem to be about plank on frame?  Thanks. 

The worst ship model is one one not built.  I have been attempting to build quality ship models for more years than I care to remember and in the process have built some that were bad beyond belief.  I still have some purchased fittings in my stash that were stripped from the models before they were trashed Over time my skills have gradually improved to the point where I now have a collection of models that I am proud of.
 
My advice is, decide on what type and period of ship that you would like to build that involves the skills that you would like to develop.  Buy the simplest kit that meets these criteria.  Get busy and build it.  Don’t worry if you make mistakes.  Everyone makes mistakes and remembers them.  Finish the model and move on.  Knowledge and skills will only improve over time by doing.
 
 

Tom,
 
Good kits are not cheap so you may be better off asking here at MSW which kits have the best materials and which are closest to being historically accurate.  Some kits offer neither.  Start a build log once you begin and you will likely get more and better help from members here than most books which tend to be more appropriate for scratch building and even for kit bashing as mentioned by Roger.    
 
You mention you are a newbie, so is this your first wooden ship model?  If it is, I would urge you to start with something small and not as complex as most of the 17th century kits available.   
 
Also, as a newbie, be sure to read the forum here at MSW on pirated kits before you make your purchase so you do not get stuck with one of these illegal knockoffs.
 
Allan
 
 

Most of these conundrums go by the boards once one becomes familiar with how wooden ships really appear. If one can't spend a lifetime on the waterfront, spending as much time as possible studying really great models in the better maritime museums is highly advisable, as is collecting as many books on the subject as one might have room for. The object of modeling is to create a convincing impression of the subject in miniature. If it doesn't look right, it isn't right. The trick is developing a trained eye for what a subject should look like at scale. The concept of scale viewing distance is important and often is overlooked. Scale viewing distance is best determined by asking, "If I were standing as far away from the real ship as would be necessary to make the real ship appear as small as the model, what details on the real ship would be visible? The most frequent mistake made seems to be models which have out of scale details that would not be visible at scale viewing distance. The biggest offenders seem to be copper plating tacks, deck planking seams, planking trunnels, rigging diameters, and most anything having to do with details on sails. If the model's scale viewing distance is seventy-five or a hundred yards, you certainly aren't going to be seeing much more than the most subtle hints of seams and roping on sails and certainly not individual coppering tacks. Reproducing the mere suggestion of those subtle details, where they are barely visible at scale viewing distance, is really where the modeler's artistic skills come into play and, generally, "less is more." If visualization isn't one's strong suit, a good rule of thumb is that at 1:96 scale (1/8" = foot)  any detail larger than one foot in size on the real vessel should be reproduced on the model and any less than one foot in size on the real vessel should be seriously considered for omission entirely if they cannot be reproduced accurately to scale. Similarly, on a 1:48 (1/4"=foot) scale model, details less than six inches in size should be omitted if they can't be reproduced to exact scale.  

Just as a general observation, if one has problems with "gap filling" in their planking, that's God's way of telling you that you need to work on your planking skills. Now, I know we've all had a painted hull that we've slapped some filler on here or there, but the object of the game is to avoid the need to do that. 
 
Given present-day planking techniques, such as Chuck Passaro's "edge-setting" heat bending method, and a reasonable amount of care, there should be no reason why plank seams shouldn't be tight over their entire length. For that same reason, there should be no reason to "double plank" a hull. (Unless, of course, you're doing an "as built" model of a prototype double-planked hull.) Double planking was a kit manufacturers' gimmick to sell more models and not have to invest in expensive solid-hull carving machinery, IMHO. Today, I would urge any beginning modeler to first plank a kit model that has laser cut planks that are certain to fit before they tackle planking a model that requires its planks to be spiled and got out of whole stock. Tackling something like one of Syren Ship Models' longboat models as a first effort is much wiser than tackling a Seventeenth Century plank on bulkhead ship of the line!
 
 See: 
 
 

Application of penetrating epoxy sealer will retard the speed at which moisture is absorbed and will repel water soaking, but epoxy coatings are all moisture-permeable, contrary to common belief. There are many reasons why one hull might crack and another not, so I'd hesitate to certainly ascribe the lack of cracking to the epoxy. I'm not a fan of edge-gluing planking in any way because if there is going to be significant movement, and if the adhesive is any good at all, the wood will break before the glue line does.
 
According to scientific testing, one of the best moisture barriers available for application to wood is thin shellac (one or two pound cut.) It is very nearly moisture impermeable. It also soaks into soft wood species, hardening their surfaces and makes it possible to sand them very smooth without any "fuzzing." I make it a practice to coat all bare wood with thin clear shellac. It makes an excellent base for paint and also makes an excellent sealer for wood which is not painted.
 
It should be added that glue alone should not be relied upon if one expects a model to last well. Every pieced joined to another should be mechanically fastened, If one is interested in ensuring an archival-quality result, planks should be mechanically fastened with glued-in scale trunnels or wire pins. 
 
See: https://thenrg.org/resource/articles/specifications-for-construction

Yes. I would not advise using CA adhesives at all, although there are a few applications for it when nothing else will do. One big advantage of PVA adhesives is that they can be softened and "unstuck" with isopropyl alcohol. 

The good Mr. Mastini's book is a good enough primer for beginning builders of boat model kits, but it has its limitations, as do most of the kits on the market, with a few notable exceptions. Mastini's book is a good book for beginning kit builders, but a lot has changed in kits since it was written. At that time, double planked model hulls were quite popular. That is not as much the case with the better kits these days which benefit greatly from laser cutting technology. (And, for openers, planking a double-planked hull requires twice the work!)

Yes, pumps. It is common for a carvel or lapstrake planked hull to dry out when a boat is out of the water and dries out. Depending upon how much the planking is opened, the boat can be launched and pumped for a few days or weeks until it "takes up," or it can be left "in the slings" if launched with a crane or travel lift or "on the stocks" if dry docked to prevent if from sinking if there is concern that the amount of leaking is more than the pumps can handle. Another practice is to put soft soap into the seams with a putty knife to stop or at least slow the leaking. As the planks expand when the boat is launched, they "spit" the soft soap from the seams and is eventually dissolves. In the age of sail, it was a regular practice to tow a ship's boats astern every so often, or in anticipation of making port, so that they would swell up and not leak unduly when it was time to use them. It may surprise the uninitiated, but a dry bilge is something of a rarity in wooden hulls and even in metal and fiberglass hulls, as water always seems to find a way somehow. Generally, most prop shaft bearings will leak a little bit as the shaft turns, if nothing else.

Most of these conundrums go by the boards once one becomes familiar with how wooden ships really appear. If one can't spend a lifetime on the waterfront, spending as much time as possible studying really great models in the better maritime museums is highly advisable, as is collecting as many books on the subject as one might have room for. The object of modeling is to create a convincing impression of the subject in miniature. If it doesn't look right, it isn't right. The trick is developing a trained eye for what a subject should look like at scale. The concept of scale viewing distance is important and often is overlooked. Scale viewing distance is best determined by asking, "If I were standing as far away from the real ship as would be necessary to make the real ship appear as small as the model, what details on the real ship would be visible? The most frequent mistake made seems to be models which have out of scale details that would not be visible at scale viewing distance. The biggest offenders seem to be copper plating tacks, deck planking seams, planking trunnels, rigging diameters, and most anything having to do with details on sails. If the model's scale viewing distance is seventy-five or a hundred yards, you certainly aren't going to be seeing much more than the most subtle hints of seams and roping on sails and certainly not individual coppering tacks. Reproducing the mere suggestion of those subtle details, where they are barely visible at scale viewing distance, is really where the modeler's artistic skills come into play and, generally, "less is more." If visualization isn't one's strong suit, a good rule of thumb is that at 1:96 scale (1/8" = foot)  any detail larger than one foot in size on the real vessel should be reproduced on the model and any less than one foot in size on the real vessel should be seriously considered for omission entirely if they cannot be reproduced accurately to scale. Similarly, on a 1:48 (1/4"=foot) scale model, details less than six inches in size should be omitted if they can't be reproduced to exact scale.  

“ However, in this hobby of ship modeling I think that anyone who is able to make their own drawings whether CAD or manual, is certainly a few steps ahead of someone who lacks these abilities.”
 
Well said, Hank!  Without these abilities modelers are limited to modeling a variety of subjects where kits or prepackaged plan sets are not available.

Thanks Bob, we all get sucked into this kind of thing now and then.  Personally, I have probably been taken in more often than most.  Stuff happens to all of us.
 
Merry Christmas.

I did buy the wood box set a long time ago.  I'm thinking they changed suppliers to lowest bidder and quality went out the window.  Looking at the price today... $25.... really? I think I paid a lot more when I bought my set.