Constitution to President conversion

Kilo,

I have that book and would be very happy to send a copy of that chapter to you. Just send me your email address and I will send it tonight after work.

Bill

Bill;

How good of you! I truly appreciate your help, mate. Shoot the material to the e-mail address I sent you via PM and I should receive it with no problems.

Thanks again.

Ray

Ray

That version of the President is a little bit odd... I think Mr. Wilkins and his young protege may have used Chappelle's line drawing of the President as a reference and somehow confused the lines indicating the gun deck level with a representation of the gun stripe.

If it were me, I'd do a few simple things to the 1/96 kit to skew it towards the President:

1. Scrape off the CONSTITUTION name on the stern (obvious)

2. Replace the curved main fife rail with something more conventional/straight

3. Ditch the spider rail on the mizzen and put  "normal" fife railing around the mizzen

4. Ditch the Trysail mast

5. Replace the double dolphin striker with a single

6. No white stripe... Perhaps yellow ochre above the wales.

7. Scrape off the Dragon on the trailboard.

8. Add a figurehead to represent George Washington (or possibly John Adams)

The "Don't Tread On Me" flag would not be accurate for any period of her existence. 

The armament would be similar to what is represented in the kit (32 24-pdrs on gundeck, 22 Carronades (42 pdrs - a bit heavier than Constitution's 32 pdr, but very similar), and one 18 pdr chase gun.

The rigging was lighter and seemed to assist in her noted sailing qualities.  Lt. Izard served on both ships and offered this assessment on the eve of war:

“This Ship [President] differs very much from the Constitution both in her Sailing and Rigging, and also her Accommodations; for she sails much better, and is much lighter rigged – Her Birth [sic] Deck is superior as also her Cabin, Ward-Room & Steerage all of which have the convenience of Air Ports- her Gun Deck and Fore-Castle are better; but her Quarter-Deck in my opinion is not as large – her Cockpit and Store Rooms are far superior to the Constitutions – The Master’s Boswain’s, Gunner’s, and Carpenter’s Store Rooms are forward on the Birth-Deck- her Lower Topsail, Top Gallent and Royal Yards are much lighter, than the Constitution’s; her Standing Rigging is smaller; but the stuff is much inferior; her running rigging is in some respects smaller but very disproportioned; and leads very irregular, but I believe the Comre. intends having it altered: the Eyes of her Standing Rigging are very large; and all of the Rigging is obliged to be kept very slack; for the least alteration in setting it up, would eventually destroy her sailing; but upon the whole I am very much pleased with this Ship and prefer her to the Constitution.” (Constitution Museum Log Lines blog)

Here is a link to a contemporary prisoner of war model of President in the Smithsonian collection:

http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_1315846

Good luck with your build and please post some pictures!

Evan

In fact, Mr. Wilkins cites Chappelle's drawings as his source. Also, that chapter in Wilkin's book seems overly simple.  None of the changes recommended by Force9 are listed in the chapter.  As in all matters of research, use as many sources as possible to triangulate your data.

Bill

As for plans - let's back up a bit.

The President, to my knowledge, is the only one of the first three 44-gun American frigates for which genuine, contemporary plans show the War of 1812 configuration. Those plans are the Admiralty draughts the British made after they captured her. Chapelle made tracings of those drawings when he was researching his first major book, The History of the American Sailing Navy, published in 1936. (Beware my memory; I don't have it in front of me.) He publishled them again in The History of the American Sailing Navy.

Chapelle was known to make mistakes in his tracings, but in general his versions of American ships captured by the British are quite reliable. Those Admiralty drawings, by nature, are based on measurements taken directly off the ship.

I think most other plans of the American 44's have been based on those Admiralty draughts with, perhaps, some details from the 1920s refit plans published by the Navy Department. And I'm pretty sure that George Campbell, when he drew the Constitution plans for the Smithsonian, started with the Chapelle President. (Campbell's drawings became the basis for the Revell kit.)

If (gawd forbid) I were building a model of the President in War of 1812 configuration, I'd start by trying to get my hands on a photographic print of the Admiralty Draught. It should be in the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich. The NMM does sell plans, but it's notorious for slow service and high prices. I'd take my measurements from the Chapelle tracings, though. (Admiralty Draught were made on linen, which has probably stretched and/or shrunk in the past 200 years.) If I couldn't get the plans from Greenwich, I'd follow the Chapelle drawings. Watch out for the features he labels "reconstructions," meaning that they weren't on the originals. And don't be surprised if you find disagreements with contemporary illustrations.

I think a model of the President is a fine idea. The Constitution has absorbed too much of the public's attention. There are other, beautiful, important American sailing warships out there. I can't count how many models of the Constitution I've seen; I've also seen a few Constellations, Essexes, and Congresses. But has anybody out there ever seen a scale model of the Chesapeake? Or the Philadelphia? Both were historically important ships, and could be made into superb models. (Ok, their historical impact was...less than dignified. But we build models of the Arizona and the Titanic.)

In all honesty I wouldn't bother tracking down that old Kalmbach book. It was written for beginners, and if you're used to working from scratch it won't tell you much.

Hope all that helps a little.

Thanks muchly to all for your guidance and well thought out suggestions, and for the upload of the relevent chapter in the Kalmbach book. (BTW, it was nicely written but, as one poster noted it was, alas, of limited value in making the requisite specific conversions to transform Constitution to President.) I've since found some splendid plans of USS President, as well as some contemorary descriptions which, albeit brief, should prove quite helpful.

I'd be happy to post the visual references for the benefit of any interested Forum members, if someone would give me a brief checkout in using the "insert image" function.

Kilo,

Here's a tutorial on how to insert images in your post:

http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/feedback_help_and_testing/f/43/t/169689.aspx

I hope it helps.

P.S. I've now learned how to use Photobucket to insert images in a post using the "insert image" tab on top of the FineScale posting window. One clicks on "Direct" to copy that URL instead of clicking on "IMG". Too bad I'm so ignorant about all this stuff - I just fumble my way around . Anyway, it works.

Also the "insert pictures" DOES work when I use the Google picture hosting site. I copied the URL when I clicked "download" on the Google site and used the "insert pictures" here on FineScale (in the Testing Forum) and the image was successfully posted.

Ray,

Have you begun this conversion yet?

Bill

I've sort-of started. The scrollworks and other decorations specific to Constitution have been removed in readiness for replacement by the limited trim of President. At the moment, I'm awaiting the arrival of some building supplies...3MM "lumber", scale-texture sail cloth, and the Scaledecks set of wood decking foremost among them. I most likely won't really put my nose to the proverbial grindstone until after Thanksgiving. Meanwhile, what I'm still lacking is more detailed information as to how the rigging differed between the two warships.

Ray,

See PM I just sent you.

Hi Kilo 66

Long-time lurker here...

Like you, I'm also a big fan of the President frigate, as well as part way into a conversion of the Revell 1/96 Constitution myself.

Dr Tilley is giving you great advice in urging you to get a copy of the British Admiralty drawings. They are a 'snapshot' in time of this ship, drawn by the world's best expert draftsmen of their time.  The British were anxious to find out what made this ship so fast, in order to copy her best sailing traits.

These drawings reveal the details a modeller would need in order to produce an accurate model. They include drawings of the stern , quarter galleries, headrails, waterlines, locations of her masts, and the most distinctive detail of all : the configuration of her shrouds, which are quite different from Constitution.

This last detail is also the most problematic for modellers ( or at least for me :).  The shrouds should never cross a gunport opening, for obvious reasons. So if you want to replicate the President's shroud patterns, per the drawings, you must deal with gunport locations vs. shrouds.

I recommend that you consider purchasing two reference books by author/marine historian Andrew Lambert:

"War at Sea in the Age of Sail"  which contains a two page spread of the British Admiralty drawings of ' President'.

" The Challenge : Britain Against America in the War of 1812 "  a lot of useful information about the ships directly involved, including 'President'.

Both can be had for under $ 5.00 US from ABE books or other online sources.

Sorry for the long-winded reply....hope I've been of some help towards your worthy project !

Cheers/Rob Mills

Carumba!

Trying to post a few relevent images but no joy.

Seafarer has some excellent points concerning any approach to converting the Revell kit into the President...

I am a bit skeptical, however, regarding Professor Lambert's The Challenge : Britain Against America in the War of 1812.  

During the bicentennial of the War of 1812, Lambert inserted himself into the media as the spokesperson for the British perspective on the war and proceeded to "debunk" many of the myths regarding American exceptionalism coming out of the conflict.  The good professor adamantly maintained that not only was Britain not humbled by the early American naval victories, but that the Americans were brought to their knees and soundly defeated - largely by the very effective naval blockade imposed on the American coast.  

I entirely agree with his fundamental premise that England was not humbled in that war, but I think his very biased and distorted arguments ultimately undermine his core message.  He goes far out of normal swim lanes to detract from American victories and over-glorify the British successes. His depiction of the capture of the US Frigate President is a case in point.  He goes thru incredible contortions to insist that the Endymion single-handedly defeated the President without any assistance from the other ships in the British squadron.  He tries desperately to prove that President was NOT crippled after initially running aground and being pounded by the heavy nor'easter before breaking free.  

Most accounts agree that the fine sailing President was slowed considerably after her masts were sprung on the bar and could not outpace the pursuing British squadron.  Endymion was able to catch up and position herself advantageously to deliver considerable damage on President while the positioning of the other British ships severely limited the tactical options available to Decatur on the President.  Realizing that his ship couldn't escape in her current state, Decatur attempted to come about and board Endymion and use her to escape.  Captain Hope in Endymion was able to easily avoid the manuever and keep the American ship at bay.  Decatur next elected to cripple his opponent's rigging to allow some chance of escape, while Captain Hope continued to inflict as much damage to the President's hull as possible.  Both captains seemed to be successful - Once the rest of the squadron pulled near enough, Endymion fell out of the action because of the risk to her spars with the loss of so much rigging, while Decatur hoisted and lowered a lantern in the darkness to admit that he was outmanuevered and severely damaged with no chance of escape.  

The entire British squadron was expertly positioned throughout the chase to limit the manueverability of President and allow the Endymion to lock in on her opponent to inflict maximum damage.  It was a team effort that benefitted greatly from the delay incurred when President ran aground and the apparent damage done to the President's speed.  Lambert makes a very specious argument that logs/records show NO damage to President in post-battle surveys and that the rest of the British squadron was too far distant to have impacted the battle.  I think the fact that President was broken up not long after the war (after her lines were used to make a near exact copy) and the fact that logs of both President and Endymion show the rest of the British squadron in sight through most of the chase undermines Lambert's stance. 

I have other problems with Lambert's perspective, but I think this review by a respected UK paper goes to the heart of my complaints:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-challenge-britain-against-america-in-the-naval-war-of-1812-by-andrew-lambert-7827277.html

I hope we can eventually view your progress as you continue with your conversion.

Thx

Evan

Hi Evan

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on President's capture.  I agree that the accidental grounding was probably the real cause of her capture. I believe she could have easily outrun the blockading squadron otherwise. They were certainly hunting for her and had a well organized plan for bringing her 'to ground'. 

She must have been in poor condition at her capture, as she was then taken to Bermuda, not Halifax, to be patched up enough for her journey to Portsmouth Dockyard to have her lines taken off. I have not found any references to any plans to rebuild or repair the original ship, which certainly would have been done if feasible. I believe she was broken up in 1817.

In regards to Lambert's political or other motivations in his book "Challenge...", all I can say is that it -was- published in 2012, the 200th anniversary of the conflict, and controversy does sell books, lol ! ( being able to read between the lines is really useful at times :-)

My recommendation for this book, as I said in my earlier post, was based on the details to be found in it, of the ships involved in the conflict, complete with many drawings, sail plans, period paintings, not to mention the time line of events, information of their movements, who commanded them and any actions they were involved in.

As an amateur historian, I find this period of history quite fascinating. A lot of this happened in my own "backyard" ( Nova Scotia/Newfoundland).

I have seen and touched artifacts ( sea chest/mess kid/copper kettle ) from USF Chesapeake at the Museum of the North Atlantic in Halifax. It makes it real, and motivates me to learn more and appreciate those who actually sailed and fought these ships.

Best regards.

Cheers/Rob

Along with the several book suggested by the knowledgable contributors to this thread, and a number of contemporary period accounts concerning the ship, I've found some interesting visual references which I thought might be of interest to forum colleagues. Haven't had much luck inserting them up to now but I'll give it one more try.

Ah, there we go now! Click on images to view full size.

USS President Draughts (After Admiralty Drawings)

 Comparative Draughts: USS President & HMS Endymion

USS President - Model Circa 1815 By Former Crewman Held As POW At Dartmoor Prison

USS President - 2010 Commercial Model

USS President - 2010 Model - Deck Detail

USS President - Sail Plan

USS Constellation - Note Single Dolphin Striker Configuration Like That Of USS President

Thanks so muchly to those who kindly extended their expertise in suggesting a course of improvemnts necessary to accomplish an accurate conversion build and for all the suggested relevent volumes. Thanks too for help in navigating the absurd image-posting system. The assistance of colleagues in the model shipwright fraternity is always appreciated.

Ray,

Can you send the photos as attachments in an email?  The photos do not show on my computer.

Thanks!

Bill

Bill,

I've let Ray know that the photos are not showing up. He now knows how to post them from Flikr but, from what I'm seeing, he posted PNG files to Flikr. I've let him know that he should change the file association from GIF or PNG to JPG. I imagine when he gets back from wherever he's going (see his "Pretty In Pink" thread) he'll redo the upload of his images using jpg and they'll be able to be seen by us at that time.

Mike,

Thanks! I appreciate it!

Bill