Uss constellation

Roger Pellett said:
. Life is too short to waste time building this kit. Google Sunk Costs!

Roger
Click to expand...
With all due respect, Roger, this is the sort of comment that discourages people from sticking with the hobby. Perhaps your life is too short to build this kit, but is your recommendation that Glenn just bin the unstarted kit and invest all his money in the tools to do everything from scratch? I don’t think the flaws in the kit automatically preclude Glenn, with some time and effort, from producing a fine-looking result. For many, this hobby presents enough challenge learning all the skills involved that 100% historical accuracy is not always the overriding concern.
 
Roger Pellett said:
The USS Constellation expert was the Dean of American Maritime History Howard I Chapelle.

Sometime after World War II a group of civic minded citizens in Maryland obtained Constellation from the US Navy with the usual idea that she would become a tourist attraction. Somewhere I have a copper coin supposedly cast from one of her copper fastenings, sold as a fundraising scheme.

Realizing that she had been modified over her lifetime, they tried to restore her to her 1798 appearance. Raining on their parade was Howard I Chapelle, a Naval Architect specializing in historic ships. Chapelle argued that the ship was an entirely different vessel than the one built in the late 1700’s. Her dimensions and hull lines were different plus she had a round stern. The original Constellation had a square stern. Chapelle argued that the navy used repair funds allocated by Congress to build an entirely new vessel.

Chapelle’s arguments seemed airtight to anyone who could could compare Constellation original drawings with the vessel sitting in Baltimore. Never less, for the next 30 or so years, a furious debate raged; Chapelle vs The Baltimore promoters. Chapelle’s scholarly arguments and dry wit on one side and increasingly silly arguments of the promoters on the other. Their final argument was the idea that since (maybe) some timber from the original ship had been used in the new one, the new vessel was still the original Constellation. Finally in the late 1980’s the Baltimore promoters gave up and she was taken in hand by a new group who restored her to her correct 1853 appearance. She can be seen in Baltimore harbor today.


The sorry saga is explained in detail in two books: Chapelle’s The Constellation Question and Fouled Anchors quoted above. Fouled Anchors was originally published by experts at the Navy’s David Taylor Model Basin about 20 years after Chapelle’s death. It includes the startling evidence that President Roosevelt (FDR) or his people faked documents regarding the Baltimore ship’s Provenance many rears before the Navy gave her to the Baltimore promoters. Those interested in Constellation should also look up Jerry Todd’s build log here on SOS. This Is an excellent model of her just prior to the Civil War.

So, what does all of this have to do with your model kit? Unfortunately the kit builds the “frigate” mouldering in Baltimore Harbor prior to her rescue and correct restoration to an 1853 Sloop-of-War. In other words, it builds a make believe vessel with both 1853 and 1798 features. Life is too short to waste time building this kit. Google Sunk Costs!

Roger
Click to expand...
Certainly appreciate the info, it's a shame the models A mash up, still will be a fun one to do until I can get the Harriet lane
 
GlennRich said:
Certainly appreciate the info, it's a shame the models A mash up, still will be a fun one to do until I can get the Harriet lane
Click to expand...
so actually, according to Roger, this is a kit of the sloop Constellation from when she was identified as the frigate constellation, therefore, it is a more accurate kit of that ship than of the original frigate. :D
It's still a nice kit that builds a nice ship. I built it once and I was at the point of having finished most of the deck furniture when someone came into the hobby shop and offered to buy the kit as I had it built at that time. So, I sold that one and bought a second one. :)
 
I have spent 60+ years of my life researching maritime history. This includes investing in and reading countless books on the subject. I also have the professional qualifications to understand the technology that these ships represent. For me, this has been an avocation, not a hobby. In addition to being personally interesting I enjoy sharing the results of this research with others who find it helpful.

On the other hand, I have no interest in promoting this hobby. Building ship models is for me a solitary experience in which I am self sufficient. Nor am I interested in promoting kits whether as awful as the one of the Constellation or the better ones that can produce accurate models. Promoting the hobby and its ship models I leave to the manufacturers and distributors of model kits. If ship model building is a dying activity I’m not concerned.

The Constellation kit may produce a superficially handsome model, but it will be misleading to those who examine it.

Roger
 
Last edited:
Roger Pellett said:
So, what does all of this have to do with your model kit? Unfortunately the kit builds the “frigate” mouldering in Baltimore Harbor prior to her rescue and correct restoration to an 1853 Sloop-of-War. In other words, it builds a make believe vessel with both 1853 and 1798 features. Life is too short to waste time building this kit. Google Sunk Costs!

Roger
Click to expand...
Wow, Roger. That is too bad (seriously). How similar was the USS Constitution to the original USF Constellation? I served on the carrier in the 70's, and I have a good deal of difficulty telling similar sailing ships apart. Probably from lack of practice. Thanks for the information. I love learning new stuff.
 
Glenn,
The under-represented perspective shared by many is that you should build what you want, the way you want, and if the end result pleases you then it was worth it. With that said, and to Corsair's point, it may be easier to build this "frigate" kit as the sloop CONSTELLATION, rather than trying to retrofit it to the original frigate.
 
The museum in Baltimore has a model of the frigate. I have photos somewhere as I thought of building the frigate myself. The Constitution, the Constellation's sister ship, is pretty similar, though the experts here can tell you how similar.
 
The original Constellation was a Frigate. Frigates had a completely armed gun deck. (a complete row of cannons port and starboard 25-35 guns total). Running above the gun deck was the spar deck. This was partially armed (10-15 guns).

The Constellation built in 1853 is a Sloop-of-War. These vessels carried their armament on a single deck, and were considered to be one class below frigates in fighting value. By 1853, however advances in gunnery had resulted in guns that could fire explosive projectiles; deadly to wooden warships. This meant that Constellation II with a little over half the guns would have been a more effective fighting ship than her older sister. She was also 13 Ft longer than the earlier vessel. The gun deck was covered by an unarmed spar deck intended to protect the gun crews. I believe that Jerry Todd does show a couple of large bore rifled guns on the spar deck of his model.

Another obvious difference was her round stern. The first Constellation had a square stern above her waterline. This stern was studded with a row of windows. Shipwrights realizing that this large flat stern with its windows was a weak spot began designing warships built after the Napoleonic Wars with fully enclosed round sterns; without the windows. Constellation II had one of these round sterns.

Constellation II also had an enclosed head. The head on the original ship had a head supported by open rails

Although subtle, the hull shapes of the two vessels are different.

The AL kit is a blend of differences between the two ships as was the Constellation in Baltimore harbor before she was taken in hand by her present owners. In theory, the kit can be bashed into the 1853 vessel but not the original built in 1798.

Roger
 
 
Namabiiru said:
Glenn,
The under-represented perspective shared by many is that you should build what you want, the way you want, and if the end result pleases you then it was worth it. With that said, and to Corsair's point, it may be easier to build this "frigate" kit as the sloop CONSTELLATION, rather than trying to retrofit it to the original frigate.
Click to expand...
There has been no directive from anyone NOT to build what you want. What has been stated in a rather forceful manner has been that, building this kit is not building a model of the actual ship. It is a decorator piece kit. Nothing keeping a person from getting satisfaction from building it.

But like a large amount of kits on the market, authenticity is um, not going to be happenning. Its a fact of life. But we all deal with it. Its just a difference of building straight from a kit or spending an extra hundred on better things for the kit.

No one bats an eye on a person who buys a 20$ F-15 kit from heller or tamiya or hobby boss for christmas, and then spends 100$ on the supe detail cockpit kit, and then the 50$ upgraded landing gear and bomb rack kit
 
Hello

Welcome Glen

I see that this kit discussion has brought out the museum level only model makers.
I am actually making this kit and few more as well. I neither care if the accuracy is perfect or I have the wrong size line or blocks on the boat.
The whole idea of building model ships is enjoying it, not tryimg to be as accurate as possible.
I admit I add some features to my models that I have reasearched , but they are to make it ascetically pleasing for myself.
Model making is an art and should be enjoyed as an art not as a regimented excercise.
Once we get persons trying to rubbish and demigrate kits, especially to new people starting this hobby then we will lose these people very quickly as it will seem to be in the to hard basket.
If you wish to build a ship to accuracy of millimetres and have it as accuarate as possible to the available information then by all means as this is the way you enjoy this hobby but it is not the way that others may do.
Also kits are built to price and to make it affordable for people to buy and enjoy building, true they have cut corners so to speak and they are marketed as being accurate but who trusts marketing.
Just let us all enjoy the hobby we have and support each other in whatever kit, style or type of ship, plane, or any other model they choose.
I will be posting my build log of this ship as soon as I get round to it and also update my other 2 build logs.
Have had some medical issues but now getting over them.

Regards
RobertB
 
GlennRich said:
Evening all, finally managed to get the constellation from AL, I intend her to be painted in the black and white scheme, is there any recommendations to research material, as my biggest model to date I want to really do it justice
Click to expand...
I built this kit back in the mid 90s and it builds into a decent model although the instructions were a little vague in places at that time but not sure what they're like on today's Artesania kits. The materials were of good quality by my standards and gave an excellent finish the only parts I painted being the metal parts ie, ships boat and the stern gallery windows.
 
One of Chapelle's complaints about the 'reconstruction' was that the 1854 Constellation was a fitting endpiece to the era of the sailing navy. John Lenthall was a master shipbuilder and the Constellation was the epitome of his art. The 1854 sloop was well worth preserving for its own sake, and modelling in that state as well.
 
Robert B said:
Hello

Welcome Glen

I see that this kit discussion has brought out the museum level only model makers.
I am actually making this kit and few more as well. I neither care if the accuracy is perfect or I have the wrong size line or blocks on the boat.
The whole idea of building model ships is enjoying it, not tryimg to be as accurate as possible.
I admit I add some features to my models that I have reasearched , but they are to make it ascetically pleasing for myself.
Model making is an art and should be enjoyed as an art not as a regimented excercise.
Once we get persons trying to rubbish and demigrate kits, especially to new people starting this hobby then we will lose these people very quickly as it will seem to be in the to hard basket.
If you wish to build a ship to accuracy of millimetres and have it as accuarate as possible to the available information then by all means as this is the way you enjoy this hobby but it is not the way that others may do.
Also kits are built to price and to make it affordable for people to buy and enjoy building, true they have cut corners so to speak and they are marketed as being accurate but who trusts marketing.
Just let us all enjoy the hobby we have and support each other in whatever kit, style or type of ship, plane, or any other model they choose.
I will be posting my build log of this ship as soon as I get round to it and also update my other 2 build logs.
Have had some medical issues but now getting over them.

Regards
RobertB
Click to expand...
I have some OCD, maybe some aspergers, not completely sure on that so I shant be sending my second to come visit your second to arrange a meeting at The Dueling Oak.

Trying to build a nice model is important. But many kits are considered to be "entry level" when they are not. Consider the Race Horse kit,,, its small and simple, but its far from entry level. Then consider alot of the solid hull models sold in the 1980s and 1990s..

"fully pre carved" actually meant "now apply this paper patter to the side of the stern and cut out with scroll saw. Apply this paper pattern to the top deck and cut out with scroll saw. Now sand the bow to final shape"

That was in a "constitution kit" i got as a gift in 1993. It took my father 8 hours to actually get the hull to final shape. And the fittins well, if we were going by scale accuracy. The steering wheel would have been 30' in diameter. And the cannons would have been 50' long
 
Thanks to everyone who have contributed to this thread; I've found it very interesting. Although I'd seen the AL model, I wasn't aware of the Constellation sloop-of-war in Baltimore. I have a particular interest in the 1817 frigate, HMS Trincomalee, whose preservation has generated similar heated discussions, so the details of the differences between the Constellation frigate and Constellation sloop, were particularly fascinating. Trincomalee's evolution towards its current preserved form followed a similar path, although the changes were modifications to the same ship, rather than a complete rebuild. Trincomalee was built as a Leda class frigate in 1817, but rebuilt as a corvette in 1845 with an elliptical stern, for the reasons Roger describes concerning the Constellation sloop. When I began my model of Trincomalee, I was considering modelling it in its corvette form, as it spent most of its active life as such, but the lack of any visual data put me off the idea. In preservation, much of the corvette upperworks were changed, but the elliptical stern was retained, so it was decided to return the look of the ship to its 1817 frigate form whilst retaining the 1845 stern. I wish I'd known about the 1853 Constellation, as I think Trincomalee as a corvette, would have resembled a smaller version of it. I decided to model Trincomalee in its preserved form, simply because of the amount of data available.

For similar reasons, if I was Glenn and feeling adventurous, I'd be tempted to use the info available for the 1853 Constellation sloop currently in Baltimore. I did a Google search for "Constellation Baltimore Images," and found a wealth of pictures of the current ship, including YouTube videos. I also found a downloadable document published by Smithsonian Institution Press, detailing the Chapelle discussion mentioned by Roger and shows the lines of both the frigate and corvette:-
The Constellation Question

Also there's an interesting build log on YouTube by Wood Brass N Glue, who mentions that the model is no longer supported by Artesania Latina:-
USS Constellation Build

by the way, Jeff (Corsair) gave a link to the USS Constellation Museum website. I couldn't get that link to work, but I think this one might:-
Historic Ships in Baltimore
 
Namabiiru said:
It wouldn’t be unheard if the kit maker didn’t know the difference either. Entirely possible they designed the kit off the sloop in Baltimore.
Click to expand...
If you need actual pictures of the one docked in baltimore harbor, just contact me. I live just a few minutes away and could take some pictures for you if you need them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top