Good book on the topic.
Posted on 08/31/2014 3:09:56 AM PDT by blueplum
Old Ironsides sailed through Boston Harbor Friday for the last time until 2018, as the 216-year-old warship prepares to undergo a three-year restoration beginning early next year.
The USS Constitution has sailed unassisted by a tug boat only twice since 1881, in 1997 and 2012. This summer it sailed with the help of a tug, but still moved by its own power. Friday was the final unassisted sail until the ship has completed its restoration.
Aside from making the usual repairs for wear and tear, the restoration aims to return Old Ironsides to an image of its 1812 self...
...For this set of repairs — during which the ship will have weather-worn areas strengthened and the copper plates of her hull replaced, making her more “seaworthy” — the original blueprints of the Constitution’s sister ship, the USS President, will be referenced for accuracy.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
Yes.
And to think she was listed as a Frigate.
Very nice. I would be happy to walk her decks.
“...And to think she was listed as a Frigate.”
USS Constitution sprang from the mind and drawing board of Philadelphian Joshua Humphreys, a pioneering shipwright who had made a name for himself designing vessels for the Continental Navy during the American War of Independence.
Old Ironsides and her sister ships were nominally frigates: speedy and maneuverable, but constructed to strength standards matching major ships of the line, and bearing armament greatly superior to the average Royal Navy frigate of the day (1790s). Some historians have termed them “super frigates”, and historically-minded naval enthusiasts insist they could be called “sixth-rate” ships of the line of battle.
Ever since artillery first went to sea, the palladium of warship design has been a vessel able to outrun or outmaneuver any foe capable of destroying her, yet mounting sufficient firepower to destroy any foe capable of catching her. The attributes measuring success in these mission areas conflict: increasing one necessarily requires diminution of another. Compromises are inevitable, and tradeoffs have to be made.
USS Constitution and her sisters embodied those compromises more successfully than most warships of their era. Humphreys, a Quaker, was so successful in crafting instruments of war for the fledgling United States, that the Society of Friends kicked him out.
And the men with guts enough to cannily utilize her.
There was one battle where she was sailed.
In reverse.
My sister in law and I were staying at a Bed & Breakfast in Constitution Bay that day. I say “IN” because we were on a boat which was our home for four days. We saw her sail past. Huge thrill. Even more so now that I know it was her last trip for three years.
Up until the 29th you could walk her decks and I assume we’ll be able to again in three years. It is not only a commissioned ship but a National monument. I’ve been on her twice.
“And the men with guts enough to cannily utilize her. ...”
The entire forum would be well-advised to note Darksheare’s words and reflect: “ships of wood, men of iron” is too flabby a phrase, when it comes to honoring American sailors of the late 18th and early 19th century.
Man for man, gun for gun, ships by ship, the US Navy equaled or surpassed the very best Great Britain’s Royal Navy could send to sea. Only in numbers could Britain make any claim to superiority over the US in 1812, commanding resources from around the globe, and relying on traditions of excellence and innovation already two centuries in the making.
Historian Robert K. Massie wrote on the second page of his book _Dreadnought: Britain, Germany, and the Coming of the Great War_, that for more than 100 years after Horatio Nelson and 17,000 British sailors bested the combined French and Spanish battle fleets at Trafalgar, the Royal Navy exuded a “confidence above arrogance”.
Which made it all the more outrageous, that in the War of 1812, a handful of vessels from the most adolescent nation then extant, dealt the Royal Navy such stunning defeats, even though they were but strategic pinpricks to the British Empire. Those cheeky Americans: how dare they stick a pin in the balloon of British confidence?
Sailors and ships were two sides of the same coin: without the vessels, no sailor, no matter how skilled and brave, could do the job. And without the sailors, the mightiest, most brilliantly conceived ship afloat could never be more than a helpless, soulless pile of timber, iron, brass, tar, and cloth.
Imagination, skill, and stalwart industry floated USS Constitution and stocked her for battle. Imagination, skill, intrepidity, dash, and guts - to look the enemy in the eye and not blink - transformed her into the most fearsome weapon.
The earliest manifestation of the military industrial complex doing its duty. May the Republic ever find such, in any future hour of need.
I had a chance to do that last October...except that is was in the middle of the government shutdown and the Navy Yard was closed to visitors.
As far as I know, kedging was only used in combat to move a ship by us, the Brits watched our guys do that and said, “Why, that’s preposterous. Uh.. they’re getting away.”
They then decided to try it themselves and the outcome was that our ship eventually got away.
[U.S.S. Constitution at the outbreak of hostilities in 1812, used kedge anchors to move in “becalmed” conditions. Engagement lasted from 17 July to 19 July, and began off Egg Harbor.]
Ain’t 0b0z0 swell?
I wish he’d catastrophically gag on his boyfriend.
Me three...
Good book on the topic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.