Force9

It is so interesting to see all of this testimony laid out end to end... Thanks Frolic for sharing this.
 
I know folks find it bizarre that I could call out the discrepancy in Dacres' testimony, but it goes to the heart of how accounts of this battle have been dissected and/or manipulated over the years.  Notice how the witnesses differ on the commencement of the close action in each account:
 
Lt. Kent: "At 5 she closed within half pistol shot, on our larboard beam, both keeping up a heavy fire and  steering free, his intention, evidently, being to cross our bows. At 5.20 the mizenmast fell and exposed the ship to a heavy raking fire from the enemy, who placed himself on our larboard bow..."
 
Master Scott: "At 5 our opponent closed with in half pistol shot on our starboard beam, both steering free and keeping up a [illegible] fire.. At 5.20 the mizen mast went over the starboard quarter, which brought the ship up in the wind against her helm which exposed us to a heavy raking fire from the enemy.
 
In his post-battle report, Captain Dacres stated: "At 5 She clos'd on our Starboard Beam, both keeping up a heavy fire and steering free, his intention being evidently to cross our bow. At 5.20, our Mizen Mast went over the starboard quarter and brought the Ship up in the Wind. The Enemy then plac'd himself on our larboard Bow, raking us..."
 
Captain Hull and 1st Lt. Morris both maintain that Constitution commenced the close action on the Larboard beam of Guerriere.  This would seem to be corroborated by Dacres' assertion that the larboard side had thirty shots below the waterline in line with the 5th row of copper.  This would imply a well coordinated broadside instead of random shots during the course of a running battle.  Very likely the result of the initial broadside that Captain Hull withheld until directly alongside Guerriere within "can't miss" range.  Both Alfred Mahan and Theodore Roosevelt assumed that Dacres erred in his initial report and the master's testimony was mistakenly captured by a clerk or otherwise mis-remembered by Scott.  All seem to agree, however, that Constitution ended up on the larboard bow at some point.
 
​Tyrone Martin capitalized on these discrepancies and created an entirely new version of the battle with Constitution engaging initially on the Starboard side.  He inserts an entirely new set of maneuvering with Constitution crossing the bow of her adversary before wearing around for another bow crossing where the final entanglement and dismasting takes place.  None of this ties back to any testimony or eyewitness account.
 
Fun stuff
 
Evan

You are correct, eagle-eye Evan!
 
Cursive writing, a badly faded xerox-copy, and an aging brain, all conspired to get that one wrong!

Frolic -
 
Can you verify the statement from Captain Dacres: "On the starboard side there were about thirty shots, which had taken effect about five sheets of copper down..."  Alfred Mahan cites that Dacres testimony as "On the LARBOARD side there were about thirty shots.."
 
Curious
 
Evan

Frolic -
 
Can you verify the statement from Captain Dacres: "On the starboard side there were about thirty shots, which had taken effect about five sheets of copper down..."  Alfred Mahan cites that Dacres testimony as "On the LARBOARD side there were about thirty shots.."
 
Curious
 
Evan

Lieutenant Kent withdrew and Robert Scott, master of the Guerriere, was called into court, sworn and examined s follows:
 
 
Q:  Have you any narrative of the circumstances that occurred in the Guerriere's action?
 
A: I have.
 
Mr. Scott then produced the following narrative:
 
"On the 19th of August of 1812, at 2 PM, being on the wind on the starboard tack, saw a sail on the weather beam standing towards us. at 3 made her out to be a man of war, went to quarters and cleared for action. At 4 the stranger was supposed to the United States Frigate Constitution, which we had formerly chased off New York. Hauled up the course, took in the top gallant sails, backed the main top sail, hoisted an ensign at each mast head. The enemy shortened sail and hauled to the wind on the starboard tack. At 4.15, furled the main top sail. The Constitution then bore up and then and hoisted American colours on each mast head.  At 4.10 gave him our starboard broadside, and wore to give him our larboard when the enemy commenced firing, wore several times to avoid being raked, exchanging broadsides. At 5 our opponent closed with in half pistol shot on our starboard beam, both steering free and keeping up a [illegible] fire.. At 5.20 the mizen mast went over the starboard quarter, which brought the ship up in the wind against her helm which exposed us to a heavy raking fire from the enemy. At 5.40 the ship not answering her helm he attempted to cross our bow and lay us on board, but Captain Dacres, perceiving his intentions, gave orders to wear under her quarter which we accordingly did, when our bowsprit caught his quarter, which hindered our wearing as expeditiously as we could have wished. At this time the fore mast went by the board and fell across the main stay and carried the main mast with it over the starboard side leaving the ship a complete wreck. The Constitution stood on ahead. All hands were immediately employed clearing the  the wreck, in hopes of being able to get the ship before the win, to recommence the action, but just as we had completed clearing the wreck, the sprit sail yard went and left the ship in the trough of the sea rolling her main deck guns under water. Our opponent at this time had refitted and had wore around to rake us and all attempts to get the ship before the wind or bring any of our guns to bear proving fruitless, the ship in a sinking condition, much shattered in her hull, and many shot between wind and water with more than one third part of her crew killed or wounded, Captain Dacres called his officers together. who all were of the opinion that any further resistance would be a useless expense of lives. At 6.45 the colours were taken from the stump of the mizen mast.
 
Q:  At what distance was the enemy when the Guerriere  opened her fire?
 
A:  She was within range of her fire.
 
Q:   In what manner did the fall of the mizen mast operate as to oppose the ship from maneuvering?
 
A:  By falling over the starboard quarter, it brought the ship into the wind against her helm.
 
 
Q:  Was the helm immediately put up and other efforts used after the fall of the mizen mast  to prevent her coming to?
 
A:  Yes it was and the yards were trimmed and every effort used!
 
Q:   How long have you been master of the Guerriere?
 
A:  About eleven months.
 
Q: Did you consider her a handy ship to work, or otherwise?
 
A:  She was long in stays and in wearing.
 
 
Q:  State to the court the causes that appear to you to have produced the fall of the fore and main mast.
 
A:   One shot had cut the fore mast in the after part, and the fore and main rigging being nearly all shot away on the ltarboard side, the fore mast fell across the main stay, and carried the main mast along with it. The rolling to windward in my opinion caused the masts to fall over.
 
Q:  If your bow sprit had not touched the Constitution, do you think the masts would have went?
 
A:  I think the would.
 
Q:  What was the state of the masts when you went into action?
 
A:  The masts and bow sprit were in a bad stateThe head of the fore mast was entirely wrung, and the tressel trees were gone.
  Q:  Did you make use of your runners to secure your masts?
 
A:   We had runners on our fore mast. Our fore rigging was bad. Two shrouds were carried away two days before the action.
 
Q:   What means were taken to get the ship before the wind, after the fall of the masts?
 
A:   We had all hands on deck to clear the wreck. The starboard fore rigging falling over the starboard best bower anchor, we cut the anchor and cable away to clear the wreck, loosed the spritsail and set it, the spritsail yard went directly after.
 
Q:  How was the wind?
 
A:  About N.N.W.
 
 
Q:  How was the ship headed when you set the sprit sail?
 
A:   About south. Right in the trough of the sea, and would not answer her helm.
 
Q:   Were many of the men who were quartered at the rigging killed or wounded?
 
A:  There were, very early in the action.
 
Q:  Did the enemy appear to have a great number of men at small arms?
 
A:  They had a great number indeed!
 
 
Q:  Did they do much execution?
 
A:  A great deal.
 
Q:  At what particular time?
 
A:  After the fall of the mizen mast, she then took a position on our larboard bow and raked us
 
Q:  What number of men were at small arms in the Guerriere at the commencement of the action?
 
A:  I do not know.
 
 
Q:   Did the Guerriere suffer from the accident of losing her masts, or for want of seamen to fight her?
 
A:  Entirely from the fall of her mast.
 
Q:   Not withstanding you were so short manned - was your fire quicker than the enemy's?
 
A:   I think it was a great deal quicker The seamen seemed to be very steady and zealous. It was impossible people could behave better, or do more.
 
Q: Was the fire of the enemy's muskets  greatly superior to the Guerriere's at the beginning of the action?
 
A:   As soon as the enemy ship was in a situation that I could see them, there appeared to be a great number of men, and the tops full, who annoyed us very much.
  Q:  Did you think the proportion of the sail the ship was brought into action under was proper?
 
A:  I verily believe it was. She was going five or six knots in the action.
 
Q:  In your opinion, was everything done previous to and in the action to prevent his majesty's ship from falling into the hands of the enemy?
 
A:  I believe every thing was done.
 
Q: What part of the ship were you in when you were wounded?
 
A:   I believe at the wheel.
  Q:   What was the general conduct as far as comes within your knowledge of the inferior officers and ships company from the time of her capture to the present moment?
 
A:  They have been very respectful, obedient and orderly.
 
 
 

Captain Dacres, apparently also in the room, but remaining silent after reading his letter, had a few questions for his late first lieutenant:
 
"Q:  Was every department of the ship properly prepared for action and during its continuance did I encourage the men by every personal exertion and every other means in my power?
 
A:  Every part of the ship was cleared for action and every exertion was used by Captain Dacres to encourage the men.
 
Q:   Did you see any English men on board the enemy when you were taken prisoner?
 
A:  There were several men pointed out to me as Englishmen. There were some I knew personally as deserters from the Halifax squadron.
 
Q:  Did you understand generally the number she was supposed to have?
 
A:   I understand about 200. The gunner of the Constitution was captain of the forecastle in the Eurydice when she came from England - he was a Scotchman and went by the name of Robert Klein [?] in the Eurydice, and in the Constitution in the name of Anderson. Their third lieutenant I believe to be an Irishman, his name was Reid.
 
 
Q:  How many of them were supposed to have been in action in Trafalgar?
 
A:  I understand that seventeen of the captains of guns were with the British  service in that action, but I cannot say from what authority."

The story of the Constitution's most famous action has been written about exhaustively. But here are the words of British eyewitnesses, to the best of my knowledge, have not been published elsewhere. The officiel letter of Captain James Dacres will be omitted, because it has  been printed many times elsewhere. Here are the recollections of those under his command.
 
The court martial was held on board HMS Africa, 64, in Halifax, on October 2, 1812.
 
Lieutenant bartholomew Kent was sworn in and testified as followed:
 
"August 19th, 1812, at 2 P.M., being on the wind on the starboard tack, we saw a sail on our weather beam, coming down before the wind. Made sail in chase. At  3 made her out to be a man of war. Went to quarters and prepared the ship for action. At 4 made her out to be the Constitution, which we had formerly chased off New York, but escaped by her superior sailing. Hauled up our courses, took in our top gallant sails, and backed the main topsail to wait for her coming down. The enemy at the same time hauled o a wind, took in his top gallant sails, courses, and reefed his topsails. At 4.5 filled, wore ship and hoisted our colours at each mast head. At 4.10 the enemy bore up - fired several shot at him. At 4..15 she hoisted her colours and returned our fire.. Wore several times to avoid being raked exchanging broadsides. At 5 she closed within half pistol shot, on our larboard beam, both keeping up a heavy fire and  steering free, his intention, evidently, being to cross our bows. At 5.20 the mizenmast fell and exposed the ship to a heavy raking fire from the enemy, who placed himself on our larboard bow, a few only of our bow guns being able to bear on him . At 5.40 the ship not answering her helm, he attempted to lay us on board, At 6, the ship coming to we  brought some of our bow guns to bear on the enemy and got clear of him. At 6.20 the fore and main masts went over the side, leaving the ship a perfect unmanageable wreck. The frigate immediately made sail ahead, and we began to clear away the wreck, in hopes of being able to get the ship before the wind to recommence the action, but just as we had cleared the wreck, the spritsail yard went, leaving the ship in the trough of the sea, rolling her guns under. The enemy by this time refitted wore round to rake us, and all attempts to get her before the wind proving in vain, the ship being much shattered in her hull, in a sinking condition, and 1/3 of her crew killed or wounded, Captain Dacres called the remaining officers together, when all were of the opinion that further resistance would be a useless expense of lives.  
 
Bart. Kent 1st Lieut.
 
Q: After the Guerriere had laid to, for the enemy to come down was she put under command in time?
 
A:  Yes. She filled previous to the enemy's coming within gunshot, and was kept under three topsails and jib and mizen staysail occasionally.
 
Q:  At what distance was the enemy when the Guerriere opened her fire?
 
A:   We fired a single shot first which went, I think, a half a mile beyond her, to try our distance. We then have her our starboard broadside shortly afterwards, and wore so as to fire our larboard broadside. The Constitution returned our broadside before the 2nd or 3rd. One shot went through our quarterdeck and another went though her gangway hammocks from her first broadside.
 
Q:  Were the best  positions preserved, thtat the superior sialing of the enemy and other circumstances would permit before the fall of the mizen mast?
 
A:  They were the best!
 
 
Q:  In what manner did the fall of the mizen  mast operate so as to prevent the ship from manuevering?
 
A:  The mizen fell on our starboard quarter. The enemy shot ahead and attempted to haul across our bows,  The ship came to at the same time and we were exposed to a raking fire from the enemy. I cannot say whether the ship came to against her helm. I can not speak as to the manner of the mizen mast operation.
 
Q:  How long were you clearing the wreck of the mizen mast?
 
A: We did not get clear of the mizen mast until the other masts fell.
 
Q:  How long were you first lieutenant of the Guerrieire?
 
A:  Nearly three years and a half.
 
 
Q:  Did you consider her a handy ship, or otherwise?
 
A:  Much the reverse, she seldom stayed, if there was any sea on. 
 
Q:  Relate to the court, the cause that appears to you to have preceded the fall of the fore and the main masts.
 
A:  Our fore mast was struck by a double headed shot, which was afterwards found laying on the fore castle. Several of the shrouds were cut away, and when we were aboard of the enemy our bow sprit was over his quarter, the pitching of slackened the fore stay and the masts fell about the same time. The main mast did not appear to me to be wounded by shot. Previous to our going into action our fore tressel trees were gone most of the fore rigging knotted, our bowsprit was defective. We were obliged to get down our long fore topgallant mast and get a short one up. The fore topmast was hanging by the top tackle pendants, the tressel trees not being able to support the weight of the topmast. The heel of the fore mast in falling fell over the main stay and the main stay being slackened by the weight and the jerk of the fore mast, carried the main mast with it. Most of the main shrouds were shot away.
 
 
Q:  Inform the court the state of the wind and sea at the time.
 
A:  There was a fresh breeze and a great deal of sea on.
 
Q:  What means were taken to get the ship before the wind after the fall of the masts, and how long were you clearing the wreck?
 
A:  The spritsail was loosed. We began immediately to clear away the wreck and got up a small spar on the stump of the foremast. I think we might have been three quarters of an hour before the whole wreck was cleared.
 
Q:  Did you succeed in getting before the wind?
 
A:  No. The sprit sail yard went and the ship having got into a trough of the sea, she lay there. She rolled so much I dod not think it would have been possible to work the guns. The shot and shot boxes on the quarterdeck were flying from side to side.
 
Q:  It appears from Captain Dacres letter that the fire from the enemy's small arms did great execution on the Guerriere's upper deck. Did you later ascertain the number of the enemy had at small arms at the time the ships came to close action, and how they were disposed of?
 
A:  When on board the Constitution I understand they had 12 men in each top with rifles and also between 50 to 60 marines with small arms on the gangways.
 
 
Q:  How many men with small arms did the Guerriere oppose at the time the ships first came to close action, to divert the enemy's fire from the men at your guns?
 
A:  In consequence of the main deck guns being shortly manned, from the number of men who were away, the marines were ordered down to man them, until Captain Dacres gave orders for the  whole of the marines to be sent up. I do not think we could have had more then ten men at small arms altogether. The whole of the marines were up when the ships closed, about thirty five in number.
 
Q:   How many men had you at each main deck gun?
 
A:  Seven including marines and a powder man - some calling themselves Americans were allowed to go below.
 
Q:  Do you know how many broadsides the ship fired?
 
A:  I cannot say. The fire from the ship was very brisk.
 
 
Q:  Relate to the court the position of the two ships when the enemy attempted to board?
 
A:   When the enemy came close to us, Captain Dacres gave me orders to go down on the main deck and snd every body up from below. I sent up part of them, but being found impracticable to board her, they were immediately sent down, previous to the others getting up The only position I observed the ships in was when I came up our bowsprit was over her larboard quarter.
 
Q:  Why was it impracticable to board?
 
A:  There was so much sea and the Guerriere coming to, it was impossible to get on board.
 
Q:  What proportion of the crew of the Guerriere was boarders and how were they armed?
 
A:   There were four men to every gun who were boarders, making 96 together, when the whole of the ships company were on board. All the men on the upper deck were boarders, armed with cutlasses - were lying on the main and upper deck  for them The boarding pikes were on the booms, some on the main deck, some on the fore castle.
 
 
Q:  Did the enemy make any attempt to board the Guerriere?
 
A:  The first lieutenant of the Constitution informed me that at the time he was wounded, he was on the tafferail to see if it was feasible to board the Guerriere. He heard us call our boarders and from the number of men that appeared on our deck, he expected we were going to board them and waited to receive us.
 
Q:  Did you exchange vollies of small arms at the time the people were up?
 
A:  Yes, we were defending ourselves with musketry and bow guns - at that time most of the marines were killed or wounded.
 
Q:  How often did the Guerriere wear during the action?
 
A:  We wore several times, but I cannot say how often.
 
 
Q:  Did the enemy wear as often?
 
A:  The enemy did not wear, she was coming down on our weather beam and yawed to give us her broadside.
 
Q:   Had you your broadsides to the enemy, when you wore?
 
A:  Part of our broadside wore on the enemy
 
Q:  What was the state of the Guerriere when the colours were ordered to be hauled down and what was the position and state of the enemy?
 
A:  All the masts  of the Guerriere were gone, several shot between wind and water, her hull much shattered and rolling so that it was impossible to use her guns The enemy wore round on the starboard bow, his masts and yards all standing, except the cross jack yard, and was approaching apparently with an intention of raking us, when we struck.
 
 
Q:  At what distance was the Constitution from the Guerriere when she struck?
 
A:  At long gun shot, about a mile.
 
Q:   How long had she retired from you to refit?
 
A:   I think about three quarters of an hour.
 
Q:   During the action, did any of the masts hamper your guns?
 
A:  Not until the fore and main masts fell - they rendered the starboard guns in part ineffectual.
 
 
Q:   Previously and during the action, was everything done that could be done to prevent the ship from falling into the hands of the enemy?
 
A:  Every thing was done."
 
 
         
 

We should also remember that Java was in position to stern rake Constitution TWICE during that fight.  The American 44s were generally handled very well during their engagements, but the reality was that they were not nearly as nimble as their smaller opponents.  The Java, in particular, was very well handled (helped in part by extra hands on board for transit to a far off station) and leveraged her maneuverability to give the Constitution everything she could handle.  The loss of Java's headgear was clearly the turning point of the battle and the Constitution took every advantage.  Likely that Old Ironsides would've won under any circumstance, but it certainly shortened the battle with less lives lost.
 
Evan

Jud
 
Careful about signing on to sail into battle with Commodore Bainbridge... Put delicately, hè was not Well liked by his crew. In fact, there was à naar mutiny when Isaac Hull resigned And Bainbridge assumed command of Constitution. Bainbridge didnt hide his disdain of common sailors And treated them with almost no respect. Hè cut à deal with THE crew - if they would give HIM à chance, hè would ease Up on harsh discipline. it worked out in THE end!

I think as far as Constitution keeping away for quite some time before engaging... Bainbridge claimed that he wanted to draw his opponent farther off shore before turning on her.  There seemed to be some indication, however, that Bainbridge mistakenly thought Java was a heavier ship at first - perhaps a small ship of the line...

We should also remember that Java was in position to stern rake Constitution TWICE during that fight.  The American 44s were generally handled very well during their engagements, but the reality was that they were not nearly as nimble as their smaller opponents.  The Java, in particular, was very well handled (helped in part by extra hands on board for transit to a far off station) and leveraged her maneuverability to give the Constitution everything she could handle.  The loss of Java's headgear was clearly the turning point of the battle and the Constitution took every advantage.  Likely that Old Ironsides would've won under any circumstance, but it certainly shortened the battle with less lives lost.
 
Evan

Jud
 
Careful about signing on to sail into battle with Commodore Bainbridge... Put delicately, hè was not Well liked by his crew. In fact, there was à naar mutiny when Isaac Hull resigned And Bainbridge assumed command of Constitution. Bainbridge didnt hide his disdain of common sailors And treated them with almost no respect. Hè cut à deal with THE crew - if they would give HIM à chance, hè would ease Up on harsh discipline. it worked out in THE end!

I think as far as Constitution keeping away for quite some time before engaging... Bainbridge claimed that he wanted to draw his opponent farther off shore before turning on her.  There seemed to be some indication, however, that Bainbridge mistakenly thought Java was a heavier ship at first - perhaps a small ship of the line...

We should also remember that Java was in position to stern rake Constitution TWICE during that fight.  The American 44s were generally handled very well during their engagements, but the reality was that they were not nearly as nimble as their smaller opponents.  The Java, in particular, was very well handled (helped in part by extra hands on board for transit to a far off station) and leveraged her maneuverability to give the Constitution everything she could handle.  The loss of Java's headgear was clearly the turning point of the battle and the Constitution took every advantage.  Likely that Old Ironsides would've won under any circumstance, but it certainly shortened the battle with less lives lost.
 
Evan

Jud
 
Careful about signing on to sail into battle with Commodore Bainbridge... Put delicately, hè was not Well liked by his crew. In fact, there was à naar mutiny when Isaac Hull resigned And Bainbridge assumed command of Constitution. Bainbridge didnt hide his disdain of common sailors And treated them with almost no respect. Hè cut à deal with THE crew - if they would give HIM à chance, hè would ease Up on harsh discipline. it worked out in THE end!

Jud
 
Careful about signing on to sail into battle with Commodore Bainbridge... Put delicately, hè was not Well liked by his crew. In fact, there was à naar mutiny when Isaac Hull resigned And Bainbridge assumed command of Constitution. Bainbridge didnt hide his disdain of common sailors And treated them with almost no respect. Hè cut à deal with THE crew - if they would give HIM à chance, hè would ease Up on harsh discipline. it worked out in THE end!

Jud
 
Careful about signing on to sail into battle with Commodore Bainbridge... Put delicately, hè was not Well liked by his crew. In fact, there was à naar mutiny when Isaac Hull resigned And Bainbridge assumed command of Constitution. Bainbridge didnt hide his disdain of common sailors And treated them with almost no respect. Hè cut à deal with THE crew - if they would give HIM à chance, hè would ease Up on harsh discipline. it worked out in THE end!

I think as far as Constitution keeping away for quite some time before engaging... Bainbridge claimed that he wanted to draw his opponent farther off shore before turning on her.  There seemed to be some indication, however, that Bainbridge mistakenly thought Java was a heavier ship at first - perhaps a small ship of the line...

We should also remember that Java was in position to stern rake Constitution TWICE during that fight.  The American 44s were generally handled very well during their engagements, but the reality was that they were not nearly as nimble as their smaller opponents.  The Java, in particular, was very well handled (helped in part by extra hands on board for transit to a far off station) and leveraged her maneuverability to give the Constitution everything she could handle.  The loss of Java's headgear was clearly the turning point of the battle and the Constitution took every advantage.  Likely that Old Ironsides would've won under any circumstance, but it certainly shortened the battle with less lives lost.
 
Evan

I think as far as Constitution keeping away for quite some time before engaging... Bainbridge claimed that he wanted to draw his opponent farther off shore before turning on her.  There seemed to be some indication, however, that Bainbridge mistakenly thought Java was a heavier ship at first - perhaps a small ship of the line...

We should also remember that Java was in position to stern rake Constitution TWICE during that fight.  The American 44s were generally handled very well during their engagements, but the reality was that they were not nearly as nimble as their smaller opponents.  The Java, in particular, was very well handled (helped in part by extra hands on board for transit to a far off station) and leveraged her maneuverability to give the Constitution everything she could handle.  The loss of Java's headgear was clearly the turning point of the battle and the Constitution took every advantage.  Likely that Old Ironsides would've won under any circumstance, but it certainly shortened the battle with less lives lost.
 
Evan

Shipmates I found a young man who sells kits of WWI Battleships and other models. These are really exquisite works of art. They are big at 1/100 scale. I really don't know what else to say. other than breathtaking.
 
here is a link to his site http://www.ml-modelships.com.ua/ 
 
Chief Out! 

Folks - thanks for all the LIKES!
 
Brian - Thanks for looking in. I think (as you probably suspect) that the netting over the gun port openings is a safety measure and not authentic.  It may be, however, that netting was placed over openings like transom/stern gun ports that didn't generally have a gun in position...
 
Tim - I think the Ropes paintings of the Java battle are on loan from a museum or historical society in New Bedford.  They are jewels of detail...
 
Stuart - thank you also for looking in... Glad to see you starting your own build!  Tyrone Martin in his "Creating a Legend" book indicates that the interlocking planks were added on the gun deck in two "thick strakes" running the length of the deck.  The modern restored ship shows similar interlocking planks on the outer edge near the waterway on the spar deck:
 

 
I'm not sure that is authentic to the 1812 period.
 
You can sorta see my feeble attempt to replicate the interlocking gun deck strakes in this view:

 
 
The yellow gun stripe is controversial among purists... The Constitution's log clearly shows the stripe being painted white (and the bulwarks green) immediately before the outbreak of war.  The Hull model in Salem also shows a white stripe.  Accounts and log entries do verify that Captain Stewart changed the stripe to yellow on his late war cruise.  I've used the Corne paintings for guidance in the belief that some captains (including Stewart and Bainbridge) likely changed the color for deception once the shooting started.  Regardless of counter opinions, I'm falling back on the Corne paintings and I'm sticking to  it!
 
Thanks again for the interest and I'm looking forward to following these new builds!
 
Evan

Al - you are doing a great job on your Glad Tidings. The Constitution build is a lot of the same processes, just more and bigger. If you are comfortable planking, for instance, it is just more planks to do. The instructions are probably very familiar to you as Model Expo seems to reuse a lot of the same information. For this detailed a ship, however, I think they are minimal. Another option is to purchase the Launk Street shipyard tutorial for the Constitution, which uses this model. The first chapter is available for free, so you can take a look and see what you think. I used the first chapter but did not use the rest. I think you could do a decent model of this ship if you take your time. It all depends on what you want in the end. In my case, I know I will be pleased with the outcome even with the many flaws because 1. I am learning a lot and have attempted things I would never have tried before, and 2. It is taking me a long time, which to me is a good return on investment.   Oh, and it is a big sucker so think about where you will put it when finished.
 
Geoff - I was going to grind the grooves off one of the hemostats I have, but they seem really hard, so I went for the easier solution.
 
Here are some pictures of the small wooden cleats from Syren in place. I am very happy with the result.
 

 

 
And here is what I was referring to in an earlier post. While looking for information on the binnacles, I re-found Force9's build log (on another site) and there was this great looking belfry that he added to his Constitution. His research found that she may have had a belfry in the 1812 era, so he put one in. I liked it so much I had to try making one. The curved piece at the top was the challenge to me, so I first tried making a form from some plywood and bending a piece of basswood strip in it. This came out OK, but the strip thickness was not consistent across the whole curve. My second try used a piece of basswood sheet. I cut the upper profile in the scroll saw, then made a cut straight across at the thickness of the ends. It was then just a matter for filing out the underside of the curve until it was the same thickness all the way along its length. I was quite afraid that the piece would split somewhere near the end of that process, but luckily for me it did not. The brass bell I had left over from a previous build and I just added a large eyebolt that I opened up to hold the bell, then glued it to the underside of the cross piece.
 

 
I have been going through the two rigging plan sheets to start figuring out the sizes of line I need to make. In the process, I saw that the main stay and preventer stay connect to bullseyes that are attached to the bulwarks under the bow pin rail. I think it will be a good idea to add these bullseyes now while I still have good access to this area.
 
 

OK folks....I have officially retired this build.  For a number of reasons - life being the main obstacle. 
 
We have recently moved from our tiny condo to a much larger town home, and I now have an official 'designated' shipyard for my relaxing (ahem) hobby.  As part of the packing, moving, unpacking, re-organizing, etc...the baby Connie suffered a unfortunate accident.  During the transit to our new home, I ran over it with my car...!
 
I know what you are thinking...how could I possibly have done that?  Well, I simply wanted to ensure that when I broke it that it would stay broke.  =-)  In truth, I learned a lot about the hobby, and some of the pluses and minuses from building in plastic.  I still love ships, and have decided to make the transition to wood kits for the very simple reason which is that was where I planned to go all along. 
 
So...my next build log will be on a nice little starter kit, The Lady Nelson. 
 
See you in the next thread!  I will be posting that adventure in (hopefully) steady pace as we have now officially landed in more solid living circumstances!  (Yay!)
 
Best
Pat