USS Constitution by The Bitter End - Model Shipways - 1:76

[The Bitter End]

Gun Port Linings

Gun port linings next, It would appear that the constitution didn not have fixed(Hinged) gun port lids at the time of launch but rather removable split lids. There is no indication of port lids at this point on any of the paintings or drawings of her or her sister ships in the early years of their existence. There may well have been port lids on the forward most ports and possibly coverings on the aft most ports but I will get into that detail at a later stage. For now our only concern is gun port linings. 

The only place where we can see these linings to any real degree is from the 1812 Isaac Hull model and Perhaps the Corne 1803 painting. In these two sources the ratio of lining to openings seems fairly consistent. If we assume an outer port opening of 3ft 3 inches as indicated in the 1794 body plan by Joshua Humphreys then we can deduct that the inner lining of the port is 4inches wide(1.3mm at scale). 


The only other piece of Evidence that was vaguely relevant is the orientation of the joints. This detail is purely academic as the ports will be painted but it is worth mentioning that David Steel shows the port linings to be the exposed frame section with 2 horizontal upper and lower sills mortoised into them. This means what would be visible to the viewer is 2 horizontal joints at the upper edge of the gun port and 2 miter joints at the lower edge of the gun port once planking has been installed.

I bulk cut the 120 side to just slightly longer than their correct length, then bulk squared off one side of each plank and marked their correct length with pencil. I first installed the upper and lower sills and then squeezed the side sills in to seat them more tightly. I made sure that the edges were slightly too close to the outer planking and then tapped them to the correct depth using this little jig.  




Once all the sills were in i gave them a good buff with some steel wool and dragged a sausage of steel wool through each port to clean up the edges. I then made up a mix of wood glue and wood filler to make a gooey filler and used this to tidy up any little gaps between the outer and inner framing. This was applied with a small silicon sculpting tool.




This is the almost final result, These ports will be painted in red ochre but that is a task for another day.


Thats all for now. Next up is Quarter Galleries, an adventure on its own.

Cheers

 

Haiko

Edited November 12 by The Bitter End

[Ronald-V]

That's neat work!

[Thukydides]

Very interesting @Marcus.K., I appreciate the amount of work you are putting into this research. As @The Bitter End said I also find the research process to uncover obscure details as much fund as building models themselves.

 

One thing that stands out to me with the vents is how many of them there are. I have found air vents on plans for HMS Camilla of 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83800) and also Daphne 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83787), but there are only 6 of them on each side. One for each cabin and then one near the bow. They are drawn in black pencil at about the line of the deck.

Edited November 12 by Thukydides

[Marcus.K.]

33 minutes ago, Thukydides said:

One thing that stands out to me with the vents is how many of them there are. I have found air vents on plans for HMS Camilla of 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83800) and also Daphne 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83787), but there are only 6 of them on each side. One for each cabin and then one near the bow. They are drawn in black pencil at about the line of the deck.

Thanks for your kind comment, Thukydides. Are you sure we see air vents here? They seem to be higher than the deck? Is it possible that these are ports for oars? The ships seem to be smaller and may have been moved by the help of oars? For them these positions would fit - except: why not having more then ... 

 

Interesting comparison. 

[The Bitter End]

1 hour ago, Thukydides said:

Very interesting @Marcus.K., I appreciate the amount of work you are putting into this research. As @The Bitter End said I also find the research process to uncover obscure details as much fund as building models themselves.

 

One thing that stands out to me with the vents is how many of them there are. I have found air vents on plans for HMS Camilla of 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83800) and also Daphne 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83787), but there are only 6 of them on each side. One for each cabin and then one near the bow. They are drawn in black pencil at about the line of the deck.

Good evening(or something to that effect) 

Thanks for taking the time to comment, the matter of the exact number of air vents is a bit of a question and the layout seen in the 1803 Corne painting is not without confusing elements. This is definitely something I will continue to look at. Your referenced drawings are great but I must say I did also think that their orientation relative to the deck beams was a little surprising. Unless perhaps they are showing cuts into the timber to accommodate internal ventilation as shown here:

https://prints.rmg.co.uk/collections/ship-plans/products/ventilation-openings-for-three-deck-ships-of-war-j7328

A bit of a rummage around the archives brought up this equally confusing image. are these perhaps air vents?? And if they are then I would definitely say that this is a bit of an excessive amount!

https://arkivalieronline.rigsarkivet.dk/da/billedviser?epid=17149179#207980,39521461

Either way, your input is appreciated and I hope that you continue to share your views. 
 

Cheers

Haiko

[The Bitter End]

Oiling The hull - I realised that I failed to mention a pretty significant mistake from my initial application of Osmo Poly X and I felt that this warranted a repost incase someone made the same mistake as me.

When they say mix the the product prior to application, what they mean is MIX THE PRODUCT PRIOR TO APPLICATION! 
 

I failed to do this with my first coat and the product came from a tin which had been standing in my workshop for some months. This resulted in a very unsatisfactory finish which i had to try to remove with Mineral spirits, I think I got most of it taken off and the final result was still ok but the mess to get this resolved was less than ideal. 

all that being said ..... back to the original post

One of the best parts of the build. Oiling the hull.

The hull was sanded back to 400 grit until all scratches were removed(kind of) and then given 2 very thin coats of Osmo Polyx Oil 3062 Clear Matt , this is a beautiful product. My only tips are to apply it with a soft scouring pad, to work in circular motions and to be very conservative with quantity. 

I also applied this over the paint which dried well and gave a lovely satin finish.

I know I should really copper or paint this hull but the wood is special to me and I quite like this very unique effect, I hope you all do too and your feedback in welcomed. 

Cheers

 

Haiko

[Thukydides]

1 hour ago, Marcus.K. said:

Thanks for your kind comment, Thukydides. Are you sure we see air vents here? They seem to be higher than the deck? Is it possible that these are ports for oars? The ships seem to be smaller and may have been moved by the help of oars? For them these positions would fit - except: why not having more then ... 

 

Interesting comparison. 

I don't want to derail the conversation from your specific subject too much as my example is only somewhat related (British, smaller ships, earlier date etc...) That being said I am not 100% sure though I have trouble thinking on what else they could be. They can't be sweep ports as they are too low (most of them are just below the planking of the deck about the level of the beams. The contract for Perseus and Unicorn (ships of the same class) also make note of cutting scuttles for each of the officers cabins and the size quoted appears to be similar to that drawn on the plans. Only thing here that might be applicable to your modeling application is that the contract does note that they should be lined with lead.

 

Quote

Officers Cabin

To build cabins for all the proper officers on the lower deck according to a plan that shall accompany this, or as shall be directed and to finish the same with bedplaces, lockers etc. as usually done in ships of war, and to cut out a scuttle in each cabin fore and aft 9 in and up and down 5 in & to line them with lead.

 

27 minutes ago, The Bitter End said:

Good evening(or something to that effect) 

Thanks for taking the time to comment, the matter of the exact number of air vents is a bit of a question and the layout seen in the 1803 Corne painting is not without confusing elements. This is definitely something I will continue to look at. Your referenced drawings are great but I must say I did also think that their orientation relative to the deck beams was a little surprising. Unless perhaps they are showing cuts into the timber to accommodate internal ventilation as shown here:

https://prints.rmg.co.uk/collections/ship-plans/products/ventilation-openings-for-three-deck-ships-of-war-j7328

A bit of a rummage around the archives brought up this equally confusing image. are these perhaps air vents?? And if they are then I would definitely say that this is a bit of an excessive amount!

https://arkivalieronline.rigsarkivet.dk/da/billedviser?epid=17149179#207980,39521461

Either way, your input is appreciated and I hope that you continue to share your views. 
 

Cheers

Haiko

Yes this is the challenge of this, lots of confusing and sometimes contradictory views. If they are vents I suspect they must angle down (similar to the the example you showed), but they appear to largely be around the beams, just below the deck planking. One thought I had was maybe they run through the room and space between the frames.

 

The second example is from 1727 so I suspect given the number (and regular spacing) of them that those are meant to be sweeps. Many of the earlier smaller vessels had them.

 

 

Your planking is looking very nice. Well done.

 

[Ronald-V]

That hull looks beautiful with the oil! 👏

[Marcus.K.]

I was checking in my Robert Gardiner´s "Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars" .. and we can find there examples for

a) ships with ports for rowing the ship - like on page 16: HMS Hyperion (1806) .. here a view on her frames - and you see the ports for the oars being in the level of the gun ports:

 https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-82795?_gl=1*10vq9vc*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTM1NTE2MjQyOS4xNzYyOTc2MTQ3*_ga_7JJ3J5DBF6*czE3NjI5NzYxNDYkbzEkZzAkdDE3NjI5NzYxNDYkajYwJGwwJGgw*_ga_4MH5VEZTEK*czE3NjI5NzYxNDYkbzEkZzAkdDE3NjI5NzYxNDYkajYwJGwwJGgw

 

Here the inboard profile - including the ports for the oars:

https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-82796?_gl=1*d508ay*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTUwNTQxMzg5MS4xNzYyOTc2MzMy*_ga_7JJ3J5DBF6*czE3NjI5NzYzMzEkbzEkZzAkdDE3NjI5NzYzMzEkajYwJGwwJGgw*_ga_4MH5VEZTEK*czE3NjI5NzYzMzEkbzEkZzAkdDE3NjI5NzYzMzEkajYwJGwwJGgw

https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/2/440/699/j5940.jpg

 

The ports are much higher than what we see in Thukydides´s findings.. So the ports in HIS examples are very likely NOT for oars.

 

b) air vents .. there are ton´s of examples with air vents in the berth deck level. A lot of them having most of the air vents in the rear section of the berth deck - where the midshipman staterooms would be in case the officiers had their quarters on the gun deck - in front of the great cabin. 

 

there are examples in which we see air vents in the rear section - but also in the mid and even the forcastle area - on berth deck level. One beautiful example is on page 28. A profile drawing of a Lively class ship build in 1799. Another example is on page 156 - a painting of HMS Phoenix .. in which we see open air vents in the belly of the ship.. 

 

I admit - not too much examples .. One thing we may think about: in Constitution the crew was sleeping in the Berth deck - and 400 man need some air ! .. I am not sure about the sleeping area on smaller british Frigates? But for sure the first getting the luxury of fresh air would be the gentlemen in the staterooms, right? The ordinary seaman usually did not have to expect a lot of attention for his well being. That might also be a reason why we so often see air vents in the stern area - but not in the forcastle. 

 

Interesting...  

 

[Der Alte Rentner]

4 hours ago, The Bitter End said:

Oiling The hull - I realised that I failed to mention a pretty significant mistake from my initial application of Osmo Poly X and I felt that this warranted a repost incase someone made the same mistake as me.

When they say mix the the product prior to application, what they mean is MIX THE PRODUCT PRIOR TO APPLICATION! 
 

I failed to do this with my first coat and the product came from a tin which had been standing in my workshop for some months. This resulted in a very unsatisfactory finish which i had to try to remove with Mineral spirits, I think I got most of it taken off and the final result was still ok but the mess to get this resolved was less than ideal. 

all that being said ..... back to the original post

One of the best parts of the build. Oiling the hull.

The hull was sanded back to 400 grit until all scratches were removed(kind of) and then given 2 very thin coats of Osmo Polyx Oil 3062 Clear Matt , this is a beautiful product. My only tips are to apply it with a soft scouring pad, to work in circular motions and to be very conservative with quantity. 

I also applied this over the paint which dried well and gave a lovely satin finish.

I know I should really copper or paint this hull but the wood is special to me and I quite like this very unique effect, I hope you all do too and your feedback in welcomed. 

Cheers

 

Haiko

I believe you know what my vote is. 

Indeed!  Show off the woodwork!!!   Gorgeous.  This makes me even more upset I didn't know to use better materials when I started.  Keep up the good work.

[Marcus.K.]

On 11/11/2025 at 7:00 PM, The Bitter End said:

Scuppers!

Another intersting little feature is the ships scuppers, there is almost no evidence for the existence of scuppers on the constitution except for the fact that clearly ships needed these and some references to  scuppers in the ships logs such as 

 “a Ball came through the scupper hole of the ships side which is lined with lead &
the particles of lead wounded him in innumerable places.” (Surgeon Amos Evans Medical Day Book, March 16, 1812 – August 27, 1812,
Amos A. Evans Collection, vol. 1, William L. Clements Library, The University of Michigan).

I decided to go for 8 scuppers per side in total. Firstly because @Marcus.K. found a reference to 16 cast scuppers(I don't have this reference and I apologise if I got this wrong) and the paintings by Antoine Roux of the president where he shows 3 round scuppers on the spar deck and 5 oval or race track shaped scuppers on the gun deck. In the absence of any other evidence I decided that this layout was as good as any and essentially copied this placement. There were also some teltale signs from corner 1803 which I used for placement but I would be lying if I were to pretend this was anything other than a slightly educated guess. The scuppers can be identified by the faint streaks of dirt below them.
....

Haiko

I had to search for it myself.. The reference for the 16 cast scuppers is only in my paper-version of Tyrone Martin´s "A Close up" from 2008. It contains a bit more information than the online version from 2003.

 

Quote

"May 1813: ship fitted with 16 cast scuppers" .. from a "T. & R. Howe´s"-bill 14. May 1813. 

 

What may be a "casted scupper"?

 

This is an example of a casted part, which might have been what the text talked about. The shown lid is a casted "scupper valve" found in the collection of the Royal Museum Greewich.

But of course the "cast scupper" may also just refer to a stub end of the scupper - made as cast part. 

 

But as the "casted scuppers" are mentioned to be fitted in 1814 we may assume that previously to that date there wasn´t any "casted" part. Which allows Haiko - pointing on the 1797 status - to not need to guess or show anything like this - but the scuppers as openings, material unascertainable for now. Could be lead, could be iron ... 

 

 

Why only in the center of the ship - around the ship´s waist?

.. in most of the cases the waist of the deck is usually the most deepest point on the deck

Principle sketch of a deck´s sheer - midship being the deepest point where water would flow to .. 

 

And also the side´s lowest point is in the region of the waist - due to the shape of the hull these are the lowest points on downwind sides of the ship in case of stronger winds. 

Now guess where the "deepest" point of the deck is right now? Where would you need the scuppers now? (Flying P-Liner: Pamir in 1905) 

 

 

For USS Constitution we think we also saw hints in Cornè´s 1803 painting we used as a reference:

Here you see a detail view on the painting. Marked with blue are 2 "dark spots" - which are in positions we see as comparable with Roux´s President Paintings.

The left one being just below the main channel, the forward one between gun 5 and 6. Just the center one would be .. either 

 a) missing in the painting by accident .. or ..

 b) that ring we see where that rope runs through, was a misinterpretation of Cornè in his sketch -

 c) wasn´t THERE .. and we had only 2 scuppers in the spar deck level - and 6 in the gun deck level.  

 

As c) seemed not very likely - you would want a scupper in the center! - we decided that a) or b) are valid .. and therefore there would be an opening needed in between those two dark spots .. 

 

Haiko marked the spot:

 

Funny coincident: that ring in the center? ... is were we would expect a 3rd scupper?.. right?

Hm.. option b) most likely?

 

As we by now have found 3 positions - comparable to Roux´s President - we can assume the other 5 scuppers to be placed somewhere on the gun deck level as we see it in the Roux paintings - even if we can´t see them in Cornè´s painting. They would be a bit lower where the gun deck itself would be. And they might be - just as Roux shows it - one plank above the air vents.  

 

 

This is (partly) a very weak chain of evidence, we agree .. but .. its the best we can offer for this essential feature for now. 

 

Edited November 14 by Marcus.K.

[The Bitter End]

On 11/12/2025 at 7:41 PM, Thukydides said:

I don't want to derail the conversation from your specific subject too much as my example is only somewhat related (British, smaller ships, earlier date etc...) That being said I am not 100% sure though I have trouble thinking on what else they could be. They can't be sweep ports as they are too low (most of them are just below the planking of the deck about the level of the beams. The contract for Perseus and Unicorn (ships of the same class) also make note of cutting scuttles for each of the officers cabins and the size quoted appears to be similar to that drawn on the plans. Only thing here that might be applicable to your modeling application is that the contract does note that they should be lined with lead.

 

 

Yes this is the challenge of this, lots of confusing and sometimes contradictory views. If they are vents I suspect they must angle down (similar to the the example you showed), but they appear to largely be around the beams, just below the deck planking. One thought I had was maybe they run through the room and space between the frames.

 

The second example is from 1727 so I suspect given the number (and regular spacing) of them that those are meant to be sweeps. Many of the earlier smaller vessels had them.

 

 

Your planking is looking very nice. Well done.

 

 

Thank you, a bit of encouragement is always nice. 

The positioning is indeed a strange element and I also can't think of what else they could possibly be other than vents of some kind. It is of course, possible that they were angled as you suggested; this would solve the issue. I will definitely keep looking into this and if I find anything more concrete, I will be sure to pass it on. 

Cheers 

Haiko
 

[The Bitter End]

Just a quick one this evening, we are in the middle of our harvest and everything is insisting on breaking leaving very little time for the hobby. 

After living in denial for some time I realised that I would have to after all do some form of moulding on the transom(If this is the incorrect term please correct me). 

The only specific evidence for this which I can find is in the close up photo taken of the Isaac Hull Model by @Force9(thank you for these great photos they have been a huge help)

here we can see some moulding around the Quarter gallery portions. Unfortunately the stern was closed in the 1812 configuration so there is no example of how the upper transom would have looked but I decided this was good enough for me to try and copy.

As I am writing this I am beginning to wonder if this was a mistake but that ship has sailed...if you will



To get this result I filed a profile into a sacrificial box cutter blade:


After a trial or two to determine a suitable profile I cut this into the transom and went over it with some steel wool to smooth things out


And painted it black as well as touching up the ochre.(The notches are to allow a tight fit under the bulkheads when pressed into place)



Thats it for tonight...Tomorrow(hopefully) painting gun ports!

Cheers

Haiko

[Ronald-V]

That looks really good, what kind of wood did you use for the moulding? (maybe I missed it while reading)

[The Bitter End]

40 minutes ago, Ronald-V said:

That looks really good, what kind of wood did you use for the moulding? (maybe I missed it while reading)

HI Ronald, thanks for your cheerleading, comments like that really help when the going gets tough

The upper moulding wood was selected kind of by accident. I was making a table from South African Yellowwood which I happened to have in my workshop. When I finished the table I ended up with some very uniform, very thin offcut strips which I decided might come in handy on this build. lo and behold they worked perfectly for the upper edge of the transom. 

so short answer...South African yellow wood

Edited November 13 by The Bitter End

[The Bitter End]

Hello everyone. 

Largely due to a very busy week, I didn't do a whole lot on Constitution except for some repairs to the gun deck(lessons learned will be shared in my spar deck post if I ever get there), a bit of tinkering on a stand to replace the pillow I'm currently using and a bit of research and execution on gun port painting. 

This was not the world's most complex process but it was a fairly agonising decision to make. Various rips records refer to "red" paint being part of the ship's supplies as mentioned in "Close up":

Aug 1803 -- Paint pigments in ship's stores included 305# black, 3 cwt white
lead, 3 cwt yellow, 50# green ("verdigris"), and 28# red
("vermilion"). [Receipt for John Osborn, 1 Aug 1803, Samuel
Brown Papers, MHS.]

 

11 Jan 1804 -- Received 15 kegs of yellow ochre, 2 of red paint, 7 small ones of
black paint, and 50 gallons of black varnish. [Ship's log, DNA.] 

This obviously does not tell us anything at all about where the paint was used or infact what exactly was meant by "red"

It is fairly safe to assume that the colour that they are referring to is red ochre, a shade of red with a fair amount of brown in it. Below is an example of a building restored to its appearance at the time of the constitution launch showing just one of many shades of red ochre. 


This leaves us with 4 paintings by Roux and Corne to find evidence for the colour we need. My approach began by selecting a portion of each painting where the colour of the gun port lining can be seen and putting it into an online colour analysis. The smaller square of colour in the upper right corner indicates what the actual colour of the specific selected pixel is:(I realise the many flaws in this method but it gives us an indication....all rather brown 



After some discussion with good old Marcus we agreed that the colour shown on the painting may be wrong for 2 reasons. Firstly, the artist wished for the viewer to experience a certain colour, depending on lighting etc that may require use of a brown to show a reddish colour. In addition and arguably more importantly we don't know how paint colours deteriorated over the 200 odd years since these were painted. That then led me to the next step of the investigation: to pull the colour from the American flags which would all have been a fairly standardised bright red colour as can be seen in this example which flew on the Constitution around 1816



This resulted in surprisingly brown colour samples for something which is known to be red:

This colour deterioration clearly showed that the colour of the gun port lining was meant to be closer to red than brown. The next logical step was to feed AI all the data I had from all the paintings and tell ChatGPT to do a colour correction for the gun ports based on the known colour deterioration of the flag. The result was surprisingly pleasing. Without any other prompting it gave me one value, HEX #A3050F:



This seemed like the perfect balance between a modern and historical red. 
 
The application of this chosen colour was achieved as follows:

1. masked off the hull completely and applied a spray-painted layer of rustoleum matt black primer

2. Applied a thin coat of Vallejo "Red"(70.926) with a tiny tiny amount of Vallejo "Black"(70.950 and a drop of Vallejo "Cavalry brown"(70.982) with a single drop of paint retarder. Exact ratios are hard to describe but it's mostly red, a smidgen of black and a drop of brown)
3. I then applied another thin coat over this of "Red" with a small drop of Vallejo "Carmine Red"(70.908) 
4. I finally finished this with a drybrushing of pure "carmine red to highlight the edges and to give the ports a bit more of a natural look. 

This recipe is by no means perfect but it worked for me. 


Now unless anyone has a warning of some sort for me I believe my next step is to begin the Quarter Galleries.

Have a great evening 

Cheers

Haiko
 

[Thukydides]

I think your colour looks good.

 

I don't think the following caveats are deal breakers to your methodology for determining the paint colour, but I figured I would note them.

 

There are two main reasons why the colours will not match (both of which you noted):

 

1. The lighting - The issue here is that in real life (and in paintings) things look very different depending on the lighting and what is around them. For example, looking at the door of my office, it is all painted the same colour, but the different faces are very different colours. This means that if you want to adjust using the ai (as you did) you need to make sure that the red deterioration you are measuring on the flag is in a similar lighting situation (in this case it should be in shadow).
2. The yellowing - paintings mostly change colour due to the deterioration of the varnish layer (that is how you get the yellowing of a painting). This does not impact all colours evenly and depends on how much dirt and how long since the varnish was replaced. For this reason I would be careful about comparing colour change between two different paintings. If you want to do the comparison try to stick to the same painting (it was not clear from your explanation if this is what you did or not).

 

That all being said, there is a broader question about how you want to depict the model. Do you want your colour to "be accurate" or do you want it to "look accurate", these are not the same thing. A model is a small scale representation of a much larger object and so light and shadows do not react the same way on these smaller objects. If you want it to look like a miniature version of the real thing then you actually need to do some tricks (your dry brushing was a good start) to try and simulate the impact of a light on the real size object.

 

I don't have enough time to cover it all here, but essentially you may want to consider simulating some of the shadows and highlights as opposed to simply using "the correct" colour. I did a presentation on the topic for my model group (though I am by no means an expert) if you are interested in more info on the topic.

Edited Wednesday at 05:16 PM by Thukydides