USS Constitution

[Albany Rifles]

i wonder if in the future they will reconstruct it piece by piece, or just shift her onto dry land.

i went several years ago; it's a sight to behold. it's gotta be an interesting duty to be the navy sailors on that ship too.

http://www.hazegray.org/features/constitution/

They did an extensive rebuild 92 - 96.

When my sister and her family lived in Fairfax in 1980s her neighbor down the street was a Navy captain who had commanded the Constitution. He said it was easily the high light of his career.

Its like being stationed at 8th & I or The Old Guard...dirt bags need not apply.

[Gus00]

Although the HMS victory is the only warship I know of to see combat in 3 different centuries- first seeing action in 1778 and last seeing action in 1941.

Wait... wha?

What sort of action did Victory see in 1941?

[Parihaka]

Wait... wha?

What sort of action did Victory see in 1941?

She was bombed by the Luftwaffe. As she is still in commission I guess that technically counts as being in action.

[Pedicabby]

Cool pics dude, thanks for posting.

[Dreadnought]

You have to remember that even Germany armed her sailing ships in that period with AA guns so all ships were considered fair game. The Coast Guard cutter Eagle was formerly the German ship Horst Wessle and awarded to the US as a war prize following WWII.

A clip from the USCG site:

Following World War II, the Horst Wessel, in the age-old custom of capture and seizure, was taken as a war prize by the United States. Initially, the Soviet Union selected Horst Wessel during the division of Nazi vessels by the victorious Allies. The four available sailing ships had been divided into three lots--two large merchant ships being grouped together. The Soviets drew number 1, Great Britain number 2, and the U.S. number 3. Before the results of the draw were officially announced, the U.S representative, through quiet diplomacy, convinced the Soviets to trade draws.

And so, on May 15, 1946, the German barque was commissioned into U.S. Coast Guard service as the Eagle and sailed from Bremerhaven, Germany to New London, Connecticut. On her voyage to the United States she followed Columbus's route across the mid-Atlantic. Click here to read Momm2c Emil Babich's recollections of this voyage (he was a Coast Guardsman who sailed aboard Eagle on the voyage from Germany to the United States soon after the end of World War II).

USCGB Eagle

This is Eagle in Philadelphia not long ago, she is very impressive to see:

[ChrisV71]

They don't sail her anymore...too much stress on the 200 year old hull.

I've read the true reason was more politically motivated than anything else and that the ship was quite capable of sailing longer distances and using more canvas. I've also read somewhere of some recent talk to sail her again.

[Albany Rifles]

I've read the true reason was more politically motivated than anything else and that the ship was quite capable of sailing longer distances and using more canvas. I've also read somewhere of some recent talk to sail her again.

And where did you read the political issue? What rationale source would that be? Be very specific before you come in here spewing that bilge?

[ChrisV71]

And where did you read the political issue? What rationale source would that be? Be very specific before you come in here spewing that bilge?

Bilge? Perhaps you should look in a mirror before making accusations at other people. When I wrote that, I was at work and didn't have the time to locate where I had read it. The article was in the Naval History magizene from the United States Naval Institute, June 2007 issue. The article is "Will the Navy Unshackle Old Ironsides?"

Will the Navy Unshackle Old Ironsides? | U.S. Naval Institute

I'm pasting the text of the article here since you have to have a login to read the article.

Will the Navy Unshackle Old Ironsides?
Issue: Naval History Magazine - June 2007 Volume 21, Number 3
By Captain Christopher Allan Melhuish, U.S. Navy (Retired)
The Constitution celebrated the bicentennial of her launching in 1997 by sailing under her own power for the first time since 1881. Erick Marshall Murray?s painting Queen of the Fleet depicted the scene when the Blue Angels saluted the frigate.

"Her future cruises will be peaceful and will give all our people, and particularly the children, a living illustration of the early history of the country. She will typify to all good citizenship and patriotism."
"Her future cruises will be peaceful and will give all our people, and particularly the children, a living illustration of the early history of the country. She will typify to all good citizenship and patriotism."
With the bicentennial of the War of 1812 only five years away, the time is right to plan how Americans intend to commemorate what is often referred to as our second war of independence. During that conflict, the frigate USS Constitution earned renown by defeating five Royal Navy warships: the Guerrière, Java, Pictou, Cyane, and Levant. The world's oldest commissioned warship afloat, "Old Ironsides" is also the Navy's oldest surviving veteran of the War of 1812, and it is therefore logical that she play a central—and national—role in the war's bicentennial celebrations. That leads to what has been an often-contentious question: Should the Constitution venture out from her current home in Boston Harbor? To give an educated answer, it is first necessary to examine her 20th-century history.
At the beginning of the last century, Old Ironsides was on exhibit at the Charlestown, Massachusetts, Navy Yard, close to where she was launched in 1797, but she was hardly recognizable as the three-masted heavy frigate of Navy lore. In the late 19th century, she had been a receiving ship, and a large barn-like structure still covered her upper decks. In 1905, public sentiment saved her from Secretary of the Navy Charles J. Bonaparte's proposal to have her used as a gunnery target for the U.S. North Atlantic Fleet. In 1925, the frigate, once again bearing the name Constitution (after being renamed Old Constitution in 1917 to free her name for a new warship that was never completed), was restored partly through the donations of schoolchildren and patriotic groups. Then, in 1931, the old warship embarked on a 35-month national tour during which more than 4.6 million Americans visited the vessel in 90 port visits.

The Constitution is an intensely political object, perhaps rightfully so given her long-standing relationship, dating back to at least the War of 1812, with the country and its citizens. One notable event in the 1960s illustrates this fact. On 18 April 1963, Captain Tazewell Shepard, naval aide to President John F. Kennedy, wrote to the secretary of the Navy with a question from the President about the practicality of sailing the ship from Boston to New York for the upcoming World's Fair.1 The frigate would be absent from her Charlestown berth for at least two months. The adverse reaction from local organizations, such as the Boston Chamber of Commerce and the Freedom Trail Committee, as well as from the mayor of Boston, created tremendous political pressure on newly elected Senator Edward M. Kennedy to oppose the voyage.

Robert Friedman, then chair of the Freedom Trail Committee, took great pains to point out that the absence of the frigate from Boston would have a negative effect on local tourism.2 In language ironically repeated 34 years later, a Boston newspaper rhetorically asked if New York could swap the Statue of Liberty for the Constitution. Other opponents claimed the Navy did not have anyone capable of sailing the frigate and that moving the ship created too great a risk of damage to her. The Navy eventually demurred, and Massachusetts Senators Leverett Saltonstall and Edward Kennedy issued a joint statement announcing the Navy's decision that the ship would remain at her homeport.

Old Ironsides Sails Again
Almost 30 years later, on 25 September 1992, the Constitution was drydocked at the Charlestown Navy Yard for an extensive three-year, $12 million overhaul. Most noteworthy, the ship's natural hog (bow and stern droop) was straightened and enormous diagonal riders (large internal rib-like beams) missing since the mid-19th century were reinstalled.
On 21 July 1997, Old Ironsides departed her homeport for the first time since 1934 and made a port visit to Marblehead, Massachusetts, about 13 miles from the mouth of Boston Harbor. Captained by Commander Mike Beck, her 64th commanding officer, the Constitution was under tow for the round trip. At noon on 21 July, Commander Beck ordered the tow slipped and gave the command to set her nearly 15,000 square feet of fighting sail. It was a historic moment, and Old Ironsides sailed free for about 40 minutes under her own power for the first time in 116 years. Together with the follow-on Marblehead port visit, the early commemoration of the ship's 200th birthday turned out to be not so much a Navy public relations drill as a profoundly patriotic event for those fortunate enough to see it. In that sense, it used America's Sea-Services heritage to bridge civil and naval relations in a simple but elegant manner.
More than 150,000 people jammed the shore or watched from the nearby flotilla of small craft to catch a glimpse of something no one alive had ever seen: an 18th-century commissioned U.S. Navy warship under way under fighting sail. Millions more watched the event on television. In a repeat of the 1920s fundraising effort, thousands of children had donated to the Old Ironsides Pennies Campaign to purchase the ship's sails. They could now see the result of their civic-minded action. After the Constitution moored in Marblehead, one nine-year-old boy donated a coffee tin full of pennies that he had collected in memory of his father, a former Bluejacket. The pennies campaign raised more than $250,000, and more important, it sparked interest in and involvement with Old Ironsides and naval heritage among a new generation.

Putting the Frigate to the Test
After the Constitution's successful excursion, the Navy planned for the ship to make a series of trips to nearby ports, leading up to her being towed to New York City in 2000 for a visit. Her proposed itinerary was to proceed to Gloucester, Massachusetts, followed by Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in 1998; then make a single trip to Newport, Rhode Island, in 1999; and finally a single round trip to New York City through the protected waters of Long Island Sound in 2000.
The purpose of the New York visit was to support the 2000 International Naval Review. President Bill Clinton, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist were to embark in Old Ironsides, which would be moored adjacent to the Statue of Liberty. Given that the last serving U.S. president to set foot aboard the Constitution was Herbert Hoover in 1932, the event would have been a significant milestone in the ship's history.

In preparation, the Navy scheduled formal dock and sea trials. I was then the commanding officer of the Constitution and oversaw crew training that was conducted in the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Eagle (WIX-327) and civilian-owned square-riggers, continuing a precedent established by Commander Beck before the frigate's 1997 cruise. I spent a good deal of time examining the navigational and seamanship aspects of towing the ship to Gloucester and Portsmouth and made plans to strike down her topmasts so that she would have the air draft to transit the Cape Cod Canal.3

The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) conducted the preparatory sea and dock trials, which cost the Navy about $250,000, on 20-21 May. A Navy tug towed the ship for approximately 50 nautical miles at speeds up to 10.5 knots.4 The maximum movement detected in the Constitution's structure was ¹/10th of an inch. NAVSEA wanted to tow Old Ironsides up to 12 knots, but that exceeded the single-screw tug's rated capacity. By comparison, the fastest towed speed recorded during the trip to Marblehead was about 8 knots.
The 2,000-ton, 21-foot-draft frigate was easy to handle at speed: the helmsman effortlessly turned the large double wheel to keep the bowsprit pointed at the tug's stern. From my vantage point in the hammock netting, I conned the ship—usually by ordering 2 to 4 degrees of rudder—thereby reducing transverse loading on the bow from yawing about the towing hawser. Rudder strain was well within NAVSEA test limits.
At the end of the tow and dock trials, I assessed the ship and crew ready to execute the tow to Gloucester and Portsmouth. I was very comfortable with her structural integrity and the level of Navy technical support for this type of operation. The crew had superbly demonstrated its capability to handle an extended daytime tow.

Preliminary results were released one week after the trials as a two-page quick-look. It stated that the "Constitution operated satisfactorily during the tow trials conducted on 20 May within its current constraints . . . there were no direct observations during the trials that would cause us to reduce or more tightly limit the operational constraints for USS Constitution . . . based on our [NAVSEA's] quick look, we continue to plan to support data gathering during the August 1998 towing events."5

A Surprising Decision

A scant dozen days later, however, the Navy announced that it had canceled all planned activities for the ship outside Boston Harbor. It referenced the preliminary results of the sea trials as well as "an operational risk assessment." The clinching argument was that "risk of unpredicted weather conditions and subsequent requirement to transit at higher speeds for weather avoidance require USS Constitution to remain close to her berth at Charlestown Navy Yard where her support and crew facilities are located."6

On the same day the Navy publicly scotched the frigate's planned trips, in what must surely have been déjà vu, Senator Kennedy announced: "Old Ironsides has been saved once again. The Navy is obviously right to give the very highest priority to safeguarding the ship against any possible danger. No vessel more clearly symbolizes the ideals, the heritage, and the history of our country than Boston's own USS Constitution."7
The Navy's 9 June announcement had been closely held—not even I was privy to its content until about 45 minutes before the scheduled press conference. The ship's crew—both Sailors and civilian riggers—was devastated by the news, especially since the results of the recent trials had supported the Navy reaching an opposite conclusion. The way the announcement was made was a decidedly shabby way to treat a crew of Old Ironsides, and given its abruptness, timing, and content, a reasonable conclusion would be that politics had played a leading role.

The final NAVSEA sea-trials report, dated 5 October 1998, stated: "weather during at-sea operations represents a significant risk. If weather conditions deteriorate unexpectedly during at-sea operations, USS Constitution may be forced to operate outside the bounds of current constraints. A higher tow speed required to return USS Constitution to safe harbor to limit exposure would increase forces on the ship's hull and subject the ship to potential damage." The report did not provide a definition of "at-sea operations," an important point when considering fetch (the distance a wind blows over the sea surface without interference), wave period, and distance to safe haven.8
The report's risk assessment should have taken into account that in 1997 the Constitution spent 36 hours away from her Charlestown berth, anchoring overnight at Marblehead. Furthermore, during the sea trials the frigate was away from her berth for nine hours, and in the Massachusetts Bay for six. While the Navy had evidently been satisfied with its ability to predict weather for these two events, the final report gave the impression that it was not as confident in its ability to do so for a visit to Gloucester, about 22 miles from the mouth of Boston Harbor, directly across Massachusetts Bay. Nevertheless, the pivotal issue was apparently getting the ship into any safe harbor under safe towing limits, and NAVSEA's report did not equate "safe harbor" exclusively with the Charlestown Navy Yard.

In 1998, two key factors evidently were critical in cancelling plans to move Old Ironsides outside of Boston Harbor: the ship's seaworthiness and the adverse effect her absence might have on Boston tourism. With respect to the former, NAVSEA, as well as Naval Historical Center Detachment, Boston—the sole organization responsible for restoring and maintaining the Constitution—had declared her structurally sound. NAVSEA also invited the American Bureau of Shipping to conduct an independent survey of the frigate. Its report, dated 19 June 1998, found her "in exceptional condition for her age . . . the vessel is stronger than she has been in years . . . [she] could be considered for classification with this Bureau under the current service limitations."9
As in 1963, the Boston-area press had pointed out the potential adverse effect the vessel's absence would have on local tourism. On the other hand, for the Constitution, national visibility is highly desirable. For example, her trip to Marblehead resulted in a significant increase in the number of people visiting the ship in her homeport, with obvious benefit to local tourism.

Steps to Freedom
If the Navy were to reconsider freeing the Constitution to permit a fuller participation in War of 1812 bicentennial events including an underway sail demonstration similar to the 1997 cruise, experience dictates that several considerations should be included in the planning. First, the Navy should tow the frigate at least once a year in Massachusetts Bay for crew training and enhanced ship maintenance. The American public should be the motivating force behind any plan to display the venerable warship in a venue other than her permanently assigned pierside berth at Charlestown. Local sentiment should also be taken into account, and Boston-area authorities should accurately access the impact on their tourism of the ship temporarily leaving Boston Harbor. Finally, the safety of the Constitution is of utmost importance. The Navy should therefore thoroughly and openly address concerns about her seaworthiness.
Old Ironsides is not a nautical hood ornament belonging only to Boston; she is in effect the nation's ship of state and should be employed accordingly. An important first step in planning the commemoration of the War of 1812 bicentennial may be to think about the political challenges of unshackling the USS Constitution from the confines of Boston Harbor.
Captain Melhuish commanded the USS Constitution from 1997 to 1999. He retired from the Navy after 27 years active service and is serving as the civilian codirector of the U.S. Fleet Forces Command Strategy and Policy Division. He dedicates this article to the young Marblehead boy who collected pennies for Old Ironsides in memory of his father.

[blidgepump]

More video of the Constitution....

There is a DVD available through Netflix, one of a series made by the History Channel, which has a one hour segment on the Constitution.

Much of the information is over my pay and grade, but the Sailing Master certainly was an interesting fellow as he trained CPO's to sail the ship in Boston Harbor.
I would recommend the time just to observe modern Navy personnel "learning the ropes" of a square rigged frigate.

[Chogy]

Wouldn't simply allowing the officers and perhaps the NCO's of the USCG Eagle to sail the ship, be a simpler way? A square-rigged ship is a square-rigged ship, at least in the sense of the sail layout, terminology, and general operation.

I cannot imagine that some sort of weather watch wouldn't be adequate to safeguard the Constitution from pop-up bad WX. The cruises could also be scheduled for known good weather months.

Does the city of Boston have some sort of legal ownership? Why should Boston have such a say? She is a U.S. Navy vessel, not a City of Boston warship.

[TopHatter]

Wouldn't simply allowing the officers and perhaps the NCO's of the USCG Eagle to sail the ship, be a simpler way?

See my answer below

Does the city of Boston have some sort of legal ownership? Why should Boston have such a say?

Sadly, yes, in a perverse way: Possession is Nine-Tenths of the law.

I find it ridiculous that Boston and Massachusetts have this kind of political sway over a US Navy warship, but as the author pointed out, "The Constitution is an intensely political object".

His concluding statement sums things up quite well: "Old Ironsides is not a nautical hood ornament belonging only to Boston; she is in effect the nation's ship of state and should be employed accordingly."

She is a U.S. Navy vessel...

Which is exactly why the Navy wouldn't allow the Coasties to man and operate her.

[Dreadnought]

There was a documentary of her on the History channel not long ago. It detailed that her "Sailmaster" is a one of a kind job for the USN as well as his training of the Naval crew that mans her. I agree it would be very nice to see her in other ports including New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore etc but I also agree to a limit that she is infact very special and risking her to fate would be putting her in jepardy. I would also agree and strongly recommend any undertaking like that would merit a escort that is perfectly suited for her and strong enough to wisk her away from any weather that could possibly damage her. She is one of a kind and considered irreplaceable as far as Naval History and Heritage is concerned.

Could you imagine if she had met the Germans armed sailing ships at sea during WWII. Now that would have been a battle to see. The old fashioned way.

Not so much in the way of firepower but more like in the manuvering/handling of the ships under sail power only in such close proximity to one another.

[Albany Rifles]

ChrisV71

Okay, IO admit bilge was too strong a word, but those of us who have been here awhile on the WABin what could be seen as an imflammatory remark about politics in a non political thread.

Now I have no doubtr that Captain Christopher Melhuish believes he is correct, there a lot of former ship's captains who disagree with him. I heard a link from an NPR interview with a NAVSEA spokesman and a former commander that 15 of the 19 former commanders thought it was not safe to sail the ship too far. (Sorry, I could not the link to post)

You'll Sink Our Battleship! - Boston Magazine

Now I firmly believe that Thomas Menino has Athlete's Tongue from having his foot in his mouth so much, and can completely believe he said what is attributed to him, I do not balieve NAVSEA made their decision based on the desires of HIZZONER or the MASS Congressional delegation. I believe it was more than likely based on the recommendations of Donald Turner, the PM of maintenace and upkeep of the ship for 25 years and the man in charge of her restoration.

That said, I love that Old Ironsides resides where she does...but I would love for her to appear in other locations...but I err on the side of the care the professionals are recommending.

Chris,

I could not find the isntance where you had logged into the introduciton thread and had introduced yourself to the WAB. Please follow the link below and tells us about yourself.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/wab...-thread-2.html

[blidgepump]

Marble Head. live or die !!!!

See my answer below

Sadly, yes, in a perverse way: Possession is Nine-Tenths of the law.

I find it ridiculous that Boston and Massachusetts have this kind of political sway over a US Navy warship, but as the author pointed out, "The Constitution is an intensely political object".

His concluding statement sums things up quite well: "Old Ironsides is not a nautical hood ornament belonging only to Boston; she is in effect the nation's ship of state and should be employed accordingly."

Which is exactly why the Navy wouldn't allow the Coasties to man and operate her.

I think Marble Head should be the dedicated home of the Constitution. :whome:

But of "course" no one could visit her as there is no where to park the car ( said with a Boston accent) !!!!
Heck, I could not find a spot when the Tall Ship festival was held there. :pari:

Ahhhh... such passion for US Navy Vessels

[Chogy]

We should look at this debate, and the joy that the USS Constitution brings, and extrapolate it into the future, in the sense that we must realize that certain vehicles, aircraft, vessels of war should be preserved in operating condition for future generations. We are doing this to a certain degree with battleships like the Iowa, but it should also have been done with aircraft like the B-36. There is a restoration in progress right now, but barring that one example, not a single B-36 remains anywhere close to airworthy. And there is (I believe) only a SINGLE B-29 capable of flight.

200 years from now, how quaint will we perceive the F-22, or an Aegis system, an M1A1 Abrams, or an aircraft carrier? I know it's very expensive, but I think it's worth it.