why is there no record in all of the Constitution's shipyard overhaul reports of their removal, assuming they were originally installed? Also, why before her first major refit and dry docking in Boston, was she reported to have a very serious hogging condition? If she had diagonal riders in her then or before, there should have been no hogging, or very little, for that is the function of these riders. It is my belief that during this frigate 's con struction , 1795-1797, they were
we are looking at a ship doctored during past overhauls for her symptoms only. omitted. There was so much government indecision in 1794-97 as to whether the country needed and/or could afford all of these major ships for an unproven and conditional Navy, that construction was a start-stop process, even after the contracts had been let. The negotiations with the Barbary States that resulted in treaties that were regularly violated were largely responsible for the indecisiveness. This, together with a Congress and State Department that were not much in favor of a Navy to begin with , made the ship builders doubt their getting paid. Some of the six frigates under construction during these shaky times were actually put on hold. Some that were farther along, as was the Constitution, were not. It would be most understandable, in this political atmosphere, that a builder might well want an earlier launching. It would also be understandable that an unproven and experimental structure, such as diagonal riders, might be silently omitted in order to proceed toward ship delivery more rapidly. It would seem a logical reason why Constitution was the second frigate of the original six to be delivered, after the Constellation . The Constellation's builder in Baltimore is on record as refusing to put diagonal riders in as specified, giving the reasons of complexity and extra building time. Constitution was dry docked in Boston ' s Charlestown Navy Yard on 25 September 1992, with something close to 15 1/2 inches of hogging in her keel. Of course, when a ship with such extensive hogging settles on to keel blocks, she should be settled down easy. And she was--on keel blocks with sand box caps. Within a week of settling, her keel had subsided on a straight line or close to it. 26
Shoring, pre-shaped to fit and support her bilges, was also placed as the water was pumped down in the dock. Her keel being without hogging when in dry dock is sort of like a leaky roof when it is not raining-people tend to forget about the problem. Constitution was originally, but informally, scheduled to be refloated late 1993 or January 1994 after routine repairs and maintenance. It was not until late in 1993 that the question resurfaced of whether to try to prevent the recurrence of hogging. On 23 October 1993, it was announced that the dry docking and associated restorative work on the old frigate would be extended-probably until autumn, 1995. The decision had been made in the summer, and preliminary work was going forward on the installation of diagonal riders in the ship 's bottom-to be done as closely to Joshua Humphreys ' original specifications as possible. I had been retained by a contract with the US Navy, Ship's Structures Division, in early 1991 to study Constitution' s condition and make a structural assessment of her as well as recommendations for restorative measures. Among the several recommendations in my report, the most significant was to install a diagonal rider system similar to that described by Humphreys. At that time, I had little hope that such a major restructuring would be considered, because of the cost, time and difficulty of construction.
to put the old ship under sail again is not an impractical proposal. It is considerably satisfying now to know that the old frigate will get her due. In an engineering sense, it is a most fundamental step, giving the hull the longitudinal strength and rigidity it apparently has never had. Whether she had diagonal riders as specified originally, she has not had them for some known time and has survived. After all, as a warship, her hull had been heavily built-nearly 20" through her outside planking, close framing, and inside ceiling. To this add all of the deck beams and decking on three full-length decks, hanging knees, lodging knees, diagonal knees, keel , keel riders, keelson, sister keelsons, deck stringers, bilge stringers and many more here unnamed, all held together with heavy copper bronze fastenings. But without the built-in truss of
diagonal riders, greater flexure in the hull is inevitable. And in a wooden hull, flexure means movement and wear at every joint and every fastening-the drift bolts, plank rivets, plank butts, timber scarfs, etc.-which, over the years, makes large and discouraging repair problems. (It is a wonder she did not leak more than several hundred gallons a day.) The above comments are a brief glimpse at the problems of an aging ship. In this case, we are looking at a ship doctored during her past overhauls for her symptoms only. And with these localized treatments, replacing decay with fresh material and worn fastenings with new, the frigate today is an image with built-in distortions. Over the years-from her beginnings, when repair was for battle damage, and through the long years of survival-she was treated with varied talent and skills. It would also be good during the present overhaul to attend to some restoration of her visual image, as Congress wi Lied some years ago. Her bow and stem should eventually be restored to a coordinated period, say 1803 or 1812. However, her present major structural rejuvenation is progress. This is the most fundamental restoration in her entire career. While the Navy has been appropriately silent on the matter of disposition when completed, with the added inner strength of the diagonal riders in place, a consideration to put the old ship under sail again is not an impractical proposal. She will have renewed spars and new rigging. And with her working sails bent on there would be no better way to astonish the maritime world- and even stir up some feeling for the ship among our citizens whose patriotic fervor has been progressivel y dimm ed- th a n to see " Old Ironsides" sail out of Boston harbor on her 200th birthday! Wow!
Thomas Gillmer, designer of the replica ships Pride of Baltimore II, Lady Maryland, and Peggy Stewart, is a fo rmer prof essor of naval architecture and chairman ofnaval engineering at the US Naval Academy. He is also the author of a new book entitled Old Ironsides, published last year by International Marine and available through NMHS. SEA HISTORY 69 , SPRING 1994