Hey guys!
A big thank you for all your contributions. They have been a real enrichment for me.
So I'm not the only one in this crazy world who had similar ideas, except that back then I just scribbled them down on paper. . . Amazing! 👍👍👍😊😊
Have a great day, everyone,
your Michel-C.

Good morning, all ship modelers.

I'm adding the Ramform Titan to this list.
It fits right into this topic thanks to its highly original, atypical shape. It looks just like a bow; it's truly strange.
However, it's certainly not a failed project; it's a highly specialized vessel, created specifically for a single purpose.

The Ramform Titan is a marine seismic survey vessel built in 2013 by the MHI shipyard in Nagasaki, Japan. Its stern beam is 70 meters, making it the widest ship class in the world.

The RAMFORM TITAN (IMO 9629885, MMSI 258070000) currently sails under the flag of Norway.


https://share.google/LKTkuddxSWEysr1n6

RAMFORM TITAN, Research Vessel - Ship Details and Current Position - IMO 9629885 - VesselFinder https://share.google/0icCG8pxcYtdR62OE

The third ship on this list is:

City of Rotterdam.

It is listed only because of the unique shape of its bow, which is truly unusual.

CITY OF ROTTERDAM (IMO: 9473468) is a Ro-Ro Cargo and is sailing under the flag of Panama. Her length overall (LOA) is 139.99 meters and her width is 22.4 meters.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:461962/mmsi:372002000/imo:9473468/vessel:CITY_OF_ROTTERDAM

The second ship on this new list has a highly original shape due to its numerous antennas.

Kosmonavt Yuri Gagarin (Russian: Космонавт Юрий ГагаЀин) was a Soviet spacecraft, or Vigilship (Veladora), dedicated to monitoring and detecting satellite communications. Named after cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, the ship was completed in December 1971 to support the Soviet space program. The ship also conducted research in the upper atmosphere and in space.
It had a highly recognizable appearance thanks to its two extremely large parabolic antennas and two smaller ones, located on the upper part of the hull.
In 1986, the Kosmonavt Yuri Gagarin was the world's largest communications ship and the flagship of a fleet of communications ships. These ships significantly extended the tracking range when the orbits of cosmonauts and unmanned missions were not over the USSR.
In 1975, the ship was part of the joint Soviet-American Apollo-Soyuz test program.
The communications ships belonged to the Soviet Academy of Sciences. The maritime part was responsible for navigation in the Baltic and Black Seas. The ships had bases in Ukraine (the Kosmonavt Yuri Gagarin and the other surveillance ship, the Akademik Sergei Korolev), but after the fall of the Soviet Union, they were transferred to Ukraine, ending their role in spaceflight.
The ship was sold for scrap shortly after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, along with the Akademik Sergei Korolev.

Kosmonavt Jurij Gagarin - Wikipedia https://share.google/IZ9UpGzGgyBbgnCVF

Maybe Steve, if that's okay. Thanks so much in advance.

Ok Alessandro, the next time that I see the model at one of our Regattas, I will have to take a few photos and see if I can sort out how to download them on ??.🤔😐.

Thanks you very much Steve.

A round shape in the water is difficult to steer and has trouble maintaining a straight course. But we modelers can cheat a little. The presence of a large rudder (as you, Steve, discovered), perhaps very long in the neutral position, can act as a keel.

I'm back.
Just been on our members WhatsApp site and the model was built by Michael Johnston a x member of the York Model Boat Club and was acquired by John White, who says that it has only two motors & propellers and has a large perspex rudder for helping with the steering. That's about all I know so sorry. 🙄 l suppose it is classed as a stand off scale model, but certainly a very unusual ship..

Thank you very much Steve.

Meeting and talking with very original model makers is a real blessing.

Sorry, I was a bit too engaged in sailing my own boats to remember, but I am sure that he had it sailing on the lake for a while ??
I will have to make some enquiries with the club's main member ( one who knows everything) 😁😁.and I will let you know. I start reading all sorts on here and finish up with a half drunk cup of tea or a very late night before getting to bed 😴😴.

Hi Steve, do you remember if the modeler was able to steer the Novgorod model, or was it impossible to follow a straight course like the real model?

Hi, Allessandro,
I have seen a R/C model of the Novgorod at one of our Regattas at the York Model Boat Club about a year ago. It was on display in the marquee along with our club members boats and those of visitors to the lake.
I am nearly certain that it belonged to one of our members but if not, then probably a Kirklees Model Boat member. 😁.

The first truly original ship on this new list is the BOTTSAND.

There are actually two Bottsand-class ships:
Two sister ships exist, the "Bottsand" (Y1643) and the "Eversand" (Y1644).

These ships carry out the oil spill cleanup mission in the Baltic. Built in 1985 by C. Lühring and Schiffko for the German Navy, the Bottsand features a hinge mechanism at the stern, allowing the entire hull to scissor-like open at a 65-degree angle, creating a collection area of 40 m² (431 sq ft). The seven storage tanks have a capacity of 790 m³ (equivalent to 5,000 barrels of recovered oil).

The shape of this ship when opened in two is truly original and unusual (the pictures speak for themselves), but it apparently appears effective and useful.

For more information, I've included a Wikipedia link at the end of the text.

https://share.google/xGvpQNPuUfZmd9NQM

Hello everyone.

I'm continuing my research and review of original, strange, bizarre, or unsuccessful boats, adding some with truly original shapes.
Their strangeness lies only in their form; as far as I know, they aren't failures.

I remind you that the topic was precisely the knowledge of ships that actually existed, at least in terms of design, with bizarre, strange, original, or unsuccessful shapes.
Who knows, it might serve not only as information, entertainment, and a pastime, but also as inspiration for some equally original model builders.

For those who haven't seen this topic before, reading the initial posts will find lists, descriptions, and illustrations of truly extravagant or completely disastrous vessels.

I'll add four or five ships.

H.M.S. CAPTAIN (1869)


WHY SHOULD IT GET INTO THE LIST?

In this review I think that the ship H.M.S, CAPTAIN of 1869 should be added, in its own right.
This ship had lines that were not grotesque but quite original and innovative.
It was definitely a failure.
She sank only a few months after entering service. If she didn't sink first it was only thanks to the skill of her crew and her captain but the ship was absolutely dangerous and a failure.


NOTES ON THE PROJECT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SHIP.

This ship was designed by Cowper Coles, an advocate of the revolving gun tower (for which he had obtained the patent in 1859).
She was a propeller-driven ship but she also had three masts and a very large sail area.
The two revolving towers were among the trees. Above them ran a walkway from bow to stern, called the "hurricane deck", to which the rigging was attached, to prevent it from being damaged by broadsides, as would have happened if it had been connected to the lower deck.
This gave it a very original look.
The masts were tripod and the ship had a very low freeboard.
Length: 98 meters.
Width: 16.23.
Gross tonnage: 7,767 GRT.


CONTRAST WITH THE ADMIRALITY.

Coles managed to have his project evaluated by the British Admiralty who deemed it good enough to be built but entrusted the review to the expert Edward James Reed.
He believed that the ship as it was designed had serious navigation defects and made various modifications to make it safer.
Reed feared above all the capsizing and had criticized the too small freeboard of only 2.4 m. Indeed, with new calculations it was discovered that the displacement was underestimated and therefore the freeboard was reduced to 2 metres.
Coles did not accept these changes which would have completely distorted his intuitions.
Ultimately two different ships were launched.
In 1866 Reed's ship was christened Monarch.
Coles' ship retained the original design and was christened Captain.
The H.M.S. Captain was built in the private Laird shipyard in Birkenhead precisely following Coles' instructions.
She was launched on 27 March 1869.


THE DISASTER

On 6 September 1870 the battleship Captain was together with ten other ships of Admiral Milne's squadron for firing exercises in the Bay of Biscay.
In the late afternoon the weather worsened and the necessary precautions were taken: reduction of the canopy, closing of hatches and skylights, etc. Etc.
The ship that risked the most of all was the Captain with its small freeboard but, above all, because the righting limit was only 21 degrees. Beyond this heel the ship would have capsized.
Around midnight the storm coming from the west had induced the ship's commander (who had already faced two difficult voyages with this ship) Burgoyne to reduce the sail and advance with a little speed of the steam engines.
He had managed to counteract the skidding but, during the changing of the first and second guard, a stronger gust suddenly increased the skidding.
The order to release the sail halyards was not carried out promptly due to various problems and the ship exceeded the fateful 21 degrees.
Unfortunately, she sank south of Cape Finisterre and only 18 of the 490 men on the crew were saved.
Coles who was on board also died.
The commission's ruling was expressed as follows:
"His Majesty's ship Captain was capsized by the pressure of the sails combined with the force of the sea.
The sails carried at the time of the accident (in relation to the strength of the wind and the state of the sea) were insufficient to endanger a ship with an appropriate degree of stability ...
The Court finds it necessary to point out that the Captain was built in homage to public opinion expressed by Parliament and other bodies, contrary to the opinion of the heads of this Department and the whole hearing has shown that they disapproved of her construction."

The first five images are of the Captain while the last two are of the Monarch.

I hope the translation wasn't a disaster.


https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Captain_%281869%29

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/12/17/missing-victorian-battleship-set-recovery-150-years/

Good evening everyone, another addition?

H.M.S. CAPTAIN (1869)

So far, four truly original, unsuccessful, extravagant and grotesque ships have been mentioned:
1. The vessel CONNECTOR
2. The BESSMER ship.
3. The battleship NOVGOROD.
4. BAZIN'S ROLLER SHIP.

Then thanks to Cashrc we added a ship that was not a failure but certainly very original.
Paddle wheel aircraft carriers: USS Sable and Wolverine
Again thanks to Cashrc I learned the story of the failed K class steam submarine.

Then I added an original project of a pleasure submarine: the MIGALOO M5 submersible yacht.

In another topic there was talk of Vasa. A very beautiful (certainly not grotesque) but unsuccessful normal galleon.

Good evening to all naval modelers on this forum.

I'm about to get off topic, but Jumpugly is right.
When I write or say (without even writing) something, the Internet (via Google or other search engines) offers you various news or articles for sale about it.
This time it wasn't a sales proposal but news.

Why do I say I'm going off the rails of my topic?
Because the theme was the most extravagant, bizarre and unsuccessful ships ever built in the world.
This is certainly not a failure. In fact, if it is built and sold it will certainly be a substantial income.
It hasn't been built yet, but it's already a finished project (or just an idea, a fantasy?).

I'm talking about the MIGALOO M5 submersible yacht.

An incredible submarine as a pleasure boat.
We know that the submarine is the narrowest and hardest naval vessel for sailors. Not everyone could fit in.
However, it is necessary because it has long been an essential strategic and tactical element for many navies (war fleets).
But who would have thought of making a yacht out of it.

Well, apparently the Austrian design studio Migaloo has presented "the world's only private underwater superyacht", to offer "a not yet existing alternative to large privately owned surface vessels".
Basically when the rich guy doesn't want to be disturbed she dives.

We were also used to hearing news of submarines used for drug trafficking and other illicit trades, but they were small boats of no nautical charm. This yacht is something else entirely, it seems like science fiction.

This submarine, called M5, will measure 165.8 meters long and 23 meters wide at its widest point, with a range of approximately 15,000 kilometers and a speed of up to 20 knots on the surface (or 12 knots submerged).

What is most incredible is that the submarine will be able to descend up to 250 meters deep and remain submerged for up to four weeks.

She will be able to hold 20 passengers and 40 crew members.

It includes a helipad, a swimming pool and spa, a gym, a cinema with art galleries, a party area with a DJ booth, as well as numerous spaces for relaxing or dining. Optional extras include a hot air balloon and an underwater shark feeding station.

Take this news with a pinch of salt (i.e. with due caution) because it comes from the Web and has not yet been confirmed.

Do you think they will really do it? Will someone be so eccentric and rich as to want to shell out a gigantic sum for such a vessel?
Is it just a hoax?
As soon as it's a reality, if it's a reality, ready to make a scale model of it, ahahahahah.

https://christian-gumpold.jimdofree.com/

Thanks Alessandro 😊, I'll certainly post some photos when completed, "before and after ". The existing boat shed is now too small. My stepson was in the process of moving rental accommodation recently and wondered if I could make use of some timber. Duly delivered, I was wondering what I could do with it all, a quick measure by hand ✋️ 😀 and realised that I could potentially now bridge the gap between house and garage hence another "home project "to finally cross of the list. Maybe one day...😂

I love the concepts on "The fourth bizarre, strange and failed ship on this list is BAZIN'S ROLLER SHIP."


Sort of reminds me of the movie "Those magnificent men in their flying machines".


And why not? Experiment all you want if you have no way to analyze it.

Today, with computer simulation, you can test any concept of anything without building a prototype.


As for those boats, the only thing missing is to attach a large blimp on top 🤣🤣🤣


Isaac

Hi Doogle, you don't know how nice it is to hear these words.
I was getting worried thinking that while I have had to finish my RC ship model for a very long time, I already have many other projects in mind that I would like to do right away but which I can't do.
Now the main problem is time but even if I had time available I lack space.
I'm heartened to know that I'm not the only one chasing a thousand ideas.
I'm glad you're doing some work that will make our beautiful hooby more comfortable, "forgot to mention that I'm also trying to construct a covered area between house and garage for boat storage and cold frame for overwintering plants". Excellent thing.
This space is vital, when you have completed it I hope you will share the photos with us.
I'm glad you appreciate these articles.
Always keep your mind busy, do well, your brain will benefit.

Hi Alessandro, funnily enough I was in a model shop this afternoon with my brother in law and I was looking at wheels to see what is available and start to "mentally "get build ideas. I was very good 👍 and didn't buy anything. Have to build the Calypso, finish off the "gravy boat " and the "Sea axe 🪓 ".
Doesn't stop me from thinking of all the possibilities ✨️ 😌 😉. Hopefully the sea axe and gravy boat will be getting wet soon. Oh, by the way; forgot to mention that I'm also trying to construct a covered area between house and garage for boat storage and cold frame for overwintering plants 🪴 😀. Meanwhile, hold down full time job, look after my wife plus the dog 🐕. Still all that said, I love reading articles like these posted and one's imagination is only limited by one's own mind. There's so much help on this site, that I'm sure I'll be asking for advice in due course. Watch this space.
😁

Hello Doogle.
In my opinion, nowadays this strange project with current technologies and materials would work well in many contexts. Not in all.
What do you think about it?

Good morning Alessandro, thanks for sharing these strange yet wonderful vessels. Was always tempted by the Russian circular and now Bazin's roller ship. 🙄
Must concentrate more and not get so easily distracted from a current projects. On the other hand.....😂🤣

The fourth bizarre, strange and failed ship on this list is BAZIN'S ROLLER SHIP.

Even though I put it last, this is, in my opinion, the most extravagant of all.
Just look at the photo to understand it.
A steamship designed by Ernesto Bazin that moved on six enormous wheels.
Not paddle wheels, but floating wheels, incredible.
Yet this ship managed to cross the English Channel.
This 1896 ship was 36.5 meters long, 13.7 meters wide and was powered by a 550 hp steam engine, she could reach 7 knots.

I have not found any news of particular flaws or inconveniences but this ship did not arouse any interest in builders and owners. It's easy to understand why. Even if she worked well, which captain would be thrilled to command her? In short, it actually seemed a little too ridiculous perhaps.
Later I found other news and much more data on the internet, very interesting, about this ship.
I attach the link at the end but I warn you that I have not checked their reliability and I have not done any checking with the sources as I usually do.

https://it.topwar.ru/121363-eksperimentalnoe-skorostnoe-sudno-ernest-bazin-franciya.html

The third ship in the list of strange, bizarre, failed ships is the battleship NOVGOROD.

Now the list has gone from four to six thanks to Cashrc who added: 1) an aircraft carrier which proved to be very useful but very original, perhaps unique (along with its twin) of its kind, and 2) a submarine which seems to have been a total failure.

As you can see from the photos and as mentioned in the first message, the feature that makes it unique and bizarre is the circular shape.
The intent was to create a platform as stable as possible for the large naval artillery of the time.
Vice Admiral Popoff's idea was realized in 1873.
The 2500 ton ship had a diameter of 36.9 meters and mounted 280 mm caliber guns.
Propulsion was guaranteed by six propellers at the stern, powered by as many steam turbines capable of delivering a power of 2400 hp (wikipedia reports a different, much higher value).
The six propellers should have made it more maneuverable than any other ship, this was the prediction but in reality it was almost impossible to maintain a course and it was very slow, just 6 knots of speed.
The ship was launched in 1873 in Nikolajev on the Black Sea, and was supposed to operate as a coast guard together with the ship Admiral Popoff, also circular but with a slightly smaller diameter, but with a greater displacement of 3647 tons.
As soon as she left the Dnieper River she became uncontrollable, she rotated out of control and caused illness to the crew who apparently were paralyzed by dizziness.
The circular platform was indeed much more stable than traditional ships as expected by its designer but the nautical qualities were terrible.
The biggest drawback of her hull shape was that it greatly reduced the rudder's ability to turn the ship by masking much of the water flow, so much so that it took up to 40-45 minutes to make a complete circle. The solution adopted was to use the engines for control and leave the rudder fixed, even if this reduced the speed of the ship.
Despite this obvious failure, Tsar Alexander II was favorably impressed by the stability of this ship and wanted the imperial yacht, the Livadia, to be built on the same principle but to look like a traditional ship.
Popoff then designed a hull that was not circular but elliptical with a length of 72 meters and a width of 47 meters. But this is another bizarre ship that perhaps deserves a separate mention.

Unlike the other ships on the list, this ship type operated for a period of time before being scrapped in 1911 and also participated in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78.

Hi Cash,
I agree with you. The K4 Class sub was a 'great' RN failure, a disaster☹️😮
Watch and weep!😭
😎

Sorry cashrc, now I understand. As usual, Google's first translation took me off the road.

Just to make you understand how it can be misleading sometimes the translation I tell you that "propellers" if abbreviated to "props" translates it into "scene things".

Now I did the search in English and I found this image that made me understand everything.
Well yes, actually, a aircraft carrier with blades is somewhat bizarre, however unusual.

I thank you very much for making me know these particular twin ships.

Good morning Cashrc.
I couldn't translate well, you'll have to excuse me.
I didn't understand what the peculiarity of the USS Sable (or its twin Wolverine) is. They are certainly not failures because they have done their job well.
Maybe you mean their shape?
Your post is very interesting in my opinion.

Hello Doug.

Thank you for attaching other images and for the links, which contain the texts.
I took the information from a tome printed in 1995 but I always forget to do the research on the internet in English instead of Italian. The results are very different.
You have interrogated the topic with many other interesting information.

I also have to thank you for this sentence you wrote:
"I can find no record of 'a disaster' on the return trip from Calais."
If you hadn't done it, I wouldn't have realized I'd created a misunderstanding and others might have misinterpreted what I meant.
Sometimes, in Italian we use the same terms in the "strict sense" or in the "broad sense".
For example, if a person asks me: "So how was your holiday?", if I reply "forget it, it was a real disaster", perhaps because the flights were delayed, I ate badly, the weather was terrible . In this case the term disaster is in a broad sense.
For example, if a person asks me: "So how was the trip to Sardinia?", if I reply "forget it, it was a real disaster", perhaps because I vomited the whole trip. In this case the term disaster is in a broad sense.
If, however, there was an accident on the highway with five vehicles involved, with deaths and injuries, I say it was a disaster using the word in the strict sense.

For the Bessmer I didn't use the term "disaster" in the strict sense, but this was obvious only to me. I must admit that I took an interpretation for granted that could instead be misleading.

A traveler (I couldn't find his name) described the return journey as "scary" (perhaps it should be translated as "terrible").

Anyway, I'm glad you allowed me to clarify.


Aside from this semantic digression, in your opinion why a similar system didn't work then and most likely wouldn't work today either?
In my opinion because the internal group would not be able to counterbalance all the sudden and unpredictable fluctuations in time. It's a question of timing in my opinion.
But I would like to know your opinion and that of others.

The British K class steam submarine. Won’t go into details, I’ll link the wiki page, but just not a great idea….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine

USS Sable and Wolverine…while not “failures”, they were a little different. They were training aircraft carriers converted from paddle wheel boats, and used to train Navy pilots on the Great Lakes in WWII. Only paddle wheel carriers I’ve ever heard of.

The Short Life of the SS Bessemer – 1875. What really happened? (Maybe😉)

Alessandro, I believe you are referring to the SS Bessemer. AKA Bessemer Saloon.
Indeed invented by and named after Sir Henry Bessemer, of Bessemer Converter fame.
He designed the ship and had it built, with considerable financial assistance - £250,000, because he was a chronic sufferer of sea sickness (Mal de Mer).
He believed that his 'swinging saloon' design would prevent that. At least for the First Class passengers🙄

The vessel did indeed make two crossings of the Channel to Calais.
A private on 12th April 1875, no passengers as the Board Of Trade passenger certificate had not yet been issued. A strong easterly wind made the crossing rough and reduced the average speed to ~ 11kn. The 'swinging saloon' was not tested.
On arrival in Calais she proved difficult to steer at low speed and struck the dock damaging a paddle.
Second trip, on 8th May 1875.
On the outward voyage, Dover to Calais, the swinging saloon was not unlocked.
Allegedly due to damage sustained on the first collision with the Calais pier.
On arrival in Calais the Bessemer again proved difficult to manoeuvre in the small harbour and demolished some 50 yards of the pier. The port authority later sent the ship owners a bill for repairs, £2,800.
After two failures the company investors bailed out and the company collapsed.
(Having used the port of Calais several times I can confirm that the harbour is tight!)
I can find no record of 'a disaster' on the return trip from Calais.
Ultimately the ship was laid up in Dover and sold for scrap in 1879.

Oh well! Nothing ventured nothing gained!
Cheers, Doug😎

https://talesfromthequarterdeck.com/2024/04/06/the-short-life-of-the-ss-bessemer-1875/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Bessemer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Bessemer#Early_inventions

The second ship in the list of strange, bizarre, failed ships is the steamer BESSMER.


Attention should not be confused with the steamship Marquette & Bessemer No. 2 which was a railway ferry in service on the Great Lakes where it sank in 1909.

The BESSMER steamer was a wheel-propelled vessel.
It was designed by the English engineer and inventor Henry Bessmer (those who studied technical subjects at school cannot fail to remember him for the steel production process. I remember him and Thomas).
This 2005 ton steamship, 106 meters long and 12 meters wide, was launched in Hull in 1875.
It was characterized by a double pair of paddle wheels and a very small freeboard, but this was not the main feature.

Bessmer's idea was to make the passenger lounge independent (in movement) from the rest of the ship. The central body had to be able to oscillate inside the hull in order to counterbalance and cancel the rolling movements.
According to Bessmer, the floor of the passenger lounge could have remained horizontal when the entire ship tilted to one side or the other.
The adjustment of the inclination of the bridge was regulated by a technician, through a system of pins and hydraulic cylinders.
The system didn't work because it couldn't compensate for roll oscillations quickly enough. Indeed, with rough seas the situation was even worsened by this system.
The Bessmer made two crossings from Dover to Calais.
On the way out the sea was calm and there were no problems but on the way back it was a disaster.
After a while she was demolished.

Of all the ships listed, it is the one with the least bizarre shape.

Hi Wolle, you are right but wait until you see the story of the Bessmer passenger ship then. It was worse there.

Hi Flaxybybuck, lucky you have all these ships and are so committed to this amazing hobby.

I wouldn't want to go on this ship, if you don't get seasick...😮

Much as I would like to model one of these strange ships I already have enough on my plate ! The last boat I have been making has taken me 3.5 years ( I am not in a hurry) and is now undergoing trials. When I took my police launch out in strong winds the superstructure was lost so I need to make a new one. That could take me many months because it is filled with electrical things that take time to do. My mind is almost set on making a Bristol pilot cutter then, based on the hull from Mobile Marine Models. So that could be the next 2 or 3 years accounted for. 😉

The Connector ship.


This is the first of those on the list, the other three will follow in as many dedicated posts.


She was launched in 1863 at Blackwall on the Thames.
Precisely a few kilometers where, five years earlier, the Great Eastern ship, designed by Isambard Brunel, had risked not going into the water.

The technical idea was that the ship's modules would oscillate in tune with the wave motion.

The Jointed Ship Company, for which the Connector was built, planned to use her as a coal ship between Newcastle and London.
On this route you would have had to leave every single form in the intermediate ports of the route.
The commercial idea was that management costs would be reduced and the period spent at the dock for unloading operations would be reduced.

Only the rear module had a steam engine, while the central and front segments had sails that allowed autonomous propulsion for all modules. Each could navigate independently of the other.

The first test was carried out on the River Thames, without any problems occurring.
Having left Blackwall, the Connector first left the bow module, continued and left the central module, then returned and reattached all the modules, before returning to the port of departure.


Even if this test was successful and there were no problems, everyone realized that the ship at sea would have been subjected to too much stress and in addition to the pitching movement it would also have suffered a strong roll.
They believed that the joints that joined the moving segments would not resist the rolling and gave up on allowing it to sail at sea.
She therefore continued to sail only on the Thames.
It can't be considered a complete fiasco but no similar ships were ever built again (at least as far as I know).

Next will be the Bessmer ship.

Hello Alessandro
These are truly strange and bizarre ships, thanks for showing them.