River transport in Eretald

Almea and the Incatena
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

I've been thinking a lot about river transport in Eretald. I think I've read what's available to read on it; and I have a couple of questions.
  1. How is upriver shipping generally powered? (Question can be taken to be relevant to any era, really, before steam.) I think the options are:
    1. oars
    2. sail - if there are good northerly prevailing winds? (If so, is this all year round?) And lots of tacking...
      More: show
      (I can see that the Caďinorians relied on sailing ships for the river trade - so I'm presuming tacking and winds are good enough to reliably get you upriver?)
    3. animal traction
    4. human traction - people literally dragging them
    5. people rowing out and chucking anchors ahead of the ship, attached to winches which the boat reels in
    6. a system of hitch-posts along the river which are used to attach ropes to in the same manner, carried forwards by rowers or riders (I might have just invented this...??)
    7. dare I say... magic?
  2. Does upriver transport take longer than downriver transport? (And related - is it priced differently?)
  3. Do riverboats generally venture all the way up to Verdúria city? (If so, they presumably have to be seaworthy.) Or is there a big trade in e.g. Pelym / Anaseri in loading goods from river craft onto seaworthy vessels? / Vyat (with its new steamer service?) (Or is the Gulf of Verdúria a bit less ocean-y than I am imagining?)
To illustrate where my thoughts are coming from on this, here is a diversion I worked on recently: a shipping schedule for So Sešue Sariley, the barge on which Kaidan Žambey, whose diary I am writing, is travelling down the Svetla in 3422.

More: show
Image

A couple of remarks:
  • I think it might make more sense for the return journey to be expected to be significantly slower. This barge could leave Lepcer every three months, for instance, aiming to reach Verduria within 4 weeks, and then resting for the time it takes less than 8 weeks to do the return journey. (The schedule would of course change to reflect that.)
  • I don't quite know what kind of vessel could take a large amount of cargo, navigate the Gulf, and still make it back up river - unless it has oars, which then need their own infrastructure and a large amount of the carrying capacity of the ship given over to the rowers... and doesn't 'feel' a modern approach, though that's kinda my modern bias. It seems on some river systems, pre-modern barges were actually disassembled at the downriver destination and sold for parts, the return journey just being too onerous to be profitable. Or 'passengers' were taken on for free to row back; or even drag the barges if necessary.
    More: show
    This is one current description of the barge I'm working on:
    The barge is capable of taking about 40 passengers (with little to nothing by way of amenities) and 3-4 crew; it is about 110 ft long, 18 feet wide, with 11 feet air draft; it has a five-sail rig (stay, aft, top, mizzen, jib) on two masts and two leeboards, or one removable leeboard; it is seaworthy, to navigate the Gulf of Verduria; it has a raised deck whereon sits the rig and the two masts that can be dropped or raised while underway, and a mess/cargo beneath; there is a quarterdeck at the back, which holds a few hammocks and a small private cabin. It takes 150+ tonnes and has a 1.5m draft. The sails are treated with lamp-black and red ochre and have a distinctive purple-black ‘glow’.
  • Perhaps long river journeys like this, and larger ships doing them (I've said there are 40 passengers on board So Sešue Sariley, and cargo), are less usual than I was imagining, and there are more like lots of little trips and passengers might be changing vessels every few ports? (I guess there's probably a mixture of these approaches, with long trips getting more common into the modern era...?)
  • Perhaps the winds are more favourable and reliable than I am giving them more credit for? This seems to have been the case in Ancient Egypt - float down, sail up worked remarkably consistently.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

sasasha wrote: Tue Jan 30, 2024 6:53 am
  1. How is upriver shipping generally powered? (Question can be taken to be relevant to any era, really, before steam.) I think the options are:
    1. oars
    2. sail - if there are good northerly prevailing winds? (If so, is this all year round?) And lots of tacking...
      More: show
      (I can see that the Caďinorians relied on sailing ships for the river trade - so I'm presuming tacking and winds are good enough to reliably get you upriver?)
    3. animal traction
    4. human traction - people literally dragging them
    5. people rowing out and chucking anchors ahead of the ship, attached to winches which the boat reels in
    6. a system of hitch-posts along the river which are used to attach ropes to in the same manner, carried forwards by rowers or riders (I might have just invented this...??)
    7. dare I say... magic?
Good questions. I'm sure you've seen the article on the corona, which notes that sailboats have been used since ancient times. I'm no expert on wind systems, but it seems reasonable to me that the prevailing winds come from the ocean, allowing transport upriver. And I've said that the Svetla is navigable as far as Aránicer.

As river trade has been going on for thousands of years, I expect there are pathways for traction animals all along the route, for times when there is no wind. Humans can pull a punt or small boat but a 120-tonne boat, maybe not. Very likely you have to pay the animal handlers, so that could make upriver travel more expensive.
[*]Does upriver transport take longer than downriver transport? (And related - is it priced differently?)
Might be the opposite, actually. A river typically goes at 5 km/h. With favorable winds, a river sailboat can go 10 to 18 km/h.

But this depends on the constancy of the wind, the design of the boat, and the weight. The whole idea of the cora was that it was fast; but a trading ship could take its time.
[*]Do riverboats generally venture all the way up to Verdúria city? (If so, they presumably have to be seaworthy.) Or is there a big trade in e.g. Pelym / Anaseri in loading goods from river craft onto seaworthy vessels? / Vyat (with its new steamer service?) (Or is the Gulf of Verdúria a bit less ocean-y than I am imagining?)
This also probably requires knowledge I don't have, but I've always pictured Verduria as accessible to both ocean and river traffic. Phoenician ships plying the Mediterranean were no longer than the one you describe, and probably narrower. Most of what you see on this map is the Eärdur— I think you can duck through to the Scafiora pretty easily. In ancient times you maybe only had to reach Bordë.

I do expect some riverboats are too small to get to Verduria, but then they're probably also too small for substantial trade.

There might be trouble at the other end. I have said the Svetla is navigable to Cerei. But maybe it's awkward for large ships, and past Aránicer the winds are blowing the wrong way. So very possibly you need a smaller boat, oared or pulled, for that leg of the trip. It would help explain why Cerei has always been a backwater.
This barge could leave Lepcer every three months, for instance, aiming to reach Verduria within 4 weeks, and then resting for the time it takes less than 8 weeks to do the return journey. (The schedule would of course change to reflect that.)
You've described a sailing vessel, again not far from Phoenician ships or medieval caravels, but with about twice the tonnage. Assuming the river is regularly 5 km/hr, and assuming my math is correct, the Lepcer/Verduria run could be done in 9 days, or in 18 if it doesn't travel at night. That's more like 3 weeks, but given days without travel, and maybe slower sections of the river, and the need not to over-promise, your 4 weeks seems reasonable.

Again, it's possible the upriver trip is faster... but also possible that the winds are not as reliable, and thus that you'd be at the mercy of the animals. I think you could make a case for anything from 3 to 6 weeks.

I agree with you that oars wouldn't be very practical. My understanding is that things like triremes were mostly used for war. They're fast but had little cargo... and really, no sleeping space— you'd take them aground and camp there at night.

The "take a barge and dismantle it at the delta" approach seems reasonable for very large cargo. Then you don't need a sail. The effect would certainly be to the benefit of regions downriver— which fits in with the perennial economics. I'd note though that Ctesifon is in the middle of the Plain, so ways to get goods upriver that far would have been prioritized.
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

Thank you for such a useful reply.
zompist wrote: Tue Jan 30, 2024 6:40 pm Good questions. I'm sure you've seen the article on the corona, which notes that sailboats have been used since ancient times.
I had in fact missed that! Thanks!! :)
I'm no expert on wind systems, but it seems reasonable to me that the prevailing winds come from the ocean, allowing transport upriver.
Me neither, but yes, that makes sense. It may only be the case for part of the year, but I don't know enough to state that.
As river trade has been going on for thousands of years, I expect there are pathways for traction animals all along the route, for times when there is no wind.
Ok, fantastic. That'll be the way, then!
Humans can pull a punt or small boat but a 120-tonne boat, maybe not.
I wish this were the case, but actually it has been known. Though it seems that actually hauling the barges was an extreme situation; the burlaki seem to have spent most of their time rowing out anchors for the ships to reel up to (1v).

Possibly there are fewer helpful winds on the Volga as it doesn't empty into a large ocean.
Very likely you have to pay the animal handlers, so that could make upriver travel more expensive.
Makes sense. Otherwise vessels will need to keep room for traction animals on board.
[*]Does upriver transport take longer than downriver transport? (And related - is it priced differently?)
Might be the opposite, actually. A river typically goes at 5 km/h. With favorable winds, a river sailboat can go 10 to 18 km/h.

But this depends on the constancy of the wind, the design of the boat, and the weight. The whole idea of the cora was that it was fast; but a trading ship could take its time.
Ah, I'd not thought of this. The papers I'd read usually stated that upriver was slower ‒ but actually, I was sometimes suspicious about how they reached that conclusion. It seems certainly the case on the Danube, but not necessarily the Rhine, IIRC – and again the Danube empties into a smaller sea.

I think your general ideas are right: in favourable conditions, upriver could occasionally be faster, but on average over a long journey, probably not so.
[*]Do riverboats generally venture all the way up to Verdúria city? (If so, they presumably have to be seaworthy.) Or is there a big trade in e.g. Pelym / Anaseri in loading goods from river craft onto seaworthy vessels? / Vyat (with its new steamer service?) (Or is the Gulf of Verdúria a bit less ocean-y than I am imagining?)
This also probably requires knowledge I don't have, but I've always pictured Verduria as accessible to both ocean and river traffic. Phoenician ships plying the Mediterranean were no longer than the one you describe, and probably narrower. Most of what you see on this map is the Eärdur— I think you can duck through to the Scafiora pretty easily. In ancient times you maybe only had to reach Bordë.

I do expect some riverboats are too small to get to Verduria, but then they're probably also too small for substantial trade.
Ok, that makes sense. Traditional Thames barges were seaworthy ‒ though they're a bit smaller than the vessel I describe. I'll do some more research, but it seems from my wiki hangover like there are some traditional Indonesian vessels that sound like they'd have these capabilities.
There might be trouble at the other end. I have said the Svetla is navigable to Cerei. But maybe it's awkward for large ships, and past Aránicer the winds are blowing the wrong way. So very possibly you need a smaller boat, oared or pulled, for that leg of the trip. It would help explain why Cerei has always been a backwater.
True! It does say on the Cerei Almeopedia page that Lepcer is the furthest the large riverboats can go. It doesn't say which large riverboats. Perhaps it's indeed the likely prerogative of a Cerei-based company to make hybrid ships that can make it between Cerei and Verduria and back with a sizeable enough cargo to make it worthwhile. (They have the Xazengri trade to finance/motivate this, I guess.)
This barge could leave Lepcer every three months, for instance, aiming to reach Verduria within 4 weeks, and then resting for the time it takes less than 8 weeks to do the return journey. (The schedule would of course change to reflect that.)
You've described a sailing vessel, again not far from Phoenician ships or medieval caravels, but with about twice the tonnage. Assuming the river is regularly 5 km/hr, and assuming my math is correct, the Lepcer/Verduria run could be done in 9 days, or in 18 if it doesn't travel at night. That's more like 3 weeks, but given days without travel, and maybe slower sections of the river, and the need not to over-promise, your 4 weeks seems reasonable.

Again, it's possible the upriver trip is faster... but also possible that the winds are not as reliable, and thus that you'd be at the mercy of the animals. I think you could make a case for anything from 3 to 6 weeks.

I agree with you that oars wouldn't be very practical. My understanding is that things like triremes were mostly used for war. They're fast but had little cargo... and really, no sleeping space— you'd take them aground and camp there at night.

The "take a barge and dismantle it at the delta" approach seems reasonable for very large cargo. Then you don't need a sail. The effect would certainly be to the benefit of regions downriver— which fits in with the perennial economics. I'd note though that Ctesifon is in the middle of the Plain, so ways to get goods upriver that far would have been prioritized.
All this seems very reasonable!

Overall, I think I'll stick to the schedule in the diagram going north, though might change the description of the barge a bit after reading the Corona article. (You have a separate word for ‘barge’, of course, ‘ďëslota’, but still, I think my description isn't quite right yet.) Going back, it might make sense to say on the schedule, ‘anticipated arrival times may vary by up to three weeks’, and maintain this idea that the boats (and captains) get as much time at home in Lepcer as they can make back before the next departure three months after the last, motivating high effort made for the return journey.

Thanks again!

Also, sorry to get off-topic, but I remember reading somewhere an account of someone arriving at a wealthy noble house in Verdúria-mažtana, and... something about cards happening, perhaps? I can't find it, but I'd like to read it again as I think it'd help me cross-reference some details in the next bits of Kaidan's story ‒ if you can help me dig it out I would be grateful! :) --- edit: found it! Ninth lesson in the Practical Course.
hwhatting
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:09 am
Location: Bonn
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by hwhatting »

zompist may correct me for Verduria, but one other thing to keep in mind is that premodern travel and transport was not nearly as tightly scheduled as we are used to; certainly not on a cargo ship that would take passengers along. You may have had a reasonable expectation plus minus a couple of days of when you would arrive at your destination, but probably not a fixed schedule - as far as I know, that came only with steam ships, when waterborne travel became independent of weather and currents.
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

hwhatting wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 11:01 am zompist may correct me for Verduria, but one other thing to keep in mind is that premodern travel and transport was not nearly as tightly scheduled as we are used to; certainly not on a cargo ship that would take passengers along. You may have had a reasonable expectation plus minus a couple of days of when you would arrive at your destination, but probably not a fixed schedule - as far as I know, that came only with steam ships, when waterborne travel became independent of weather and currents.
Thanks - and good point! That's kind of why I started this thread - to try to find out roughly what the reasonable expectations would have been. I worked it out, more or less, for down-river, but up-river was much more confusing.

My instinct is that ‘it will take anything from 3-6 weeks to get back, but if it's a regular-ish journey it will probably look something like this’ should be a fairly safe advertising strategy for this Cerei company. I will alter the ‘schedule’ to make it clear it's, well, “more sort of... guidelines” :)
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

PS. I created more information about this company than I could ever really need... If you're interested, here are the bits of it that are presentable! I'm not sure how realistic it is (another reason for this thread): the economics of it are difficult to imagine.

One thing included below is a model for 12 vessels (and 12 captains) sailing weekly from Lepcer covering the whole year. That may be too many vessels... Depends how much profitable trade they can do, I guess! There would of course be many competing companies on most of the route, but few if any others that do the whole trip. Cerei vessels can bring something the other southern nations can't (goods direct from the Xazengri route), so I'm imagining them to enjoy a modest prosperity in this era. Perhaps cutting the volume (and number of vessels) in half makes sense.

If you (zomp, hwhatting or anyone!) think this info is realistic or not in any way I'd be interested!

More: show
So Perë Etaldete Cumbutát Ďëslotië i Cerei
(SPECĎIC)
The All Eretald Barge Company of Cerei

One month down, two months up. The captains get however long they can make back back, i.e. if they do the return journey from Lepcer to Verdúria in 5 weeks they get 3 weeks off. It can take 6, or, if conditions are especially favourable, can also take less than 4. To get upstream they use a combination of sail (tacking) and towing. The passages where towing is common tend to have animals to rent on shore.

The barge is capable of taking about 40 passengers (with little to nothing by way of amenities) and 3-4 crew; it is about 110 ft long, 18 feet wide, with 11 feet air draft; it has a five-sail rig (stay, aft, top, mizzen, jib) on two masts and two leeboards, or one removable leeboard; it is seaworthy, to navigate the Gulf of Verduria; it has a raised deck whereon sits the rig and the two masts that can be dropped or raised while underway, and a mess/cargo beneath; there is a quarterdeck at the back, which holds a few hammocks and a small private cabin. It takes 150+ tonnes and has a 1.5m draft. The sails are treated with lamp-black and red ochre and have a distinctive purple-black ‘glow’.


1. So Zol Tižapaž (the strong catfish)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to first of months olašu, vlerëi, yag, šoru.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to first of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.



2. So Peil Řit (the peaceful pan)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to eighth of months olašu, vlerëi, yag, šoru.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to eighth of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.



3. Soa Bomë Stelika (the old dragonfly)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months olašu, vlerëi, yag, šoru.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.



4. So Pelvo Syetnorei (the bowl of Syetnor)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months olašu, vlerëi, yag, šoru.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.



5. So Sešue Sariley (the heavy easterner)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to first of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to first of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.



6. So Sotok Solialán (the grasshopper to tomorrow)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to eighth of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to eighth of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.



7. Soa Mesë Mália (the benevolent Mália/boss-lady)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.


8. So Munénë Petukul (the worldly little rooster)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months reli, calo, želea, froďac.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.



9. Soa Ecopa Meyán (the osprey on the water)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to first of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to first of months vlerëi, yag, šoru, olašu.



10. So Huntene Erei (the eager one of the South)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to eighth of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to eighth of months vlerëi, yag, šoru, olašu.



11. Soa Niza Capei (the beech fairy)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to fifteenth of months vlerëi, yag, šoru, olašu.



12. So Tuyo Žantomei (the prophet’s pipe)

Leaves Lepcer on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months cuéndimar, recoltë, išire, bešana.

Leaves Verdúria on nearest scúreden to twenty-third of months vlerëi, yag, šoru, olašu.



Backup vessels: So Kapro Klušec (the splashing/pissing goat); So Breme Voyul (the placid messenger).


Here is yet more info, mainly a draft character sketch for Captain Sfica. No idea why I did this really!! I guess I like detail. The stuff about Lapiri is probably fairly late-night sleepless nonsense.

More: show
There are 12 captains, and a couple of back-ups on call. They take two months on, one month (ostensibly) off.

e.g. Graženom Ambrišo Sfica takes some of olašu off, then captains the Sešue Sariley throughout reli and cuéndimar, then takes some of vlerëi off, then captains the same ship throughout calo and recoltë, then takes some of yag off, then captains the Sešue Sariley again through želea and išire, then takes some of šoru off, then captains it through froďac and bešana.

This is the theory; in practice things get muddier. Sfica’s family actually lives in Liynnor and he sometimes swaps with another captain there, relinquishing some of his fee, so he can spend some time at home. He has also sometimes been called on to cut his leave short and captain a different vessel, throwing his leave schedule off, of course. If he wants a holiday or is ill, he has to give up an entire trip and relinquish all commission; some of the cost of this can be offset by recruitment/training (see below).

During his leave he still works, mainly on crewing the company’s vessels, ostensibly from an office in Lepcer, or on surveying vessel condition and recommending repairs. He hates this; sometimes he can persuade the company to let him work at recruitment in Liynnor instead. He also does some training for new / prospective captains (which grants him further opportunities to travel, both to Liynnor and on the smaller southern routes).

The company has smaller vessels going further east on the Svetla as well, up the Limeta, up the Meuna as far as Duvocati, and south to Herui on the Xazen. It also runs a line from Čenero to Kereta, in Lapiri, via Lake Como. It jointly operates a portage between Kereta and a tributary of the Limeta, creating what it calls the Lapiri Circle. There are proposals to make a portage line to Sezui on the Aränë, and then downriver to Dobray; the company is having talks with a strange Lapiri organisation to do so ‒ the bizarrely named Daluy Cunculë Yagomië Maramoië (Royal Society of Penguin Hunters), which seems to be a personal creative outlet for the Lapiri king. (King Ružar of Lapiri is a spritely dreamer with a passionately vacant expression, and seems highly excited about all this; he has come up with dozens of drawings for the company to peruse of ever more unlikely routes and systems of unloading and transporting goods from one river system to another, including one drawing of using homing pigeons as pack animals, drawing sleds.)

Sfica hates all this, and can think of nothing worse than being dragged into endless discussions about how to take boats and goods over land. He used to dream of being a sea captain. He has never been at sea, beyond the Gulf of Verdúria, but every time he swings by Arin Island to the Scafiora and feels the ocean swell, smells the saltwater, and calculates the tides in his head, he feels alive, at home. His wife (Nařřema) and his daughter (Tisati) sometimes try to encourage him to leave the company, take them to Verdúria, and get a job on an ocean vessel. They can see how unhappy he is, plying the river for months on end. He doesn’t believe he could do it; he knows the river so well he is afraid of stepping outside of that comfort zone; but there is a wealth of passion and enthusiasm in him that is only unlocked by the sea. He knows the depth of the Gulf of Verdúria square cemisa by square cemisa. When he has met an iliu, a small handful of times as is typical for a river captain, he has pressed them for deep conversations about the precise nature of the continental shelf, the mechanism of the tides, the effects of pressure on the body and on the buoyancy of vessels, ocean currents, fluid dynamics in general… He is not a learned man and does not care to read. But he listens, and learns by ear things far beyond his need as a river captain.

He is taciturn, brash, dismissive and unfriendly to most outsiders, but he has a fast, if occasional, sense of humour, and those who know him well know he is a deeply passionate man who has simply locked his greatest desire (the sea) away from himself because he believes himself unable to break free of his own existence. Probably, somewhere, he is scared. (His childhood friend Claili was lost at sea when she had left Liynnor and then Verdúria for Téllinor, and her ship went down somewhere near Karímia.)

His friend, Captain Meicom Vižo, helps him out by taking his boats from Liynnor to Lepcer. To make this work, Vižo must be happy to take a chunk out of his life going to and from Lepcer. He doesn’t do it every time Sfica asks. Sfica trusts him nevertheless; Sfica gets paid in Lepcer, and Vižo sometimes collects the payment for him (and deposits it in a bank there).
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

Some offhand comments...

It might be realistic to skip a few months of the year— let's say the fall— because the prevailing winds reverse during that time.

You refer to "sailing (tacking)" for the upriver journey, but perhaps this is left over from before my post. :) Tacking is sailing against the wind, and the idea here is that you can get to Aránicer easily with the wind blowing south, off the ocean.

A fast riverboat might well tack to travel faster than the current, but a trading ship isn't in a great hurry.

40 passengers sounds way too much. If it's a cargo ship, five would be a lot. Maybe ten if the idea is that the ship makes port every night and the passengers find inns— but that's going to be expensive.

Re HW's comment, I'm curious now when travel schedules were first used. ZE 3422 corresponds to about 1725 AD, and I do imagine things would be lackadaisical by modern standards, but highly businesslike to contemporaries. "Passengers are requested to arrive by the 5th as the Ship will leave promptly within the week."
User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 4480
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by Raphael »

zompist wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 4:00 pm
Re HW's comment, I'm curious now when travel schedules were first used. ZE 3422 corresponds to about 1725 AD, and I do imagine things would be lackadaisical by modern standards, but highly businesslike to contemporaries. "Passengers are requested to arrive by the 5th as the Ship will leave promptly within the week."
I think I vaguely remember a mention of regularly scheduled horse-drawn carriages between French cities in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

Raphael wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 4:04 pm
zompist wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 4:00 pm
Re HW's comment, I'm curious now when travel schedules were first used. ZE 3422 corresponds to about 1725 AD, and I do imagine things would be lackadaisical by modern standards, but highly businesslike to contemporaries. "Passengers are requested to arrive by the 5th as the Ship will leave promptly within the week."
I think I vaguely remember a mention of regularly scheduled horse-drawn carriages between French cities in Victor Hugo's Les Misérables.
Good, but that story starts in 1815. Schedules were definitely a thing in the 1800s.

I do think a carriage service could operate on a schedule in the 1700s, but I don't know how these things really operated.

Minute hands were only added to watches around 1700.
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

zompist wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 4:00 pm It might be realistic to skip a few months of the year— let's say the fall— because the prevailing winds reverse during that time.
Ok. Ships and captains need a bit of time off each year, I guess.
You refer to "sailing (tacking)" for the upriver journey, but perhaps this is left over from before my post. :) Tacking is sailing against the wind, and the idea here is that you can get to Aránicer easily with the wind blowing south, off the ocean.

A fast riverboat might well tack to travel faster than the current, but a trading ship isn't in a great hurry.
True, but the wind doesn't blow in the right direction for Aránicer - Lepcer, so tacking is probably necessary then.
40 passengers sounds way too much. If it's a cargo ship, five would be a lot. Maybe ten if the idea is that the ship makes port every night and the passengers find inns— but that's going to be expensive.
Ah, ok. From what I've now read on shipping, I can see your point, and think I ought to downgrade the number of passengers on the Sešue Sariley. (Though it is indeed the case on this barge that passengers aren't provided with anywhere to sleep on board; they can sleep on deck if they must, but there are no amenities for them at all. The low price of passage thus goes some way to offset the cost of finding board at port. I think this is just the economic model of this company - by no means general.) Also, possibly, the number of vessels operated by the company (though again, not necessarily)...

However...

According to the Almeopedia, in 3479, there were 553,867 registered visitors to Lake Como. That's 46,155 a month, roughly 11,000 a week, obviously more than a thousand people a day. Not all will come by ship, but if, say, 50% of them do, that's still way more than 500 passengers a day alighting at a port, let alone passing it. (I'm treating Como as if it were a river port here; I know it's not, quite, and the data is skewed as it's a pilgrimage site ‒ but it's the best data we've got.) If the average number of passengers per ship is as low or lower than 10, the port would be handling 50-100 incoming ships per day... This, in its own way, seems too much to me (though maybe not!).

I think, then, by 3479 at least, there should be substantial passenger infrastructure on the river(s). A tradition of hybrid cargo-passenger trips seems potentially likely to me. The economy of Eretald (and Almean agricultural societies in general) seems so river-based ‒ into antiquity... I may be wrong, but I think the volume of potential passengers could be substantial enough that letting only 5-10 paying people sit in between barrels on your 150 tonne boat may not be so shrewd, economically.
Re HW's comment, I'm curious now when travel schedules were first used. ZE 3422 corresponds to about 1725 AD, and I do imagine things would be lackadaisical by modern standards, but highly businesslike to contemporaries. "Passengers are requested to arrive by the 5th as the Ship will leave promptly within the week."
This is a nice expression of what I was trying to articulate. As for the actual history of it, I am sure I remember seeing (these sorts of ‘don't be a day late’) schedules for stagecoaches in 18th century Britain... I'll do more research, at some point! But I like your expression of ‘lacksadaisical by modern standards, but businesslike to contemporaries’.

My instinct is that transport schedules are probably linked to sophisticated banking, insurance and commercial regulation: before that, late delivery of goods can have no real consequence. With more development on that front, consumers have more power to punish producers/importers/vendors for supply issues. Schedules provide (some kind of) agreed terms of delivery; a (very flexible, by modern standards!) contract of sorts entered into by both parties.

Addendum/edit:
Evidence I've found of travel schedules (TBC):
  • 1834
  • Allegedly, mid-17th century (like mine, departure is scheduled by day, rather than by time)
  • 1698: "Whoever is desirous of going between London and York or York and London, Let them Repair to the Black Swan in Holboorn, or the Black Swan in Coney Street, York, where they will be conveyed in a Stage Coach (If God permits), which starts every Thursday at Five in the morning." (same source)
  • 1754: (and this one makes me laugh) "However incredible it may appear, this coach will actually (barring accidents) arrive in London in four days and a half after leaving Manchester." (same source)
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

sasasha wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 5:01 pm According to the Almeopedia, in 3479, there were 553,867 registered visitors to Lake Como. That's 46,155 a month, roughly 11,000 a week, obviously more than a thousand people a day. Not all will come by ship, but if, say, 50% of them do, that's still way more than 500 passengers a day alighting at a port, let alone passing it. (I'm treating Como as if it were a river port here; I know it's not, quite, and the data is skewed as it's a pilgrimage site ‒ but it's the best data we've got.) If the average number of passengers per ship is as low or lower than 10, the port would be handling 50-100 incoming ships per day... This, in its own way, seems too much to me (though maybe not!).

I think, then, by 3479 at least, there should be substantial passenger infrastructure on the river(s). A tradition of hybrid cargo-passenger trips seems potentially likely to me. The economy of Eretald (and Almean agricultural societies in general) seems so river-based ‒ into antiquity... I may be wrong, but I think the volume of potential passengers could be substantial enough that letting only 5-10 paying people sit in between barrels on your 150 tonne boat may not be so shrewd, economically.
It's all too easy to lose track of my own details. :) I see also that Cerei is supposed to be prosperous in 3480 due to the trade with Xurno.

However, I'd take the Como numbers differently. Just as one data point (it was the first thing I thought of googling), in 2019 80% of the tourists visiting Kyoto were Japanese. The great majority of visitors to Como (let's say 75%) would be locals, from Svetla or Cerei. Of the rest, in 3479, quite a few would come by horse, by carriage, or by foot. So maybe 200 arrivals by ship per day? I'd also note that this is fifty years after your narrative and the travel economy would have ramped up considerably.

I think you can have a 40-passenger boat, but it'd be a passenger service. You might try to picture the outline of your boat (110 by 19 feet) on the street outside— you'd literally have the railings lined with passengers, impeding the crew. This site talks about how you can travel on a cargo ship today, and says passengers are limited to 12— and that's on a far larger ship, with 20-30 crew.
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

zompist wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 5:46 pm
sasasha wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2024 5:01 pm According to the Almeopedia, in 3479, there were 553,867 registered visitors to Lake Como. That's 46,155 a month, roughly 11,000 a week, obviously more than a thousand people a day. Not all will come by ship, but if, say, 50% of them do, that's still way more than 500 passengers a day alighting at a port, let alone passing it. (I'm treating Como as if it were a river port here; I know it's not, quite, and the data is skewed as it's a pilgrimage site ‒ but it's the best data we've got.) If the average number of passengers per ship is as low or lower than 10, the port would be handling 50-100 incoming ships per day... This, in its own way, seems too much to me (though maybe not!).

I think, then, by 3479 at least, there should be substantial passenger infrastructure on the river(s). A tradition of hybrid cargo-passenger trips seems potentially likely to me. The economy of Eretald (and Almean agricultural societies in general) seems so river-based ‒ into antiquity... I may be wrong, but I think the volume of potential passengers could be substantial enough that letting only 5-10 paying people sit in between barrels on your 150 tonne boat may not be so shrewd, economically.
It's all too easy to lose track of my own details. :) I see also that Cerei is supposed to be prosperous in 3480 due to the trade with Xurno.

However, I'd take the Como numbers differently. Just as one data point (it was the first thing I thought of googling), in 2019 80% of the tourists visiting Kyoto were Japanese. The great majority of visitors to Como (let's say 75%) would be locals, from Svetla or Cerei. Of the rest, in 3479, quite a few would come by horse, by carriage, or by foot. So maybe 200 arrivals by ship per day? I'd also note that this is fifty years after your narrative and the travel economy would have ramped up considerably.
Fair points! It's still quite a few.
I think you can have a 40-passenger boat, but it'd be a passenger service. You might try to picture the outline of your boat (110 by 19 feet) on the street outside— you'd literally have the railings lined with passengers, impeding the crew. This site talks about how you can travel on a cargo ship today, and says passengers are limited to 12— and that's on a far larger ship, with 20-30 crew.
This is a good exercise - visualizing it - I'm going to draw some boats tomorrow :D

So... On the point of crew numbers, I decided to drop them and drop them until I only had 3-4 for this barge. Obviously, it makes economic sense for a shipping company to take the lowest crew numbers possible; as long as there's enough labour to sail safely, and load and unload at port. Well, what does my particular barge company have in its favour here? Time. It spends a whole night at every port. Either their numbers will be cost-effectively swelled by crews in port to load, or just the 3-4 of them can do all the heavy work given they've got a few hours to do it and a reasonable rest to follow (note the quarterdeck to house the crew).

Re whether or not a boat like this can carry cargo and passengers. You may well be right. But let's see what you think of the drawings. You can fit a lot of stuff in the hold of a 18ft x 110ft, pretty flat-hulled, 5ft draft, 11ft air draft boat: I should calculate it, really, though that's a whole rabbit hole. You're certainly right that if 20 passengers were lined up on each side, each would only have about a metre to themselves. But the boat is much wider than you imply: wider than my living room, by some way. People can cluster. I.... *think*.... a hybrid design is honestly possible. And if so.... Potentially economical. Potentially....

I shall draw, you shall judge! :)

Oh, and, re the modern practice of travelling on container ships and the like. Modern people need cabins, bathrooms etc. They need kitchens to cook for them and medical facilities and all kinds of mumbo jumbo that the more down-and-out people among the middle classes in 1725 or 3422 would quite happily do without...

I got on the back of a sleeper train once in Delhi, headed for Agra. Got on at the back (jumped, actually), realised my ticket was for a carriage near the front. I had ‘cargo’ of my own (two enormous puppets in the shape of a giant bird and an octopus, made out of hoover-tubes and lampshades and such-like). Had to make my way through about 14 carriages stuffed with people ‒ who, incidentally, were very helpful and sort of carefully pumped these puppets up the whole length of the train. The point is a social one, not a technical one: people travel in cramped conditions when the economics calls for it.
hwhatting
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:09 am
Location: Bonn
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by hwhatting »

Stage coaches had schedules earlier, because they were specific:
- They were part of royal / imperial postal systems; that was their original purpose, taking passengers along was a nice earner on top. Government mail was expected to be delivered fast and on a schedule; private mail tagged along - again, to make money to cover the cost of the government service. While the services carried official mail, they were often outsourced to private operators (e.g. to the Thurn und Taxis family in the Holy Roman Empire).
- They had their own infrastructure - specific inns on the routes, where horses would be exchanged, fed, and cared for. That allowed them to be (relatively) fast and keep to the schedule. (The postal roads were also meant to be maintained to allow higher speed, but that was often more theory than fact.)
- They wouldn't carry large cargo, only mail and parcels sent by post, plus the (limited) baggage of the travellers.
So if you want something like that, you need to imagine a service of fast passenger boats that maybe takes mail along, not a cargo ship that lets passengers hop on. Even in our times, cargo ships still frequently wait in ports until they have filled up with cargo for the next leg of the journey*); that would have been the default modus operandi in premodern times.
*) Which, due to containers and modern communications is much faster nowadays than it used to be; an acquaintance of my brother who is a sailor told us that they don't see much of foreign ports because the turnaround times (unloading, finding the next cargo, loading it) have come down to a couple of hours. Before containers and big cranes, loading and unloading could take days; before the telephone and the telegraph, finding the next cargo (or finding out that fitting cargo was waiting in a neigbouring port) could take weeks.
User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 4480
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by Raphael »

Now I wonder, when and why did the robbers along major roads that were so notorious about 300-200 years ago disappear?
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

Thanks, hwhatting, I'm grateful for your input.

I'm going to offer some remarks; I didn't want to get maybe quite as deep into this as I have, really, and what happens on Almea is for zomp to decide. But one thing I'm taking (respectful) issue with is the idea that 'it will be the same way it is on (some bit of) Earth (that I know well)'. Why do we conworld, if not to ask how else might things work, given specific parameters? If zomp had taken the former approach, there would only be one Thinking Kind on Almea, and it would just be a clone of Earth. Etc. I'm sure we all have our examples from our own conworlds.

Also, using historical models is only particularly useful if we can check the various different models that are available to see if our findings are general, on which I take issue with your first point:
hwhatting wrote: Thu Feb 01, 2024 5:16 am Stage coaches had schedules earlier, because they were specific:
- They were part of royal / imperial postal systems; that was their original purpose, taking passengers along was a nice earner on top. Government mail was expected to be delivered fast and on a schedule; private mail tagged along - again, to make money to cover the cost of the government service. While the services carried official mail, they were often outsourced to private operators (e.g. to the Thurn und Taxis family in the Holy Roman Empire).
This information may stand for the Holy Roman Empire - I don't know - but it is incorrect for the history of the stagecoach in Britain. The British Post Office consisted of riders on horseback from its inception in 1635 for 150 years, until John Palmer made the suggestion to swap to stagecoach in 1782 and created the Royal Mail. Stagecoaches for passengers were first recorded in 1610 (the first route was from Edinburgh to Leith, but by mid-century there was a growing nationwide network).

In part, I think this underlines that there isn't just one way for a society's transport infrastructure to develop into the industrial era. Just because in the Holy Roman Empire in the 17th-18th centuries, the post provided a specific context for transport schedules to appear, it is not the case that other factors in other times/climes(/universes!) might not also provide a specific context for similar development of other kinds of transport schedules.
- They had their own infrastructure - specific inns on the routes, where horses would be exchanged, fed, and cared for. That allowed them to be (relatively) fast and keep to the schedule. (The postal roads were also meant to be maintained to allow higher speed, but that was often more theory than fact.)
Sure - and why can't river travel have its own infrastructure, too, if the conditions are right? Specific inns on the routes, animals to hire for hauling, etc. Eretald has made extensive use of riverboats for millennia (in common with other alluvial agricultural cultural areas on Almea*). A riverboat design with a continuous tradition going back to classical times is still stamped on Verdurian coins. We might think, for a second, how much riverboat infrastructure development is represented by the year designation 'ZE 3480'. We might, too, look at the map of Almea: every large nation we know much about until 3480 exists on its major river system; arguably, except Šura, though of course it has its rivers too, though it's more littoral-orientated. (I'm not counting Kebri as large, but even then, its small rivers are important to it: they are quick to copy Verduria in establishing a steamboat service between Kebropol and Laaven, a little upriver.) If the most advanced areas of Almea don't have any specific river transport infrastructure by the early industrial era, I'll be pretty surprised!

Let's also think about the specific rivers in question for a moment. They're rather large. If zomp would be happy to share it here (it was recently put on the Patreon), there's a comparative map of Europe and Ereláe which is useful to consider here. The Svetla, the Eärdur and the Meuna are enormous rivers, each comparable to the Volga (and those three all drain in the same channel, at whose mouth sits Verdúria city). If you have this great whacking thing slap bang in the middle of your territory, it is your infrastructure.
- They wouldn't carry large cargo, only mail and parcels sent by post, plus the (limited) baggage of the travellers.
Sure, stagecoaches are small (though the Franco-Iberian Diligence / Diligencia was a bit larger and held a specific luggage deck, but still, nothing like a barge!).
So if you want something like that, you need to imagine a service of fast passenger boats that maybe takes mail along, not a cargo ship that lets passengers hop on.
I don't follow: there can't be cargo ships that let passengers hop on, because stagecoaches didn't carry large cargo?

(And I doubt correspondence in Eretald generally goes by boat, unless it is not very urgent. A rider can carry a fair amount of letters, and can go anywhere, and is usually going to be faster. Zomp, not sure if you've written yet about the Verdurian postal service? Though I note that it has one.)
Even in our times, cargo ships still frequently wait in ports until they have filled up with cargo for the next leg of the journey*); that would have been the default modus operandi in premodern times.
*) Which, due to containers and modern communications is much faster nowadays than it used to be; an acquaintance of my brother who is a sailor told us that they don't see much of foreign ports because the turnaround times (unloading, finding the next cargo, loading it) have come down to a couple of hours. Before containers and big cranes, loading and unloading could take days; before the telephone and the telegraph, finding the next cargo (or finding out that fitting cargo was waiting in a neigbouring port) could take weeks.
This definitely gave me food for thought, for which I'm grateful!

Again, though, let me take this back to the specific parameters this has grown in:

Why would a company want to run a barge service from the relative backwater of Lepcer 1000km to Verdúria, rather than just buy things from their neighbours?
  • They want specific quality goods that are not found in nearer ports. (Check)
  • They have specific goods that are not provided to Verdúria by nearer ports. (Check - cf the Xazengri trade)
  • It's physically possible to do it and come back alive. (Check, if you have the right kinds of boats.)
  • You can make a profit doing so. (I don't know as it's a very complex/unanswerable question when Almea is a text-based simulation that by its nature lacks deep/complex economic models for us to actually test, but taking on day-passengers is only going to help with this.)
The cargo is probably mostly intended for each end-to-end destination. If you can't sell it in Verdúria city, you probably won't be able to sell it anywhere... It has one of the biggest markets in the world, and I imagine there are plenty of wholesalers ready to buy up cargo that isn't specifically spoken for around the city. You have contacts, correspondence, and three months between visits to the city to work out what you're going to buy.

If you leave Lepcer without a full cargo, that's no biggie. You have a month to buy some interesting stuff to sell along the way. You can also take on passengers instead: at least on certain sections of the river, there are hundreds of pilgrims seeking passage every day, and that's just the pilgrims. Hey, why don't you take on a few passengers anyway? They're willing to part with money just to sit on top of your deck, on your cargo if necessary, with literally nothing that you have to do to look after them.

With the cargo, it's the same story for the way back: if you don't buy a full shipsworth of stuff in Verduria over the few days you're there, you will have between 30 and 50 more days to try to buy piecemeal from ports along the way. And again there are the people who are willing to just sit on your ship with no input in all weathers, simply because they need a way to get from A-B; you can take as many or as few as you like or as feels convenient for you and your crew -- just like Stagecoach owners allowed people to sit on the top of the Stagecoaches for a reduced price.

____

I hope in all I'm managing to persuade you that your arguments, while interesting, do not preclude the development of alternative models given alternative parameters. On what actually happens in Almea, of course I defer to Zompist. Thank you for an interesting discussion!

____

*Almea seems big on enormous river systems, and Almean Thinking Kinds on living on them. Why? I don't know -- a few potential factors: it's warmer than here; its geological history is quite different (no evidence of ice ages); I'm no expert in tectonics but it seems in a splitting apart phase rather more than a smashing together phase, so it has lots of these massive plains; and of course its sentient beings come from and remain particularly at home in the water...
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

Some pictures, to scale, to illustrate what I was imagining:

Image

Image

Don’t worry, the 2s are suggestions of where to put your tun barrels (or Verdurian equivalent), not people. ;)
sasasha
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:41 am

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by sasasha »

I also did this.

Image

I’m not a sailor or someone who knows much about sailing. This double lateen rig was inspired by two things: zomp’s drawings of the corona, and the rig of the 18th century Russian double boat. It has a pair of leeboards (currently deployed on starboard) to stay upright in open waters without a keel - the corona has an outrigger for the same purpose, but I think this vessel needs something more compact so it can also go in relatively narrower channels upriver. Thames barges have leeboards, and they were also around in ancient China. (They essentially mean your boat has a shallow draught for river travel, and won’t capsize at sea.)

Does this seem like the kind of thing you’d see going up and down the Svetla?
Last edited by sasasha on Fri Feb 02, 2024 6:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
hwhatting
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:09 am
Location: Bonn
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by hwhatting »

@sasasha: My point is not that there is would be no river transport that lets people hop on and off; my point is that it wouldn't have schedules.
What would be the need to bind your cargo ships to a schedule, instead of waiting until there is cargo?*) This is only needed from when you have big industrial supply chains, where you have a regular output at one point that needs to be at another point in a certain rhythm. My understanding is that we're not there yet at this point of Eretaldian history.
Now, if you want a scheduled passenger service, that makes sense; but that would be the equivalent of the stagecoach, specialising in carrying people, their baggage, and some small, urgent freight. Maybe not express mail, if horse couriers are faster, but in premodern times, waterborne transport is always cheaper and more effective than land transport, so non-urgent mail could go on them as well.
Good to know about the British system; but it doesn't really change my point - stagecoaches relied on a specific infrastructure, and were made for relative speed, and they didn't carry large cargoes.
My understanding of Almea is that, despite the additional intelligent beings and some magic, it is still subject to the same social and economic forces as Earth; I don't see either the viability or necessity for a scheduled cargo service before the steam engine and industrialisation.
*) When you send a cargo ship from (say) Žesifo to Verduria, you want it to be there as soon as possible, and then have your ship back as soon as possible. Passengers are a nice side money, but you won't spoil them by promising a schedule. When you have space and are ready to add and deliver cargo on the way, you have agents in the concerning ports who take care of that; they tell you where and when such cargos will be available by courier (every premodern trading house had agents in their ports of call who would inform them about opportunities and other news by correspondence.) Again, you go by that intelligence and don't bind yourself to a schedule. When you do tramp service (take up a cargo here, bring it to its destination, load a new cargo there, go to the next port) you don't want to bind yourself to a schedule, you want to be able to go to whatever port your new cargo is for, up and down the river, Again, my take on this is that a scheduled cargo line is something that appeals to us moderns, but doesn't make sense in a pre-industrial, pre-steamship age.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

Some replies to both of you...

First, I like seeing sasasha's drawings. You're developing an appealing illlustration style!

Second, as a bit of Word of God: I don't think the mixture of cargo + 40 passengers would work. Nor 30. :( I suggest thinking that a particular boat would concentrate on cargo or on passenger service.

Some particular reasoning:
* It really would be cramped, especially for multi-week trips.
* Crews really would not appreciate civilians lounging uselessly every few feet. Whatever their duties onboard, it would impede them or actually be a danger. This doesn't come up so much in a railroad carriage!
* HW's point about the needs of cargo ships are well taken. In 3422 it's likely that your cargo takes a few days to find/load.
* Premodern travel is generally very expensive. As I noted here, a traveler can count on spending several times the daily wage each day. Tourism, even pilgrimage, is a middle- to upper-class experience...the poor are walking.

This isn't to say a cargo ship wouldn't take passengers. Some extra coins won't go amiss. But their job is the cargo, and I think they'd limit it pretty severely. I'd also note that a time-honored way to get around is to actually work on the ship. It's also possible that e.g. at the height of pilgrimage season, boats take on more passengers than usual, at least for certain legs of the journey, e.g. Aránicer-Liynnor. I expect most travel would be a few cities along, not the whole river.

Given the many reasons for travel, there would be passenger ships probably with cabins or benches on board. This is probably how most of those pilgrims to Como travel. A longer trip (e.g. Verduria to Como) probably provides food; otherwise it's port-to-port, with just beverage service. :) (You don't want cranky passengers fainting from thirst, but it does mean providing barrels of ale.) (Or water of course. River water is potable if you don't think about it closely. And don't draw it just downstream from a settlement.)

Mixed modes are possible too. Maybe you build an extra two or four benches in the crew area and share the crew's food.

I don't think the river transport in Eretald is that unearthly! Rivers are key to earthly transportation and city placement too. Eretald is perhaps more comparable to China than to Europe, in that there's just two major river systems so you can get almost anywhere by river.

As for industrial cargo service, it really depends on what year we're looking at. 3480 is comparable to 1800, which is well into the industrial revolution. You already have steam engines and steam-powered paddleships. On the other hand, businesses are still sole proprietorships with a single location so it's not a full operation. Things would be far less advanced fifty years before.

Finally, I'd note that schedules can be aspirational or even promotional documents! Even a pure cargo service might like to advertise its experience and reliability. I think sasasha's ship is based in Cerei, which means it's probably taking Xurnese goods downstream and Verdurian upstream, thus loading most of its cargo at the two ends.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: River transport in Eretald

Post by zompist »

Oh, and I'm no ship designer either. Your designs look fine, though some questions:

* Why is there a meter of space between the lower flooring and the bottom of the boat? If it's cargo space it needs to be accessible.
* The mast seems like it should be thicker.
* The bottom deck would be extremely grim and dark, no? No portholes? Maybe partial grid ceilings?
* Maybe a short raised section at the back? The rudderman would probably appreciate getting a better view, and that could provide a captain's cabin.
Post Reply