The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: Early Ship Ferry Loading Time vs Comfort Level  (Read 1808 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dannyman

  • *
  • Posts: 182
Early Ship Ferry Loading Time vs Comfort Level
« on: August 10, 2013, 12:46:15 AM »
So, here's what raises an eyebrow in 1814:

Paddle Ship loading time: 30-40m loading / Max comfortable 43:30
Brig passenger berths: 45-1:30m loading / Max comfortable 57:15
East Indiaman passenger berths: 2h-3h loading / Max comfortable 2h

Loading Time becomes Wait Time, not journey time, right?

What happens for layovers?  Say, a trip from Town A -> Town B -> Town C?  Do the through passengers disembark and wait?  Or do they wait on the ship?  This would imply that it is practically impossible to be a comfortable through passenger . . .

Online jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 18425
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Early Ship Ferry Loading Time vs Comfort Level
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2013, 11:21:08 AM »
Loading time does indeed become wait time rather than journey time, but only loading time for the passengers that are actually loading: loading time for other passengers joining at later stops is part of the journey time. I do not think that many passenger ships in this era did make multi-point journeys like this, did they? One would generally have ships running single point to point journeys.

Offline Jando

  • *
  • Posts: 455
Re: Early Ship Ferry Loading Time vs Comfort Level
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2013, 09:00:36 AM »
Loading time does indeed become wait time rather than journey time, but only loading time for the passengers that are actually loading: loading time for other passengers joining at later stops is part of the journey time. I do not think that many passenger ships in this era did make multi-point journeys like this, did they? One would generally have ships running single point to point journeys.

Oh, I don't think one can say that. Point-to-point happens for ferry services or the real ocean liners, like Plymouth or Hamburg to New York. But many ships, even larger passenger and mixed cargo ships had multi-stops, esp. when servicing coastal waters or archipelagos. A well known historical example in Europe is probably the Norwegian Hurtigruten.

Quote from the Hurtigruten history found here: http://www.hurtigruten.co.uk/utils/About-Hurtigruten/History/Hurtigrutens-history/: 1893: The first Hurtigruten voyage departs Trondheim for Hammerfest, via 11 harbours.

"Via 11 harbours", in Simutrans Experimental that would amount to 12x2 hours loading time for a one-way trip, i.e. 24 hours, i.e. roughly 4 months of game time for loading time alone! Actual travel time comes ontop of that. :)

Edited to add that also in modern times multi-stop itinaries are quite common, like these huge container ships picking up cargo in 4 or 5 Asian ports for Europe and then in Europe calling port at 4 or 5 stops.

Online jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 18425
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Early Ship Ferry Loading Time vs Comfort Level
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2013, 10:14:03 AM »
But, in those cases, the passengers/cargo really would have to wait whilst all the other passengers and cargo loaded at each port, would they not? I do not think that the loading times are unrealistic in themselves.