Bantam pusher monthly cost is >10x (~500¢/mo) comparable vehicles (~40¢/mo)

[freddyhayward]

see title

[Matthew]

This is where the pakset's balancing spreadsheet comes into its own.

Looking at the relevant entry, we can see that it was classified as a PassengerShip with a crew of 50.

A Pathé newsreel about the first bantam pusher, helpfully posted by Freahk earlier this year, specifically mentions that they only required a crew of one.

Changing the crew classification to Single cuts the monthly fixed cost by 98%! However, the wages were classified as Ship, which is the lowest possible level. I don't think the captain of a 20th century diesel tug (I know it doesn't tug, but economically it's a tug!) would be paid like an ordinary seaman on a sailing ship. So I set the wages at the same level as a TruckDriver in this pull request.

[freddyhayward]

Was the crew of one unique to bantam pushers compared to other tug boats or boats of similar size and role?

[Matthew]

Was the crew of one unique to bantam pushers compared to other tug boats or boats of similar size and role?

Yes, I think so. Firstly, the newsreel mentions the crew of one as though it was something exceptional. Secondly, looking at some trade websites and forums, it seems that many harbour and (large) river tugs today still have multi-member (sometimes quite large) crews. E.g. the Maritime UK website says harbour tugs typically have a crew of four. It would have been higher when steam engines required stokers for fuel and frequent cleaning. Thirdly, river boats used to be economic lifeblood of the town where I live (with a church and other facilities for boat men) and not only was there more than one man, there were often whole families living on the boats.