CHARACTERISTIC AND PERFORMANCE OF IWT

In general, inland navigation is a slow mode that has its strength in the high payloads
of vessels. Thus, IWT is suitable for all kinds of mass goods, both liquid and dry bulk.
Another main feature is the relatively low network forming capacity. The backbone of
IWT is represented by natural navigable rivers, supplemented by man-made canals
connecting the most important rivers with each other.
Operational costs per tonne-kilometre are low compared to other surface transport
modes. According to the UN, IWT costs are as low as one sixth of road costs and between
one third and a half of rail costs.
The total cost advantage of IWT depends much on the length of transport on
waterways and the distance of the consignee to or from the transhipment point. Last but not
least there are different types of transhipment, closely related to the commodity as well as to
port facilities and these result in different costs. In unfavourable situations the costs of
transhipment are double the waterway transport costs.
On the other hand, many examples show that intermodal transport with inland
navigation is efficient. Thus, even with additional costs in intermodal transport, as compared
to direct road transport, the very low costs of IWT more than compensate the additional costs
of transhipment and road haulage if the main leg is long enough.
With regard to flexibility, IWT is at a disadvantage because its most common ship type,
the self-propelled vessel, is built for certain commodity types. In addition, IWT is clearly less
flexible than road, rail and maritime transport: in case of problems along the route, the vessel
can rarely be re-routed.
Transport distance
There is no minimum or critical distance in IWT. If the loading and unloading sites are
close to the water, even a short distance is cost-effective and cheaper than other modes.
Transhipment does imply higher costs; especially where the transhipment of heavy goods is
followed by increasing transport costs for pre haul and end haul.
Conclusions
It can be summarised that the important advantage of IWT is its large capacity and
therefore the ability to carry all sorts of bulk goods at minimum transportation costs per t-km.
This is also the case for large numbers of containers covering general cargo.
The main shortcoming of IWT is its limited geographic scope, which causes additional
costs of transhipment and further road or rail haulage to link the waterways to shippers or
freight storage sites. Furthermore, on some inland waterways there are weather
dependencies, which may have an impact on its reliability.
To compensate the lack of network forming in inland navigation requires a better
degree of organisation of the transport chain. IWT must be more integrated in logistic
processes. There are many chances to compete with single road transport by forming
intermodal transport chains with suitable loading units but this requires first of all the
willingness of shippers and forwarders to change their well working single mode concepts.

IWT in comparison to other modes

Characteristics

Inland
Waterway

Rail

Raod

Air

EU15: 156000
km

EU15: 51000 km
Motorway +
270000 km
Highways

Myanmar: 6915
km

Myanmar: 5844
km

Myanmar:
129000 km
Motorway +
19500 km
Highways

Commodity
type; mode of
appearance

dry bulk, liquid

bulk, container;
specially bulky
shipments;
dangerous goods

all except
perishables,
container, swap
bodies

all

all except
dangerous goods

Shipment size

large, depending
on waterway
class and ship
configuration

train loads,
wagon loads,
depending on
train length

up to carry 28
tonnes

small

Commercial
speed

Slowest mode

Medium mode

Fast

overnight for
most relations

Punctuality

sporadic
congestion
problems only

predominantly
night traffic,
scheduled
services

guaranteed
delivery time

overnight
transport,
guaranteed
delivery time

Reliability
(problems)

major
meteorological
Climate: high, low
congestion,
problems, labour
water levels
accidents, labour
conflicts
conflict problems

minor
meteorological
problems, labour
conflicts

Safety

high

Medium mode

major problem

limited

Energy
consumption/
emissions

lowest / lowest
(difference
between and
downstream and
upstream)

medium/
emissions
depending on
type of traction

high / high

high / high

EU15: 30000 km

Network size

FLEET
The technical and organisational parameters of the ships in operation are decisive
factors concerning the competitiveness of inland navigation. They refer to both intermodal and
intra-modal competition. Above all, competition is determined by the costs, which are
influenced by various parameters like those listed in the following:
1) size and ships capacity utilisation ratio
2) draught or draught restrictions, respectively
3) ship technology, equipment, age and condition of the ship
4) flag, i.e. registration of the ship
5) operator structure (independent ship owner or shipping line)
6) operation modus, e.g. operation time of 14, 18 or 24 hours
7) crew structure (number, qualification of the crewmembers)

Power Vessels

Non-Powered Vessels

Passenger / Cargo

118

Cargo vessel / Tug

24

Oil Barge

Ptug

17

Poontoons

30

Pilot tug

17

Fresh water carrier

Miscellaeous

Cargo Barge

126

IWT fleet in Myanmar (ref: Myanmar Market Scan)

Self-propelled cargo ships (extracted from Europe IWT)

Tonnage capacity at a draught of

Vessel type

Dimension (L x B)
1.50 m 2.00 m 2.50 m 2.80 m 3.50 m

Large river motor ship

110.00 m x 11.40 m

600 t 1200 t 1800 t 2100 t 3000 t

Europe ship

85.00 m x 9.50 m

570 t

930 t 1350 t

Johann Welker

80.00 m x 9.50 m

600 t

940 t 1280 t

Gustav Koenigs (extended)

80.00 m x 8.20 m

500 t

800 t 1100 t

Gustav Koenigs

67.00 m x 8.20 m

420 t

670 t 1000 t

Kempenaar

50.00 m x 6.60 m

400 t

600 t

Peniche

38.50 m x 5.00 m

250 t

300 t 400 t *

BM-500
56.50 m x 7.60 m
*) with a maximum draught of 2.20 m.

415 t

475 t

650 t
-

Pushed barges (extracted from Europe IWT)

Tonnage capacity at a draught of

Barge type

Dimension (L x B)
2.00 m

2.50 m

2.80 m

4.00 m

Europe Type I

70.00 m x 9.50 m

940 t

1240 t

Europe Type II

76.50 m x 11.40 m

1250 t

1660 t

1850 t

Europe Type IIa

76.50 m x 11.40 m

1140 t

1530 t

1800 t

2800 t

Europe Type IIb

76.50 m x 11.00 m

1100 t

1500 t

GSP-54

54.00 m x 11.00 m

900 t

SP-65

65.00 m x 8.20 m

900 t

SP-35

32.50 m x 8.20 m

415 t

LASH

18.70 m x 9.50 m

250 t

335 t

385 t

See-Bee

29.75 m x 10.70 m

490 t

640 t

730 t

Interlichter

38.25 m x 11.40 m

585 t

775 t

900 t

OBP-500

45.50 m x 9.60 m

480 t

River / Sea Vessels

The operation of river/sea ships enables the direct transport of goods from an inland
port over an inland waterway and sea stretch to another river or seaport. Such direct transport
eliminates the expensive, time-consuming and damage-risky transhipment in the intermediate
seaport.
Comparison between requirements and measurements of IWT and sea traffic

Special requirements set up for the operation

in inland waterways

Special requirements set up for the operation

in maritime (coastal) waters

Restrictions of:
1) length
2) breadth
3) height
4) draught
Additional equipment as for instance:
1) stern anchor
2) river radar
3) rate of turn indicator
4) navigation light as required by Flag
Increased manoeuvrability
Stop ability in downstream nabigation
Elevating wheelhouse

Longitudinal strength
Stability
Sea-keeping abilities
Freeboard
Tonnage measurement
Equipment and facilities as for instance:
1) life-saving equipment
2) nautical equipment
3) hospital on board
4) lashing equipment and fittings
5) spare parts stock on board

Folding masts
Prescribed noise level outside
Application of national rules and regulations

Application of international rules and regulatons

Application of approved certified materials

Main particulars of some typical Eastern Europe river-sea ships

Type

Volga 1

Volga 2

Rossiya

139.9

117.5

96.3

119.2

86.9

16.6

16.6

13.6

13.4

12.2

4.5

4.4

5.2

3.8

2.7

5500

4480

3730

3100

1230

2 x 970

2 x 970

n.a.

2 x 640

2 x 440

Speed (kn)

11

n.a.

n.a.

10.5

10.8

No of TEU

140

104

122

~ 100

54

Loa (m)
Bmax (m)
d (m)
DWT (tons)
Output (kW)

Sormovskiy

A general side elevation and deck layout of Sormovskiy Class

ST

Main particulars of some typical river-sea ships designed in Germany

Type

Rhein

Weser

Elbe

Cargo-Liner

Eurocoaster

Loa (m)

87.9

88.45

82.5

79.9

81.4

Bmax (m)

12.9

11.35

11.35

9.5

5.5

4.94

4.79

2.99

3.1

Air draught (m)

12.6

12.6

9.3

4.6

4.5

DWT (tons)

3750

3000

2590

1360

1500

Output (kW)

1500

1125

1350

n.a.

700

Speed (knots)

11.7

11.5

12.8

n.a.

n.a.

TEU capacity

176

118

118

n.a.

75

Draught (m)

A general and side elevation and deck layout of Eurocoaster Class

General framework conditions and interactions

The competitiveness of the fleet is considerably determined by the costs. Costs are all
dependent upon the available loading draught (and/or bridge clearance for container
transport) as well as the size of the operating vessel and therefore mainly on the infrastructure
conditions.
Principally, additional competitive advantages can be realised with further specialised
vessels (high degree of adaptation to a certain navigation area and/or commodity). Due to
mostly needed expensive and long-term investments and the dedicated character, this
strategy can basically only be applied in case of long-term partnerships between operator and
shipper.
Modernisation and innovation
A further clear characteristic of all of the IWT fleet is the long lifetime of vessels. This
has both advantages and drawbacks. Whilst investment for buying a ship can be extended
over decades, the long lifetime also hinders fleet innovation. This applies both to size (scale
enlargement) and the implementation of technological innovations. On balance,
disadvantages arise from competition with other modes.

An optimal use of the existing infrastructure is of crucial importance. In this context, a

targeted and further adaptation of the vessels up to the limits of the existing infrastructure
conditions will strengthen the competitive position of inland navigation.
On account of the long lifetime of vessels, modernisation and innovation aspects have
the highest priority. A considerable share of the present fleets has to catch up in terms of
modernisation. Promising approaches to solve these problems are systematic research
activities, as well as targeted financial means and incentives. Against the background of the
large number of small and medium financially restricted single-vessel-operators, these
aspects are of vital importance.
INTERFACES: PORTS AND TRANSHIPMENT SITES
Transhipment interfaces are crucial parts of almost any IWT chain, and often determine
the success or failure of the entire supply chain. For the purpose of the study three different
types of inland ports have been determined with regard to their specific role, activities and
special services they provide:
1) Conventional inland ports providing ship-to-shore transhipment services almost
exclusively to inland vessels (no calls of river-sea ships), using prevailingly traditional
Lo-Lo (vertical) transhipment technologies for various kinds of dry cargoes including
containers (ports not specialised in some unconventional commodity or technology).
2) River-Sea ports as inland ports (located deeply in the hinterland) on major waterways
providing water transhipment services both to inland and river-sea vessels running
directly to the port of call located overseas (sea port or another river-sea port on other
waterway).
3) Deep-sea ports with a considerable role in inland navigation services and maritime
shipping (deep-sea, short-sea, coastal) and acting as an interface between all inland
modes (inland navigation, road and rail, and possibly pipeline)
i)

ii)

A terminal (end station for a certain means of transport) is a part of a port or a

separate transhipment/temporary storage entity dealing with special kinds of
commodities, as e.g. oil terminal, grain terminal, container terminal or Ro-Ro
terminal. The terminal itself is in no case the final destination of a shipment but just
the place where goods change the mode of transport. A port can contain a number
of (specialised) terminals.
A transhipment site is an appropriately arranged and fitted, usually compact
location on the waterway bank (wet transhipment site) used by industrial
companies or service operators for transhipment of cargoes transported to and
from the site by inland vessel. Transhipment sites are not necessarily called ports.

RIVER INFORMATION SERVICES (RIS) SYSTEM

Modern logistics management requires extensive information exchange between the
supply chain partners. River Information Services have to be seen as a major step forward,
turning inland navigation into a transparent, reliable, flexible and easy-to-access transport
mode.
RIS are defined as a concept for harmonised information services to support traffic and
transport management in inland navigation, including interfaces to other transport modes.
The development of RIS makes inland navigation attractive to modern supply chain
management. In addition to the meaning of RIS for commercial logistics actors, RIS have
proven to be invaluable for waterway authorities (e.g. supporting traffic management tasks,
dangerous goods monitoring, etc.).

River Information Services (RIS) are expected to produce four types of strategic benefits
1)
2)
3)
4)

increased competitiveness of inland navigation;

optimised use of public infrastructures and funds;
improved safety;
increased environmental protection

RECOMMENDATION
Market: integrate IWT into logistics chains
The success of the inland navigation system in new and more demanding markets
depends on its integration into and adaptation to the requirements of the entire door-to door
logistics chain. In this context, several measures are needed like the further development of
harmonised intermodal loading units (ILUs), incentives for shippers to apply modal shift in
combined transport.
Further co-operation with logistics service providers, between IWT and rail and road
operators as well as within the sector could also support this aim. The increased usage of
information- and communication technologies supported through the implementation of RIS
within all actors and their improved networking will contribute to the integration of IWT into
intermodal logistic chains.