Railways and supply

[cathar1244]

Looking for comments from scenario designers.

TOAW and supply -- all railways are equal in TOAW. So ...

... in a scenario at about 10km hex scale with units as divisions and brigades, time is World War II --

is it realistic to have single-track lines in the scenario? That is, could a single track line supply several divisions engaged in mechanized warfare?

I'm thinking a minimum of two tracks is a better choice for TOAW supply purposes under the conditions mentioned, but would enjoy seeing what others think.

Cheers

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

Looking for comments from scenario designers.

TOAW and supply -- all railways are equal in TOAW. So ...

... in a scenario at about 10km hex scale with units as divisions and brigades, time is World War II --

is it realistic to have single-track lines in the scenario? That is, could a single track line supply several divisions engaged in mechanized warfare?

I'm thinking a minimum of two tracks is a better choice for TOAW supply purposes under the conditions mentioned, but would enjoy seeing what others think.

Cheers

This is from James Dunnigan's 1971 Korea wargame designer notes concerning the difficulty of cutting rail supply by air:

"A thirty-six division CCF army can be supplied by as little as one train of 50 cars a day."

[Lobster]

Right. It takes surprisingly little in the way of rail transport to supply an army. But if you want to move it then it can take weeks and many, many trains.

[cathar1244]

Thanks for the comments. I did find this.

In the technological conditions of 1939, an astonishing ‘1,600 lorries would be required to equal the capacity of just one double-track railway line’. Worse, trucks use up vast amounts of road space and require more fuel and people than an equivalent railway, greatly elongating the army’s ‘train’, which meant that in relation to payload, ‘the railway maintained its superiority at distances of over 200 miles…however great the effort, there was little chance that motor vehicles would relieve, much less replace, trains as Germany’s main form of transportation in the foreseeable future.’

and,

Rail transportation was expected to be the backbone of the transportation system in the post-OVERLORD period. Transportation Corps railway planners believed that by D plus 120 there would be in operation an extensive railway system, consisting mainly of double-track lines, which would be based on Cherbourg and the Brittany ports of Quiberon Bay and Lorient and would extend eastward as far as Dreux and Chartres. The planning staff also drew up plans for subsequent utilization of rail lines up to and beyond the German border.

Dunno. For NW Europe in 1944, double track lines are probably the best to represent in the game, although some single track lines could be added if game supply mechanics call for it.

Cheers

[Lobster]

In TOAW there are only rail lines. No difference between double track, single track, narrow gauge, standard gauge or wide gauge.

[cathar1244]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

In TOAW there are only rail lines. No difference between double track, single track, narrow gauge, standard gauge or wide gauge.

Yep. But in RL, they are not the same. So the scenario designer has to assess if a particular line "fits" the scenario, given what supply issues may surface in the scenario during playtesting. Thus my question. We've had plenty of people here design WWII scenarios with rail lines. I assume they choose the rail lines to depict based upon a method of some kind, and am trying to determine if there is consensus on what kind of rail lines were typical for support of corps to army scale mechanized operations.

The quotes I found point in the direction of double-track lines. My guess is that those were easier to manage rail traffic with. No doubt, single track lines would be used if nothing else was available.

The other thing nagging at me is an old bit of advice from the TOAW manual that suggested keeping road and rail networks simpler vice complex to avoid Elmer confusion. Seems none of the design decisions are cut and dried.

Cheers

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

The other thing nagging at me is an old bit of advice from the TOAW manual that suggested keeping road and rail networks simpler vice complex to avoid Elmer confusion. Seems none of the design decisions are cut and dried.

Obsolete advice. Ralph has optimized the path finding code so that is no longer necessary.

[Lobster]

I doubt finding double track lines in Western Europe would be much of a problem unless you are looking at the Alps or the central region of Italy. Single and narrow gauge there for good reason. Once you get into the U.S.S.R. and the Baltic states it's a completely different story. Looking at a current map would be of little service. [;)]

Regardless, supply can easily be provided on a narrow gauge or single track line. Limiting supply based only on double track lines would be misleading.

Bottom line it's up to the guy making the scenario and what he is trying to accomplish. Heck in WitE there are no roads at all I do believe.

[Curtis Lemay]

Remember that single track lines handle two-way traffic via bypasses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_loop

[cathar1244]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

The other thing nagging at me is an old bit of advice from the TOAW manual that suggested keeping road and rail networks simpler vice complex to avoid Elmer confusion. Seems none of the design decisions are cut and dried.

Obsolete advice. Ralph has optimized the path finding code so that is no longer necessary.

Thank you! Nice to know.

Check on the bypasses for single-track railways.

Lobster: Yeah, will just to make some choices and then see how it washes out in playtest.

Thanks all for the comments.

Cheers

[cathar1244]

For anyone interested, these map series at 1/500,000 cover much of Europe and show rail lines as well as indicating whether they are single- or multiple-tracked lines.

https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/ ... ed_forces/

https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/europe_500k/

Cheers

[Lobster]

This should be a good read for you. [;)]

http://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/umrcourses ... 20WWII.doc

[cathar1244]

Thanks, I'll give that document a read.

Cheers