Can the map of Australia be improved?

[esteban]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, 330 tons per day = 9900 supply per month. Now the question is was 1300 trucks the total possible? What if the Allied player sends 13,000 trucks?

I remind you that this is 1300 trucks arriving PER DAY. The total number of trucks on the whole road between Alice Springs and Darwin would have been much higher. The distance is such that it would take at least 2-3 days, driving the same trucks in shifts, to make the trip.

So lets say at least 4000 trucks on the road at any one time. Perhaps with the average truck running 20 hours a day, with 2 driver shifts. Average speed on the road would be 20-30 miles per hour most likely. This was before people built nice, smooth high speed freeways (well, except in Germany). Then there would have been at least a couple thousand trucks down for maintenance at any given time.

So I would say you are talking about at least 6000 trucks involved in the whole effort, with at least 15000 drivers. And at perhaps 5000 people keeping the trucks gassed up and running, and the road in shape, and another 5000 loading and unloading trucks and warehousing the stuff going onto or off of the trucks at either end. This is not to mention the increased labor force that the rail running to Alice Springs and from the narrow guage terminus to Darwin would be needing. This puts a huge labor burden on what had practically been a wilderness before the war.

If the roadway could take it, you would have to multiply all this by a factor of nearly 10X to run 10X as many trucks.

At that point, the your are talking about a force of perhaps a quarter of a million men, just to keep that road moving. Considering Oz had a population of about 7 million then, that is a STUPENDOUS labor burden on the country. Proportinally, it would be as if the U.S. went to war, and the population of New York City had to be relocated to the Midwest, to drive trucks from Kansas City to Denver.

Even if the trucks could be freed up from other theaters (Brits needed them, Americans needed them, Aussies needed them for everything else they were driving around, the Russians got +- 300,000 trucks from us through lend lease, and they loved them, India needed them, the "Burma Road" needed them, the Free French, Brazilians, Canadians, Kiwis....) the labor demand that you are talking about would so large that the Aussies would have had to demobilize half their combat units, ships and squadrons to supply the manpower.

[Blackhorse]

Original: Mogami
There is a limit to the number of bases. In may be in fact that the connection to Darwin was required for other then geographical accuraccy.

Two questions:

1. How many "free slots" are there for additional bases in the game?

2. Which Alaskan and Canadian bases are currently in the game?

[ I'm hoping to feed akbrown the info necessary to do a similar map revision for Alaska and Canada. I know how the current rail system looks in game, thanks to Spooky's excellent fansite. But his map doesn't show all the bases. I've got a pretty good idea of how the Alaskan map *should* look to accurately reflect the potential / limitations of the inland ALCAN highway; and Alaska's dependence on sea-supply. I think it can be done without adding too many new bases . . . but I'm still waiting for my CD to arrive [:(], and I don't want to wait however much longer that may be.]

[stubby331]

The distance is such that it would take at least 2-3 days, driving the same trucks in shifts, to make the trip.

FYI, references that I read concerning time taken mention a 4 day road trip from Alice springs north (one way of course)....

For more info, have alook at this URL from the Australian war memorial website

http://www.awm.gov.au/database/collection.asp

From here you can search & view the complete photo database of the Australian War Memorial.

Click on Collections search.

Type in Alice springs in the search engine, Then Select WW2 in the conflicts drop down box, then click search....

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: esteban

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, 330 tons per day = 9900 supply per month. Now the question is was 1300 trucks the total possible? What if the Allied player sends 13,000 trucks?

I remind you that this is 1300 trucks arriving PER DAY. The total number of trucks on the whole road between Alice Springs and Darwin would have been much higher. The distance is such that it would take at least 2-3 days, driving the same trucks in shifts, to make the trip.

So lets say at least 4000 trucks on the road at any one time. Perhaps with the average truck running 20 hours a day, with 2 driver shifts. Average speed on the road would be 20-30 miles per hour most likely. This was before people built nice, smooth high speed freeways (well, except in Germany). Then there would have been at least a couple thousand trucks down for maintenance at any given time.

So I would say you are talking about at least 6000 trucks involved in the whole effort, with at least 15000 drivers. And at perhaps 5000 people keeping the trucks gassed up and running, and the road in shape, and another 5000 loading and unloading trucks and warehousing the stuff going onto or off of the trucks at either end. This is not to mention the increased labor force that the rail running to Alice Springs and from the narrow guage terminus to Darwin would be needing. This puts a huge labor burden on what had practically been a wilderness before the war.

If the roadway could take it, you would have to multiply all this by a factor of nearly 10X to run 10X as many trucks.

At that point, the your are talking about a force of perhaps a quarter of a million men, just to keep that road moving. Considering Oz had a population of about 7 million then, that is a STUPENDOUS labor burden on the country. Proportinally, it would be as if the U.S. went to war, and the population of New York City had to be relocated to the Midwest, to drive trucks from Kansas City to Denver.

Even if the trucks could be freed up from other theaters (Brits needed them, Americans needed them, Aussies needed them for everything else they were driving around, the Russians got +- 300,000 trucks from us through lend lease, and they loved them, India needed them, the "Burma Road" needed them, the Free French, Brazilians, Canadians, Kiwis....) the labor demand that you are talking about would so large that the Aussies would have had to demobilize half their combat units, ships and squadrons to supply the manpower.

Cool I thought for a minute you were go to say it could not be done.

[Platoonist]

Blackhorse....

Here are the Alaskan and Canadian bases in the game from east to west.

Vancouver, Canada
Prince Rupert, Canada
Juneau
Sitka Is.
Anchorage
Nome
Kodiak Is.
Cold Bay
Dutch Harbor
Umnak Is.
Atka Is.
Adak Is.
Ogliuga Is.
Amchitka Is.
Kiska
Attu

And the Komandorski Islands....Russian or should be.[:)]

[esteban]

Hehe, I was wondering about the Komandorski's. When I saw that on the map, I was thinking "Aren't those Russian?"

[jrcar]

No. 1300 Trucks total to move 330 tons per day. IIRC Most trucks could carry 7 tons.

Cheers

Rob

ORIGINAL: esteban

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, 330 tons per day = 9900 supply per month. Now the question is was 1300 trucks the total possible? What if the Allied player sends 13,000 trucks?

I remind you that this is 1300 trucks arriving PER DAY. The total number of trucks on the whole road between Alice Springs and Darwin would have been much higher. The distance is such that it would take at least 2-3 days, driving the same trucks in shifts, to make the trip.

So lets say at least 4000 trucks on the road at any one time. Perhaps with the average truck running 20 hours a day, with 2 driver shifts. Average speed on the road would be 20-30 miles per hour most likely. This was before people built nice, smooth high speed freeways (well, except in Germany). Then there would have been at least a couple thousand trucks down for maintenance at any given time.

So I would say you are talking about at least 6000 trucks involved in the whole effort, with at least 15000 drivers. And at perhaps 5000 people keeping the trucks gassed up and running, and the road in shape, and another 5000 loading and unloading trucks and warehousing the stuff going onto or off of the trucks at either end. This is not to mention the increased labor force that the rail running to Alice Springs and from the narrow guage terminus to Darwin would be needing. This puts a huge labor burden on what had practically been a wilderness before the war.

If the roadway could take it, you would have to multiply all this by a factor of nearly 10X to run 10X as many trucks.

At that point, the your are talking about a force of perhaps a quarter of a million men, just to keep that road moving. Considering Oz had a population of about 7 million then, that is a STUPENDOUS labor burden on the country. Proportinally, it would be as if the U.S. went to war, and the population of New York City had to be relocated to the Midwest, to drive trucks from Kansas City to Denver.

Even if the trucks could be freed up from other theaters (Brits needed them, Americans needed them, Aussies needed them for everything else they were driving around, the Russians got +- 300,000 trucks from us through lend lease, and they loved them, India needed them, the "Burma Road" needed them, the Free French, Brazilians, Canadians, Kiwis....) the labor demand that you are talking about would so large that the Aussies would have had to demobilize half their combat units, ships and squadrons to supply the manpower.

[Mike Scholl]

[quote]ORIGINAL: jrcar

No. 1300 Trucks total to move 330 tons per day. IIRC Most trucks could carry 7 tons.

Cheers

Rob


Rob
What trucks are you refering too. The most common military truck of the Second Sorld
War was the "Duece and a Half"---which you could overload to 3 tons in need. Over the
Roads in question, 2 tons per truck is probably a more realistic average.

[jrcar]

Mostly they were civilian semi-trailers.

Cheers

Rob

[timtom]

Anyway, I think the point is moot. As pointed out by a previous poster, if the map is designed with what could have been in mind, then by logical extension, a trail, road, or railroad ought to be put in every hex possible. I believe a suspension-bridge to Tokyo was suggested [:D]

[akbrown]

Blackhorse,

With my Aussie map pretty much done, save a few tweaks to come, I thought that I would help out with Alaska. I have started to make a low res map on the same scale as my Australian one. If you are willing to help, I can send you a copy of my work in progress for assistance. The first step is to add in the terrain. 'Local knowledge' would be useful as I don't have a good map showing terrain and/or vegetation. Also, if anyone else wants to help out please let me know.

Andrew

[Blackhorse]

ak,

Thanks! Please email to both joel.szabat@ost.dot.gov and joelsz@aol.com. I have never worked graphics on my PC, so let me know if there are any programs I need, or procedures I need to follow, to open the map. I also welcome anyone's help -- are there any Alaskan Sourdoughs (Old Timers) reading this?

Platoonist -- thanks for the base list!

[Buck Beach]

I have a questions that may have already been addressed. Was there a significant improvement in the route to Darwin and the other northern towns during the time span of the game, if so how do you think any ongoing improvement could be reflected?

Secondly (and only Matrix can answer this), there seems to be a consensus of opinions that a change needs to be made. Will the issue of the transportation links be addressed with a patch and how high of a priority will it command? it seems to be pretty much of a game buster and it would be a bitch for many (not I particularly) if any correction were a couple of months or more down the road given to the length of time it takes to play a game either against the AI or real blood.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

Original: Mogami
There is a limit to the number of bases. In may be in fact that the connection to Darwin was required for other then geographical accuraccy.

Two questions:

1. How many "free slots" are there for additional bases in the game?

2. Which Alaskan and Canadian bases are currently in the game?

[ I'm hoping to feed akbrown the info necessary to do a similar map revision for Alaska and Canada. I know how the current rail system looks in game, thanks to Spooky's excellent fansite. But his map doesn't show all the bases. I've got a pretty good idea of how the Alaskan map *should* look to accurately reflect the potential / limitations of the inland ALCAN highway; and Alaska's dependence on sea-supply. I think it can be done without adding too many new bases . . . but I'm still waiting for my CD to arrive [:(], and I don't want to wait however much longer that may be.]

I know how important it is to some of us to have a historical as accurate as possible game. My question is (and I really don't know), how important are the Alaska and Canada bases and transportation links. More important let's say that only reflecting a point in the middle of the United States to represent all of the bases and production east of the West Coast, not to mention the lack of aircraft production that is incorporated into the coast's facilities (no I am not lobbying for a change in that concept).

Come on troops, let's get real!! Yes, Australia is very important because of its historical impact and location. But, Alaska and Canada????

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

Original: Mogami
There is a limit to the number of bases. In may be in fact that the connection to Darwin was required for other then geographical accuraccy.

Two questions:

1. How many "free slots" are there for additional bases in the game?

2. Which Alaskan and Canadian bases are currently in the game?

[ I'm hoping to feed akbrown the info necessary to do a similar map revision for Alaska and Canada. I know how the current rail system looks in game, thanks to Spooky's excellent fansite. But his map doesn't show all the bases. I've got a pretty good idea of how the Alaskan map *should* look to accurately reflect the potential / limitations of the inland ALCAN highway; and Alaska's dependence on sea-supply. I think it can be done without adding too many new bases . . . but I'm still waiting for my CD to arrive [:(], and I don't want to wait however much longer that may be.]

I know how important it is to some of us to have a historical as accurate as possible game. My question is (and I really don't know), how important are the Alaska and Canada bases and transportation links. More important let's say that only reflecting a point in the middle of the United States to represent all of the bases and production east of the West Coast, not to mention the lack of aircraft production that is incorporated into the coast's facilities (no I am not lobbying for a change in that concept).

Come on troops, let's get real!! Yes, Australia is very important because of its historical impact and location. But, Alaska and Canada????

Important enough to build the Alcan highway. Japan invaded Aleutians in June, 42. If Junyo and Ryujo were at Midway, I wonder what would have happened.

Seriously. The allies have so much shipping, giving them any more advantages such as unlimited supply to Alaska frees up yet more. Japan needs all the historical assistance it can get.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Important enough to build the Alcan highway. Japan invaded Aleutians in June, 42. If Junyo and Ryujo were at Midway, I wonder what would have happened.

Seriously. The allies have so much shipping, giving them any more advantages such as unlimited supply to Alaska frees up yet more. Japan needs all the historical assistance it can get.

Important enough to build the Alcan highway. Japan invaded Aleutians in June, 42. If Junyo and Ryujo were at Midway, I wonder what would have happened.

Seriously. The allies have so much shipping, giving them any more advantages such as unlimited supply to Alaska frees up yet more. Japan needs all the historical assistance it can get

Are you wit me or agin me, unable to tell from your post?

I certainly am not able to discuss the possiblities of a successful establishment of a supportable Japanese presents in Alaska (especially with some one who has over 2800 posts [:)]). I am not saying historically these area were not important, ONLY, they don't appear important to go into that much detail for purposes of the game. Question, And if the Japs had taken significant positions in Alaska, then what?

[Blackhorse]

Original: Buck Beak
Are you wit me or agin me, unable to tell from your post?

I certainly am not able to discuss the possiblities of a successful establishment of a supportable Japanese presents in Alaska (especially with some one who has over 2800 posts ). I am not saying historically these area were not important, ONLY, they don't appear important to go into that much detail for purposes of the game. Question, And if the Japs had taken significant positions in Alaska, then what?

He's wit me. [;)]

Alaska is significant enough in WitP that they've put 17 bases in the game. We might as well get them right.

Alaska was important enough historically, that the US had 150,000 soldiers stationed there by 1943 . . . and had to supply them by ship from the West Coast. In the game, the allies don't have to bother to heavily garrison Alaska, or risk any ships, because they can rapidly reinforce the state over a rail route that, historically, did not exist.

If the Japanese had taken significant (Anchorage, Juneau) positions in Alaska? Most likely, the US and Canada would have invaded - by sea - to take them back. Of course, in the game, you could choose to ignore them if you wanted to . . .

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

Original: Buck Beak
Are you wit me or agin me, unable to tell from your post?

I certainly am not able to discuss the possiblities of a successful establishment of a supportable Japanese presents in Alaska (especially with some one who has over 2800 posts ). I am not saying historically these area were not important, ONLY, they don't appear important to go into that much detail for purposes of the game. Question, And if the Japs had taken significant positions in Alaska, then what?

He's wit me. [;)]

Alaska is significant enough in WitP that they've put 17 bases in the game. We might as well get them right.

Alaska was important enough historically, that the US had 150,000 soldiers stationed there by 1943 . . . and had to supply them by ship from the West Coast. In the game, the allies don't have to bother to heavily garrison Alaska, or risk any ships, because they can rapidly reinforce the state over a rail route that, historically, did not exist.

If the Japanese had taken significant (Anchorage, Juneau) positions in Alaska? Most likely, the US and Canada would have invaded - by sea - to take them back. Of course, in the game, you could choose to ignore them if you wanted to . . .

You think with all the other crap they had to deal with?

OK,OK,OK I see this is your personal crusade to correct the Matrix people for not regonizing the importance of this rather remote area. So be it. Vaya bien (go well).

[stubby331]

Could the Alaskan Crusaders start their own thread?

[mogami]

Hi, While we are at it can we increase the size of the map and add Panama and Madagascar. And the map should increse enough to show the long range Japanese and German transports flying between the Home Islands and airfields the Germans have in Russia. How are my I-400 class submarines going to be of any use if I can't bomb Panama? How can I send submarines to get stuff from Germany if Germany is not even on the map? Geez Matrix wake up!