Eastern Sahara and Cairo-Khartoum rail

[WanderingHead]

If I'm not mistaken, a rail line from Cairo to Kharoum was established long before WWII.

I wonder why the Eastern Sahara is made impassible? It could be made rough terrain, with rail there and in Sudan. It seems like it would make an African campaign more interesting and not suffer for realism.

Just wondering.

[Joel Billings]

Was there? I looked around on the web and found mention of rail from the Sudan border south, but that at best there was a ferry link on the Nile going north. That might be good enough to add a rail, but technically I don't think there was a full rail link. Anyone have good info on this?

[JanSorensen]

I dont believe there was a railroad all the way. Between Aswan and Wadi Haifa (sp?) I believe a ferry was used.

[WanderingHead]

I think Jan is right, and I was mistaken. It seems to be the case, even to this day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape-Cairo_railway

Which is amazing, because that is essentially the same as it was when Kitchener built the railroad more than 100 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_A ... evelopment

So, it seems that in 1896-98 Kitchener built the railroad with the gap Jan described. The railroad was built to supply his army as they dealt with the Mahdi uprising in Sudan.

The other point, though, was why impassible? Kitchener managed to campaign southward from Egypt in the 19th century, why can't the Italians in 1941?

As to modelling the rail in the game, since it was mostly there I'd think it could be modelled by giving Eastern Sahara rail but with only 5 or 10 capacity. And, if you want to hinder the Axis even more cut Eastern Sahara in two.

If anyone has any good references, I'd be interested in more than I've been able to find.

[WanderingHead]

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
The other point, though, was why impassible? Kitchener managed to campaign southward from Egypt in the 19th century, why can't the Italians in 1941?

Ahh shucks, I know I was a little off in my initial understanding of the rail, but it still seems like the impassible status is worthy of some comment.

To me it seems like an artificial hindrance of the Axis, and really not a critical hindrance anyway. In practice, if the Eastern Sahara were rough (or divided into 2 rough zones) then it seems more realistic, more interesting, and also still very difficult for the Axis to exploit without taking the Suez Canal given supply line issues.