Turkish Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#46

Post by BDV » 05 May 2014, 15:28

The other player in the demolition game is obviously NKVD, and their connections with the kurds, the turkish communists, and possibly the armenian emigres.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#47

Post by alltoes » 05 May 2014, 23:04

I'm not sure Russia would create problems with Turkey pre-Barbarossa. If Germany had a transit agreement with Turkey, I am sure they would tell the Russians it was solely to attack British interests in the Middle East and even set up an attack into India!!! Of course, the real intention most likely would be to either occupy or destroy Baku. Baku was an ever looming black GOLD mine for Germany never to be reached!
In June 1941, the Germans violated Russian airspace numerous times. Stalin did not want to give a reason for war with Germany. Russia continued to supply oil and material up to June 21!


pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 05:40

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#48

Post by pugsville » 06 May 2014, 08:14

Russian Response hard to say, if Moving troops into Turkey would trigger a response? Would Stalin continue to deny the facts staring at him? Was there a level of evidence he would accept? It's impossible to say the workings of Stalin's mind, but you would have to say there was some chance of further provocations leading to Stalin seeing the light. Persia was very much in the traditional Russian sphere of influence can't see Stalin accepting Germans in Persia, Turkey ? The thing is the whole surprise effect on the invasion of Russia was pretty influential. If the Russian were organised to defend in depth, willing to trade space for time and didn't have most of their airforce destroyed on the ground, it is a big thing. Stalin's acceptance of the fact the Germans were planning to attack does not nesscarily mean reasonable and sound defensive military measures.

Moving german troops into turkey has a X% greater chance of Stalin waking up and smelling the coffee and a Y% chance adopting sound military preparations. X and Y are basically pretty unknowable. What is easier to say is that the 'surprise' assault was a very real and large advantage and anything that provides some chance of that being removed must deliver very real and tangible advantages to make it worth while.

User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#49

Post by BDV » 06 May 2014, 15:31

How would SU react to Germany's blunderbuss in Turkey?

For varied reasons, I don't think we have a good view/understading of the evolution of relations between Soviet Union and Nazi Germany in the January 1939 - December 1940 timeframe and how Stalin, the uncontested Czar of Soviet Russia perceived them.

Like I have never seen the Soviet/Stalin's reaction to Weserubung, when Germany got to block the western ports of Russia (Leningrad/Vyborg), and got to take a controlling position overseeing the northern ports (Murmansk, Archangelsk).

Stalin et co were not pleased, IMO. But only such knowledge would let us speculate with some modicum of reasonabless.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#50

Post by alltoes » 06 May 2014, 16:17

Pug and BDV I agree with your posts. However, the British had bases in Iraq. Therefore, Russia did not have as much influence in Iraq. If the Germans had a transit agreement with Turkey AND played their cards correctly, I don't believe Stalin would change his stance. Stalin was informed from many sources of the impending Barbarossa.
This area is a great big "what if". Each what if built on a what if exponentially increases possibilities.
A potential scenario is as follows; Transit agreement signed in March '41. Railroads expanded throughout Turkey. German troops transit into Southern Turkey. By June 1, 1941 parts of Syria and Iraq are occupied by German troops. This is used to deceive Russia on true intentions. June 22, most of the German troops in Turkey are sent via railroad to Eastern Turkey. Within days, their force is great enough to attack into Georgia with Baku as the primary objective.
Go ahead guys, rip it apart!!!

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#51

Post by alltoes » 06 May 2014, 16:22

Another action Germany could employ was to act as mediator for Russian ships to pass through the Dardanelles. This "negotiation" should ease the mind of Stalin. This is one of the areas discussed by Molotov when in Berlin during the previous year.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#52

Post by phylo_roadking » 06 May 2014, 16:54

A potential scenario is as follows; Transit agreement signed in March '41. Railroads expanded throughout Turkey. German troops transit into Southern Turkey. By June 1, 1941 parts of Syria and Iraq are occupied by German troops.
The Turks are going to complete their rail network in four months??? 8O
By June 1, 1941 parts of Syria and Iraq are occupied by German troops. This is used to deceive Russia on true intentions.
Germany isn't going to occupy "parts of Syria"; Syria is Vichy French, and its a MAJOR breach of the Armistice. It throws FAR too much politically up in the air on the eve of BARBAROSSA for Berlin to deal with - such as the Vichy government of Syria-Lebanon going over to the Allies in reaction and for their own "protection"...the forces for EXPORTER, after all, are poised on the Lebanese border ready for June 8th! Berlin fought shy of occupying any Vichy territories as long as they could for VERY good reasons!
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#53

Post by alltoes » 07 May 2014, 15:35

I was under the impression there was a Vichy-German agreement around May '41 to allow usage of air bases in Syria to fuel on their way to N. Iraq. With transit rights for Germany in Turkey, why wouldn't Vichy be "squeezed" to allow direct German troop access in Northern Syria? Also, wasn't there a pro-German coup in Iraq in the early part of '41? I believe this is what led to the Anglo-Iraq conflict in May '41.
My verbage "occupy" was incorrect. Instead it should have stated "invited" troops. I am sure the new pro-German Iraqi government would have allowed German troops in Iraq in an attempt to expel UK troops.
To Stalin, this would have made sense of German presence. At the same time, German troops would be closer to Baku...as the crow flies.
The Turkish rail system could have gained considerably with German direction....and in 4 months. The problem would be to expand the system quickly without the Russians realizing its true intent.......a difficult proposition.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#54

Post by phylo_roadking » 07 May 2014, 19:58

I was under the impression there was a Vichy-German agreement around May '41 to allow usage of air bases in Syria to fuel on their way to N. Iraq. With transit rights for Germany in Turkey, why wouldn't Vichy be "squeezed" to allow direct German troop access in Northern Syria?
There's "squeeze" in terms of agreements within the provisions of the Armisitce...in return, Vichy got to move tanks into Syria-Lebanon IIRC...and outright breaches of it - which apart fropm anything else would change Vichy's standing I.E. "neutrality" in respect of the rest of the world. It would, for example, see the food aid and other aid that the U.S. was sending to Vichy nipped in the bud immediately ;)
Also, wasn't there a pro-German coup in Iraq in the early part of '41? I believe this is what led to the Anglo-Iraq conflict in May '41.
My verbage "occupy" was incorrect. Instead it should have stated "invited" troops. I am sure the new pro-German Iraqi government would have allowed German troops in Iraq in an attempt to expel UK troops.
The coup was notably NOT successful ;)
To Stalin, this would have made sense of German presence. At the same time, German troops would be closer to Baku...as the crow flies.
Not by that date in 1941 it wouldn't; relations were at an all-time low, after all. The USSR was still sending its oil and minerals west as agreed...but in all other respects the pact was dead in the water.
The Turkish rail system could have gained considerably with German direction....and in 4 months.
Ahem....the Turks are STILL trying to finish their rail network :P This wasn't a case of replacing/re-guaging existing Soviet lines...we're talking about cutting gradients, driving tunnels etc. through the Anatolian plateau and its mountainous terrain!
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 05:40

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#55

Post by pugsville » 08 May 2014, 04:26

On improvised airfields and Crete v the Caucasus, the Ju52 was one of the best planes at operating of rough air strips, the ME109 one of the worst.

The Russians had a large garrison which would outnumber the maximum number of German troops the railways could support 2 to 1. Attacking over very mountainous terrain which would channel any attacks into a small number of easily predictable area over terrain heavily favors the defender and not favorable to tanks. Very real and quite large difficulties that should not be dismissed out of hand.

The increased logistical costs and increased commitments would lead to less German forces actually being committed to front line combat against Russia.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#56

Post by phylo_roadking » 08 May 2014, 15:35

On improvised airfields and Crete v the Caucasus, the Ju52 was one of the best planes at operating of rough air strips, the ME109 one of the worst.
Quite correct -although that's looking at the virtues...or not!....of the aircraft themselves...

There's a set of factors with resepct to any airfields that need to be taken into account - in the case of the LW the presence (or not) of airfield operating units....the terrain/surface...equipment for heavy lifting and clearing wreckage etc. Look at MacDonald's accounts in "Crete: the Lost Victory" for example :wink: The JU52s themselves were great....but dusty scratch airfields that weren't kept sprayed down, or sprayed down incorrectly and turned into quagmires; unskilled Heer personnel drafted in to replace LW personnel; flightlines blocked by wreckage etc....
The Russians had a large garrison which would outnumber the maximum number of German troops the railways could support 2 to 1. Attacking over very mountainous terrain which would channel any attacks into a small number of easily predictable area over terrain heavily favors the defender and not favorable to tanks. Very real and quite large difficulties that should not be dismissed out of hand.
And all of which had already benefitted the Germans in their shoestring defence of Narvik for two months in 1940 ;) One would expect they'd have learned from the lesson...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#57

Post by alltoes » 08 May 2014, 19:24

[Also, wasn't there a pro-German coup in Iraq in the early part of '41? I believe this is what led to the Anglo-Iraq conflict in May '41.
My verbage "occupy" was incorrect. Instead it should have stated "invited" troops. I am sure the new pro-German Iraqi government would have allowed German troops in Iraq in an attempt to expel UK troops.

The coup was notably NOT successful ;)]
I disagree. It was successful. Hence the Angol-Iraqi conflict.

[Not by that date in 1941 it wouldn't; relations were at an all-time low, after all. The USSR was still sending its oil and minerals west as agreed...but in all other respects the pact was dead in the water.]
Then why did Russia continue to send oil, ore, and other material to Germany up to June 21, 1941? AND Germany was behind on the payments!!!
[Ahem....the Turks are STILL trying to finish their rail network :P This wasn't a case of replacing/re-guaging existing Soviet lines...we're talking about cutting gradients, driving tunnels etc. through the Anatolian plateau and its mountainous terrain!]
But earlier posts display a rail network throughout the country. This network could have been expanded in 4 months. I am not saying it would be similar to today's rail network, but it could have been greatly improved. War creates and requires a greater driving force. There is more incentive, greater need for completion, greater ambition to succeed.

Also, with increased German troops in Turkey, I am sure the U.K. would answer in kind in the region. The action to expel Vichy in Syria June '41 was around 35K troops. With German troops in Turkey, I am sure the numbers in Iraq and Syria would at least double.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#58

Post by phylo_roadking » 08 May 2014, 19:54

But earlier posts display a rail network throughout the country. This network could have been expanded in 4 months. I am not saying it would be similar to today's rail network, but it could have been greatly improved. War creates and requires a greater driving force. There is more incentive, greater need for completion, greater ambition to succeed.
War - and railway construction - ALSO requires money, equipment and labour and time...

The map in question illustrates a "funny"....in that historical material on the Turkish railways is remarkably thin on the ground. What IS known is that investment by TCDD stopped DEAD in the water in 1950 with the network sitting very much as it is today. From then on until the 1990s there as no investment...and no further rail-laying or maintenance...

What the map ALSO doesn't illustrate...and I haven't been able to find any source since...is what parts of the network were completed when before 1950- in other words - which bits had NOT been built before the spring of 1941...
Also, with increased German troops in Turkey, I am sure the U.K. would answer in kind in the region. The action to expel Vichy in Syria June '41 was around 35K troops. With German troops in Turkey, I am sure the numbers in Iraq and Syria would at least double.
Which of course ilustrates another not un-minor issue - the potential for a combined or coordinated ALLIED counteroffensive in the general area...not to mention the prospect of a British/Commonwealth "raid" damaging or blocking physically any of the "southern" routes on the network.
The coup was notably NOT successful
I disagree. It was successful. Hence the Angol-Iraqi conflict.
Successful as in causing the British invasion of Iraq??? And as a result of Vichy actions during the short war, directly led to EXPORTER? Yep, very successful :lol:
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

alltoes
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 29 May 2011, 00:07

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#59

Post by alltoes » 09 May 2014, 16:02

Phylo, you remind me of a long past girlfriend. She always created adversity to stir up a fight no matter how wrong she was.
Historically, there were British Mandates in the Middle East. Hence, there were a number of British bases in various locations. The Iraqi coup in part was to expel the British. In Palestine British forces were to maintain the peace.
If the British attacked Turkish railroads, even with German "transiters" upon them, would probably create a declaration of war or direct conflict with Britain.
Success???? Hmmm....the USSR broke up after 70+ years. The Roman Empire lasted over 400 years. I guess they were unsuccessful too.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Turksih Railway Capacity supply to caucasus

#60

Post by phylo_roadking » 09 May 2014, 20:44

Success???? Hmmm....the USSR broke up after 70+ years. The Roman Empire lasted over 400 years. I guess they were unsuccessful too.
The USSR? Successful??? :lol:

as for the Western Roman Empire that lasted for 400 years...how long did the OTHER bit of the Empire last? :wink:
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Post Reply

Return to “What if”