Matrix Games Forums

Come and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

OIL

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> OIL Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
OIL - 1/29/2012 1:24:08 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Some very interesting statistics. Even if Germany couldn't fully exploit the soviet oil fields if they captured them, the Soviet Union would have ground to a halt. That depending on the size of the Soviet above ground stock.
The Soviets would have been begging for peace in 6 months to 2 years.



quote:

As a highly developed industrial state, Germany was dependent even in peacetime on external sources for an adequate supply of oil. Even though Germany’s 1938 oil consumption of little more than 44 million barrels was considerably less than Great Britain’s 76 million barrels, Russia’s 183 million barrels, and the one billion barrels used by the United States, in wartime Germany’s needs for an adequate supply of liquid fuel would be absolutely essential for successful military operations on the ground and, even more so, in the air.1 For Germany, it was precisely the outbreak of the war in 1939 and the concurrent termination of overseas imports that most endangered its ability to conduct mobile warfare.

German oil supplies came from three different sources: imports of crude and finished petroleum products from abroad, production by domestic oil fields, and syntheses of petroleum products from coal.

In 1938, of the total consumption of 44 million barrels, imports from overseas accounted for 28 million barrels or roughly 60 percent of the total supply. An additional 3.8 million barrels were imported overland from European sources (2.8 million barrels came from Romania alone), and another 3.8 million barrels were derived from domestic oil production. The remainder of the total, 9 million barrels, were produced synthetically. Although the total overseas imports were even higher in 1939 before the onset of the blockade in September (33 million barrels), this high proportion of overseas imports only indicated how precarious the fuel situation would become should Germany be cut off from them.2

At the outbreak of the war, Germany’s stockpiles of fuel consisted of a total of 15 million barrels. The campaigns in Norway, Holland, Belgium, and France added another 5 million barrels in booty, and imports from the Soviet Union accounted for 4 million barrels in 1940 and 1.6 million barrels in the first half of 1941. Yet a High Command study in May of 1941 noted that with monthly military requirements for 7.25 million barrels and imports and home production of only 5.35 million barrels, German stocks would be exhausted by August 1941. The 26 percent shortfall could only be made up with petroleum from Russia. The need to provide the lacking 1.9 million barrels per month and the urgency to gain possession of the Russian oil fields in the Caucasus mountains, together with Ukrainian grain and Donets coal, were thus prime elements in the German decision to invade the Soviet Union in June 1941.3

The smallest of the Russian oil fields at Maikop was captured in August 1942, and it was expected that the two remaining fields and refineries in Grozny and Baku also would fall into German hands. Had the German forces been able to capture these fields and hold them, Germany’s petroleum worries would have been over. Prior to the Russian campaign, Maikop produced 19 million barrels annually, Grozny 32 million barrels, and Baku 170 million barrels.4


http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1981/jul-aug/becker.htm

Post #: 1
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 11:48:42 AM   
paullus99


Posts: 1614
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline
While it might have been possible to capture the oil fields, I seriously doubt they would have been intact - and the chances of Germany moving any significant quantities of oil out of the Caucasus back to Germany were slim to none. The infrastructure didn't exist, nor did the tankers (which were already stretched just trying to supply the front), and they would have been prime targets for partisans anyway.

That's not to say the capture of those fields would not have put a serious crimp on Russian fuel supplies - but unlike Germany, Russia had allies that could have at least attempted to pick up the slack. Again, not to say it isn't a scenario that would overall benefit the Germans, but they would not have been able to put that oil to use.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 2
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 12:36:24 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Well it is quite a question. But I'm inclined to think the capture of Baku would have knocked the soviets out of the war. Hitler only needed a fraction of what the Caucasus could offer to fuel the European economy.
Could the US have taken up the slack? That's contingent on the US being able to move up to 200,000 barrels a day to the Soviets and the Soviets being able to redistribute that from somewhere like Archangel.
I don't think this could have been achieved overnight.

Hitlers aim after knocking the the Soviets out was the capture of the middle east and its vast oil reserves. This would have been the trump card against US native oil.

(in reply to paullus99)
Post #: 3
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 1:27:43 PM   
juret

 

Posts: 205
Joined: 10/17/2011
Status: offline
changing the question

Could soviets have supplied their forces with oil if they had lost those 3 fields in the south???

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 4
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 2:02:28 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
At the time that was where the Soviet Union was getting almost all its oil. No, after that the Soviets would be depending on the ready stocks of oil they had. The question is how extensive were they and how long would those last?

(in reply to juret)
Post #: 5
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 3:30:15 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 269
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juret

changing the question

Could soviets have supplied their forces with oil if they had lost those 3 fields in the south???



The Caucasus accounted for the bulk of the Soviet Oil up to 1942 and it was also where most of the Oil field related know how was concentrated. But after late 41, Oilfields East of the Urals were developed at a very rapid pace and the Caucasus became of marginal importance from 43 onward.

(in reply to juret)
Post #: 6
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 5:49:12 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6375
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
The Axis never even got close to Baku. They may as well have been trying to conquer the moon. Therefore, this entire discussion is moot.

The whole go for the oil strategy was just plain chuckleheaded.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 7
RE: OIL - 1/29/2012 7:14:45 PM   
von Beanie


Posts: 249
Joined: 6/3/2002
From: Oak Hills, S. California
Status: offline
I suggest you read Antonucci's Blood for Oil. Every nation the Germans conquered in Europe was a net importer of oil. So their overall situation got worse the more they conquered. Having Italy become an active ally made things much worse.

The U.S. was the world's largest exporter of oil during the WW2 years. Any Russian shortage would have been made up by them, and/or exploitation of the Iranian/Iraqi oil.

The Russian oil supply became threatened when the Germans reached the Volga at Stalingrad, for the simple reason that much oil was shipped by river barge traffic on the Volga. As a result, in 1942 the Russians quickly built the railline from Baku to Astrakhan to permit another way of shipping the oil from Baku. The Germans were shocked when a distant recon force accidentally discovered the railline, since it was not on any of their maps.

Here's a link to the article (the Command Magazine article had much better accompanying graphics): http://www.eiaonline.com/history/bloodforoil.htm

< Message edited by von Beanie -- 1/29/2012 7:41:58 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 8
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 4:15:44 AM   
USXpat

 

Posts: 352
Joined: 8/26/2010
Status: offline
If what could have happened is limited purely to what did happen, there'd be no reason to play war games.  I think there is an excessive dependency on "official records" as relates to Germany's Petrol industry during WW2.  Granted, I see a lot of these things in "conspiratorial terms" - i.e. Standard Oil and Shell's relationships with IG Farben.  This is not to say that Germany was not handicapped in terms of oil, but if they really wanted more oil, there were companies selling it - and Germany had plenty enough war booty to buy it... of which there's still plenty that still has not turned up.  Whether the records indicate that or not can be compared with unofficial sales from a company like Gazprom in conjunction with various offshore companies. 

Leastwise, according to several intelligence reports, Germany didn't have enough oil to last the duration of 1942, say nothing of 1943 or 1944.  If everything was based upon "official records" they probably would have collapsed by the end of 1942.  But, most governments are not that transparent, much less Hitler's regime (or more to the point, the corporations behind his regime).  Not to be inflammatory, but if we have the kinds of things going on today in an era of "openness and transparency" (cough) we can guess that a fair amount of the same was going on back then.

The whole oil issue really should be broken down into the drilling and refining/production.  Considering that the production and refining would need to be done at or close to the site, we can forego the need to transport it back to Germany for all but the higher grade fuels.

So, let's start with the drilling.  At Baku, up through the 16th century, there were hand-dug wells producing naptha as shallow as 35 FEET.  Large scale oil drilling started in 1872 sponsored by a collection of international investors (British, Belgian, Swedish, etc.) - and by 1900 there were over 3,000 wells; 65% of which were producing  on an industrial scale - and at that time, accounted for half the world's oil production.  Easy money, just ask the Rothchilds.  So, even if the Russian Army was able to destroy, completely and irrevocably each and every last one of those drills... had the Germans reached Baku, they would only need to be drilling down 100 - 200 feet (and they had enough documents from Shell to know where to look).

It's obviously easier to set up a drill today then back then.  Today, a 2,000 foot well can probably be dug in a week and completed in 3-4 weeks; but we're talking a fraction of that kind of depth.  A couple hundred feet could've been excavated by hand if Germany wanted to put POW's or anyone to be placed in concentration camps to work.  Either way - figure some combination of salvaging some portion of those 3,000 wells (some of which might have not been blown), getting new drills in, and in some cases, and maybe just plain massive digging - and Germany has more oil.

But, then - it's not just a matter of having the oil - but the right quality/purity/composition.  How long would it take to set up a refinery?  That's where what I know ends, but I think for starters Germany's engineers would be taking an incremental approach.  Diesel would not likely be a problem, but Germany's vehicles didn't use diesel (most of Russia's did though).  For a tank... I don't have a clue - but would guess that low grade vehicle fuel would not be particularly difficult and could be done in some volume starting fairly fast.  It's not like they were running the kind of high performance engines we run today.   Aircraft fuel would be a completely different story.

Here's the kicker though... Baku was not always a happy part of the Soviet Union.  Baku is the capitol of Azerbaijan and is a mostly Muslim oriented culture and history, having been part of Persia.  Azerbaijan was made part of Russia in the early 1800's following two wars with Russia.  Following the collapse of Tsarist Russia, it declared its independence (briefly in conjunction with Armenia & Georgia) - 1918.  Lenin had other plans, asserting that the Soviet Union could not survive without Baku's oil - and invaded it (again), costing 20,000 Azerbaijan lives in 1920. 

Anyways - it is worthwhile to point out that Grozny (the second major oilfield) is the capitol of... Chechnya.  

Aside from Hitler's regime having relatively "very good" relations with several Islamic sects/groups/organizations, there's the simple fact that from this region of the world - Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkestan, Kazakhstan, etc. - some 400,000 volunteers/conscripts were raised in and fought alongside Germany AGAINST RUSSIA/US/England. (Though not always with enthusiasm, some certainly did).  Azerbaijan had a population of about 4 million, but from that were drawn enough men to fill over a dozen battalions... and probably a lot more would have volunteered for Axis service had they not already been conscripted by Russia and under the supervision of NKVD and commissars. 

So, there's a very good question as to whether or not "ALL" of those oil wells would have been blown - Russian Army or not.  750 or so of them were shut down which cut production down by about half.  If the Axis forces were that close to Baku - one could surmise that native Azeri's would not be thrilled seeing their entire industry collapsed by a government that was itself collapsing (in such event as Germany was approaching).  

Even if the Russian Army did manage to destroy 90% of all the wells and production in Baku, that would still have left 2 million (maybe 3 million) metric tons per year, probably more with German efficiency - if the fields were retained.  That equates to about 1/3rd of total German oil production from all sources, including synthetic. 

There's no lack of oil in Azerbaijan, it's still producing oil today, lots of good contracting jobs there (including a need for English Teachers), and has the second longest oil pipeline in the world. 

So, everything considered as relates to the need for oil to run a war machine, the shot at the Caucasus was not quite as far fetched as it may seem.  A logistical nightmare of epic proportions?  Yes, but one can imagine that if Germany sank as much into the effort to reach Grozny and/or Baku as it did just to take Stalingrad, I think it comes really close to a 50-50 situation for Baku and an absolute certainty for Grozny. 


(Edited to clarify Baku's drilling depth)

< Message edited by USXpat -- 1/31/2012 4:18:33 AM >

(in reply to von Beanie)
Post #: 9
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 6:07:59 AM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Well the quoted article makes it clear that Germany only needed a fraction of what Baku produced to make the difference. Given a certain amount of time Germany would've made that happen.
We can really see the Germans scraping for oil after 42. Until then they'd remained buoyant enough with reserves and captured stocks. After that they were moving out of trucks back to horse drawn traffic and their armor was reduced to mobile pill boxes and their air power greatly curtailed.
The Russian advances from Kursk onwards weren't based on the Russians being so much better as the Germans having become so bad off. Best remembered that the Russian loss of life had been immense compared to what the Germans suffered.

(in reply to USXpat)
Post #: 10
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 8:25:38 AM   
vlcz


Posts: 387
Joined: 8/24/2009
From: Spain
Status: offline
Keeping on track with the subject , a time ago I had an exchange win bletcleygeek about the effects IN GAME of axis seizing Baku. He had the theory -that I fully support- that even when they take no part of the production and giving back the city next turn (to avoid a caucasus disater) would mean about 50 turns of soviet oil production (according to Emir Agic production diagrams 80% fuel/oil production comes from Baku http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2685466&mpage=1&key=Economic%2Cmap%2Cresources�)

That would make a real (albeit probably too far away) target for a 42 onslaught.


(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 11
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 9:43:21 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5938
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The Axis never even got close to Baku. They may as well have been trying to conquer the moon. Therefore, this entire discussion is moot.

The whole go for the oil strategy was just plain chuckleheaded.


Thats your option, which is counter to the facts poeple have posted that know what they are talking about.

Taking the oil fields were easly doable IF the right mix of forses were sent that way in June 42. The distance is really not that far if you take 5 secs and look at the rail net. The hole flank is easly defendable because of the limited sullpy net for the russians.

The rail lines can easly be converted to support the advance if started in easly summer. Who needs trucks to transport oil when you have railcars, lol. Why would they use trucks? And partisan effects were next to zero for the germans. How much supplies were stopped because of them? The hole partisan thing is a huge myth poeple still by into.

Stalin killed more of his own before Hitler invaded then Hitler killed during the war. Most Russian were happy the germans invaded. Hitler was a bonehead when it came to this huge advantage he throw away. He could have had another million men if he had promises the western russian states there freedom in exchange for oil. Better to fight for the murder you know then the one you don't.

Its not that German needed the oil, but that Russia would be with out it. It would be like someone shutting off the oil from the gulf area to the US. Total collapse of the econemy withen a few weeks.

That would have been the end of Russia anyone with an open mind can see that.

I dont try for it during early 42 because I have to pocket russian units to weaken the red machine. Most russian player just like Russia do not put many troops south of Rostov.

Taking it in wite would be very easy in most cases, but not worth the cost. Because the effects are zero as with most things in this game. Hvy/resoures have no effect on the game because of design and the same goes for oil.

Its window dressing.

Pelton




< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/31/2012 10:04:25 AM >


_____________________________

GHC
22 - 4 - 8

15 games ended in 41 (15-0-0)
7 games ended in 42 (5-0-2)
8 games ended in 43 (2-3-3)
4 games ended in 44 (0-1-3)


General Cheesefinder of WitW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 12
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 9:52:37 AM   
vlcz


Posts: 387
Joined: 8/24/2009
From: Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Taking it in wite would be very easy in most cases, but not worth the cost. Because the effects are zero as with most things in this game. Hvy/resoures have no effect on the game because of design and the same goes for oil.

Its window dressing


are you sure Pelton? Even for the infantry heavy red army having all those tank and mech corps without fuel for 50 turns does not seem "window dressing"dressing, do you think fuel reerves are so masive as to compense that?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 13
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 11:08:21 AM   
Karri

 

Posts: 802
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline
"Its not that German needed the oil"




I've just always thought that you were misinformed and angry, Pelton, but clearly you are just an Axis fanboy(explains all your rants). I doubt anyone can seriously suggest that Axis were anywhere near to taking Baku. Then again, you are not interested in any of the facts, so that alone makes the discussion moot since you will simply repeat your usual facade.

You clearly need to read a few books.


< Message edited by Karri -- 1/31/2012 11:09:06 AM >

(in reply to vlcz)
Post #: 14
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 11:47:32 AM   
76mm


Posts: 2104
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Most Russian were happy the germans invaded.


I could hardly think of a more idiotic statement.

Is there any hope of an end to some of your ridiculous historical statements (I seem to recall gems such as "the Red Army never got better...", etc.)?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 15
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 12:50:06 PM   
Farfarer

 

Posts: 669
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
Historical speculation and reality aside, would the game be more fun if seizing Baku and connecting it gave the Axis a big bump in oil, fuel, or VP? I've always wanted to be able to use captured factories etc. somehow.

I also suspect Ploesti and Baku were removed as magic bullet wins early on in testing, for obvious reasons.

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 16
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 1:06:40 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1017
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
Can't find any figures about Oil, but according to Erickson, there are some pretty interesting figures for coal.

"In 940, the Donbas produced 94.3 million tonnes of coal, the Urals 12 million and the Karaganda fields 6.3 million "

Now that is a lot of your industrial fuel to lose

(in reply to Farfarer)
Post #: 17
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 1:45:41 PM   
vlcz


Posts: 387
Joined: 8/24/2009
From: Spain
Status: offline
quote:

Farfarer
Historical speculation and reality aside, would the game be more fun if seizing Baku and connecting it gave the Axis a big bump in oil, fuel, or VP? I've always wanted to be able to use captured factories etc. somehow.


IMHO it would be throwing any historical reality and credibility to the bin. On the other hand punishing the soviet economy and mechanized operative capacity accordingly would by "per se" a sufficient bonus to the axis.




(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 18
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 2:12:44 PM   
vlcz


Posts: 387
Joined: 8/24/2009
From: Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled
Can't find any figures about Oil, but according to Erickson, there are some pretty interesting figures for coal.

"In 940, the Donbas produced 94.3 million tonnes of coal, the Urals 12 million and the Karaganda fields 6.3 million "

Now that is a lot of your industrial fuel to lose


some figures
Coal Production

(in millions of tons)


1940 % 1945 %
Don Basin 85.5 55.8 36.9 25.7
Moscow Region 9.9 6.5 20.0 15
Kuznets 21.1 13.8 28.9 20.2
Pechora 0.2 0.2 3.3 2.3
Urals 11.7 7.6 25.1 17.5
Karaganda 6.3 4.1 25.1 17.5
Central Asia 1.9 1.3 1.7 1.2
East Siberia 8.5 5.6 7.6 5.2
Far East 0.6 0.4 7.0 4.8
Georgia 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.5
Other 0.4 0.3


it is of note the expansion of Moscu , Urals and (specially) karaganda in the war period.

data taken from
http://www.sturmvogel.orbat.com/SovOil.html
(allegedly from Soviet Transportation Policy by Holland Hunter, 1957)

you have data about Oil in the same link




(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 19
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 7:25:36 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vlcz




you have data about Oil in the same link




An interesting statement in the link!!!

quote:

The big question is why did the production of Baku decrease by nearly 50% by 1945 since it was never bombed by the Germans. Is this a result of a failure to repair or replace essential equipment in the oil fields as well as a failure to drill new wells when existing ones ran dry? Or perhaps something as simple as a labor shortage?


Quite simply civil demand for oil fell as much of the Soviet Union had been reduced to a wreck by the war.

Fuel oil is about 7.15 traditional barrels (1 barrel = 159 liters) This can vary from 6 to 8 barrels depending on the weight of the oil.

We see the changes in production 1940/1945 in millions of tonnes.

Crude 31.1/19.5
....................

Petrol 4.4/3.2

Kerosene 5.5/3.2

Diesel 0.63/0.52

Motor Fuel 1.5/0.53

Fuel Oil 9.9/6.1

Looking at Germany the 1941 annual requirement was for 12 million tons (approx).

However only 3/4 of that was being produced and the rest made up of stocks.

Ultimately the Germans needed to find another 3 million tons p.a. just to maintain consumption....let alone the additional requirements for industrial expansion.



(in reply to vlcz)
Post #: 20
RE: OIL - 1/31/2012 7:41:46 PM   
USXpat

 

Posts: 352
Joined: 8/26/2010
Status: offline
The Soviets pre-emptively shut down 750 wells in 1942.  

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 21
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 1:08:36 PM   
fcam1387

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 5/17/2006
Status: offline
OT, but in terms of this game, does the Soviet economy collapse if you manage to capture those Caucasus oilfields?

(in reply to USXpat)
Post #: 22
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 2:53:11 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
According to the game manual, unless the fuel supplies are kept up then the movement rates for mechanized and motorized units start falling. Also Baku is one of the two supply conduits for the Soviets in the game. Oil also contributes to the creation of supplies.

quote:

21.1. THE PRODUCTION SYSTEM
Production is conducted by various factories located in town, city and urban hexes. The
exception is Lend Lease supplies and vehicles, which are automatically added to the applicable
pool during the logistics phase. Some factories, including all Lend Lease factories, are located
off-map. Each factory point will produce a certain amount of an item each turn if the town, city
or urban hex it is located in is connected to the supply grid (20.1) and sufficient basic items
are stored at the factory location for local use. There are three basic items required to allow
the production system to run; resources, oil and manpower. Resources are required by Heavy
Industry factories to produce supplies and by synthetic fuel factories to produce synthetic fuel.
Supplies are required by armament, aircraft, AFV and combat vehicle factories to build the
equipment for air group units and ground elements. Oil is required by fuel factories to produce
fuel to allow motorized units to move and generic vehicles to operate. Manpower factories
provide the men that are matched with equipment during the replacement phase to build
complete ground elements that flow to the units. There are two types of production rates used
for factories. Some factories (Heavy Industry, Fuel, Synthetic Fuel, Vehicle and Armaments)
have a static multiplier for each year (1941-45) that is used to determine the amount of production for each factory point. The ratio of basic items required to produce the end product
remains the same. For example, if a notional amount of 1000 resources is required to produce
1000 supplies, a one to one ratio of resources to supplies will be required no matter what the
multiplier may be. Each other factory type has a fixed production rate that will not change.
However, for aircraft, AFV, and combat vehicle factories the number of factory points of each
type of factory in each town, city or urban hex will increase over time based on its expansion
rate until its build limit is reached.




(in reply to fcam1387)
Post #: 23
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 3:06:38 PM   
Offworlder

 

Posts: 869
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
Not really. But it seems that the capture of Baku somehow has an effect on Lend-lease transfers - at least I have that impression.

BTW on an earlier topic, many non-Russian nationalities living within the USSR did throw in their lot with the advancing Germans. This was especially the case in '42 when basically the Germans were advancing on lands inhabited by peoples who were antipathy towards Russians, the Communist Party apparatus or both. The help the Germans recieved from Cossacks, Ukraninans and several of the peoples of the Caucasus, is well documented and was a combination of past national rivalries and the heavy handedness of the Soviet system.

As to the capture of Baku and its effect in real terms, there can be endless disputes, since it is a what if scenario. Had the Germans taken Stalingrad, the bulk of the oil and its byproducts would not have been available to the Soviet Union anyway, since it was moved via barges along the Volga mostly. I would seriously doubt that even if the Germans did not arrive at Baku proper, if the whole south Caucasus was cut off from the rest of the USSR (by the fall of Stalingrad), there might (and I repeat MIGHT) have been an insurruction of the local population which would have had the same effect on the USSR.

Whiich puts in perspective the value of that piece of real estate in real life and frankly blows up the myth that the Germans made a strategic mistake in going for Stalingrad (they actually made of tactical mistake in not surrounding and then capturing the place but previous experience showed them that they could remove the Red Army easily enough from built up places). It was their underestimation of Russian resolve and utter Russian ruthlessness that held the Germans at bay and frankly, turned the tide of war in the allies favour...

(in reply to fcam1387)
Post #: 24
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 10:04:30 PM   
paullus99


Posts: 1614
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline
Hmmmm....Pelton is talking about how easy it would be to convert about a thousand miles of rail (or more), find enough tanker cars that could be spared from pulling oil from Romania, sending them all the way into the Caucasus, over multiple large rivers, some of which didn't have adequate bridges for heavy freight, plus continue to send supplies to the front....yep, sounds easy to me.



_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to Offworlder)
Post #: 25
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 10:28:24 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 14372
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Don't forget that paullus "it's not like germany needed the oil" anyway

_____________________________

WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to paullus99)
Post #: 26
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 11:27:01 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline
Most bulk oil traffic from Romania most likely used barges on the Danube river.

Similarly most bulk oil from Baku would have used the Volga. The difficult bit would be transferring loads to the Don the 50 km via Stalingrad, but after that it is plain sailing.

The Soviets built a connecting canal post-war that could take 5,000 ton ships.

(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 27
RE: OIL - 2/2/2012 11:58:41 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2212
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Hmmmm....Pelton is talking about how easy it would be to convert about a thousand miles of rail (or more), find enough tanker cars that could be spared from pulling oil from Romania, sending them all the way into the Caucasus, over multiple large rivers, some of which didn't have adequate bridges for heavy freight, plus continue to send supplies to the front....yep, sounds easy to me.




But first, they have to rebuild all the derricks etc to get the stuff out. And let's not forget those pesky partisans.

(in reply to paullus99)
Post #: 28
RE: OIL - 2/3/2012 2:01:40 AM   
paullus99


Posts: 1614
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline
And not like there would be any pipelines remaining or seeing Germany divert the massive amount of steel production necessary to built the pipe that would be needed.....much less the replacement equipment to repair the "scorched earth" damage to the wells or refineries themselves.

Germany could deny those resources to Russia, but never could have made use of them - at least in the context of the war years.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 29
RE: OIL - 2/3/2012 6:06:24 AM   
Karri

 

Posts: 802
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfgar

Most bulk oil traffic from Romania most likely used barges on the Danube river.

Similarly most bulk oil from Baku would have used the Volga. The difficult bit would be transferring loads to the Don the 50 km via Stalingrad, but after that it is plain sailing.

The Soviets built a connecting canal post-war that could take 5,000 ton ships.


How do germans get the barges to Volga? Or protect them while they are there?

(in reply to wulfgar)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> OIL Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.112