Build a better trans-Siberian railway

You seem to be overlooking the point that this is Russia doing this.
Well said, certainly Russia's Trans-Siberian railway today is doing exactly what I'd aspired it to be in my OP. So, let me reposit my original query. How can we get the Russian railway functionally in place, double tracked (where necessary) earlier.

They've got some really ambitious plans for 2030.

russianrailway-map.jpg


https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/russianrailway-map.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=640

The northern railway to the Alaskan coast looks very interesting. Perhaps one day we'll see a reconnected Bering Strait. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Strait_crossing
 

BooNZ

Banned
Well said, certainly Russia's Trans-Siberian railway today is doing exactly what I'd aspired it to be in my OP. So, let me reposit my original query. How can we get the Russian railway functionally in place, double tracked (where necessary) earlier.

In the first instance, double tracking would not be possible before the OTL Russo-Japanese war because many of the cost cutting measures dramatically sped up the construction of the original track. Also, it is difficult to imagine double tracking would result in a significant difference to the outcome of WW1, since the length of TSR is far from an optimal to support the war effort for a nation the size of Imperial Russia. For similar reasons, I do not see the TSR being economically competitive with seagoing freight, except for a few time sensitive niches.

Notwithstanding the above, keeping Witte with influence with Russian leadership would certainly have assisted in getting the TSR double tracked quicker. In addition to being a competent Finance Minister with a strong grasp of railway matters, Witte worked hard to keep a lid on military spending and general belligerence in the Russian leadership. Avoiding unnecessary military expenditure, avoiding Japanese hostilities and maintaining significant economic interests in the East, would have contributed funds and incentive to make more progress on the double tracking of the TSR.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
In the first instance, double tracking would not be possible before the OTL Russo-Japanese war because many of the cost cutting measures dramatically sped up the construction of the original track. Also, it is difficult to imagine double tracking would result in a significant difference to the outcome of WW1, since the length of TSR is far from an optimal to support the war effort for a nation the size of Imperial Russia. For similar reasons, I do not see the TSR being economically competitive with seagoing freight, except for a few time sensitive niches.

Notwithstanding the above, keeping Witte with influence with Russian leadership would certainly have assisted in getting the TSR double tracked quicker. In addition to being a competent Finance Minister with a strong grasp of railway matters, Witte worked hard to keep a lid on military spending and general belligerence in the Russian leadership. Avoiding unnecessary military expenditure, avoiding Japanese hostilities and maintaining significant economic interests in the East, would have contributed funds and incentive to make more progress on the double tracking of the TSR.

Double tracking the TSR would depend only on how much money you spent and could be done at the same time the original line was laid. It would be much cheaper if you trailed the construction of the second line by a year behind the original

As for speed of construction, the simplest would be to drop the ferry idea for Lake Baikal and pursue the original construction route rather than go through Manchuria. The Manchurian route proved enormously expensive, required large forces to protect and was greatly damaged during the Boxer rebellion- not only increasing the cost but delaying its completion by about two years
 
As for speed of construction, the simplest would be to drop the ferry idea for Lake Baikal

The problem is that the route south of Baikal had some really, really nasty terrain. If the ferry had worked properly it would have been a perfectly appropriate initial step. Like the single tracking, light weight rails, and low speed were all initial steps. (Whether they were MEANT as stepping stones to a better system, I'm not sure, but in fact that's what they were.)

IIRC it took a couple of years to build the bit south of Baikal, so removing the ferry might have SLOWED the construction effort, not sped it up.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
The problem is that the route south of Baikal had some really, really nasty terrain. If the ferry had worked properly it would have been a perfectly appropriate initial step. Like the single tracking, light weight rails, and low speed were all initial steps. (Whether they were MEANT as stepping stones to a better system, I'm not sure, but in fact that's what they were.)

IIRC it took a couple of years to build the bit south of Baikal, so removing the ferry might have SLOWED the construction effort, not sped it up.

The ferry could never really provide for a military deployment- which was the main purpose of the railway. The Circum-Baikal could have easily been started in 1898 when the main lines reached the lake if the survey was finished rather than starting the survey work

Some of the problems were caused by the need to save money (going around hills rather than through them, making inclines steeper and shortening embankments) as well as speed. The general idea is that all infrastructure is upgraded as increased use justifies the added expense- such as expanding a road to four lanes from two or paving rather than using gravel

The Russians also raised the work force by 50% in 1903-1904 compared to 1902-03 so save another year there

Nicholas should have listened to his generals more than his finance minister
 

BooNZ

Banned
The ferry could never really provide for a military deployment- which was the main purpose of the railway.

Nope - the Railway construction was overseen by Witte upon the instruction of Alexander III - neither of whom were militaristic or foreign policy hawks. The primary purpose of the TSR was to ultimately bind Eastern Russia to the West (i.e. domestic purposes).

The Circum-Baikal could have easily been started in 1898 when the main lines reached the lake if the survey was finished rather than starting the survey work
The preliminary survey work on Circum-Baikal had commenced in 1888 and continued - as noted elsewhere, it was a challenging and remote environment. I guess if an ASB had provided them with a crystal ball, alternative decisions might have been made.

The Russians also raised the work force by 50% in 1903-1904 compared to 1902-03 so save another year there

Which highlights that the ferry was only ever a stop gap measure to get the TSR operational as early as possible. The increase in work force was likely a panic measure as increased Russian belligerence made war in the East more likely. The Russians were also 'rush building' battleships around this time, notwithstanding their protracted build times compared with proper naval powers...

Nicholas should have listened to his generals more than his finance minister

From the late 1890s this was increasingly the case. Rush building naval assets for use in the East, the on-going occupation of Manchuria, adventurism in Korea and the diplomatic goading of the Japanese resulted in the humiliation of both the Russian army and navy. Humiliations that were to be repeated ten years later.

If Nicky had continued to listen to his Finance Minister (who was an increasingly outspoken dove), the Japanese would have been accommodated/appeased as Russia continued to improve the TSR and (mostly) peacefully extended its influence through Manchuria and greater China.
 
Last edited:
Top