Hey I am working on a TL featuring a surviving Austro-Hungarian Empire. The POD is way back in the 1900s, but the help I require at this stage regards the post-1900 period.
In your opinion, is Venice or Triest the best location for a large Norfolk-like naval base in the WWII and post-WWII periods?
Ok, now, in my TL there might not be a WWII or it might be really different than OTL's WWII, but my question here is not really about events. What I'm speaking here of is ship size and traffic volume. So do you think that Venice or Triest would be the best locations to support a large modern naval base similar in size and scope with the US one at Norfolk in the 20th century?
There woud be both advantages and problems with both situations. The Triest area is mountainous and that might create problems both in terms of the location of a nearby naval air station and in terms of meteorological conditions that might affect air traffic; also concerning road and rail supply routes to the naval base. Also the urban areas themselves and the commercial ports occupy a large portion of the available land. Finally, the natural harbours of the Triest area are not very large in size. There is a good natural harbour between Triest and Muggia/Mulgs and also a smaller one in the north part of Triest but that's about it.
The advantage would be that the natural harbours of Triest are of really good quality being rather deep, i.e. heavy ships would be able to sail there without further development.
Venice has it's own problems though. Venice is closer to the border with Italy (which is not very friendly towards the Empire), which is on the River Po. Most of the Venetian Lagoon is really shallow so extensive work should be done for it to accomodate large battleships, cruisers, destroyers and aircraft carriers. A lot of water displacement (when large ships sail in the lagoon) can damage the historical buildings of Venice and the other historical cities of the lagoon and also upset the hydrological balance of the lagoon. Now, my naval base would be located on the southern tip of the litorale del Cavallino, the peninsula just north of the Lido inlet into the Lagoon, between Punta Sabbioni and the inlet. So that is some distance from Venice itself. However I still expect that large construction efforts would be required to reshape part of the lagoon in the 19th and eraly 20th century, probably on the scale of what was done by the Netherlands. So the disadvantages of Venice stem mainly from the hydrological conditions of the lagoon itself. The advantage that Venice has is that, once reshaped, it would make one hell of a harbour.
Now, reshaping the Venetian lagoon is nothing new. The Venetians themselves did it for naval and military purposes. However, I'm not sure how acqua alta ("high waters" - i.e. occasional flooding) events would play out if there is a Naval Base on the tip of the Cavallino peninsula. It's possible it would make any alt-MOSE Project (which is an effort to enlcose the lagoon when the high waters come, separating it from the Sea, just as the Dutch do) very difficult, because access to the base should be available at all times, so where would one place the enclosing barriers?
Frankly I am leaning towards th Venice option, meaning that I belive the Venetian lagoon could be safely reshaped and it would provide a better harbour, but I'm not sure on the technical details and other aspects. So who knows maybe Venice is too much work and Triest would be better after all.
So, what would you say, which one would make for a better location for a large naval base?