Japanese Carriers at Guadalcanal

[McPherson]

They already had a narrow gauge line to Alice Springs but apparently the link to Darwin didn't open until 2004 and it took 3 years to build it. It's probably good that the existing route was narrow gauge at the time. A line could also theoretically be run from Queensland to Darwin along the southern shore of the Gulf of Carpentaria but I'm not sure that would be easier. Does anybody know anything about the feasibility of building railways through the Northern Outback in 1943?

The GHAN

Explanation: The railhead at Alice Springs was about 1600 kilometers over rough terrain. Spreading the gauge from Adelaide to Alice Springs would be child's play and could be done from Australian resources as the beds and sleepers were in place. Just apply new sleepers and spread the rails to standard gauge and ship in the rolling stock from the US. The hard part is the new line.

The hard part resembles Death Valley difficult terrain conditions until one approaches the "tropical" coast . Let me write that again... DEATH VALLEY type terrain. Not impossible, but the ALCAN is a tundra cakewalk by comparison.

 

[marathag]

The hard part resembles Death Valley difficult terrain conditions until one approaches the "tropical" coast . Let me write that again... DEATH VALLEY type terrain. Not impossible, but the ALCAN is a tundra cakewalk by comparison.

There was a narrow gauge Death Valley railroad, used for moving Borax. Built in 1914.

 

[McPherson]

Death Valley is a couple hundred kilometers long. The railroad covered about 30 km of it.

 

[Chris Triangle]

Why spread the rails at all? A narrow gage line requires bridges and tracks support less weight, smaller loading gage and allows tighter turns all translating into an easier build. It would be slower and could carry a bit less but would still be more than adequate for moderate loads.

In any case, such a project is going to take at least a year so there needs to be at least one reliable overland route for trucks immediately. Road trains make the best use of those trucks and are already well known in Australia. In the end, Darwin will get what it needs somehow or other.

 

[McPherson]

Tanks, bulldozers, artillery, landing craft, aviation engineering materials = long standard gauge width FLATCARS. Or specialized trucks.

The US is supplying the haulage, so the transportation infrastructure needs to fit the haulage. Not ideal, but that is the bottleneck that plagued Cartwheel that had to be fixed at port and on roads. This GHAN bottleneck is just one more adaptation.

 

[Chris Triangle]

Tanks, bulldozers, artillery, landing craft, aviation engineering materials = long standard gauge width FLATCARS. Or specialized trucks.

The US is supplying the haulage, so the transportation infrastructure needs to fit the haulage. Not ideal, but that is the bottleneck that plagued Cartwheel.

First of all, as you mentioned earlier a lot of those things, especially the big ticket items, are already coming in by ship, often from the USA but possibly from Britain as well. The train isn't so much going to have to move tons of tanks and planes, its mainly bringing things like in food, building materials (especially lumber), ammunition, clothing, smaller machines and parts, vehicles that can be made in Australia, mail and of course, passengers. I think that a narrow gauge should work well. Also, what exactly do you mean by "aviation engineering materials"?

As for the haulage, the US already builds lots of narrow gauge locomotives and rolling stock for its own impressive network of narrow gauge lines out west and exported a lot of them too, including to Japan, which uses the same 3'6" track. Besides that, Australian builders were surprisingly proficient and built trains for various gauges. While American rolling stock would be welcome, don't underestimate the Australians' ability to make their own engines.

Regardless of how the project proceeds, it's hard to see how it wouldn't take at least a full year. Besides building the tracks, unless you want to engineer fancy condensing locomotives, you've also got to build stations along the way with wells and water tanks to keep the boilers filled, not to mention track maintenance crews. It might have been necessary to bring in laborers from elsewhere in the empire if such a project were to be undertaken. As you said, it does indeed make the ALCAN, much of which was built over surprisingly easy terrain, look like a cakewalk.

The answer IMO:

These babies on the other hand, will go a long way towards supplying the ports of Darwin and maybe Broome, from Eastern Australia as well towards building any railway itself since they can bring in supplies supplies to crews working on segments way past the railhead. They only need some earthmovers to clear a path and keep it open through monsoon season. Just don't ship anything fragile this way.

 

[Chris Triangle]

Mack8 brought up something I'd been wondering about in an offshoot thread, and that is the Japanese experience with twin engine designs. JustLeo mentioned a plane I had never heard of, which was Mitsubishi's Ki-83. This made it to prototype stage by the end of 1944 and while it would probably not have been the best option as a fighter, it looks to have been by far the best design for a B-29 interceptor, with a good rate of climb, more than enough speed to catch the 4-engined beast (except maybe at very high altitude) and of course, the potential for far greater firepower and/or armor than the single engined planes. ITTL, I think it could definitely have been ready to bite into B-29s by the time they started making their attacks. That is a another very good reason not to bother with the J2M.

 

[galveston bay]

What about a more passible road from Cairns to Darwin? That's entirely feasible and even if it isn't paved all the way, a proper crew armed with the latest American earthmoving equipment and a few refueling stations could keep the road open through the Gulf country except in the summer monsoons. And we might see a real boom in one of the most iconic of Australian vehicles: the road train. In many ways, this is the idea vehicle for the job.

I expect you could take care of that just as quickly

 

[McPherson]

Runways need lime (cement) and shaker pans (to pour). Cement mixers pavers and earth rollers in addition. Prefab buildings. Marston mats. Ammunition in the form of bombs and rockets on roads is a big no-no.

 

[Chris Triangle]

Runways need lime (cement) and shaker pans (to pour). Cement mixers pavers and earth rollers in addition. Prefab buildings. Marston mats. Ammunition in the form of bombs and rockets on roads is a big no-no.

I'm not sure what the debate is here. The land route still suffices for most of the Australian-made goods. Not sure about the shaker pans but the Marston mats would easily fit on the trucks. Heavy equipment can go by ship as can any prefab buildings. They're not as regular a sort of cargo and are only needed in relatively limited numbers so they can be sent as needed from either overseas or around the Southern end of the continent. Bombs aren't going to detonate without fuses so pack the fuses separately and I see no issues. And did Australia even make rockets?

 

[sonofpegasus]

This might sound crazy and a bit ott. But why not do all three simultaneously. Use the narrow gauge to haul the materials for a standard gauger railway route. At the same time drive a road through from Alice to Darwin, doing it along s viable rail route. Having done that either lift the narrow gauge and lay it from A to D or if viable lay new rail. Once that is done then lay a full gauge along side if need. So by wars end you have a comprehensive north south link that is robust and flexible.

 

[jsb]

If things crack up at Midway so badly as some imagine, and the US has to adopt a passive (submarine campaign) holding action until late 43, the whole Southwest Pacific offensive could be a writeoff with just the Central Pacific drive being undertaken from late 43 onward. Bulldozerkrieg. Drive straight for the Marianna Islands. Not my preferred strategy because that is bloody, straight at them fighting and prolongs the war a whole year, but doable. It could lead to a negotiated peace in mid 46 which is the Japanese war aim in the first place. After Germany an exhausted America could say; "Okay, throw the Philippines back to us, evacuate Indonesia and what islands we bypassed to get where we are, and we of course keep whatever else we took from you so far. You promise to play nice in the future and it is a wash."

I have to ask why would US be willing to agree to anything?

By 44 the USN will win with the new fleet of Essex's almost no matter what IJN does, once they win they can take the island bomber bases they need to hit the home islands and complete the blockaded. What then make the US accept a negotiated peace and even if they do what happens to US public opinion when they ask for all the POWs back ?

 

[McPherson]

McPherson said: ↑

Not my preferred strategy because that is bloody, straight at them fighting and prolongs the war a whole year, but doable. It could lead to a negotiated peace in mid 46 which is the Japanese war aim in the first place. After Germany an exhausted America could say; "Okay, throw the Philippines back to us, evacuate Indonesia and what islands we bypassed to get where we are, and we of course keep whatever else we took from you so far. You promise to play nice in the future and it is a wash."

I have to ask why would US be willing to agree to anything?

By 44 the USN will win with the new fleet of Essex's almost no matter what IJN does, once they win they can take the island bomber bases they need to hit the home islands and complete the blockaded. What then make the US accept a negotiated peace and even if they do what happens to US public opinion when they ask for all the POWs back ?

Probably due to economic exhaustion. The US had been going full 3 shifts 24/7/52 RTL for three years straight. Work forces, much like combat units, need breathers. And if the Japanese put up a competent fight, which they would have to do to bring about a one axis drive straight at them, it would be one very tough war. Okinawa like early and often.

 

[jsb]

Probably due to economic exhaustion. The US had been going full 3 shifts 24/7/52 RTL for three years straight. Work forces, much like combat units, need breathers. And if the Japanese put up a competent fight, which they would have to do to bring about a one axis drive straight at them, it would be one very tough war. Okinawa like early and often.

Do we really think this is at all likely?

How do you stretch out the war in Europe as well, without it USSR will join in and anyway US is huge it can afford far more Okinawa's than Japan and at worst its only how many? Was the USA exhausted at the end of WWII, at worse it has to slow down a bit but it was nearly 50% of the worlds production by then so even going to 40% for a few days off a week still steamrollers Japan.

 

[McPherson]

YMMV. There are a lot of myths about WWII. The US as a juggernaut I believe was one of them.