Trans-Sahara Railroad is built, 1930s

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

I'm loving this idea, but would it benefit the French economically at all?

Here's another one; you all know the Cape-Cairo plans, right? I saw a map once that proposed a Cape-Singapore railway, going from Capetown to Cairo, through the Suez to Baghdad, across Persia into India and then into Malaysia and Singapore via Siam.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

Essentially, the only bits not currently built are a small stretch of the Trans-Asian railway through Burma (though you can get a diversion into China), and a stretch encompassing about half the Sudan in the Cape-Cairo. Several different guages of course, but there are trains now being developed which can even handle that.

And if there's a 'railway race' started by the French and British competing (Trans-Saharan, then Cape-Cairo, then extending Trans-Saharan round to Gabon, Istanbul-Cairo, Istanbul-Baghdad-Tehran etc.), it's quite possible that more of these sort of projects could end up being built.

What would this mean for railroads in the future, i.e. our present? More useful? Could this have effects on the rise of air travel?

 

[jlckansas]

You might see a Trans Saharan pipeline for both water and oil, 2 individual ones, maybe that would follow the railway from Nigeria to the ports on the med. A prewar water one would be the best bet with the oil one following the war or even started during it by the allies. Better transport of goods to the interior and a better way to get raw materials to ports. As to people transport I would look at the example of China and India in modern times, air transport is there but they still rely on the Railways to transport people in large numbers.

In WWII I could see the capture of the railway a priority on the coast of the mediterranian. Once you had the railhead there you could pretty much roll up the rest due to lack of reinforcement, like the island hopping in the Pacific, once they are cut off from resupply just keep them bottled up until surrender.

 

[nimbletoes]

I know the French used forced labor and native military units to build railroads, but would it really be sustainable to drag huge reluctant labor gangs to the middle of Sahara? I mean the mortality rate would be high as hell.

True, but look at all those desperadoes they sent every year to Devil's Island...think how many of them would've ended up being trained-out to the Sahara rail-head and put to work? Anyhow, who cares (certainly not the French authorities) how many convict slaves die in the desert? Of the roughly 80,000 convicts who were sent out to Devil's Island, only about 2,000 lived to return to France.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

You might see a Trans Saharan pipeline for both water and oil, 2 individual ones, maybe that would follow the railway from Nigeria to the ports on the med. A prewar water one would be the best bet with the oil one following the war or even started during it by the allies. Better transport of goods to the interior and a better way to get raw materials to ports.

A water pipeline could be connected to resevoirs in the Sahara, and could be used to help make the land a bit more hospitable. Interesting thoughts

 

[Astrodragon]

I'm loving this idea, but would it benefit the French economically at all?

Here's another one; you all know the Cape-Cairo plans, right? I saw a map once that proposed a Cape-Singapore railway, going from Capetown to Cairo, through the Suez to Baghdad, across Persia into India and then into Malaysia and Singapore via Siam.

While those plans may be a trainspotters wet dream, they are never going to be economic. There isnt a vast amount of trade for that route, and wherecthere is shipping is much cheaper.

 

[yourworstnightmare]

We must all remember that France did not control parts of central Algiers before the early 1930s, simply because controlling Sahara was not a simple task, however this railway project might prompt the French to assume control of Sahara much earlier. The middle of Sahara was still plagued by Slave raids, and the same people who raided for slaves might try to rob the trains, so an earlier French presence would make sense, and France would probably pressure Spain to take more actively control of the border areas with Spanish Morocco (West Sahara) as well as Italy to push further into Libya to pacify the situation there.

 

[arctic warrior]

Try looking up North African railways - quite a lot was built before WWII; different gauges though but AFAIK did link Morocco through Algiers to Tunesia just north of the Mareth (French fortifications directed at Italian Libya) line.
The Italians also projected and began building railways now abandoned from Tripolis to Tunesia and eastwards to Benghazi.

 

[yourworstnightmare]

Try looking up North African railways - quite a lot was built before WWII; different gauges though but AFAIK did link Morocco through Algiers to Tunesia just north of the Mareth (French fortifications directed at Italian Libya) line.
The Italians also projected and began building railways now abandoned from Tripolis to Tunesia and eastwards to Benghazi.

Yes, but neither the French, the Spanish nor the Italians had a strong enoguh presence in the deep parts of the Saharan desert to stop raids before the 1930s. It was quite a big victory for "civilization" when they could claim all Sahara was secure.

 

[arctic warrior]

Some possible knock-ons in WWII:

But the rail line would end in Oran, a long way from the front.

Doug M.

@yourworstnightmare:
Yourright - but was actually thinking of the quote... my bad didn't quote it!

 

[Gridley]

For that matter how hard is it to change the gauge of a line?

You've already got at least part of the bed (you might need more) laid, the line surveyed... some curves may have to be changed, and if you've got tunnels they might be a problem, but most of the work is done already.

 

[Alex Richards]

What would this mean for railroads in the future, i.e. our present? More useful? Could this have effects on the rise of air travel?

Hmmm. Well a better integrated rail system that manages to stay reasonably cheap, while at the same time air travel remains more expensive, you could see a sort of 'middle class grand tour' using the railways, with air travel remaining the preserve of the upper class.

Interestingly enough, you can currently get a student railcard allowing 28 day unlimited travel anywhere in Europe for about £500. Extrapolating on this, if we propose that that £1000 ticket from Ayrshire to Cornwall instead got you to, say, Delhi, Calcutta, Nairobi or perhaps even Beijing, we could be looking at something along the right lines.

 

[freodhoric]

If a railcar runs over a Fennec Fox nesting in the rails, and then derails, what will happen to the people on board?

A) I can confidently assure you that no train, ever, including horsecarts, could possibly be derailed by a Fennec fox.
B) Car/train collisions don't always derail the train. There is a huge size/hardness difference between 1,000+ pounds of steel and 3 pounds of small mammal.
C) If the fox is nesting, presumably under the rail, how would that cause derailment?
D) Sorta relevent Snopes article.
E) Totally irrelevant: Brunton's Mechanical Traveler.

For that matter how hard is it to change the gauge of a line?

You've already got at least part of the bed (you might need more) laid, the line surveyed... some curves may have to be changed, and if you've got tunnels they might be a problem, but most of the work is done already.

I think it would depend. Going down in size wouldn't be much harder than replacing rails, which is occasionally needed. Going up might necessitate new bridges, enlarging tunnels, and widening the bed along the whole route. In either case, still a lot of work.