Trans-Siberian Railroad Project Collapses

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
People talk about the Russo-Japanese War like it was set in stone, when in reality the Trans-Siberian Railway played a huge role in the history of the region. For starters, if the eastern half of the railroad wouldn't have been there by 1895, the Triple Intervention would have been much more unlikely. Later on it was the approaching completion of the Trans-Siberian Railway that played a major part in the sense of urgency Japan had in her relations with Russia just prior the Russo-Japanese War, and the Russian insistence on continuing the occupation of Manchuria - mainly to secure her railroads there. Not to mention the fact that Russia wouldn't have a base at Dalian to begin with without the Triple Intervention.

Without the railroad the Russian response to Boxer Revolt would be different because they couldn't mobilize and supply such large formations in Manchuria as in OTL, and Witte himself wouldn't have the influence he had in OTL. The butterflies from this change are huge, and quickly stack up.


Good point. Russia will probably much more circumspect about contesting Japanese interests, leaving me wondering if Japan is ever motivated to fight them.

A Japan that keeps all its marbles from the Chinese war has the Kwangtung peninsula sooner and probably annexes Korea sooner. Without the Triple Intervention, it is less motivated to participate in a European alliance system, because it feels less vulnerable and has less hankering for vengeance. Europeans may not feel motivated to reach out to Japan for balance of power reasons. Either a happily ever after territorially satiated Japan, or a Japan that went to war with the Spanish or Dutch East Indies, would be more likely than a Japan that deliberately assaults Russia.
__________________
 

LordKalvert

Banned
I may need to revisit my readings on the Trans-Siberian railway, but I previously came to the conclusion it had been completed as fast as humanly possible with no cost spared. I had been thinking 'WI' it had been prioritised, but concluded it had.

Difficult to believe the Manchurian branch would have cost as much as those midway stretches, isolated from anywhere. The rationale for the Manchurian line would have been economic penetration into Manchuria, since I understand land concessions applied to the path of the tracks.

The railroad is pressed ahead but costs aren't spared. There's an effort to build quickly and cheaply and the Russians take a lot of shortcuts.

The biggest one is to abandon the circum-Baikal link and go with the icebreaking ferry. It would have been enough for light commercial traffic but no where near enough for wartime Witte won the argument but the Boxer rebellion proved the need to press ahead with the original idea

The Far Eastern sections are a nightmare to build- much more so than the Amur line would have been. The Amur line followed the river and supplies could easily have been delivered to any point on the route. The railroad could have been broken into as many sections as possible allowing as fast of construction as you would want

The extreme costs of the Manchurian line are due to-

1) The need to have the rails hauled in overland

2) The insane corruption that took place on that line

3) The high cost to defend it and the destruction of vast spans during the Boxer rebellion

Witte had a huge number of schemes in Manchuria- none of them had much prospect of an early return if any. Some of them were downright harmful. The vast sums spent on upgrading the port of Dalni was, rightfully, vehemently opposed by the Navy that pointed out that it would allow the Japanese to supply an attack on Port Arthur

Actual spending on the Manchurian lines-

1898 25,000,000
1899 60,000,000
1900 86,000,000
1901 82,000,000
1902 102,000,000


Total 355,000,000

Peter Gatrell The Tsarist Economy

There's no reason to delay (other than cost) until 1898- the survey work was completed during the Sino-Japanese War and the treaty concluded in 1895 but formally signed at Nicholas' coronation in May 1896 The Amur line was already surveyed and plotted, was on Russian soil and could proceed at the Russians leisure


As for the Circum-Baikal route- it could have been sped up by perhaps two years- if you had pushed the other routes a little faster it may have been possible to start on it a bit earlier

Once the Lake is reached, the work can proceed simultaneously on several sections at once. The work force is about 9,000 in 1901 and 1902 rising to 13,500 in 1903 and 1904. Getting the workforce of 1901-02 up to 1903-04 levels could have cut maybe a year

Better tools (steam shovels for example) could have sped things up a bit as well

The Russians did, in the words of a contemporary observer, a "first class job of building a second class railroad" They really cut a lot of corners
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Good point. Russia will probably much more circumspect about contesting Japanese interests, leaving me wondering if Japan is ever motivated to fight them.

A Japan that keeps all its marbles from the Chinese war has the Kwangtung peninsula sooner and probably annexes Korea sooner. Without the Triple Intervention, it is less motivated to participate in a European alliance system, because it feels less vulnerable and has less hankering for vengeance. Europeans may not feel motivated to reach out to Japan for balance of power reasons. Either a happily ever after territorially satiated Japan, or a Japan that went to war with the Spanish or Dutch East Indies, would be more likely than a Japan that deliberately assaults Russia.
__________________

Most contemporary observers thought the Japanese had attacked China in an effort to preempt Russia in the Far East. The Russians certainly did.

The railroad plays no role in the actual intervention. The only land forces the Russians had were about 30,000 men in Vladivostok. The moved into forward defensive positions on the off chance that the Japanese marched across Manchuria

The Interventionists relied on their Naval power to threaten the Japanese by cutting off their forces in Korea.

If they run into any trouble, they can always resupply the Chinese Army and make into something resembling a fighting force

I don't think you can quench the Japanese thirst for territory. They really had "limited" their demands as it were
 
There were several problems with OTL's icebreaker scheme.

1) when they measured the ice depth (to gauge what kind of ice it would have to break through), they got a rather too small a number. (I forget if the winter they measured the ice was particularly warm, if they did it in a sheltered bay, or at the wrong time of year. But ice on Baikal gets much thicker than the icebreaker was built for.

2) the ship was built in Britain, and had to be designed for disassembly and then transport on rail cars. (So the boilers, for instance, had to be far too small for a ship that size, and thus they need multiple units.) THEN, the Russian logistics system LOST several of the disassembled pieces, so what arrived at Baikal was only most of the ship. The rest had to be reconstructed, somehow.

===
If they got the ship designed to the correct spec, and got all the pieces to the Lake, I think the icebreaker could have served very well the first few years.

Yes, they'll have to build a line south of the lake eventually, but that can wait. Just like improving ballast and rail weight on the line can. The important thing is to get a through line.

A rickety creaky RR is much, much, much better than any other alternative available. And is a very good basis for building a decent RR.

(It's what the the various Transcontinentals did in North America did - build something, anything, and then you can fix it later.)
 

LordKalvert

Banned
There were several problems with OTL's icebreaker scheme.

1) when they measured the ice depth (to gauge what kind of ice it would have to break through), they got a rather too small a number. (I forget if the winter they measured the ice was particularly warm, if they did it in a sheltered bay, or at the wrong time of year. But ice on Baikal gets much thicker than the icebreaker was built for.

2) the ship was built in Britain, and had to be designed for disassembly and then transport on rail cars. (So the boilers, for instance, had to be far too small for a ship that size, and thus they need multiple units.) THEN, the Russian logistics system LOST several of the disassembled pieces, so what arrived at Baikal was only most of the ship. The rest had to be reconstructed, somehow.

===
If they got the ship designed to the correct spec, and got all the pieces to the Lake, I think the icebreaker could have served very well the first few years.

Yes, they'll have to build a line south of the lake eventually, but that can wait. Just like improving ballast and rail weight on the line can. The important thing is to get a through line.

A rickety creaky RR is much, much, much better than any other alternative available. And is a very good basis for building a decent RR.

(It's what the the various Transcontinentals did in North America did - build something, anything, and then you can fix it later.)

The icebreaker's capacity during the winter was only one trip a day rather than than the ten and later twenty pairs that they got by the circum-baikal route. The icebreaker was sufficient for civilian needs

It was never going to be enough for the military's need. The struggle over the Trans-Siberian railroad is largely a fight between the military and the finance ministries with the foreign ministry popping in occasionally
 

BooNZ

Banned
It is easy to understate the challenges facing the Russian state in constructing the TS railroad. After impressive industrial growth through the 1890s, its industry remained substantially inferior to that of even A-H (for example). While it had a massive labour pool, it's education system meant that there was forever a shortage of skilled labour. The Russian administration was also known to be both inefficient and corrupt.

The achievements of the builders of transcontinental railways in America were certainly impressive, but the scale and latitude of the TS railroad appears to be an altogether more challenging endeavour. In the circumstance, it would be understandable if corners were initially cut...

...

Yes, they'll have to build a line south of the lake eventually, but that can wait. Just like improving ballast and rail weight on the line can. The important thing is to get a through line.

A rickety creaky RR is much, much, much better than any other alternative available. And is a very good basis for building a decent RR.

(It's what the the various Transcontinentals did in North America did - build something, anything, and then you can fix it later.)

The above makes a whole lot of sense.

...
It was never going to be enough for the military's need. The struggle over the Trans-Siberian railroad is largely a fight between the military and the finance ministries with the foreign ministry popping in occasionally

Ultimately it was intended to become enough for the military's needs, but belligerence resulted in Russia being entangled in conflict before the rail had upgraded sufficiently. As a outlined by DT, the toughest part is pushing through the initial line, which can then be more easily improved upon.

The construction Trans-Siberian railroad was largely driven by Witte, who as the former Railway Minister (with a head for mathematics/logistics), who became the long serving and influential Finance Minister (for both Nicky and his father). Any fights with the military on railway matters would have been decidedly lopsided in favour of Witte. A better understanding of logistics (in the military or foreign ministries) might have resulted in a more circumspect Russian foreign policy in the East.

The railroad could easily have been finished earlier (and cheaper) if Nicholas had listened to Vannovski rather than Witte- kept to the original line which ran along the amur rather than cutting across Manchuria. The Amur route would have allowed supplies to go by barge and could be broken into as many sections as you want

With the benefit of hindsight, Manchuria was the optimal route - OTL construction on the Manchurian line was commenced in 1897 and was completed in 1902/03 (six years construction), while the Amur route was started in 1907 and completed in 1916 (nine years construction - even with the increased use of technology). Prima facie the Amur route provided for more challenges (permafrost, river crossings and isolation) with few if any economic benefits.

The Manchurian line represented a shortcut to the Pacific Ocean, both in terms of travel time and distance of line laid. The Manchurian line provided significant economic concessions allowing for Russian economic penetration into Northern China. The Manchurian line also terminated at Darien, a centrally located warm water port which would have maximised potential use of the rail.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
The above makes a whole lot of sense.



Ultimately it was intended to become enough for the military's needs, but belligerence resulted in Russia being entangled in conflict before the rail had upgraded sufficiently. As a outlined by DT, the toughest part is pushing through the initial line, which can then be more easily improved upon.

The construction Trans-Siberian railroad was largely driven by Witte, who as the former Railway Minister (with a head for mathematics/logistics), who became the long serving and influential Finance Minister (for both Nicky and his father). Any fights with the military on railway matters would have been decidedly lopsided in favour of Witte. A better understanding of logistics (in the military or foreign ministries) might have resulted in a more circumspect Russian foreign policy in the East.



With the benefit of hindsight, Manchuria was the optimal route - OTL construction on the Manchurian line was commenced in 1897 and was completed in 1902/03 (six years construction), while the Amur route was started in 1907 and completed in 1916 (nine years construction - even with the increased use of technology). Prima facie the Amur route provided for more challenges (permafrost, river crossings and isolation) with few if any economic benefits.

The Manchurian line represented a shortcut to the Pacific Ocean, both in terms of travel time and distance of line laid. The Manchurian line provided significant economic concessions allowing for Russian economic penetration into Northern China. The Manchurian line also terminated at Darien, a centrally located warm water port which would have maximised potential use of the rail.


the Manchurian line was never the optimal route- the notion that the railway could serve as a transit to the Far East was ridiculous. Rail was vastly more expensive than sea and the Trans-Siberian could never compete except for the most high value of cargo such as passengers where time was valued. Bulk commodities which is what most trade with China was, would always prefer the shipping right

The railway was also supposed to encourage settlement- that would favor the Amur line. Settling Chinese in Manchuria is a lot worse use of scarce Russian capital than settling Russians along the Amur

The Amur line was secure while the Manchurian line was not- It didn't require hindsight, Vannovski saw and so did Kuroptkain As for Dalni, the Admirality was unanimous in its opinion that it would seriously jeopardize Port Arthur. The military was right and Witte was wrong Russia communications with its Far Eastern provinces needed to be under Russian control and that means the Amur line

The notion that some quite peaceful penetration (which never got anywhere near the investment involved) could achieve anything during this era is the height of naivete- something that Witte demonstrated on a continuing basis

Finally, the insane prices Witte paid for substandard merchandise was serious hindrance to the completion of the route
 
(It's what the the various Transcontinentals did in North America did - build something, anything, and then you can fix it later.)
Essentially, an effort like this is 90% logistics. Once you've got a rickety, creaky line in, you can use that line to support the work parties for a less rickety, les creaky line. Really, the 'opening' of the railway from end to end is just the marker for the real work to begin.
 

BooNZ

Banned
the Manchurian line was never the optimal route- the notion that the railway could serve as a transit to the Far East was ridiculous. Rail was vastly more expensive than sea and the Trans-Siberian could never compete except for the most high value of cargo such as passengers where time was valued. Bulk commodities which is what most trade with China was, would always prefer the shipping right

Who said the Manchurian railway would serve as a transit to the far East?

The Manchurian railway was a tool for Russian economic penetration into China - goods produced in Northern China/Manchuria would be transported on rail controlled by Russia to ports controlled by Russia. Imports into Northern China could be distributed thought the same Russian controlled distribution channels.

The railway was also supposed to encourage settlement- that would favor the Amur line.

Did the Russians have a surplus of eskimos? Was there a less hospitable stretch of rail than Amur anywhere in the world?

Settling Chinese in Manchuria is a lot worse use of scarce Russian capital than settling Russians along the Amur

Why would the Russians be settling Chinese?

The Amur line was secure while the Manchurian line was not- It didn't require hindsight, Vannovski saw and so did Kuroptkain As for Dalni, the Admirality was unanimous in its opinion that it would seriously jeopardize Port Arthur. The military was right and Witte was wrong Russia communications with its Far Eastern provinces needed to be under Russian control and that means the Amur line

The Manchurian line was secure to the extent that it was secured by Russian armed forces. Indeed, the presence of the line justified the Russian occupation of Manchuria and the continued presence of the Russian armed services. From 1900 the Russian military was increasingly dominated by hawks and showed a total disregard for the Japanese position. You suggestion the Russian army and navy were repeatedly expressing their concerns regarding the threat of Japan, does not reconcile with Russia's conduct...

Witte was clear he did not believe Manchuria should be occupied by Russia, but if it was, it needed to be by a force sufficient to defend it. The Russian army and navy ultimately failed to assess the true threat of Japanese forces.

The notion that some quite peaceful penetration (which never got anywhere near the investment involved) could achieve anything during this era is the height of naivete- something that Witte demonstrated on a continuing basis
That era was one of the most peaceful in history and the Manchurian line had only been completed in 1902.

Finally, the insane prices Witte paid for substandard merchandise was serious hindrance to the completion of the route

As Finance Minister, I suspect Witte was not involved in day-to-day procurement - I daresay you believe some neo-liberal procurement policy should have been put in place... :rolleyes:
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Who said the Manchurian railway would serve as a transit to the far East?

That was Witte and his main argument in favor of the Manchurian line

The Manchurian railway was a tool for Russian economic penetration into China - goods produced in Northern China/Manchuria would be transported on rail controlled by Russia to ports controlled by Russia. Imports into Northern China could be distributed thought the same Russian controlled distribution channels.

There wasn't a lick of trade to be had and everyone knew it. Now if your intention is to conquer Manchuria, ok, but really you'd need the secure Amur line first

Did the Russians have a surplus of eskimos? Was there a less hospitable stretch of rail than Amur anywhere in the world?

I'm sure there are and settling the Amur valley is just what they do once they finish the Amur line after the Japanese War


Why would the Russians be settling Chinese?

That is the end result of building the line through Manchuria. The Chinese and the Manchus used the line to expand their settlements. Its one of the big jokes about Witte's scheme


The Manchurian line was secure to the extent that it was secured by Russian armed forces. Indeed, the presence of the line justified the Russian occupation of Manchuria and the continued presence of the Russian armed services. From 1900 the Russian military was increasingly dominated by hawks and showed a total disregard for the Japanese position. You suggestion the Russian army and navy were repeatedly expressing their concerns regarding the threat of Japan, does not reconcile with Russia's conduct...

Witte was clear he did not believe Manchuria should be occupied by Russia, but if it was, it needed to be by a force sufficient to defend it. The Russian army and navy ultimately failed to assess the true threat of Japanese forces.

That the Manchurian line required tens of thousands of troops to protect was the main argument against it. As for Witte's arguments that he wasn't provoking the Japanese they are laughable

That era was one of the most peaceful in history and the Manchurian line had only been completed in 1902.

Really?

1894-95 Sino Japanese War

1896 Ottoman Greek War
1896 Abysinnian War
1898 Spanish-American War
1899 Boer War
1900 Boxer Rebellion

It was a game of pounce or be pounced

As Finance Minister, I suspect Witte was not involved in day-to-day procurement - I daresay you believe some neo-liberal procurement policy should have been put in place... :rolleyes:

I would suggest you consider the reality rather than the fantasy. Witte was involved in the procurement and did sign the deals that, for example, wasted 8,500,000 rubles on overpriced rails in 1902-03 alone
 
I was reading more about the British colonial railway construction company that did much of the NZ main trunk line. It seemed that part of the deal with the NZ colonial government required the company to recruit the labourers in the UK to work on the railway construction - BYON? (Bring your own navvies?).

They ended up bringing several thousand over, but ended up losing most of them for various reasons. Seemed many of them were not actually navvies per say, more people that signed on as such but were actually farm labourers and keen to go back to that as soon as they found a job.
 

BooNZ

Banned
That was Witte and his main argument in favor of the Manchurian line

That argument would have been applied to the TS railway in general, not just the Manchurian Line. The Manchurian line was simply the most direct.

There wasn't a lick of trade to be had and everyone knew it. Now if your intention is to conquer Manchuria, ok, but really you'd need the secure Amur line first

The China trade was incredibly lucrative, but dominated by the British, which is why the British favoured the status quo. OTL the Russians were actually occupying Manchuria years before the Amur line had commenced. If that Japanese had been appropriately appeased, the Amur line may not have been needed at all.

I'm sure there are and settling the Amur valley is just what they do once they finish the Amur line after the Japanese War

If the Russians were struggling for settlers in the rich fertile soils of Manchuria, they're going to really 'dig' that permafrost.

That is the end result of building the line through Manchuria. The Chinese and the Manchus used the line to expand their settlements. Its one of the big jokes about Witte's scheme

The key driver would have been the Chinese deliberately lifting the floodgates on immigration into Manchuria in the 1890s. Meanwhile the Russians needed to employee Chinese managers in Manchuria to administer their interests because that lacked suitably skilled Russian manpower.

That the Manchurian line required tens of thousands of troops to protect was the main argument against it. As for Witte's arguments that he wasn't provoking the Japanese they are laughable

Railways security was largely a Trojan horse to get Russian troops into Manchuria. As Witte was a firm dove, there is an element of irony there.

Really?

1894-95 Sino Japanese War

1896 Ottoman Greek War
1896 Abysinnian War
1898 Spanish-American War
1899 Boer War
1900 Boxer Rebellion

It was a game of pounce or be pounced

Meh - those are scarcely proper 'civilised' [European] wars. Greater powers of that era were settling their disputes discretely with horse-trading rather than overt wars between themselves...

I would suggest you consider the reality rather than the fantasy. Witte was involved in the procurement and did sign the deals that, for example, wasted 8,500,000 rubles on overpriced rails in 1902-03 alone

Without context it might be protectionism, racketeering, corruption, logistics or perhaps your imagination.

Response above
 
Top