|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 2, 2019 14:22:42 GMT -6
"A drop of oil is equal to a drop of human blood" So said Ferdinand Foch, a famous French Field Marshall. I think that says it all. Someone let me know when this thread settles down to discussing the subject at hand.
|
|
AiryW
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by AiryW on Jan 2, 2019 14:42:49 GMT -6
I promise I wont draw blood. Light bruises at the worst.
|
|
|
|
Post by ursamaior on Jan 2, 2019 14:50:49 GMT -6
Understood. Sorry if I was rude. Coming from that region please forgive my sensitivity when confronted with fake history. Romania prior to the fall of France was a liberal democracy. It is true that a state of emergency had been enacted in order to fight the fascist organizations however that does not preclude a country from being a democracy if indeed there is a genuine emergency. The US constitution is generally considered a watershed document when it comes to creating a liberal society and it specifically grants the power to suspend habeas corpus and resort to martial law in times of great danger to the public. Considering that fascists assassinated the prime minister in this period it is certainly true that it was a time of great danger. While Romania did not entirely embargo Germany, neither did the US entirely embargo Japan. When it came to the crucial matter of oil they did show a clear preference for the British over the Germans. The iron guard that you speak of was not only excluded from the Romanian government but the government had gone to extreme measures in order to keep it that way. This is the state PRIOR to the fall of France. I place emphasis on that term because the word "prior" indicates that I am not speaking of the political reversal to accommodate the fascists which happened AFTER the fall of France. Your comments about myself are not merely rude, they are inaccurate. You claim to have "sensitivity to fake history" which is odd because in your case such a sensitivity should be an autoimmune disorder.
Dude cool down!
I have not stated anything, just asked. Your overreaction shows that I touched something really sensitive. What is it? You took your history lessons in Bucharest?
Such sentences that because the romanians preferred the british over the germans they were "liberal democrats" make me really laugh.
In that region the poles were the most democratic at that time but even their system is better described as a military dictatorship.
|
|
AiryW
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by AiryW on Jan 2, 2019 15:32:22 GMT -6
*snort* ...the last refuge... |
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Jan 5, 2019 1:47:34 GMT -6
In the developer journal, William mentioned that if a faction is cut off from oil access, there is a risk that oil-firing ships will have ordered strategic moves cancelled or that they will be unable to take part in a battle. Maybe the aftermath of a fuel shortage could be extend into other aspects as well. Some other aspects already occurred to me are: 1. Submarine activity and efficiency reduced(They are using diesel, which is a product from oil). 2. Air forces performances reduced(Lack of fuel would have a negative impact on both airman quality due to less training and aircraft mechanic performances). 3. Social unrest level increases(coldness and famine). I would like to discuss with you guys about other possible aftermath of a oil shortage. 
In terms of military effects, #2 is certainly a major one. Lack of fuel for the air force has an immediate impact on training of new pilots, since the number of hours of flight training must be curtailed in order to have fuel for combat missions. And few hours in training means lower skilled pilots. And as Chuck Yeager observed, it's the man, not the machine, so lower skilled pilots, however good their aircraft, tend to get shot down at much higher rates.
|
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jan 5, 2019 19:38:20 GMT -6
Ok...final warning for those in this thread that are getting into personal attacks; that specifically violates our TOS and will not be tolerated.
I hope I have made myself clear.
|
|
AiryW
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by AiryW on Jan 6, 2019 18:27:53 GMT -6
In terms of military effects, #2 is certainly a major one. Lack of fuel for the air force has an immediate impact on training of new pilots, since the number of hours of flight training must be curtailed in order to have fuel for combat missions. And few hours in training means lower skilled pilots. And as Chuck Yeager observed, it's the man, not the machine, so lower skilled pilots, however good their aircraft, tend to get shot down at much higher rates. In WWII the effect of oil on flight training time was severe as Adam Tooze has helped us all learn. (I mean I'm assuming that's where we're all getting it. Great book.) However his book on WWI doesn't mention oil shortage, rather he mentions the French+British ability to manufacture more planes. So I would think that between 1916 and 1944 there is a point where manufacturing is efficient enough that the ability to procure oil is more of a limit then the ability to procure aircraft. I wonder at what point that was. I'm thinking in terms of peak production, i.e. Germany wasn't cutting pilot hours in 1939 because the number of planes was very small but Germany in 1939 was presumably technologically capable of manufacturing tens of thousands were it not for the fact that the WWII broke out in the very early stages of mobilization compared to WWII. |
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 6, 2019 18:38:56 GMT -6
In terms of military effects, #2 is certainly a major one. Lack of fuel for the air force has an immediate impact on training of new pilots, since the number of hours of flight training must be curtailed in order to have fuel for combat missions. And few hours in training means lower skilled pilots. And as Chuck Yeager observed, it's the man, not the machine, so lower skilled pilots, however good their aircraft, tend to get shot down at much higher rates. In WWII the effect of oil on flight training time was severe as Adam Tooze has helped us all learn. (I mean I'm assuming that's where we're all getting it. Great book.) However his book on WWI doesn't mention oil shortage, rather he mentions the French+British ability to manufacture more planes. So I would think that between 1916 and 1944 there is a point where manufacturing is efficient enough that the ability to procure oil is more of a limit then the ability to procure aircraft. I wonder at what point that was. I'm thinking in terms of peak production, i.e. Germany wasn't cutting pilot hours in 1939 because the number of planes was very small but Germany in 1939 was presumably technologically capable of manufacturing tens of thousands were it not for the fact that the WWII broke out in the very early stages of mobilization compared to WWII. This article is interesting - theconversation.com/how-world-war-i-ushered-in-the-century-of-oil-74585 - and this one - oilgeopolitics.net/History/Oil_and_the_Origins_of_World_W/oil_and_the_origins_of_world_w.HTM |
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Jan 7, 2019 0:32:15 GMT -6
In terms of military effects, #2 is certainly a major one. Lack of fuel for the air force has an immediate impact on training of new pilots, since the number of hours of flight training must be curtailed in order to have fuel for combat missions. And few hours in training means lower skilled pilots. And as Chuck Yeager observed, it's the man, not the machine, so lower skilled pilots, however good their aircraft, tend to get shot down at much higher rates. In WWII the effect of oil on flight training time was severe as Adam Tooze has helped us all learn. (I mean I'm assuming that's where we're all getting it. Great book.)
I first learned about it from the fairly comprehensive historical reference section of the manual for the old game Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. This was back when games shipped with thick, spiral-bound manuals packed with information. (I still have that manual. Although my pick for best manual would be the one for Red Baron. A beautiful manual. Still have that one too.) |
|
