Saudi Arabian oil convoy to US

[Philippe]

This bothers me.

I don't know the figures off the top of my head, but I didn't think that Arabia was supplying all that much oil to the US in the 1940's. Oil was only discovered in the Kingdom in something like 1936, and the concept of the US guzzling Saudi oil in the 1940's strikes me as a bit anachronistic. I would have thought the maritime traffic flow was between the Gulf and India at that point in time.

Does anyone know what lies behind this? Is it perhaps a proxy for something else?

[PowerGmbH]

Hi Phillipe:

as i am making some investigations to enhance significantly the Global Campaign Map ( yes it will throw you out of the chair, so cool!),

here is some information i found some time ago regarding OIL SUPPLY and Production:

Main Oil Exporters in 1935

United States

6,958 kt

Iran

6,860 kt

Romania

6,221 kt

Dutch East India (Indonesia)

5,139 kt

Russia

3,369 kt

Columbia

2,279 kt

Main Oil Importers in 1935

Great Britain

10,487 kt

France

6,390 kt

Canada

4,509 kt

United States

4,366 kt

Germany

3,863 kt

Japan

3,680 kt

and some older Information on annual Production by 1929:

USA 138.104.000

Venezuela 20.402.000

UdSSR 14.477.000

Mexiko 6.700.000

Iran 5.549.000

Niederl. Indien (Indonesien) 5.239.000

Rumänien 4.847.000

Kolumbien 2.911.000

Peru 1.777.000

Argentinien 1.365.000

Trinidad 1.213.000

Britisch Indien (Indien, Burma) 1.201.000

Polen 675.000

Irak 116.000

Deutsches Reich 103.000

[Philippe]

Nice figures. The situation in 1929 is not totally applicable since it would show Saudi oil production at 0. Note that there are different grades of oil, so you can be a net importer and a significant exporter at the same time (viz. the U.S.). The real question that needs to be addressed is the volume and direction of maritime traffic. I'm sure the people behind the Silent Hunter III Grey Wolves 2.0 mod that is getting ready for December release have an excellent handle on this, largely because they had to know the frequency and tonnage of random encounters in any given area of the world.

But I would still like to hear what the design intent behind the Saudi convoys was -- I suspect it has to do with more than just Saudi oil.

[SeaMonkey]

Ibn Saud, the absolute ruler of SA was pro-allied leaning throughout the war and eventually declared war on the Axis in March of 45.

The Saudi Arabian oil fields were developed by US companies and commercial production was started in 1938. There were exports, how much, it's not clear, but SA was a recipient of Lend-Lease supplies and I'm sure they made concessions for those receivables.

[Guest Mike]

From the Convoy Code Index there weer 4 convoy codes too and from the PErsian Gulf - BP from Bombay, KP from Karachi, PA to Aden and PB to Bombay.

The ships that made them up, dates of sailing and ssome notes can be found in the "Shorter convoys database" at that same page - unfortunately there isn't any info on cargoes except for the BP series which carried troops.

Powergmbh have you seen word resource list ? It gives the % of world production of various resources by country in 1937.

[Philippe]

Don't forget that traffic out of the Persian Gulf includes Iran and Iraq, not just Saudi Arabia.

[JonS]

During WWII, using a standard metric (bbls per day, or sumfink) North American Oil production was 600, South/Central American production was 500, Asian was 60, Europe was 60, and the "Middle East" (incl everything from Egypt to Afghanistan, Somalia to Stalingrad, and in particular includes Soviet production from Maikop to Baku) was 300.

Oil from Saudi/Kuwait/Iraq/Persia was important, but not terribly so. I see no reason why any of it would be shipped from there to the US.

(numbers sourced from graphic in Deighton "Blood, tears, and folly)

Jon

[Guest Mike]

IIRC the original development of oil in the Mid-east was to fuel RN ships in the Indian ocean and Med wasn't it?

There's a summary of WW2 for hte various "minor" Mid-east states here

[ November 25, 2007, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organist ]

[Liam]

I think the idea is to give Arabia a meaningful existence on the map and something worth fighting for in the region. A Strategic Goal possibly, or a strategic alternative if the Axis have full gain of the MidEast in Vanilla SC it's not such a great gain with 1 oilfield and 1 shipment of oil to the West. I do not think it really represents the exact amount of oil extracted and mailed to the USA... Including all of the MiddleEast in the Axis sphere of influence would've probably been bad news for the Allies... For it would cost a greater Gem, India-Suez, the jugular Far East Support System of the British Empire

[Edwin P.]

"Aramco shunned the offer of direct government involvement (USA) but with its aid achieved a 25-fold increase in crude oil supply from 20 thousand barrels per day in 1944 to 500 thousand barrels per day in 1949.

The Ras Tanura refinery's distillation capacity was expanded from 50 thousand barrels per day to 127 thousand barrels per day between 1945 and 1949, in part to supply the increasing requirements of the U.S. Navy."

From my point of view the effect of Saudi Oil production is non-existant in WAW, unless Saudi Arabia joins the allies (a rare event in most games)

In that case I assume that investment in their oil fields increases and this causes production increases to 500K barrels a day, the historical rate that was obtained in 1949 after Aramco's investment in the oil fields increased.

This would equal annual production of 180m barrels.

As for where the oil went, it was owned by American companies and the Allied player can easily send it to the UK or USSR via merchant ship convoys.

[Konigs]

A word for Edwin P. and Stalin's Organist, thank you. You two always seem to have the data and or the most interesting web sites to back your position.

Stalin's Organist, how do you find so many interesting sites?

thanks guys,

Konigs

[jon_j_rambo]

Lets talk reality. Germany going to Africa & the Middle East is the stupidest thing. Reality, you need shipping (thus naval control) to bring home the goods. Parts, equipment, & labor is needed to pull the black gold out of the Middle East.

Germany & Mr. Rommell were deceived to think they ever had a chance in Africa. The Allies had all kinds of ships & supplies. Even if the ground war would have gone a little better for Gerry, it wouldn't have mattered.

You're in Dreamland if you think Germany actually had a chance in real-life to take over anything requiring ships.

[Philippe]

You're wandering off-topic or missing the point. What's at issue here is whether or not the game design reflects historical reality. If it doesn't, and there isn't a pressing design reason for having that convoy, the convoy should be removed (and possibly replaced by something else).

I have yet to see anything that suggests there were convoys of ships going from Saudi Arabia to the US that would have been vulnerable to raiding if Saudi Arabia had entered the war. I don't think Saudi oil production was particularly significant during WW II, and I can't think of anything else that would be moving in sufficient quantities to warrant convoys. I also suspect that there may be some kind of game-design short-hand going on here, and that the Saudi-US link is really a proxy for something else entirely. I think what we need at this point is some commentary on design intent.

[Lars]

It wasn't.

But as you note, it does give the Germans another nice convoy line to raid. The US doesn't have one for the Carib or coastal traffic.

[Edwin P.]

Good point Lars, most American convoys started in the Gulf of Mexico and run up the Eastern coast before heading North East towards Europe.

[Edwin P.]

Also Philippe, consider the fact that to get Saudi Arabia on the Allied side would require in WAW a large expenditure of MPPs on Diplomacy - and that this my in my mind be considered investments in uping their oil production.

That said, in how many games does Saudi Arabian convoys get activiated. I just don't see it.

And as for the Axis taxing it, keep in mind that Turkey was selling Chrome to Germany, and could likely have been persuaded to alllow tankers carrying oil to traverse its roads - thus avoiding the need to ship oil via ships.

[Minty]

saudi only has to be above 30% right? 2, maybe 3 diplomacy hits. cost of 150 to 225mpp. probably take a year. Say start in jan 41 means you get it jan 42. then 2 years of 20 MMP a turn = 40 X 20 = 800MPP.start earlier with the british and you get a lot more.

Seems a bargain to me

[SeaMonkey]

Actually you can induce those SA convoys to USA by DoWing them.

Its not an easy conquest with the supply situation in the desert, but a paradrop with some air support from Kuwait gets the job done.

UK can accomplish this early if they focus and its 25 MPPs additional to USA base.

You then can link up with USSR forces through Iran and neutralize any Axis attempt at subjecting the MidEast. Makes for a nice little side show.

[Liam]

If it's on the map it will be used. And for those who think that the Oil out there was of no value, it's not so much what you yourself can do with the oil, but rather what your opponent cannot do with it! Also lets not forget the Italian Navy in WW2, it was Massive and strong enough locally to support the Nazis if they'd of ever used it right. Of course the Italians didn't and that's history, but for a brief period in 1941-42 the Axis Owned the Med, and didn't even know it... Because of the crippled RN BBs in Alexandria Harbor by Italian demolitionists. They just didn't do proper Recon...

The transport capacity to bring that oil home to Italy and send it up the Boot to Germany was of no great effort. Similarly the Italians had conquored Somalia and probably could've occuppied and quelled any local rebellions in the Mideast... So long as Stalin stayed out... He had many issues with the locals, Muslims weren't particularly fond of a Godless Communist, nor of Imperial Western Power

Regardless the actual value of the Oil pumped out may not be significant but the region may be more significant with the Greater Strategic Goal. Ultimately it gives Japan and Germany-along with Italy a place to meet up and talk about dividing up the World, with a Conquested China-India-Burma-Indo China...Perhaps the Japanese Army would've turned to Far East, Central USSR-Baku next... Which was a little bit vital for the Russian War Machine. Plus not too healthy for Australia-South Africa or India for the UK...

Not that this is a gamebreaker for WW2 but certainly something that may have brought Churchill and the British people to the Diplomatic Board. I'm shocked we don't see a deduction of MPPs for loss of Suez for the UK, the Horn is just not as fast a place to do their business

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Konigs:

Stalin's Organist, how do you find so many interesting sites?

my google-fu is strong and my employment booring ...... :cool:

[Philippe]

Dieseltaylor has just posted on this topic in the CMAK forum, pointing out that there were 4.5 million tons of Lend-lease aid to the Soviet Union that went through Persia. He also posted a great link to a website on the subject.

That isn't Saudi-US, but it may represent a convoy in the right general area (assuming the Lend-lease got to Iran by going around Africa). The direction of the flow should be US to Iran rather than Saudi to US, and the flow doesn't consist of oil.

[Hubert Cater]

Just adding a comment from a similar and recent email response, see below.

The convoy was essentially added to reflect the eventual investment and transfer of oil resources to the US. It also gives a reason for players to fight over Saudi Arabia.

Again this is all hypothetical, i.e. since in real life Saudi Arabia was never invaded and the major investments happened after the war so it is really just a matter of reflecting what may have happened if it history was changed by player actions. For example, if players do not invest diplomatically in Saudi Arabia or if they do not invade Saudi Arabia then everything remains as it was historically.

[Liam]

HC is right, it's a hypothetical investment. Though many of SC2's qualities are hypothetical. Also we should support this as it's making the game more GeoPolitical, even if a inch... and less ETO Isolated.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Liam:

HC is right, it's a hypothetical investment.

Do you think? *pfft* What would he know about his own game?