No port in Bilbao??

PSP/DS/PC/MAC : WWII turn based grand strategy game

Moderators: firepowerjohan, Happycat, rkr1958, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
Aryaman
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:12 pm

No port in Bilbao??

Post by Aryaman » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:52 pm

Hi
I have noticed that the city of Bilbao, in the northern coast of Spain, doesn´t have a port, I hope that will be corrected for GS 2.0, right?

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4717
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:14 pm

We're looking into this.

Is there a particular reason Bilbao port should be on the map? The Spanish naval base was in El Ferrol in La Coruna further to the west. Would Bilbao port have any significance during WW2 for getting in supplies to the military units?

ncali
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:12 pm

Post by ncali » Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:53 pm

Stauffenberg wrote:We're looking into this.

Is there a particular reason Bilbao port should be on the map? The Spanish naval base was in El Ferrol in La Coruna further to the west. Would Bilbao port have any significance during WW2 for getting in supplies to the military units?
Given that both cities and ports are supply centers, isn't the question whether there was sufficient facilities to embark/disembark troops and to repair ships?

Rhialto
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:13 pm

Post by Rhialto » Thu Dec 30, 2010 9:10 pm

ncali wrote: Given that both cities and ports are supply centers, isn't the question whether there was sufficient facilities to embark/disembark troops and to repair ships?
I would say so, yes:

At 07.14 hours on 29 May, 1940, U-37 fired three warning shots across the bow of the unescorted Telena (Master Harold Fitch Gosling) off Muros, Cape Finisterre and opened fire with the deck gun when the ship used its radio. Soon her cargo caught fire and the crew was forced to abandon ship which went aground in shallow water. The master and 17 crew members were lost. 18 crew members were picked up by the Spanish trawlers Buena Esperanza and Jose Ignacio de C. and landed at Mari and El Grove near Vigo. Later the wreck was seized by Spain, salvaged and brought into the harbour of Vigo, where 7400 tons of the oil was salvaged. On 17 Aug, 1940, the tanker arrived in Bilbao and was repaired at the Seatoa Naval Yard.
http://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ships/330.html

As for shipping people:

Agencies in England organised the hiring of the S.S.Habana, formerly a hospital ship, to evacuate children from the Bilbao area. At 10,551 tons the Habana was the second biggest ship of the Cia Transatlantica fleet.

In May 1937 some 3,840 Spanish Basque children crammed aboard the SS Habana – all had one suitcase and a label listing their name tied with string to their lapel. The children came with 80 teachers, 120 auxiliaries and 15 catholic priests.

http://rwhiston.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/1/

Finally, this is is an useful account of the siege of Bilbao in 1937. It states that the factories and mines were not damaged in the siege.

http://spanishcivilwar.devhub.com/blog/534332-bilbao/

leridano
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 860
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:51 pm

Post by leridano » Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:44 am

ncali wrote:Given that both cities and ports are supply centers, isn't the question whether there was sufficient facilities to embark/disembark troops and to repair ships?
In CEAW-GS most of the sea ports were at the time of WW2 both sea ports and navy naval bases. So this I think it should be the criterion here. Bilbao was and actually is a big sea port but it was not a spanish naval base. Bilbao was in WW2 a bigger sea port than El Ferrol that was an important spanish naval base. So we have to distinguish between only merchant-civil sea ports and both military and merchant-civil sea ports: these last ones should be the ones added in CEAW.

So IMO it would be inappropriate to add a sea port in Bilbao because there´s not even any important naval base near of this sea port like it happens e.g. in France with Marseilles city and Toulon or Leningrad city and Kronstadt in USSR or Genoa and La Spezia in Italy or La Coruña city and El Ferrol in Spain.




    Aryaman
    1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
    1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
    Posts: 833
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:12 pm

    Post by Aryaman » Fri Dec 31, 2010 1:52 pm

    leridano wrote:
    ncali wrote:Given that both cities and ports are supply centers, isn't the question whether there was sufficient facilities to embark/disembark troops and to repair ships?
    In CEAW-GS most of the sea ports were at the time of WW2 both sea ports and navy naval bases. So this I think it should be the criterion here. Bilbao was and actually is a big sea port but it was not a spanish naval base. Bilbao was in WW2 a bigger sea port than El Ferrol that was an important spanish naval base. So we have to distinguish between only merchant-civil sea ports and both military and merchant-civil sea ports: these last ones should be the ones added in CEAW.

    So IMO it would be inappropriate to add a sea port in Bilbao because there´s not even any important naval base near of this sea port like it happens e.g. in France with Marseilles city and Toulon or Leningrad city and Kronstadt in USSR or Genoa and La Spezia in Italy or La Coruña city and El Ferrol in Spain.



      However Valencia has a port, and it was no naval base and it was considerably smaller commercial port than Bilbao

      Post Reply

      Return to “MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion”