Railway campaign

[rcaf_777]

Just wondering if anyone has ideas for this? I am looking at the Going Home Module for ideas, but I would be intrested in ideas for

1. The Setting IE which rail line to use? US or Europe?

2. Premis for PC conducting this campaign (Why are they there?)

3. Encouters, adventures Bad Guys, Good Guys

Thanks for the help.

[Legbreaker]

To my understanding the US rail system is in a pretty poor state already isn't it? The war would wreak absolute havoc upon it making it probably worse than the European network even though tanks, artillery, etc have caused untold damage to the lines, yard, etc.
How many lines are in North America (including Canada and Mexico) as well? Is there the same density as in Europe which allows for alternate route to be used without going hundreds, or even thousands of kilometres out of the way?
Even with the several years of warfare, I think the European network is more suitable for roleplaying. The US network would probably need a fairly large group of workers to repair sections (especially bridges, tunnels, and yards in and around nuked cities) instead of the train being able to find a way around. The resources required in the US (especially in rails, sleepers, and bridge materials) is likely to be far beyond the capability of PCs.

[Adm.Lee]

Actually, by the late '90s, American railroads were recovering very well from the dark days of the 60s & 70s.

Unless you're out West, rail lines are still dense enough that one may only have to go dozens of kilometers out of your way, not hundreds.

Both European or American railnets will need lots of care from combat or nukings. I'd say the Polish & western Soviet tracks would be in the worst shape, since the most intense combat happened there, as well as air action against rail lines.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

Actually, by the late '90s, American railroads were recovering very well from the dark days of the 60s & 70s.

Fair enough. Doesn't quite fit with the T2K timeline though.

[Brother in Arms]

For years I have been contemplating running a game or writing a story with a Rail workers truck that can ride the rails or ride on the road. Just 3 players one truck a little gear keep it really simple and thus very difficult think of all the potential obstacles and troubles that could result in a campaign like this.

cheers!
BIA

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Fair enough. Doesn't quite fit with the T2K timeline though.

Please expand this

[rcaf_777]

Here what I was thinking

PC group in one or two hi-rail trucks, with a still to brew fuel. They are sent out from a port of dis embarkation to recon head of work parties to check the condition of rails, rail bridges ect. Milgov is planing to use this rail line to move troops and equipment to station X which is now a Army Outpost.

Put in a few NPC of rail workers, or US Army Engineer Officers or medic.

And Away you go

Hey man it worked for the walking dead

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

Please expand this

Well the war starts in the mid 1990's so the majority of manpower and materials would be going towards that rather then improving civilian infrastructure as it did IRL. Some work may have commenced, but quickly halted as the war kicks in.
We can see from the timelines (all three canon versions) the war was in full swing very quickly too - very little build up time. The only units left in the US were a few assigned to civil defence plus a handful waiting for shipping to come available to take them to Europe, the Middle East, or Korea.
We also know that the first nukes to hit the US were in November 1997 which absolutely would have halted any further work which may have been slowly proceeding.

Re the walking dead, in that you haven't had nuclear war tearing the place up. Most infrastructure is still in one piece (mostly) and, provided the manpower and skills are available, generally repairable. Zombies don't tend to rip up rail lines, destroy entire cities, and commit acts of sabotage...

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

To my understanding the US rail system is in a pretty poor state already isn't it? The war would wreak absolute havoc upon it making it probably worse than the European network even though tanks, artillery, etc have caused untold damage to the lines, yard, etc.
How many lines are in North America (including Canada and Mexico) as well? Is there the same density as in Europe which allows for alternate route to be used without going hundreds, or even thousands of kilometres out of the way?
Even with the several years of warfare, I think the European network is more suitable for roleplaying. The US network would probably need a fairly large group of workers to repair sections (especially bridges, tunnels, and yards in and around nuked cities) instead of the train being able to find a way around. The resources required in the US (especially in rails, sleepers, and bridge materials) is likely to be far beyond the capability of PCs.

Don't forget, here in the U.S., we ripped up some of our railways for "rails to trails" that converted them into bike and hiker trails. When I was a teen in the late 1970's and early 1980's, one local track, the Montour railroad track was in use but 20 years later, it became a bike/hike path. My fahter worked at a coke plant and when he had to manage loading railroad cars with the coke, he often seen cars listing as much as 20 degrees to one side or the other and he questioned the safety on that but he had to load them anyways.

[Silent Hunter UK]

Originally Posted by Nowhere Man 1966

Don't forget, here in the U.S., we ripped up some of our railways for "rails to trails" that converted them into bike and hiker trails.

We did the same with some of our lines closed due to the Beeching Axe.

[Legbreaker]

So really it's just the main lines that are likely to have received upgrades prior to the war and the rest either ripped up of continued to be neglected?
I can't imagine too many privately owned lines receiving expensive upgrades without the companies being forced to do so either by government or economic necessity.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

So really it's just the main lines that are likely to have received upgrades prior to the war and the rest either ripped up of continued to be neglected?
I can't imagine too many privately owned lines receiving expensive upgrades without the companies being forced to do so either by government or economic necessity.

No on the "neglect" part, the '90s saw the start of the revival of short lines. The major corporations sold off branches that were unprofitable to them, but small companies could make a go of them. Lines that were redundant, or went to no-longer-extant industries, were the ones that were closed permanently. Deregulation in the '80s allowed the Class I roads to have the cash to reinvest in their infrastructure, and business began expanding. Around 2010, the heads of the big roads were heard to say that they'd had the best two decades in their careers.