Andrew Clark wrote:
"Brian Watson" wrote


Or perhaps it is a "just in case" escape facility?


In what conceivable circumstances would members of the Royal Family be
evacuated from Buckingham Place by *tube train*? Of all the modes of
emergency transport, that seem the least likely.


One that involved flying out from Heathrow Airport - Hyde Park corner -
Piccadilly Line - Heathrow!

In article ,
Stuart wrote:
Andrew Clark wrote:
"Brian Watson" wrote


Or perhaps it is a "just in case" escape facility?


In what conceivable circumstances would members of the Royal Family be
evacuated from Buckingham Place by *tube train*? Of all the modes of
emergency transport, that seem the least likely.


One that involved flying out from Heathrow Airport - Hyde Park corner -
Piccadilly Line - Heathrow!

except that when these arrangements might have been made, the Picadilly
line stopped at Hounslow. Mind you, there could have been an ulterior
motive for extending to Heathrow ,,,,

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

On 23 Feb, 14:49, "Clive Coleman." wrote:
In message , Graeme Wall
writesAmericans might not retaliate but pull back into their isolationist mode.
Hence the perceived need for a British independant nuclear strike capability.

That's why we've got Trident? We don't have any nuclear capability not
controlled by the Merkins, even Trident requires their permission before
it can be used. The excuse being that when it was sold to us, the cost
would have been double but Merka would share development costs with us
as long as they retained right of veto, which I understand is a twin key
approach, neither can fire it without the express permission of the
other. What good is that to us. Remember Suez, it was the Merkins that
buggered that up, so much for special relationships.


Dare I suggest that we buggered up Suez by having such a ridiculous
plan in the first place.

"Roland Perry" wrote

It only needs to be functioning enough to handle one battery loco and a
carriage. No signals required.

I always thought the Tube was electrically operated?

And what happened to the abandoned rolling stock? Evaporated?

In message .com
"The Jinx" wrote:

On 23 Feb, 11:10, Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
David Hansen wrote:



On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:06:50 +0000 someone who may be Roland Perry
wrote this:-

It would probably be more secret. And it depends what the risk is. If it
was a dirty biological bomb in London, and a riot amongst the populace
who were being prevented from leaving for fear of infecting the rest of
the country, it could well be the best of the three options.

The purple powder incident in the Westminster parliament
demonstrated the difference between plans and reality. The bods
should have been kept in the chamber to prevent potential
contamination of others, but they left.

How one would prevent millions of people leaving London is beyond
me.

There was a plan to clear a big open space all the way round London that
could be patrolled by armed police and military units that would prevent
any one trying to get out from the inner zone. Would have cost many
millions of pounds to put into practice.

That rings a bell. Have you by any chance got War Plan UK?



Yes, but I'm referring to the M25...

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message . com,
Mizter T writes
Dare I suggest that we buggered up Suez by having such a ridiculous
plan in the first place.
I know exactly where you're coming from and I whole heartedly agree with
you, but that doesn't change things. Our trying to take back the Suez
canal was a half baked idea, and was opposed by the Merkins who threaten
to bring us down financially if we didn't do as they said, it was no
special relationship then, and Blair putting his nose up Bush's backside
show's just how one sided the special relationship really is. I firmly
believe it's time we got away from war mongers and joined the EU whole
heartedly, with if necessary our own nuclear deterrent. You can't
serve two masters.
--
Clive.

In article ,
Andrew Clark wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote

It only needs to be functioning enough to handle one battery loco and a
carriage. No signals required.

I always thought the Tube was electrically operated?


but batteries are simply a storage medium for electrity

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

In message , Stuart
writes
One that involved flying out from Heathrow Airport - Hyde Park corner -
Piccadilly Line - Heathrow!
I used to have a picture a little underground train that carried two
people and operated between the white house and some main station in
Washington D.C. This must be at least 30 years ago and was meant to be
secret. Years before Washington got a metro proper. If it can happen
there, it can happen here. I'm not asserting that is has, but I
wouldn't be surprised.
--
Clive.

In message , at 19:14:27 on Fri,
23 Feb 2007, Andrew Clark
remarked:
It only needs to be functioning enough to handle one battery loco and a
carriage. No signals required.

I always thought the Tube was electrically operated?

Last time I looked a battery loco carried its own electricity.

And what happened to the abandoned rolling stock? Evaporated?

In the depot. The first thing you'd have done is cleared the running
tracks.
--
Roland Perry

"Brian Watson" wrote in message
...
A contributor to The Robert Elms Show on BBC Radio London has just claimed
there are secret underground train lines between Buckingham Palace and
various other London sites.

Nifty conspiracy theory, or fact?

--
Brian
The Eurostar has the ablity to cloak and that will be soon travelling under
London so that's kinda secret

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/09/stealth_train/

Andrew