In message , michael adams
wrote:
The stations in question Belsize Park, Camden Town, Goodge Steet, Stockwell,
Clapham North, Clapham Common, Clapham South are all deep level tubes
running through 11 feet 8 inches (3.56 m) tunnels.

The plan envisaged subsequently using the 16.ft 6in diameter shelters as
platform spaces, not as "train size" tunnels, as you claim above.

No, they weren't. 16'6" is too small for a platform tunnel.

From the various sources I've studied (*not* just The Web of a Million
Lies), the tunnels were explicitly designed as shelters, but put in
locations where they could be used as the basis for an express tube
after the war.

Such express tubes were under consideration from 1937 onwards (see
http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/victoria.html for some details) and at
some times were planned to be capable of carrying mainline stock. So
it's not surprising that a 16'6" *non* station tunnel size was chosen.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In message , michael adams wrote:
The stations in question Belsize Park, Camden Town, Goodge Steet, Stockwell,
Clapham North, Clapham Common, Clapham South are all deep level tubes
running through 11 feet 8 inches (3.56 m) tunnels.

The plan envisaged subsequently using the 16.ft 6in diameter shelters as
platform spaces, not as "train size" tunnels, as you claim above.

No, they weren't. 16'6" is too small for a platform tunnel.

There appears to be a misundertanding here. I'm not claiming anything
but merely quoting back material from a link posted by spud,

" work began in 1940 on building deep level shelters which were envisaged
to eventually become the platform tunnels for the express route.

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

which contradicts his earlier claim, supposedly based on the same source -

quote

wrote in message ...

Are you autistic? Yes, built to as in straight tunnels of train size

/quote

I'd originally posted material from Subterranea Brittanica and Wiki
which followed the genearally accepted line, that there was no
pre-war plan, and it was this, that spud was claiming was
nonsense.



From the various sources I've studied (*not* just The Web of a Million Lies), the
tunnels were explicitly designed as shelters, but put in locations where they could be
used as the basis for an express tube after the war.

Indeed. The only source which claims otherwise appears to be
spud's link

quote

"As congestion on the Northern Line increased in the '30s, a plan was
developed to build a second pair of tunnels in parallel with the Charing
Cross branch of the Northern Line

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

/quote

None of the original material available on the web, or the quoted
versions of it at least - the LTPB New Works Programms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Works_Programme

or scans of an undated but circa 1942 account of the construction
of the tunnels discovered by Mark Bennett and posted on the SB website
concerning the "shelters suggest otherwise. ...recently completed" (p 2)
....while on page 3, its explained that they were so arranged as to line
and level so as to be incorporated at a later date in a new system of
tube tunnels should further developement be necessary. But no mention
of any pre-exiting plans at all.

The very existence of such an account , which appears to be a
supplement from a Civil Engineering journal, the quality of the
production etc is somewhat surprising given the circumstances
under which it was produced. Presumably it would have had
positive propaganda value not only at home to counter claims
that not enough was being done but if it fell into enemy hands -
the extensive measures the UK Govt takes to protect
its own citizens. Even if by that stage, as it turned out
thankfully, the worst of the conventional bombing was over


Such express tubes were under consideration from 1937 onwards (see
http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/victoria.html for some details)


Indeed on the route of what became the Victoria line

"The first plan which was a recognisable precursor of the Victoria Line
appeared in 1937. A new express tube line would run from Victoria to
Finsbury Park "

whereas for the Northeren Line

"After World War II, a 1946 plan for London envisaged providing a completely
separate express route under the Northern Line, allowing the Victoria and
Finsbury Park route (now called "route 8") to serve new markets"

However plans are one thing, obtaining the necessary funding is another
which has been the story of the Underground since its inception really.
Had the whole thing been constructed during the course of a five year
plan using slave labour at the whim of some tyrant then presumably
its history wouldn't have been quite so interesting or given so
much scope for speculation.


and at some times were planned to be capable of carrying mainline stock. So it's not
surprising that a 16'6" *non* station tunnel size was chosen.



michael adams

Link added to otherwise identical previous post

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In message , michael adams wrote:
The stations in question Belsize Park, Camden Town, Goodge Steet, Stockwell,
Clapham North, Clapham Common, Clapham South are all deep level tubes
running through 11 feet 8 inches (3.56 m) tunnels.

The plan envisaged subsequently using the 16.ft 6in diameter shelters as
platform spaces, not as "train size" tunnels, as you claim above.

No, they weren't. 16'6" is too small for a platform tunnel.

There appears to be a misundertanding here. I'm not claiming anything
but merely quoting back material from a link posted by spud,

" work began in 1940 on building deep level shelters which were envisaged
to eventually become the platform tunnels for the express route.

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

which contradicts his earlier claim, supposedly based on the same source -

quote

wrote in message ...

Are you autistic? Yes, built to as in straight tunnels of train size

/quote

I'd originally posted material from Subterranea Brittanica and Wiki
which followed the genearally accepted line, that there was no
pre-war plan, and it was this, that spud was claiming was
nonsense.



From the various sources I've studied (*not* just The Web of a Million Lies), the
tunnels were explicitly designed as shelters, but put in locations where they could be
used as the basis for an express tube after the war.

Indeed. The only source which claims otherwise appears to be
spud's link

quote

"As congestion on the Northern Line increased in the '30s, a plan was
developed to build a second pair of tunnels in parallel with the Charing
Cross branch of the Northern Line

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

/quote

None of the original material available on the web, or the quoted
versions of it at least - the LTPB New Works Programms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Works_Programme

or scans of an undated but circa 1942 account of the construction
of the tunnels discovered by Mark Bennett and posted on the SB website
concerning the "shelters suggest otherwise. ...recently completed" (p 2)
....while on page 3, its explained that they were so arranged as to line
and level so as to be incorporated at a later date in a new system of
tube tunnels should further developement be necessary. But no mention
of any pre-exiting plans at all.

http://www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/featur...rs/photo2.html

The very existence of such an account , which appears to be a
supplement from a Civil Engineering journal, the quality of the
production etc is somewhat surprising given the circumstances
under which it was produced. Presumably it would have had
positive propaganda value not only at home to counter claims
that not enough was being done but if it fell into enemy hands -
the extensive measures the UK Govt takes to protect
its own citizens. Even if by that stage, as it turned out
thankfully, the worst of the conventional bombing was over


Such express tubes were under consideration from 1937 onwards (see
http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/victoria.html for some details)


Indeed on the route of what became the Victoria line

"The first plan which was a recognisable precursor of the Victoria Line
appeared in 1937. A new express tube line would run from Victoria to
Finsbury Park "

whereas for the Northeren Line

"After World War II, a 1946 plan for London envisaged providing a completely
separate express route under the Northern Line, allowing the Victoria and
Finsbury Park route (now called "route 8") to serve new markets"

However plans are one thing, obtaining the necessary funding is another
which has been the story of the Underground since its inception really.
Had the whole thing been constructed during the course of a five year
plan using slave labour at the whim of some tyrant then presumably
its history wouldn't have been quite so interesting or given so
much scope for speculation.


and at some times were planned to be capable of carrying mainline stock. So it's not
surprising that a 16'6" *non* station tunnel size was chosen.



michael adams

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:12:19 -0000
"michael adams" wrote:
which contradicts his earlier claim, supposedly based on the same source -

When someone has to post a 3 page response you know they've lost the argument.

--
Spud

wrote in message ...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:12:19 -0000
"michael adams" wrote:
which contradicts his earlier claim, supposedly based on the same source -

When someone has to post a 3 page response you know they've lost the argument.


Eh ? You're the one who claimed there'd been a plan to run full
size size express trains through 16ft 6in platform tunnels. Not me.

Based on a garbled "understanding" this link you'd found, all by yourself

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

Are you changing your mind again and claiming the link is correct, and that
there was such a plan after all ? A plan for which nobody else can
find any evidence ?




michael adams

....

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:49:46 -0000
"michael adams" wrote:
Eh ? You're the one who claimed there'd been a plan to run full
size size express trains through 16ft 6in platform tunnels. Not me.

Based on a garbled "understanding" this link you'd found, all by yourself

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

Are you changing your mind again and claiming the link is correct, and that
there was such a plan after all ? A plan for which nobody else can
find any evidence ?

I simply pointed out they were the same size as the moorgate tunnels. You
seemd to think you'd made some killer point however *shrug*

My original point was that the plans for the system were around for a decade
before these were built. They were based on them and are in the same location.
Do you deny this?

--
Spud

wrote in message ...


My original point was that the plans for the system were around for a decade
before these were built.

Indeed. So that presumably you have evidence for this claim,
over and above the link you posted.


michael adams

....

When I read this argument about the purpose of these tunnels, I can't help thinking of the questioning of Nathaniel Whatsisname in Pickwick Papers:

"On this question there arose the edifying brow-beating, customary on such points. First of all, Mr. Winkle said it was quite impossible for him to say how many times he had seen Mrs Bardell. Then he was asked if he had seen her twenty times, to which he replied, 'Certainly--more than that.' Then he was asked whether he hadn't seen her a hundred times--whether he couldn't swear that he had seen her more than fifty times-- whether he didn't know that he had seen her at least seventy-five times, and so forth; the satisfactory conclusion which was arrived at, at last, being, that he had better take care of himself, and mind what he was about."