Please excuse and forgive me if this is VERY old hat but I have been away
from the Newsgroup for a long time.

As I understand it a certain length of additional tunneling was done on the
central line way back with a view to having extra tracks. This work was
abandoned and I know one section was taken over by what was then the GPO
(BT) as an underground exchange. This is mentioned in one ofJames Herberts
books (Domain or Lair). At the time I worked for BT and asked my boss about
this and he confirmed the details mentioned in the book. He also said that
at the time when it was being used London Underground even used to make them
buy platform tickets when they needed access via the station!

Steve


"Kat" wrote in message
...
lonelytraveller wrote:
I had read that there were some shelters built under some of the
central tube stations, but that the planned one at St. Pauls was never
actually built.

Now, I was passing through St. Pauls this morning on an eastbound
train, and happened to stand at the back (west), which is unusual for
me, and when we got to St. Pauls, I noticed that there seemed to be a
series of several black doors at the west end of the platform. I would
guess this is pretty close to where the old post office building was,
near the bombed church, and there seems to be a wierd blockhouse in a
similar position in the middle of the road on the surface.

Did they build it after all, as it would have been good for the Post
office, but keep it secret, or are these doors something completely
unconnected?

According to our duty manager, who used to work on that group, the doors
do lead to what was going to be a shelter. He said that while the
excavating was taking place local people complained about the noise and
got the work stopped by finding some ancient law forbidding any tunnelling
under St Paul's Cathedral. The excavated area is now a ventilation shaft
and the block house thing you describe is the top of it.
That was what I was told.....
--
Kat

I suppose that could have been the cavern then.

On 10 May 2005 12:09:59 -0700, "lonelytraveller"
wrote:

I suppose that could have been the cavern then.

Apart from the fact that it's the Chancery Lane deep level shelter,
four stations away from your fantasy cavern. It's laughable that you
are prepared to believe any old wive's tale you're told, while
whinging that, "the books don't tell you everything, only the stuff
thats [sic] obvious and everyone else knows" when it's perfectly clear
that you haven't even read many of the books in the first place.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

its perfectly clear that you have high blood pressure

In message .com,
lonelytraveller writes
its perfectly clear that you have high blood pressure

No need for high blood pressure.

There are all sorts of conventions in News (or "Usenet") postings, so
correct or at least widely observed ands some not.

But quoting text (just a reasonable amount, to give context, isn't so
much a convention or a rule as much as a way of increasing understanding
of meaning. Therefore, to make your points, it's in your interests to
do this.

Some people post via news software (not via e-mail although they can
look similar in some ways). You choose to post via Google Groups which
is arguably more cumbersome although perhaps you find it more convenient
for your needs. You can, as has been pointed out, reconfigure this to
quote and then trim that accordingly. If you don't want to do that or
are unable, then you can cut and past from the original, or at least put
headings in square brackets or symbols to give meaning or sense to
your replies.

This isn't a nag, just a bit of advice from people who use Newsgroups a
lot to help you get your meaning across.

Hope this helps.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On 11 May 2005 11:50:50 -0700, "lonelytraveller"
wrote:

its perfectly clear that you have high blood pressure

Which just goes to prove that your medical judgements are about as
valid as your ones about the Underground.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

I'm a qualified doctor.

lonelytraveller wrote:
I'm a qualified doctor.

Who can't work out how to properly quote using Google Groups? Well,
**** me, but I've just managed it, which I guess - yet again - makes me
much smarter that you.

In article , WHUK writes
Please excuse and forgive me if this is VERY old hat but I have been away
from the Newsgroup for a long time.

As I understand it a certain length of additional tunneling was done on the
central line way back with a view to having extra tracks. This work was
abandoned and I know one section was taken over by what was then the GPO
(BT) as an underground exchange.

That's the Chancery Lane Deep Shelter.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In article ,
"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote:
In article , WHUK writes
Please excuse and forgive me if this is VERY old hat but I have been away
from the Newsgroup for a long time.

As I understand it a certain length of additional tunneling was done on the
central line way back with a view to having extra tracks. This work was
abandoned and I know one section was taken over by what was then the GPO
(BT) as an underground exchange.

That's the Chancery Lane Deep Shelter.

Known as 'Kingsway'. Entered, in the best spy tradition, from a bland
office frontage on High Holborn.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.