Central Line - Beneath the City Streets query
David Connor
Clive D.W. Feather <cl...@on-the-train.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Colin Beadle writes:
> > According to Peter Laurie' Beneath the City Streets book (c. 1969)
> > there is a parallel underground line running under the Central Line
> > accessible via an office building in, I think, High Holborn. The
> > line was designed as an express east-west tube line apparently but
> > was in fact used by the government as a deep level atomic shelter
> > system. Someone told me that there is a door at the bottom of the
> > escalator on the westbound platform at Chancery Lane that goes
> > to the tube underneath. Has anyone got a more recent source of
> > info re: this express tube line?
>
> I don't know who's doing the garbling, but this is a garbled
> reference to the Deep Shelter Tubes built during WW2.
>
> Or, as a friend has commented, it's a reference to MailRail.
It sounds like a garbled reference to a number of underground rail
facilities in the Holborn area. There are quite a lot of them!
Between 1863 and 1873, a 3' 8½" gauge pneumatic tube railway for
freight was constructed between Euston and St Paul's via St Giles
Circus. In the 30s, when new ticket halls for St Paul's and Chancery
Lane tube stations were constructed beneath the roadway, these pierced
the pneumatic tube. A door leads into this tube from the ticket hall
at St Paul's station - perhaps this explains the alleged link from an
LUL station.
As Clive indicates, during WW2 a number of deep level shelters were
built. Their construction was partially justified by designing them so
that they could be converted to civillian rail use after the war.
Thus, they were built on alignments which enabled them to be linked up
to form express tube lines, should the need arise. Most were under the
Charing Cross branch of the Northern Line, but two were started under
Central Line stations. Construction of the shelter at St Paul's was
abandoned, but that at Chancery Lane was completed in 1942. It was
never used for its intended purpose - a public shelter - being retained
for government use. I am not sure what it is used for today, but
suspect that (like some of the others) it is used to store archives.
Obviously, in the event they never were linked into express tube lines.
(BTW, is Crossrail supposed to take over the Chancery Lane shelter and
use it as running lines?)
In 1939, the Post Office built a short tunnel under High Holborn for
telephone cables, linking into an earlier such tunnel at St
Martin's-le-Grand. In 1945, the government became worried about the
threat of atomic attack, and asked the Post Office for a secure
communications network under London. Between 1951 and 1954, a network
of tunnels was built under London, which apparently contains a 2" gauge
railway. The centrepiece of this network was a large telephone
exchange, including living accommodation, 100 feet below Gray's Inn
Road between Hatton Garden and Red Lion Square. This was linked to the
earlier cable tunnel, and has four branches running under Chancery Lane
station for switching units and an artesian well. This network was
soon rendered obsolete, after the Hydrogen bomb was demonstrated by the
USSR in 1955.
I've not heard of any direct links between the three separate
underground complexes at Chancery Lane (LUL, deep level shelter, PO),
but it is possible that they exist. BTW, am I right in assuming that
the PO tunnels are now owned by BT?
The Holborn area also includes the operating Piccadilly and Central
Lines, the Post Office Railway, Thameslink, the abandoned Central Line
station at British Museum, the disused Piccadilly Line branch to
Aldwych (including the little-known platform 6 at Holborn), the
abandoned Kingsway Tram Subway (partially used for the Strand
Underpass), and presumably part of the abandoned network of 2½"
diameter pneumatic tubes that once ran under central London.
BTW, does anyone know where I might obtain a copy of Beneath The City
Streets (preferably the later edition)? TIA.
--
David Connor
Rotherhithe, London, UK
cross-posted to uk.rec.subterranea
ne...@derwent.co.uk
From: "David Connor" <dco...@dircon.co.uk>
>station at British Museum, the disused Piccadilly Line branch to
>Aldwych (including the little-known platform 6 at Holborn), the
Is it still possible to reach that platform or has it been sealed up?
NJR
Andrew Emmerson
> Between 1951 and 1954, a network
> of tunnels was built under London, which apparently contains a 2" gauge
> railway.
I have visited the deep-level tunnels on a number of occasions and spoken
to others whose work involved going down there and nobody has ever
mentioned a 2ft gauge railway (you say 2" gauge -- is this a reference to
the London Transport model railway club premises at Holborn Kingsway
underground station? There is/was a door marked as such on one the
platforms at that station.)
What is true is that when the deep-level tunnels were being constructed
during the war, spoil was taken away by the Post Office tube railway and
hauled to the surface at remote locations, so that anyone tracking lorry
movements would not twig what was going on. There are some official
photographs of these 'freight' trains.
>The centrepiece of this network was a large telephone
> exchange, including living accommodation, 100 feet below Gray's Inn
> Road between Hatton Garden and Red Lion Square. This was linked to the
> earlier cable tunnel, and has four branches running under Chancery Lane
> station for switching units and an artesian well. This network was
> soon rendered obsolete, after the Hydrogen bomb was demonstrated by the
> USSR in 1955.
Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The exchange (Kingsway) was not
closed down until the 1980s and parts of the facilities there were not
decommissioned until the mid-90s, as we learned on a couple of Sub-Brit
visits.
> I've not heard of any direct links between the three separate
> underground complexes at Chancery Lane (LUL, deep level shelter, PO),
> but it is possible that they exist.
There is a passageway, used in the wartime construction of the exchange
tunnels. London Transport charged so much for running special trains
(disruption to its other activities) that a goods lift to the exchange was
built in Furnival Street. Kingsway exchange has direct connections to the
main deep-level subway network.
>BTW, am I right in assuming that the PO tunnels are now owned by BT?
Correct, although BT is trying to find a buyer for Kingsway exchange,
which would then, presumably, be sealed off from the main deep-level
network.
David Connor
David Connor <dco...@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
> Between 1951 and 1954, a network of tunnels was built under
> London, which apparently contains a 2" gauge railway.
Err, that should have read a 2' gauge railway (feet, not inches)!
Sorry about that - I tend to use metric measurements wherever possible,
and these obsolete measurement systems confuse me. :-)))))
BTW, does anyone know anything about this railway - does it definitely
exist? Is it covered by the Official Secrets Act?
Richard Lamont
>> Colin Beadle writes:
>> > According to Peter Laurie' Beneath the City Streets book (c. 1969)
>> > there is a parallel underground line running under the Central Line
>> > accessible via an office building in, I think, High Holborn. The
>> > line was designed as an express east-west tube line apparently but
>> > was in fact used by the government as a deep level atomic shelter
>> > system. Someone told me that there is a door at the bottom of the
>> > escalator on the westbound platform at Chancery Lane that goes
>> > to the tube underneath. Has anyone got a more recent source of
>> > info re: this express tube line?
It's a pity this thread didn't arrive in uk.rec.subterranea earlier,
because several of us have been down there and know this site quite
well!
http://www.stonix.demon.co.uk/rsg/reference/sites/k/Kingsway.html
There is indeed a staircase (and a 10-ton goods lift) going down
from Chancery Lane tube station to the shelter. I don't know
whereabouts it appears in the tube station - I have only seen it
from the bottom, where it connects via a locked gate into one of
the cross-passages.
Although these shelters were built under eight tube stations during
the war, the vague plan to join them up into an express tube line
afterwards never happened.
--
Richard Lamont To hell with Echelon and NSA/GCHQ spooks!
ric...@stonix.demon.co.uk Uncripple your Netscape from 40 to 128 bit
http://www.stonix.demon.co.uk/ encryption now. http://www.fortify.net/
Colin Beadle
On 4 Jun 1998 11:03:08 GMT, ric...@stonix.demon.co.uk (Richard
Lamont) wrote:
>>> Colin Beadle writes:
>
>>> > According to Peter Laurie' Beneath the City Streets book (c. 1969)
>>> > there is a parallel underground line running under the Central Line
>>> > accessible via an office building in, I think, High Holborn. The
>>> > line was designed as an express east-west tube line apparently but
>>> > was in fact used by the government as a deep level atomic shelter
>>> > system. Someone told me that there is a door at the bottom of the
>>> > escalator on the westbound platform at Chancery Lane that goes
>>> > to the tube underneath. Has anyone got a more recent source of
>>> > info re: this express tube line?
>
>It's a pity this thread didn't arrive in uk.rec.subterranea earlier,
>because several of us have been down there and know this site quite
>well!
>
>http://www.stonix.demon.co.uk/rsg/reference/sites/k/Kingsway.html
>
>There is indeed a staircase (and a 10-ton goods lift) going down
>from Chancery Lane tube station to the shelter. I don't know
>whereabouts it appears in the tube station - I have only seen it
>from the bottom, where it connects via a locked gate into one of
>the cross-passages.
>
>Although these shelters were built under eight tube stations during
>the war, the vague plan to join them up into an express tube line
>afterwards never happened.
I had some business in Holborn today and decided to have a look at
Furnival Street. I assume the entrance to the shelters is the site on
the rt hand side with the two ventilation chimneys? Is the site on the
earlier left hand side with the ASEA crane attached to it anything to
do with the entrance?
Alan Ford
>>station at British Museum, the disused Piccadilly Line branch to
>>Aldwych (including the little-known platform 6 at Holborn), the
>
>Is it still possible to reach that platform or has it been sealed up?
AFAIK it's long since been converted to a storeroom for LU use, although
much of the tiling remains, similar to the platform 5 tiling (except
it's green not blue, IIRC).
HTH
Alan
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Alan Ford (ICQ 3033272) | Discography Central + Mailing List |
| al...@whirlnet.demon.co.uk | http://www.whirlnet.demon.co.uk/discog/ |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
David Connor
Richard Lamont <ric...@stonix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> It's a pity this thread didn't arrive in uk.rec.subterranea earlier,
> because several of us have been down there and know this site quite
> well!
>
> http://www.stonix.demon.co.uk/rsg/reference/sites/k/Kingsway.html
What a great web site! For those who don't have web access, this page
explains that the deep level shelter and the underground telephone
exchange are one and the same - the Post Office took over the shelter
in 1949, and extended it between 1951 and 1954. It has since been
advertised for sale.
Sorry for any confusion I may have inadvertently caused. I took most
of my information from "London Under London", which treats them as
totally separate.
<subtle hint>
Of course, if someone would sell me a copy of "Beneath the City
Streets" I wouldn't make mistakes like that.....
</subtle hint>
BTW, I have the first edition of "London Under London". The second
edition doesn't look much different - is it worth getting?
> There is indeed a staircase (and a 10-ton goods lift) going down
> from Chancery Lane tube station to the shelter. I don't know
> whereabouts it appears in the tube station - I have only seen it
> from the bottom, where it connects via a locked gate into one of
> the cross-passages.
Do all the deep level shelters have links from their related tube
stations, or is this feature unique to Chancery Lane? I can't remember
seeing the distinctive surface-level buildings at CL (though I haven't
looked for them) - does the link to the station replace this feature?
I'm surprised that there's a goods lift to the station, as opposed as
to the surface. Does this suggest that one of the original CLR lift
shafts is also in use as a goods lift, or that heavy loads were brought
in by train?
David Connor
Andrew Emmerson <mids...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
> David Connor wrote:
> > Between 1951 and 1954, a network of tunnels was built under
> > London, which apparently contains a 2" gauge railway.
>
> I have visited the deep-level tunnels on a number of occasions and
> spoken to others whose work involved going down there and nobody
> has ever mentioned a 2ft gauge railway (you say 2" gauge -- is this
> a reference to the London Transport model railway club premises
> at Holborn Kingsway underground station? There is/was a door
> marked as such on one the platforms at that station.)
I was referring to the Post Office tunnels constructed in 1951-1954,
not the wartime shelters - I assume you are referring to the former
also. I meant 2' gauge. This is taken from "London Under London",
which talks about them as if they are fact. (I'm not sure that I trust
them on this, hence my use of the word "apparently".)
First edition, pages 186-187, includes:
~ Banks of cables flank the two-foot-gauge railway line which hauls the
~ cables. In more recent Post Office cable tunnels, which are smaller
~ in diameter, the railway has been replaced by battery-powered
~ trucks.
~ <snip>
~ The manhole covers make the system easily penetrable: in December
~ 1980 the New Statesman held its Christmas party in one of them.
This suggested that the partygoers, or other trespassers, might have
seen it.
Its been years since I saw a copy of "Beneath The City Streets", but I
believe that Laurie speculated that it probably existed, when he
discussed the size of the tunnels and whether they were single or twin
bore.
> What is true is that when the deep-level tunnels were being
> constructed during the war, spoil was taken away by the Post
> Office tube railway and hauled to the surface at remote locations,
> so that anyone tracking lorry movements would not twig what
> was going on. There are some official photographs of these 'freight'
> trains.
I hadn't heard of that before. Again, are you referring to the wartime
shelters or cold war tunnels? I had no idea that either was linked to
the PO tube. Are you sure these photos aren't of the contractor's
trains for the PO tube deviation to serve the new Western District
Office? This deviation was authorised in 1954 and opened in 1958,
although the new Western DO didn't start operating until 1965.
OTOH, I always assumed that the railway opened here seven years early
because they wanted the tunnels complete before building the
foundations of the new office. Perhaps construction was advanced as
part of this cover story (although if so, it seems slightly late).
> >The centrepiece of this network was a large telephone
> > exchange, including living accommodation, 100 feet below Gray's Inn
> > Road between Hatton Garden and Red Lion Square. This was linked to
> > the earlier cable tunnel, and has four branches running under
> > Chancery Lane station for switching units and an artesian well.
> > This network was soon rendered obsolete, after the Hydrogen bomb
> > was demonstrated by the USSR in 1955.
>
> Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The exchange (Kingsway) was not
> closed down until the 1980s and parts of the facilities there were
> not decommissioned until the mid-90s, as we learned on a couple of
> Sub-Brit visits.
Again lifted from "London Under London", and again about the tunnel
network as opposed to the shelters. My interpretation was that they
were referring to the bomb-proof nature of the tunnels, not their
actual use for telecoms. I assume that A bombs do not have the same
radiation effects as H bombs, but could very well be wrong.
> There is a passageway, used in the wartime construction of the
> exchange tunnels. London Transport charged so much for running
> special trains (disruption to its other activities) that a goods lift
> to the exchange was built in Furnival Street. Kingsway exchange
> has direct connections to the main deep-level subway network.
So presumably the connection was only used during the original
construction, not the 1951-1954 rebuilding, or for operational reasons?
BTW, does anyone know how many underground railway systems there are or
have been in London. The one's that I've heard of (and can remember
off the top of my head) are:
# The existing passenger-carrying LUL, Railtrack, DLR and BAA rail
tunnels, and their predecessors.
# The PO tube railway (1927).
# Various temporary construction railways.
# The passenger-carrying pneumatic railway at Crystal Palace (1864).
# The Tower Subway (1870).
# The Waterloo & Whitehall Railway (1866 - abandoned in the early
stages of construction).
# The Pneumatic Dispatch Company's 2' gauge line at Euston (1863).
# Their 3' 8½" gauge line from Euston to St Paul's (1865 on).
# Abandoned workings for pneumatic railways under the Thames at
Greenwich and Woolwich. (Were these workings used for the later
pedestrian tunnels there?)
# The wartime line in the Plessey Factory that was constructed in the
Central Line tunnels between Leytonstone and Newbury Park.
# The alleged 2' gauge system in the PO tunnels (referred to above).
# A 2' gauge cable-hauling line in the ex-CEGB cable tunnel between
Barking and Thamesmead.
# IIRC, an underground network as part of the former 18" gauge system
at Woolwich Arsenal.
# The Kingsway Tram Subway (1906, rebuilt 1931).
# An automated luggage transfer system, using vehicles rather than
belts, between T4 and the central terminal area at Heathrow.
# A network of 2½" diameter pnuematic tubes throughout the city
centre, linking Post Offices for message transfer [1].
# Similar such systems at Harrods, and possibly in supermarkets [1].
# A 2' 6" (hand-propelled?) line under the Household Cavalry barracks
at Knightsbridge, used to remove horse manure.
# The 1861 pneumatic demonstration line at Battersea Fields, on the
site now occupied by the power station [2].
# The Tower Hill Pageant system of "timecars", similar to its sister
line under York City Centre [3].
[1] - Not strictly speaking railways, as presumably there are no rails,
just tubes.
[2] - Not actually underground, but using cast-iron tubes to
demonstrate the system later used underground.
[3] - This is a tourist ride around various historical scenes, built
under Tower Hill. The system has no rails - the cars
electronically follow a buried cable, in a similar way to rescue
vehicles in the Eurotunnel service tunnel.
Does anyone have any others to add to the list?
As far as underground post office railways are concerned, how many
exist worldwide? Apart from the three London lines (1863, 1865, 1927)
I know that the Chicago freight subway carried mail sometimes, and that
there are lines in Brussels and Zurich. Does anyone know of any
others?
Martin Trump
In article <01bd9642$81523be0$LocalHost@default>, David Connor
<dco...@dircon.co.uk> writes
>Does anyone have any others to add to the list?
Not a railway, but in the same vein, the London Hydraulic Company. I
have fond memories of using a lift working on this system at the
Rembrandt Hotel, Kensington.
The LHCo. died about 25 years ago if IRC, was going to be sold off as a
means of installing fibre optic cables throughout central London.
Anyone know the outcome?
Regards,
--
Martin Trump
Andrew Emmerson
In article <6mZpJGAD...@wmeadow.demon.co.uk>,
Mar...@wmeadow.demon.co.uk (Martin Trump) wrote:
> the London Hydraulic Company. I have fond memories of using a lift
working on this system at the Rembrandt Hotel, Kensington.
Me too -- an insurance company's office in Holborn. The Grosvenor Hotel at
Victoria station had a goods lift of this kind which they converted with
an oil compressor afterwards. It may still be there; it had the classic
rope-in-the-corner control system.
>
>Anyone know the outcome?
The LHP Co. pipes were bought by Mercury Communications after they had
been rejected by BT as being too complicated to re-use for communications
use. Susbsequently BT realised they should have bought them after all,
just to make things more difficult for Mercury!
Andrew Emmerson
In article <01bd962c$6b82bee0$LocalHost@default>, dco...@dircon.co.uk
(David Connor) wrote:
> Do all the deep level shelters have links from their related tube
> stations,
Yes.
>or is this feature unique to Chancery Lane?
No.
>I can't remember > seeing the distinctive surface-level buildings at CL
(though I haven't looked for them)
No, there arne't any; they re-used the old station entrance and lift
shafts instead. Bear in mind that the GPO had already done cable diversion
works here (see literature reference in my earlier post) so the
availability of the old station was fresh in their minds.
> I'm surprised that there's a goods lift to the station, as opposed as
> to the surface.
There isn't. The goods lift is some way away, direct to street level, in
Furnival Street.
>Does this suggest that one of the original CLR lift shafts is also in
use as a goods lift,
No, passenger lifts.
>or that heavy loads were brought in by train?
Originally, yes.
Andrew Emmerson
In article <6l5utc$u...@stonix.demon.co.uk>, ric...@stonix.demon.co.uk
(Richard Lamont) wrote:
> Although these shelters were built under eight tube stations during
> the war, the vague plan to join them up into an express tube line
> afterwards never happened.
No, although Peter (Nebulous Books) Bancroft has researched pre-war
minutes of London Transport that describe a study visit to New York in
order to research the notion of bypass tunnels to increase traffic
capacity. I suspect that LT agreed to help construction of these shelters
only at locations that would have had a practical use after the war.
Andrew Emmerson
In article <01bd9642$81523be0$LocalHost@default>, dco...@dircon.co.uk
(David Connor) wrote:
> I was referring to the Post Office tunnels constructed in 1951-1954,
> not the wartime shelters - I assume you are referring to the former
> also.
No, I was referring to these tunnels as well.
>I meant 2' gauge.
I guessed!
>This is taken from "London Under London", which talks about them as if
they are fact. (I'm not sure that I trust them on this, hence my use of
the word "apparently".)
There is a lot of drivel in that book. A photograph of a hydraulic press
(or something like that) is captioned as a System X telephone exchange and
I noted several other errors of fact.
>
> First edition, pages 186-187, includes:
> ~ Banks of cables flank the two-foot-gauge railway line which hauls the
> ~ cables. In more recent Post Office cable tunnels, which are smaller
> ~ in diameter, the railway has been replaced by battery-powered
> ~ trucks.
> ~ <snip>
I suspect the railway was a temporary affair for installing the cables.
Published accounts of the deep-level subways make no reference to any
permanent railway and I never saw it on my visits to cable chambers at
Kingsway and Wood Street.
> ~ The manhole covers make the system easily penetrable: in December
> ~ 1980 the New Statesman held its Christmas party in one of them.
I think this is fiction. That newspaper showed a photo of Duncan
Campbell cycling along one of these tunnels and another photo purportedly
take in a tunnel adorns the back cover of _War Plan UK_. I believe the
Moles' Christmas Party was an embellishment of the truth and the photos
could easily have been faked (that was the claim made by BT at the time).
I think you'd have to ask DC himself how much was true. Even if he did
find one manhole cover unlocked, this does not mean that the whole system
was compromised. Most entry points were inside operational buildings.
>>'freight' trains.
>
> I hadn't heard of that before. Again, are you referring to the wartime
> shelters or cold war tunnels?
Wartime tunnels beneath the Central Telegraph Office, Newgate Street. The
spoil was loaded at KEB, removed to surface at Mount Pleasant. The core
network of tunnels in the Kingsway and Faraday area was constructed during
the war. The extensions northwards and along the Edgware Road was in the
1950s.
>I had no idea that either was linked to the PO tube. Are you sure these
photos aren't of the contractor's trains for the PO tube deviation to
serve the new Western District Office?
Absolutely. The captions are extremely explicit.
>This deviation was authorised in 1954 and opened in 1958, although the
new Western DO didn't start operating until 1965.
That's valuable knowledge.
> OTOH, I always assumed that the railway opened here seven years early
> because they wanted the tunnels complete before building the
> foundations of the new office. Perhaps construction was advanced as
> part of this cover story (although if so, it seems slightly late).
>
> > >The centrepiece of this network was a large telephone
> > > exchange, including living accommodation, 100 feet below Gray's Inn
> > > Road between Hatton Garden and Red Lion Square. This was linked to
> > > the earlier cable tunnel, and has four branches running under
> > > Chancery Lane station for switching units and an artesian well.
> > > This network was soon rendered obsolete, after the Hydrogen bomb
> > > was demonstrated by the USSR in 1955.
> >
> > Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The exchange (Kingsway) was not
> > closed down until the 1980s and parts of the facilities there were
> > not decommissioned until the mid-90s, as we learned on a couple of
> > Sub-Brit visits.
>
> Again lifted from "London Under London", and again about the tunnel
> network as opposed to the shelters. My interpretation was that they
> were referring to the bomb-proof nature of the tunnels, not their
> actual use for telecoms.
OK, we understand each other then.
>I assume that A bombs do not have the same radiation effects as H bombs,
but could very well be wrong.
I think it's down to penetration levels.
>
> > There is a passageway, used in the wartime construction of the
> > exchange tunnels. London Transport charged so much for running
> > special trains (disruption to its other activities) that a goods lift
> > to the exchange was built in Furnival Street. Kingsway exchange
> > has direct connections to the main deep-level subway network.
>
> So presumably the connection was only used during the original
> construction, not the 1951-1954 rebuilding, or for operational reasons?
Agreed.
For anyone interested in following up this subject, I'd refer them to
_New Statesman_, 19/26 December 1980. Christmas with the Moles.
_IPOEE Journal_, Victory issue, January 1946. Safeguarding
Telecommunications in Wartime). Description and photos of Faraday Citadel
exchange, deep-level cable tunnel between Federal exchange and govt
departments, deep-level tunnel system between Citadel and tube railways,
use of tube railway tunnels to protect telephone cables, use of pilot road
tunnel at Dartford for telephone cables.
_IPOEE Journal_, January and April 1947. Two-part article, Some Features
of Deep-Level Tunnelling Under London. Lots of pix, discusses temporary
railway for removing spoil from Greathead shields. Photo in part 2 shows
cable connection to Waterloo & City Railway.
_IPOEE Journal_, April 1970. The London Cable Tube System, describes
laying cables with two-wheeled trolleys and tractors, no map.
_IPOEE Journal_, pp 276-283, vol 28 (1935/36). Recent underground
diversion works in London. Diverting cables at Chancery Lane, discovery of
Pneumatic Dispatch Co.'s tube, with photo.
_IPOEE Paper no. 187_, June 1945. Cabling Problems in Subways and Tunnels.
Plan shows route of 7ft tunnel from Holborn TE to KEB (P.O. Railway) and
Faraday Building (and connection to Waterloo & City Railway). Photo shows
telephone cables in P.O. Railway tunnel.
_IPOEE Paper_, The London Cable Tube System (December 1967). Lengthy,
detailed, illustrated paper, tracing history back to 1925 Gresham
St-London Wall) and 1942 (Faraday-Holborn). No mention of railways.
_Bunkers Under London_, paperback by Nigel Pennick. Some interesting
speculations on what he calls anomalies.
_Electrical Review_, 2nd July 1971. London's telephone cable tunnels.
Detailed and illustrated article, with route map.
All of this material is in the public domain and not classified in any
way. The BT Archives at Holborn TE are open without appointment and would
be a good place to see the IPOEE (Institution of Post Office Electrical
Engineers) material.
Richard Lamont
In article <memo.19980605...@midshires.compulink.co.uk>,
mids...@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson) writes:
> I suspect the railway was a temporary affair for installing the cables.
> Published accounts of the deep-level subways make no reference to any
> permanent railway and I never saw it on my visits to cable chambers at
> Kingsway and Wood Street.
If you look at the photo in War Plan UK (first edition p.108, second
edition fig.7 between p.222-223) you can see a pair of crude tracks
on the floor, which appear to be roughly two feet apart.
Richard Lamont
In article <memo.19980605...@midshires.compulink.co.uk>,
mids...@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson) writes:
> (David Connor) wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised that there's a goods lift to the station, as opposed as
>> to the surface.
>
> There isn't. The goods lift is some way away, direct to street level, in
> Furnival Street.
There are two goods lifts: the original one went up to the Central
Line, but hasn't been used for years. The shaft is still there,
although the flood gate at the bottom of it was closed when Sub Brit
visited in July 96. This lift is marked as Platform Lift (10 Ton)
on the plan drawing on the RSG web site.
LT charged the PO a lot of money for bringing stuff in by train to
go down in this lift, so the PO installed the Furnival Street
goods lift later.
>>Does this suggest that one of the original CLR lift shafts is also in
> use as a goods lift,
>
> No, passenger lifts.
>
>>or that heavy loads were brought in by train?
>
> Originally, yes.
>
And having been brought in by train, they were unloaded onto the
platform and sent down to the telephone exchange in the original
goods lift.
Andrew Emmerson
In article <6l8p6t$7...@stonix.demon.co.uk>, ric...@stonix.demon.co.uk
(Richard Lamont) wrote:
> If you look at the photo in War Plan UK (first edition p.108, second
> edition fig.7 between p.222-223) you can see a pair of crude tracks
> on the floor, which appear to be roughly two feet apart.
I have done and I can't! Looking carefully, these 'rails' are not
straight and they have bumps that follow exactly the longitudinal contour
of the floor. Steel rails could not get like that. Lead strips or paint
could. The 'rails' appear to have width but no height, too. In any case
were these rails, one would reasonably expect the width of the vehicles
that ran on them to be significantly wider than the track gauge. And this
being the case, such vehicles would foul the cables on either side. I
spoke once more this morning to a former safety officer whose job it was
to walk the tunnels and he says he never saw any kind of rail.
Harper photos of these tunnels indicate the 'rails' are the lateral edges
of a raised walkway, that stands about an inch or so proud of the main
floor. Another photo of a tunnel under construction shows a double track
contractor's railway.
Tex Bennett
On 4 Jun 1998 21:42:51 -0100, "David Connor" <dco...@dircon.co.uk>
wrote:
>Again lifted from "London Under London", and again about the tunnel
>network as opposed to the shelters. My interpretation was that they
>were referring to the bomb-proof nature of the tunnels, not their
>actual use for telecoms. I assume that A bombs do not have the same
>radiation effects as H bombs, but could very well be wrong.
Same radiation effects but much bigger blast and thermal effects,
especially the big megaton city busters that were in vogue in the 50s
and 60s. There is a possibility that even an airburst could collapse
the tunnels (the phenonemon is known as "air slap") or even vapourise
them. And of course the cratering effect of a ground burst H-Bomb is
imense. (even in London clay)
So what was proof against the nominal 20 kiloton bombs of the early
-mid 50's was not against the multi megaton weapons that arrived a few
years later - Hence the idea of dispersing government to far flung
corners of the UK in the RSG scheme.
--
Tex Bennett
*** spam spoiler -> please replace BeeTee with bt ****
Charles Norrie
In article <memo.19980605...@midshires.compulink.co.uk>,
Andrew Emmerson <mids...@cix.co.uk> writes
>In article <6mZpJGAD...@wmeadow.demon.co.uk>,
>Mar...@wmeadow.demon.co.uk (Martin Trump) wrote:
>
>> the London Hydraulic Company. I have fond memories of using a lift
>working on this system at the Rembrandt Hotel, Kensington.
If you used hydraulic lifts very late on, you could well find that they
were not powered from the LHP system but from ordinary and adjacent
electric pumps operating the hp equipment.
LHP made sense as long as steam engines created the pressurised water
system. Gradually, and for economic reasons, the system was electrified.
But, if it were electrified, why not drive the end equipment directly by
electric motors (thus avoiding friction and leakage losses in the hp
system)? Hence the LHP in the end replaced its network by the occasional
piece of equipment powered by an electric pump.
Thus the system declined and disappeared.
--
Charles Norrie (When replying please remove the double meat filling)
Martin Trump
Thanks, Andrew. I often wondered what the outcome was.
Regards,
--
Martin Trump
mary...@mcmail.com
>
> Noting all you chaps on about Kingsway telephone exchange... last week I
contacted BT to ask if it was still possible to arrange a visit. Here's their
reply
"The former Kingsway Telephone Exchange site is now effectively closed.
Because of the safety and other considerations involved in opening up the
location, including the need for escorting, special arrangements would need
to be put in place for members of the public to carry out a visit. These
measures would be expensive and we would require you to cover the costs,
resulting in a bill to you of at least £1,000"
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Harry Pearman
I live next to the LHP pumping station in Wapping.
It is a listed building with no specific use at the moment.
All of the pumps and other machinery is still there in good condition.
Harry Pearman
Duncan Campbell
Kingsway & Chancery Lane
The main entrance to the former tube shelter below Chancery Lane is at
32/33 High Holborn. The goods lift is on the east side of Furnival
Street. It is the one with the crane. As described, the access door from
Chancery Lane Central Line station (directly above) was part of the
original WW2 construction.
Also as described, the shelter was converted for use by the PO as Kingsway
trunk exchange. It was linked to an E-W section of the deep level cable
tunnel system by a short passage running south. I have been there.
Extension tunnels were also built for switchgear. Generators and fuel
tanks were installed. The silencers for the generators may be seen high on
the buildings at High Holborn. They are best viewed from the passage to
Grays Inn, just west.
There are not and never were any rail lines within the deep level cable
tunnels.
The 1980 New Statesman article on my visits to and mapping ofthe
tunnels featured authentic pictures. The NS cover picture was taken at
the junction 100 below the statue of George IV in Trafalgar Square.
Behind me, for those who have seen it, is the blast door giving access to
"Q Whitehall", the government communications unit which is in the northern
part of the deep level section under Whitehall.
The "moles" on the photograph were, of course, painted in. BT did
indeed at first try to suggest that we hadn't been down there. Then they
and the Special Branch went down, and found the tinsel we'd put up :-)
This was about 8 days before Christmas. It was a long journey that night.
I would not recommmend future visitors to visit with a folding bike, a DJ
and a top hat, nor indeed a photographer whose reasonable nervousness lost
him many pounds of water as we walked in from Bethnal Green. The trip
should have ended with an easy egress via the hatch that is just outside
the ICA in the Mall. But it was too heavy for us to raise. Thereon hangs
another tale (and a folding bicycle and a top hat).
Duncan Campbell
Richard Griffin
"David Connor" <dco...@dircon.co.uk> writes:
> BTW, I have the first edition of "London Under London". The second
> edition doesn't look much different - is it worth getting?
As I work in a copyright library, I have access to both copies - the 2nd
ed. has an extra chapter on the end, dealing with various things like
JLE (Jubilee Line Extension), Crossrail, DLR Bank extension, Leicester
Square substation, etc. Some clanger-type errors (though not all) have
been removed in the later version. Oh yes, some photos/illustrations are
different too.
Probably, in your situation I'd browse through the new edition in your
friendly public library, but hang on to your old(er) edition.
Richard.
David Connor
That was always my understanding - that although there were no definite
plans for new lines, as the shelters were going to be built anyway for
use during WW2, they might as well be built in such a way that they
could have civilian uses after the war. Its interesting that they were
aligned for relief lines for the Central and Northern Lines, as neither
line has yet had a relief line built, whereas two other tube lines
have. A principal reason for the building of the Victoria Line was to
relieve the Piccadilly; and similarly the Jubilee was built partly to
relieve the Bakerloo.
I note your use of the phrase "bypass tunnels" rather than the more
usual "express routes". I may be making too much of a single phrase,
but if this was the term used in the board minutes then it may suggest
a rather different form of use for the shelters than is usually
supposed. In 1927, LT commissioned bypass loops at the surface station
at Brent (now Brent Cross) on the Northern Line. This station has an
island platform, and the loops passed outside the platform tracks,
allowing fast services to overtake trains stopping at the station.
They were taken out of use in 1936, although apparently the trackbeds
can still be seen. I wonder if this idea was kept alive, and the deep
shelters were intended to be used as loops for overtaking (being
connected to the existing tracks at each end) rather than being joined
directly to form new lines?
--
David Connor
Rotherhithe, London, UK
x-posted to uk.transport.london (again !!!)
roy.s...@virgin.net
> Kingsway & Chancery Lane
>
> The main entrance to the former tube shelter below Chancery Lane is at
> 32/33 High Holborn. The goods lift is on the east side of Furnival
> Street. It is the one with the crane.
> The 1980 New Statesman article on my visits to and mapping ofthe
> tunnels featured authentic pictures. The NS cover picture was taken at
> the junction 100 below the statue of George IV in Trafalgar Square.
> Behind me, for those who have seen it, is the blast door giving access to
> "Q Whitehall", the government communications unit which is in the northern part of the deep level section under Whitehall.
> Duncan Campbell
There is also the other entrance to Kingsway at Tooks Court. A walled
compound with parking space. (I've seen BT vans in there) Also visible
ventilation shaft and lift.
I've always looked in vain for 'Q' entrances around the ICA. Peter
Laurie told me , in BtCS, to peer through grilles in the toilets ;-o One
very visible bit of evidence may be the large strucure outside the ICA
on the other side of the road, surrounded by grass. It appears to be a
ventilator. Big and pebbledashed.
Where can I obtain a copy of the famous NS article?
Roy
Richard Lamont
In article <358382...@virgin.net>,
roy.s...@virgin.net writes:
> There is also the other entrance to Kingsway at Tooks Court. A walled
> compound with parking space. (I've seen BT vans in there) Also visible
> ventilation shaft and lift.
Presumably this is the entrance with the passenger lift at the southern
extremity of Kingsway's southern sector?
roy.s...@virgin.net
On the wall in Tooks Court was a wooden painted sign 'No Parking - By
order of The Min. Building & Public Works.
Nick Leverton
In article <3583BB...@virgin.net> roy.s...@virgin.net writes:
>Richard Lamont wrote:
>On the wall in Tooks Court was a wooden painted sign 'No Parking - By
>order of The Min. Building & Public Works.
"Min, min, min min min ..."
"Yes, yes, yes yes yes ?"
But who would park on the wall anyway ? Fiendishly cunning, these
Public Works people ...
N. [I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist it]
Stephen King
>>On the wall in Tooks Court was a wooden painted sign 'No Parking - By
>>order of The Min. Building & Public Works.
>But who would park on the wall anyway ?
And from the Goodge Street Deep Level Shelter
a small hanging sign advising:
LIFT SERVICE
SUSPENDED
By Order
Ministry of Works
Engineering Division
So what else is a lift service, other than suspended?
(Did the author have a sense of humour?)
(And yes, there are hydraulic piston lifts in existence now -
but not in 1940!)
Steve
Clive D.W. Feather
In article <01bd9660$c3e47cc0$LocalHost@default>, David Connor
<dco...@dircon.co.uk> writes
>I note your use of the phrase "bypass tunnels" rather than the more
>usual "express routes". I may be making too much of a single phrase,
>but if this was the term used in the board minutes then it may suggest
>a rather different form of use for the shelters than is usually
>supposed.
>I wonder if this idea was kept alive, and the deep
>shelters were intended to be used as loops for overtaking (being
>connected to the existing tracks at each end) rather than being joined
>directly to form new lines?
I think you are reading too much into the phrase. The deep tunnels are
well below the depth of the ordinary tunnels, and using them as bypasses
for individual stations would result in a switchback route ! Furthermore
there would be far too many such bypasses - you wouldn't want them at
every station along a stretch.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Regulation Officer, LINX | Work: <cl...@linx.org>
Tel: +44 1733 705000 | (on secondment from | Home: <cd...@i.am>
Fax: +44 1733 353929 | Demon Internet) | <http://i.am/davros>
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address
Colin Fee
Stephen King wrote:
> And from the Goodge Street Deep Level Shelter
> a small hanging sign advising:
>
> LIFT SERVICE
> SUSPENDED
>
> By Order
> Ministry of Works
> Engineering Division
>
> So what else is a lift service, other than suspended?
>
> (Did the author have a sense of humour?)
>
> (And yes, there are hydraulic piston lifts in existence now -
> but not in 1940!)
>
Ahhh! Did you not know that when the Eifel (world's biggest mechano set)
Tower was completed, the lift used to take people up to and down from the
first level was a hydraulic (using water) lift powered by a steam-driven
pump.
Phssssstoooo!
Colin.
Richard Griffin
Colin Fee <Coli...@med.monash.edu.au> writes:
> Stephen King wrote:
> > (And yes, there are hydraulic piston lifts in existence now -
> > but not in 1940!)
> Ahhh! Did you not know that when the Eifel (world's biggest mechano set)
> Tower was completed, the lift used to take people up to and down from the
> first level was a hydraulic (using water) lift powered by a steam-driven
> pump.
Come to think of it, some of the first injuries on the City & South
London Railway (now Northern Line Stockwell - City) were caused by
failure in a hydraulically-operated passenger lift: the car crashed to
the bottom, and the counterweight broke free and smashed down through the
car.
Richard.
Stephen King
>> So what else is a lift service, other than suspended?
>Ahhh! Did you not know that when the Eifel (world's biggest mechano set)
>Tower was completed, the lift used to take people up to and down from the
>first level was a hydraulic (using water) lift powered by a steam-driven
>pump.
>
>Phssssstoooo!
>
>Colin.
Well done! No, I didn't know that.
Steve
David Connor
Richard Griffin <vi...@astro.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Colin Fee <Coli...@med.monash.edu.au> writes:
>
> > Stephen King wrote:
> > > (And yes, there are hydraulic piston lifts in existence now -
> > > but not in 1940!)
>
> > Ahhh! Did you not know that when the Eifel (world's biggest mechano
> > set) Tower was completed, the lift used to take people up to and
> > down from the first level was a hydraulic (using water) lift
> > powered by a steam-driven pump.
>
> Come to think of it, some of the first injuries on the City & South
> London Railway (now Northern Line Stockwell - City) were caused by
> failure in a hydraulically-operated passenger lift: the car crashed
> to the bottom, and the counterweight broke free and smashed down
> through the car.
The original 1890 lifts on the CSLR were powered by hydraulic rams, but
they were *also* suspended! The rams were located inside the lift
shafts (alongside the lift cars), not beneath them. Cables connected
the rams with the roofs of the cars by means of pulleys located above
the shafts, and the cars were thus suspended in the normal way.
Indeed, in 1897 one of the hydraulic lifts at Kennington was converted
to electrical operation - this would not have been possible had the
rams directly supported the cars. As a result of this experiment at
Kennington, all subsequent CSLR lifts were electrically operated.
The original stations built for the CSLR had large domes above the lift
shafts, and that at Kennington (now a listed building) still survives.
The reason for the domes is unknown, as the pulley wheels took up a
very small proportion of the otherwise empty space. It has been
suggested that the architect misunderstood the size of the lift
equipment. Later CSLR stations, which had electric lifts (presumably
requiring more space for equipment at the head of the shaft) had no
domes.
The were also hydraulic lifts on the Underground system at Finsbury
Park, Highbury & Islington and Shepherd's Bush. I don't know whether
these used rams beneath the cars, or followed the CSLR pattern. The
lifts at Shepherd's Bush may(??) have used hydraulic fluid, but the
others used water. They are all long gone.
Hydraulic lifts have returned to the Underground in recent years
(presumably with rams beneath the cars). Hammersmith
(District/Piccadilly) and Hillingdon stations have both had hydraulic
lifts since 1994, and the Docklands Light Railway (owned by LT until
1992) has standardised on such lifts since it opened in 1987. They are
all intended primarily for the disabled (able-bodied passengers being
directed to stairways). Hydraulic lifts were chosen because although
they are slower than electric lifts, they are regarded as more
reliable. The only such lifts actually beneath the surface are the two
installed by the DLR at Bank - ownership of these passed to London
Underground Ltd in 1994.
The accident to which you refer occurred at London Bridge on 28 June
1900. This station had only opened earlier that year, and therefore
the accident occurred to an electrically-operated lift. The
counterweight pulley shaft broke, causing the lift to drop the full
length of the shaft and hit the buffers. The emergency brake did not
operate because the lift was still being tested by the contractors, and
had not been handed over to the railway - it should not have been in
service, but for some reason was. The impact dislodged weights
balanced on girders on the roof of the lift, which crashed through the
roof and seriously injured three people. (These weights were being
used by the contractors in order to adjust the balance of the lift - I
assume they were used to simulate a load.)
There *was* an accident to a hydraulic CSLR lift: at Oval on 2 August
1909. A copper pipe burst, leading to a sudden loss of hydraulic
pressure. This caused the lift to drop rapidly for the last 13 feet of
travel, stopping suddenly at the bottom. Six passengers received minor
injuries, and the lift was flooded by water from the burst pipe!
I would guess that the hydraulic lifts at the Eiffel Tower were
suspended, rather than using rams beneath the cars, as they would not
have operated vertically (instead travelling diagonally up the tower's
legs).
b.h.j...@hw.ac.uk
I've been consulting The Pocket Guide to Scottish Words and it seems
that _wheesht", meaning "stop your noise, be quiet" comes from "'ist
oo", being the Gaelic for "Be quiet".
However, "ist oo" is only the phonetic spelling because I cannot find
the proper yaccabacah`cer-coo.
As for "poch ma hone", I used to think it was a Gaelic Grace, because of
the circumstances under which I first heard it. Quite a lot of us said,
"Amen".
============ ===== ===== BILL J. ===== ===== ============
GM8APX, qthr Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Visne scire quod credam? Credo orbes volantes exstare
Net-Tamer V 1.11 - Registered
Marc Cornelius
In article <01bd9aaa$a2409060$LocalHost@default>, David Connor
<dco...@dircon.co.uk> writes
[snip]
>The reason for the domes is unknown, as the pulley wheels took up a
>very small proportion of the otherwise empty space. It has been
>suggested that the architect misunderstood the size of the lift
>equipment. Later CSLR stations, which had electric lifts (presumably
>requiring more space for equipment at the head of the shaft) had no
>domes.
[snip]
Possibly the architect thought a larger dome would look better than a
smaller one?
--
Marc Cornelius
Richard Griffin
"David Connor" <dco...@dircon.co.uk> writes:
> The accident to which you refer occurred at London Bridge on 28 June
> 1900. This station had only opened earlier that year, and therefore
> the accident occurred to an electrically-operated lift. The
<snip>
> There *was* an accident to a hydraulic CSLR lift: at Oval on 2 August
> 1909. A copper pipe burst, leading to a sudden loss of hydraulic
> pressure. This caused the lift to drop rapidly for the last 13 feet of
> travel, stopping suddenly at the bottom. Six passengers received minor
> injuries, and the lift was flooded by water from the burst pipe!
Well! Thanks for all that... I must have been mixing up the two
accidents - about which I read in the small-print summary at the back of
Rails Through The Clay (Croome & Jackson).
Richard.
Ric Colsey
> As for "poch ma hone", I used to think it was a Gaelic Grace, because >of the circumstances under which I first heard it. Quite a lot of us >said, "Amen".
>
STILL has me cacking myself laughing. Almost as good a "shit" story as
Marshell Ney's "Merde!"
p u l s e
b.h.j...@hw.ac.uk wrote in message <6mbo3n$icu$3...@glencoe.hw.ac.uk>...
>
>As for "poch ma hone", I used to think it was a Gaelic Grace, because of
>the circumstances under which I first heard it. Quite a lot of us said,
>"Amen".
>
Grapple me gronglers, "poch ma hone"? No no no... you mean "pog mo thoin"
(pronounced poag muh hone") - literally translated from Irish, this means
"Kiss my arse" - and may have been said once or thrice by Spike Milligan
(himself).
--
p u l s e
~~~~~~~~~~
pu...@tinet.ie
http://acs.ie/niall
