View Single Post
  #12  
Old June 3rd 04, 04:41 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
In article , "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
In article , (Al

Dykes)
wrote:



Some people might do well to look at the geology of Syria. The

flatter
parts are generally sandstone or an equivalent crumbly rock that won't
support tunneling much deeper than irrigation. A start was once made

on
a Damascus subway, but apparently abandoned because every tunnel would
have to be steel- or concrete-lined.


As is every tunnel on the London Underground, except for some of the
older tunnels were cast iron segments or brick linings are used.

The more mountainous areas are karst, which does tend to have natural
caves, but doesn't lend itself enormously to tunneling. Serious deep
excavations, like Cheyenne Mountain, are granite or similar hard rock.


You may wish to think again

London is built on clay, I guess that means you think they couldnt
possibly build the London Underground


No, I said _serious_ tunneling. Cheyenne Mountain is a good example of a
serious tunneling excavation (and other system) intended to withstand
near misses of nuclear weapons, or deep-penetrating PGMs with
conventional warheads.


Cheyanne Mountain was designed and built long before the concept of
deep-penetrating PGM's became a reality, so it is doubtful that it was
"intended" to handle that event; it was intended to withstand anything but a
direct hit from a high yield nuclear warhead, though.


The sea bed under the English Channel is made of soft chalk.
Somehow though they managed to build a tunnel under it.

The technical breakthrough that makes tunnelling in soft
materials isnt exactly new . The use of a tunnelling shield
and brick lining dates in modern times was introduced
by Marc Brunel but the technique seems to have been known
to the Romans.


And won't have much effect on a modern penetrating or high blast weapon.
Cheyenne Mountain isn't only granite, it's granite in a matrix of steel
stabilizing bolts. Zhiguli is presumably comparable.

In the middle east the techniques for building extensive
underground tunnels have been know since antiquity.
The network of irrigation tunnels in Iran are known
as the qanat and in Arabia they call them the falaj.


Exactly. The qanats are what I'm describing in the Syrian lowlands. They
don't and can't go deeply enough to withstand modern bombing.


If you think that such facilities can only be built in granite, think again.
I'd be very surprised if Mount Weather in Virginia, one of the
formerly-secret (along with Raven Rock in Maryland and the congrssional
facility at White Hot Springs (IIRC) in West Virginia) emergency relocation
sites, was built in anything other than that Karst limestone you ridiculed
earlier. Mount Weather and Raven Rock are both tunnel complexes.

Brooks