Source: File: plan
to build a double Channel tunnel. See an original image at: <http://www.railwaywondersoftheworld.com/channel-tunnel.html>
[Accessed 06 November 2016]
Prior press releases
had well discussed
The likelihood of
a tunnel being built;
From the English
coast of chalky downs,
To pass beneath
the sea and rise again
On French soil -
emerging between Calais
Or Boulogne - all
to help the war efforts.
The leader of these plans for a channel
Tunnel given to
Sir Frances Fox - totally
Confident of ambitious
plans feasibility -
Just to consider
the existence of tubes
Beneath London,
or the 1903 railroad
Simpson tunnel in
Pennsylvania, USA.
Alongside
technicalities of construction
Came
argumentation over safeguarding
The tunnel's
completion - Although
The channel
tunnel's existence was little
More than paper
blueprints, came evolving
Discussion on the
idea of its destruction.
The debate of a
report carried forward
By Telegraph's
engineer correspondent.
Historically,
there had been a long desire
For the creation
of linking together Britain
And France - prior
opposition had been
Raised by Field
Marshal Wolseley.
While Wolseley had died
a year prior to
1914 world war, Garnet Wolseley put out
1914 world war, Garnet Wolseley put out
His theory that
any such passage link,
Would be quite 'calamitous' for England -
He suggested an ever-present
peril from
A continental
army, seizing the tunnel.
At that time
Edward Watkin had dreamed
The ideal of a
rail line Manchester to Paris,
That began in
1880 - but big opposition
From figures like
Wolseley and the Queen
Caused the ideas cancellation, for purposes
Of national
security; arguments resumed.
Times changed, as
came in a reminder
That in Wolseley's
peak how poison gas
Was not known, or
uses of high calibre
Explosives -
electricity was then in its
Infancy; while no
one could then have
Imagined armoured tanks carrying guns.
The new prospect
had taken on a solid
Formation by Channel Tunnel committee,
Created within
the House of Commons -
British Prime
Minster Asquith had called
For a review in
the light of experiences
Due to the war,
from the war committee.
Supporter of the
tunnel, Arthur Fell MP;
A figure that had
previously produced
A paper for the
tunnel in 1913 - in 1916
Led a delegation
of MPs before Asquith,
Advising that many
military oppositions
Had 'practically
disappeared' off scene.
Governmental
military advisers were
Well satisfied such
a tunnel could not
Be used in any
armed invasion against
Britain. A
discussion then centered
On how the tunnel
might be rendered
Unusable, for
purposes against invaders.
The simplest of
ideas would be to flood
The entrance over
a short length - close
To the English
coast there would be
A 'V' shaped dip,
into which water could
Be filled by
electric sluice gates - operated
Not just by Dover
forts but from London.
Even a rat would
not be able to pass,
And this would
stop complete damage.
Their first plan had been to blow tunnel
Roof, to let water
flood the whole length -
Originally a
viaduct entry would be built,
Leading from the
cliffs into the tunnel.
In emergency British
war ships could
Blow this
construction, in order to halt
Any enemy using
the tunnel - yet since
The submarine
came into service this
Idea was dropped
- as any submarine
Could easily destroy
such a viaduct.
A further consideration
from such
Submarines was an attack actually
On the seabed, by
laying of mines.
A hole might be
blown, allowing the
Channel waters to
flood the tunnel;
Likely thwarted
by 100 feet of chalk.
Due to water
pressure at that depth
Any explosion
would be less effective
Than if on land -
an additional plan
Of engineers
focused on the French
Coastline where
the tunnel opened;
Though positioned 4 miles inland.
The jurisdiction of
protection would
Still be guarded
by gunnery of British
Fleet - with consideration
by engineers
To French side,
regarding inland attacks;
to recall how first months had been threats
On Calais,
targeted by German invaders.
New plans suggested making the land
Around the tunnel
access into some
Type of fortress as a last stand -
To aid English
side to put into action
All preventative
measures - in addition
A French power
station would assist.
Being able to
supply electricity part
Way into the
tunnel - they could
Halt any rogue
trains trying to enter
The route by a
switch; while a British
Power station
would be out of range
Of enemy, being 20
miles inland.
Engineer Sir
Frances Fox believed
That within 6
years the tunnel would
Be completed; a
straightforward build,
To total
£8,000,000 for English share.
With a ventilation system simpler than
London tubes, travel was 30 minutes.
With a ventilation system simpler than
London tubes, travel was 30 minutes.
The underlying
suggestion seemed
To indicate that
war with Germany
Would likely last,
well beyond when
The tunnel would
be operational; into
At least six more years of war. To add
France had no
fears from the tunnel.
In the commons
the discussions
Of the proposition
in connecting
England to the continent
came via
A reminder by Mr
Fell to Asquith -
That peace with France
had lasted
100 years, to be so for much longer.
To note rate of
scientific progression,
By fifty or 100 more
years to 2016,
No one could make
any prophecy
As to what in
future needs might be,
In protection
from threats above, or
Below the sea
or even from the air.
by Jamie Mann.
Anon.,1916. Channel Tunnel -
Invasion Risks - Engineering Safeguards. The Daily Telegraph, [online] 06
November 1916. P.4. Col.3. Available at: <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ww1-archive/12213599/Daily-Telegraph-November-6-1916.html> [Accessed: 06 November 2016].
Source: File: Edward
Watkin. Available at: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Watkin>
[Accessed 06 November 2016]
Source: File: Garnet
Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley. Available at:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnet_Wolseley,_1st_Viscount_Wolseley>
[Accessed 06 November 2016]
Mann, J., 2016. 100 years Ago - Poems by Jamie Mann. [letter] (Personal
communication, 06 November 2016).
#WW1 #WW1centenary #GreatWar #WW1poem #GreatWar #WW1centenary
#worldwarone #worldwaroneremembered #WW1Britain
No comments:
Post a Comment