In message , at 15:39:43 on
Sat, 24 Feb 2007, David Hansen
remarked:

How one would prevent millions of people leaving London is beyond
me.

Luckily we don't have to rely on you to do this.

Nice try. However, people could walk, as they have done before in
London and New York.

In the absence of road blocks, which seem to be one of the measures
mentioned as a way to stop an exodus. I agree, in the circumstances I'd
walk too, but home is over 100 miles from London, and many opportunities
to be stopped on the way.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 14:38:21 on Sat,
24 Feb 2007, Andrew Clark
remarked:
In the depot. The first thing you'd have done is cleared the running
tracks.

Without traction power?

Can you explain why the many references to battery locos have escaped
your attention?

And who would clear the rolling stock, precisely? The Royal Household?

That would have been done long before, when the lines were shut to the
public.
--
Roland Perry

In message
David Hansen wrote:

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:10:01 +0000 someone who may be Graeme Wall
wrote this:-

How one would prevent millions of people leaving London is beyond
me.

There was a plan to clear a big open space all the way round London that
could be patrolled by armed police and military units that would prevent
any one trying to get out from the inner zone. Would have cost many
millions of pounds to put into practice.

It would take some time to organise. By the time it had been
organised I suspect many would have left.



They've already done it, it's the M25.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

John Rowland wrote:
Pete Fenelon wrote:
In uk.railway Brian Watson wrote:
(I won't mention the private taxi the Royal Family uses, at that
will just confuse people).
They have at least one that members of the royal family drive, ISTR.
Phil the Greek's favourite vehicle for driving around town, isn't it?

Presumably its purpose is use of bus lanes.

Isn't it for a form of "camouflage" - no one would think much of a
black cab in London, but they might notice a more distinctive vehicle.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
...
John Rowland wrote:
Pete Fenelon wrote:
In uk.railway Brian Watson wrote:
(I won't mention the private taxi the Royal Family uses, at that
will just confuse people).
They have at least one that members of the royal family drive, ISTR.
Phil the Greek's favourite vehicle for driving around town, isn't it?

Presumably its purpose is use of bus lanes.

Isn't it for a form of "camouflage" - no one would think much of a
black cab in London, but they might notice a more distinctive vehicle.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK



Perhaps he is moonlighting. The Civil List isn't what it used to be.

John Rowland wrote:
Brian Watson wrote:
"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
. ..

People are always claiming that the UK Tridents can't be fired
without the USA authorisation (or even that only the USA controls
them), but they never seem to be able to provide any evidence for
this (or any evidence as to why the UK would be foolish enough to
sign up to such a deal).
Might be something to do with incurring HUGE debts to the US during
WW1 and the rematch between 1939 and '45.

Those debts were paid off in December.

Only the WWII-related ones. We still (now largely theoretically) owe the
USA money from Round One, but we are owed rather more money by other
countries than we ourselves owe. The various debts were all pretty much
put to one side during the depression between the wars, except for
Finland who paid up their bit.

While there are various books on how the west would have dealt with a
Soviet attack and the resulting WWIII, has anyone looking into the other
angle, and what the USSR thought the evil capitalist imperialists would
do when they launched an attack on the workers of the eastern bloc?
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Roland Perry" wrote

Can you explain why the many references to battery locos have escaped your
attention?

Not all the rolling stock is battery operated, is it? I was referring to the
everyday clutter of hundreds of trains using the system.

That would have been done long before, when the lines were shut to the
public.

You see, I think you have in mind some sort of orderly gradual transition
from normality to emergency, when the government announces a problem and TfL
responds by ordering all the LT staff to clear the system of rolling stock,
and generally closes it all down neatly.

I on the other hand don't think that any emergency likely to cause it
necessary to make an emergency covert evacuation of VIPS from London is
going to happen in such a way. Whether a missile strike, a dirty bomb or a
germ scare, the transition time is likely to be extremely short, either
minutes or a couple of hours, and tidying all the trains away to their
depots is simply not going to be a priority either for TfL or LT staff -
most of the latter will have other priorities. It might happen, of course,
but the strong likelihood is that it won't, and the system will be abandoned
in some state of disorder.

This being the case, no sensible planner is going to choose the Tube as a
route for VIP emergency evacuation: there is only a slim possibility that it
could be so used, and there are far more reliable methods available.

Incidentally, while LT is rightly proud of the transport continuity provided
in some areas of London during the Blitz, in the East End a very large
number of station staff, bus and train drivers and conductors abandoned
their posts under fire. That sort of precedent suggests continuity of public
transport service in London in an sudden-onset acute emergency cannot be
expected.

In article , says...
"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
...
John Rowland wrote:
Pete Fenelon wrote:
In uk.railway Brian Watson wrote:
(I won't mention the private taxi the Royal Family uses, at that
will just confuse people).
They have at least one that members of the royal family drive, ISTR.
Phil the Greek's favourite vehicle for driving around town, isn't it?

Presumably its purpose is use of bus lanes.

Isn't it for a form of "camouflage" - no one would think much of a
black cab in London, but they might notice a more distinctive vehicle.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK



Perhaps he is moonlighting. The Civil List isn't what it used to be.




Can you imagine flagging down Phil?

"Cor blimey guv, what is it with all these bloody foreigners coming over
here and pinching our jobs?

I 'ad that Queen Elizabeth in the back the other day"...

--
Halmyre

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:38:21 on Sat, 24
Feb 2007, Andrew Clark remarked:
In the depot. The first thing you'd have done is cleared the running
tracks.

Without traction power?

Can you explain why the many references to battery locos have escaped your
attention?

Not much use in using battery loco's or any other type of loco's if you have
passenger trains on the main line that cannot move because of no power being
available. How long will it take for a small number of battery loco's to
drag thesse abandond trains out of the way?

And who would clear the rolling stock, precisely? The Royal Household?

That would have been done long before, when the lines were shut to the
public.

How?

Roland Perry

"Clive Coleman." wrote in message
news
In message , Stuart
writes
One that involved flying out from Heathrow Airport - Hyde Park corner -
Piccadilly Line - Heathrow!
I used to have a picture a little underground train that carried two
people and operated between the white house and some main station in
Washington D.C. This must be at least 30 years ago and was meant to be
secret. Years before Washington got a metro proper. If it can happen
there, it can happen here. I'm not asserting that is has, but I wouldn't
be surprised.

Something like this website shows? http://www.clouse.org/capitol1.html

Nick P



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com