| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Spooks Underground
Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last
night? That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my childhood! |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last night? That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my childhood! I'm assuming it was a 1972, parked in the Aldwych tunnel at Holborn? If so, there are many older trains still in service on LU. We also saw the usual escape into the disused Jubilee platforms at Charing Cross (not far from Aldwych, but I don't think there's an underground route between them). I was wondering where all the other twisty foot passages were? They looked clean and unused, rather than disused. |
Spooks Underground
In message , Recliner
writes wrote in message Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last night? That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my childhood! I'm assuming it was a 1972, parked in the Aldwych tunnel at Holborn? If so, there are many older trains still in service on LU. We also saw the usual escape into the disused Jubilee platforms at Charing Cross (not far from Aldwych, but I don't think there's an underground route between them). But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would have done! :-) I was wondering where all the other twisty foot passages were? They looked clean and unused, rather than disused. I assumed that hey were all part of the Charing Cross complex but could of course be wrong. The 72 stock *was* in Aldwych, I presume? -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Spooks Underground
|
Spooks Underground
"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
.... But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would have done! :-) Actually, that would have been rather clever, but assumes a knowledge about LU's history that companies like Kudos are unlikely to have. I've been down the old King William Street tunnels, and it would have been great if they could have re-created that seedy (and dark ) WWII look. Wouldn't it be nice if disused tunnels were all so clean, dry and brightly lit as in Spooks (not a rat or stalagmite to be seen)? Obviously, if we're being picky, I doubt that you could get a nuclear bomb into a briefcase either. But then, Spooks isn't about accuracy, and they do tell their tales rather well. |
Spooks Underground
In message , Recliner
writes "Ian Jelf" wrote in message ... But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would have done! :-) Actually, that would have been rather clever, Blush Oh, really, it's nothing. You're too kind! :-)) but assumes a knowledge about LU's history that companies like Kudos are unlikely to have. They have only to ask....... I've been down the old King William Street tunnels, and it would have been great if they could have re-created that seedy (and dark ) WWII look. Wouldn't it be nice if disused tunnels were all so clean, dry and brightly lit as in Spooks (not a rat or stalagmite to be seen)? Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of television and film production generally. The problem is, if you recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling point of view. Obviously, if we're being picky, Me?! :-) I doubt that you could get a nuclear bomb into a briefcase either. If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved. But then, Spooks isn't about accuracy, and they do tell their tales rather well. This is only the second one I've seen. I saw one in an hotel last week and tuned in again this week because I'd enjoyed it so much. -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 9, 2:52 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I assumed that hey were all part of the Charing Cross complex but could of course be wrong. The 72 stock *was* in Aldwych, I presume? Somehow one of the ticket office staff had found her way onto the train and were having a snooze when the spooks rudely awoke her. But its good to see her customer training came to the fore. B2003 |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 9, 4:01 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I doubt that you could get a nuclear bomb into a briefcase either. If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved. Unfortunately not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition B2003 |
Spooks Underground
In message , at 16:01:24 on Tue,
9 Dec 2008, Ian Jelf remarked: Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of television and film production generally. The problem is, if you recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling point of view. Nor is it very good for the overtime bills, people falling over one another and so on. I'm told that most "night" scenes are actually shot in daylight with filters on the camera. -- Roland Perry |
Spooks Underground
In message , Roland Perry
writes In message , at 16:01:24 on Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Ian Jelf remarked: Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of television and film production generally. The problem is, if you recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling point of view. Nor is it very good for the overtime bills, people falling over one another and so on. I'm told that most "night" scenes are actually shot in daylight with filters on the camera. That was a technique called "la nuit americaine" and is less used nowadays, I think. Graeme Wall will no doubt shortly be along to confirm or deny this! -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
On Dec 9, 4:01 pm, Ian Jelf wrote: I doubt that you could get a nuclear bomb into a briefcase either. If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved. Unfortunately not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase, casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack. So my statement stands. |
Spooks Underground
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 04:56:47 -0800 (PST),
wrote: Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last night? That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my childhood! IIRC it looked like one of the Piccadilly Line trains usually parked on the Aldwych branch which had been "untidied". |
Spooks Underground
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 04:56:47 -0800 (PST), wrote: Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last night? That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my childhood! IIRC it looked like one of the Piccadilly Line trains usually parked on the Aldwych branch which had been "untidied". I think it was a 1972, not 1973, stock (half) train (1973 stock doesn't have full red ends). I don't think they park a 1973 stock in the Aldwych branch any more. |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase, casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack. So my statement stands. Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube would immediately be clocked as suspicious. Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions they have now that could fit in a suitcase. B2003 |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote: Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase, casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack. So my statement stands. Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube would immediately be clocked as suspicious. Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions they have now that could fit in a suitcase. In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American) bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase. I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb. You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding and conventional explosives. The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the electronics, if any. |
Spooks Underground
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 16:01:24 +0000, Ian Jelf
wrote: I doubt that you could get a nuclear bomb into a briefcase either. If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved. Unfortunately, I believe it is possible. I have watched documentaries about the subject in the past. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Spooks Underground
"Recliner" wrote in
: wrote in message On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote: Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase, casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack. So my statement stands. Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube would immediately be clocked as suspicious. Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions they have now that could fit in a suitcase. In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American) bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase. I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb. You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding and conventional explosives. The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the electronics, if any. But have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass and you will see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available in Woolworths. |
Spooks Underground
In message , at 21:17:33 on
Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Recliner remarked: In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American) bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase. I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb. You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding and conventional explosives. The "Uranium" part seemed to be inside a stainless steel globe the size of a tennis ball. The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the electronics, if any. And possibly the battery - it seemed fully charged even after being buried for 20 years. -- Roland Perry |
Spooks Underground
But have a look athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_massand you will see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available in Woolworths. And if they are, they won't be much longer. But you can probably get 50% off at the moment ;-) |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 10, 9:42 am, Phil C wrote:
But have a look athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_massandyou will see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available in Woolworths. And if they are, they won't be much longer. But you can probably get 50% off at the moment ;-) You could call it a mass reduction. *cough* B2003 |
Spooks Underground
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
... In message , at 21:17:33 on Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Recliner remarked: In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American) bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase. I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb. You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding and conventional explosives. The "Uranium" part seemed to be inside a stainless steel globe the size of a tennis ball. The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the electronics, if any. And possibly the battery - it seemed fully charged even after being buried for 20 years. -- Roland Perry I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! MaxB |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Batman55" wrote:
I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! Indeed. It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone outside full view of whats going on, not to mention the free reign its agents have to wander around london shooting and sniping at people without being spotted by a single plod (who were no doubt too busy nicking congestion charge dodgers). B2003 |
Spooks Underground
In message , at 10:09:04 on
Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Batman55 remarked: I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual The bottom of the escalators was Charing Cross, Jubilee Line, of course. Was the top of the escalator shot (through the locked grill) genuinely at London Bridge? - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! Especially the part where they couriered the briefcase from Grosvenor Square to "London Bridge", then down the escalators and defused, in about five minutes :) -- Roland Perry |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Batman55" wrote: I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! Indeed. It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone outside full view of whats going on, not to mention the free reign its agents have to wander around london shooting and sniping at people without being spotted by a single plod (who were no doubt too busy nicking congestion charge dodgers). Yes, that bit probably was authentic... |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Batman55" wrote: I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! Indeed. It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone outside full view of whats going on, not to mention the free reign its agents have to wander around london shooting and sniping at people without being spotted by a single plod (who were no doubt too busy nicking congestion charge dodgers). The Met and BTP would be nicking the camera crews following them around - surely today's priority? Paul S |
Spooks Underground
In message
, at 02:22:07 on Wed, 10 Dec 2008, remarked: It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone outside full view of whats going on And them a clear shot of anything on the runway. But not at DLR trains, which seemed to be entirely absent from the tracks. -- Roland Perry |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 10, 10:23 am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:09:04 on Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Batman55 remarked: I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual The bottom of the escalators was Charing Cross, Jubilee Line, of course. Was the top of the escalator shot (through the locked grill) genuinely at London Bridge? From what I remember of charing cross the main escalator to the jubilee line didn't have a curved corridor leading to it - it joined almost directly with the passageways leading to the northern and bakerloo. But there may have been a 2nd escalator somewhere that I never used. B2003 |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
... On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Batman55" wrote: I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic, almost documentary feel to the programme! Indeed. It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone outside full view of whats going on, not to mention the free reign its agents have to wander around london shooting and sniping at people without being spotted by a single plod (who were no doubt too busy nicking congestion charge dodgers). B2003 You used to be able to stand on Prince Regent platform and watch the aeroplanes (if you like that sort of thing) until they stuck this building up blocking the view. It is quite isolated and nice to see it is completely empty! No doubt the landlord was glad of the rent, even if it was in roubles. MaxB |
Spooks Underground
wrote in message ... Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last night? Oh yes! I took great interest in noting the continuity errors. Yes, I _know_ it's entertainment, and not factual, but when did the Bakerloo line go to "London Bridge"??? (I suspect it was actually filmed at Aldwych). -- MatSav |
Spooks Underground
In message , at 06:13:22 on
Thu, 11 Dec 2008, MatSav remarked: I took great interest in noting the continuity errors. Yes, I _know_ it's entertainment, and not factual, but when did the Bakerloo line go to "London Bridge"??? At what point was it suggested that it did? (I must have missed it). (I suspect it was actually filmed at Aldwych). The majority of the filming was at Aldwych and Charing Cross (Jubilee Line). The worst error (a plot hole rather than continuity error) was arriving at the Charing Cross platforms, complete with original signage, when they were supposed to be at London Bridge. -- Roland Perry |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 11, 8:36*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 06:13:22 on Thu, 11 Dec 2008, MatSav remarked: I took great interest in noting the continuity errors. Yes, I _know_ it's entertainment, and not factual, but when did the Bakerloo line go to "London Bridge"??? At what point was it suggested that it did? (I must have missed it). (I suspect it was actually filmed at Aldwych). The majority of the filming was at Aldwych and Charing Cross (Jubilee Line). The worst error (a plot hole rather than continuity error) was arriving at the Charing Cross platforms, complete with original signage, when they were supposed to be at London Bridge. -- Roland Perry The station where they went into the tunnel and headed down the tracks was Holborn. |
Spooks Underground
|
Spooks Underground
On Dec 11, 8:00*pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:51:52 on Thu, 11 Dec 2008, remarked: The majority of the filming was at Aldwych and Charing Cross (Jubilee Line). The worst error (a plot hole rather than continuity error) was arriving at the Charing Cross platforms, complete with original signage, when they were supposed to be at London Bridge. The station where they went into the tunnel and headed down the tracks was Holborn. Yes, of course. Because you could see the Piccadilly "through trains" in the distance. So it was the disused Aldwych-branch platform, not Aldwych itself. Quite a distance from Liverpool St, though. Finding some sort of secret passage from Aldwych (where they ran down the tracks to) into the Jubilee line towards Charging Cross is much more realistic, as I understand there really is a tunnel almost all the way from the Charing Cross station to Aldwych. -- Roland Perry The tunnels at Charing Cross (Jubilee) do extend some way down the Strand. But not as far as Aldwych station. |
Spooks Underground
|
Spooks Underground
wrote in message
On Dec 11, 8:36 am, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 06:13:22 on Thu, 11 Dec 2008, MatSav remarked: I took great interest in noting the continuity errors. Yes, I _know_ it's entertainment, and not factual, but when did the Bakerloo line go to "London Bridge"??? At what point was it suggested that it did? (I must have missed it). (I suspect it was actually filmed at Aldwych). The majority of the filming was at Aldwych and Charing Cross (Jubilee Line). The worst error (a plot hole rather than continuity error) was arriving at the Charing Cross platforms, complete with original signage, when they were supposed to be at London Bridge. -- Roland Perry The station where they went into the tunnel and headed down the tracks was Holborn. Almost all modern filmed series shot on the Underground are on the Aldwych branch or the disused Jubilee Charing X station, and related passages, as no other underground sections are readily available for filming. It's just a case of whether they bother to disguise the stations and trains. In this case, they made little or no effort to disguise the locations, presumably because Spooks isn't built on an accurate portrayal of anything. One curiosity is that Spooks uses the entrance of Freemasons' Hall at 60 Gt Queens St (www.ugle.org.uk) as a substitute for Thames House on the Thames. It's not more than a few steps from Freemasons' Hall to the Aldwych branch, and you wouldn't have to be much of a conspiracy theorist to suggest that they were linked by a secret tunnel. |
Spooks Underground
On Dec 11, 8:22 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:10:08 on Thu, 11 Dec 2008, remarked: Finding some sort of secret passage from Aldwych (where they ran down the tracks to) into the Jubilee line towards Charging Cross is much more realistic, as I understand there really is a tunnel almost all the way from the Charing Cross station to Aldwych. The tunnels at Charing Cross (Jubilee) do extend some way down the Strand. But not as far as Aldwych station. They may not go all the way, but the "gap" is probably smaller than from Liverpool St (where they dived into the system) to Holborn (where they emerged moments later). -- Roland Perry But unless you know that PD is the signal cabin code for Holborn and what a Piccadilly line train looks like, they were never there and simply went from Liverpool Street to London Bridge, albeit through a station still with Charing Cross on the roundel. The only other nugget I can give is that when that metal grill gate has electrity cables connected up to it, they were in level 5 of a station! That's the magic of televison! |
Spooks Underground
|
Spooks Underground
wrote in message ... On Dec 11, 8:00 pm, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 11:51:52 on Thu, 11 Dec 2008, remarked: The majority of the filming was at Aldwych and Charing Cross (Jubilee Line). The worst error (a plot hole rather than continuity error) was arriving at the Charing Cross platforms, complete with original signage, when they were supposed to be at London Bridge. The station where they went into the tunnel and headed down the tracks was Holborn. Yes, of course. Because you could see the Piccadilly "through trains" in the distance. So it was the disused Aldwych-branch platform, not Aldwych itself. Quite a distance from Liverpool St, though. Finding some sort of secret passage from Aldwych (where they ran down the tracks to) into the Jubilee line towards Charging Cross is much more realistic, as I understand there really is a tunnel almost all the way from the Charing Cross station to Aldwych. -- Roland Perry The tunnels at Charing Cross (Jubilee) do extend some way down the Strand. But not as far as Aldwych station. |
Spooks Underground
wrote Finding some sort of secret passage
from Aldwych (where they ran down the tracks to) into the Jubilee line towards Charging Cross is much more realistic, as I understand there really is a tunnel almost all the way from the Charing Cross station to Aldwych. The tunnels at Charing Cross (Jubilee) do extend some way down the Strand. But not as far as Aldwych station. Within a few yards ... but at a different level -- Andrew |
Spooks Underground
In message , at 22:46:34 on Thu, 11
Dec 2008, Andrew Heenan remarked: The tunnels at Charing Cross (Jubilee) do extend some way down the Strand. But not as far as Aldwych station. They may not go all the way, but the "gap" is probably smaller than from Liverpool St (where they dived into the system) to Holborn (where they emerged moments later). -- Roland Perry |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:03 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk