Nuclear powered tunnelling machines.
Since the 1950ís, the US Government
has had nuclear powered tunneling machines.
They were patented in the 1970's (US Patents #3,693,731).
As it burrows through the rock hundreds of feet below the surface,
the Subterrene heats whatever stone it encounters
into molten rock, or magma, which cools
after the Subterrene has moved on.
The result is a tunnel with a smooth, glazed lining,
somewhat like black glass, which is also apparently
strong enough that it doesnít even require reinforcing of the walls.
It was featured in OMNI magazine, Sept 1983, p80.
I happened to see a picture of (what I assume is)
one of these machines in a UFO magazine,
but at $15, I wasn't going to (let alone couldn't afford to) buy it.
Then I was visiting a friend and he showed me the
and lo and behold, there was the picture. Hmmm, what would
the US Air Force be doing tunneling deep under the ground?
So, with the above picture and the US Patent Office patent,
I think that adds up to
that these things are real.
And further to that, it is highly likely that the claims of underground
bases and tunnels across America (if not the world) are indeed true.
Here's a pic of one photographed in Denmark.
It appears that there is a high probability then that an tunnel
now exists under the Atlantic Ocean connecting America to Europe.
For those of you aware of the difficulties encountered
in the Burnley tunnel being constructed in Melbourne, Australia,
just think, we could have been driving under the Yarra
years ago if they used this machine.
And none of these delays caused by leakages due to cracks
which are the direct result of a large corporation trying to save money
and constructing a cheap tunnel instead of doing it the correct way
(double layered as per the Sydney Harbour tunnel).
From http://www.wic.net/colonel/!subdril.txt (dead link)
(now defunct site due to the Colonels death).
Robert Salter, of the RAND Corporation, has suggested
building a subway from New York to Los Angeles
magnetically levitated above the tracks.
The trains would zip through the evacuated tunnels
at speeds faster than an SST,
crossing the country in less than one hour.
Building such a train presents no special technological problems,
but the cost of tunneling from coast to coast would. To be
economically feasible, engineers would have to develop a new way to dig.
The federal government's Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory,
in New Mexico, however, may have an answer to this challenge.
Called the Subterrene,
the Los Almos machine looks like a vicious giant mole.
The beauty of the Subterrene is that,
as it burrows through the rock hundreds of feet below the surface,
it heats whatever stone it encounters into molten rock,
or magma, which cools after the Subterrene has moved on.
The result is a tunnel with a smooth, glazed lining. For power,
the Subterrene can use a built-in minature nuclear engine
or even a conventional power plant.
I have seen this machine, and watched it in action.
Normal rate of speed is approximitly six and one/half miles per hour
depending on Type of rock, sand etc
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 03:13:27 -0400
From: Steve Lacy < Sandmob(at)AOL.COM >
Could government mole machines be building a
secret worldwide tunnel system?
UNDERGROUND BASES AND TUNNELS
by Richard Sauder, Ph.D.,
Adventures Unlimited Press
The nuclear subterrene (rhymes with submarine) was designed
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, in New Mexico.
A number of patents were filed by scientists at Los Alamos,
a few federal technical documents were written -
- and then the whole thing just sort of faded away.
Or did it?
Nuclear subterrenes work by melting their way
through the rock and soil, actually vitrifying it as they go,
and leaving a neat, solidly glass-lined tunnel behind them.
The heat is supplied by a compact nuclear reactor
that circulates liquid lithium from the reactor core
to the tunnel face, where it melts the rock. In the process
of melting the rock the lithium loses some of its heat.
It is then circulated back along the exterior
of the tunneling machine to help cool the vitrified rock
as the tunneling machine forces its way forward.
The cooled lithium then circulates back to the reactor
where the whole cycle starts over.
In this way the nuclear subterrene slices through the rock
like a nuclear powered, 2,000 degree Fahrenheit (Celcius?)
- earthworm, boring its way deep underground.
The United States Atomic Energy Commission and the
United States Energy Research and Development Administration
took out Patents in the 1970s for nuclear subterrenes.
The first patent, in 1972 went to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
The nuclear subterrene has an advantage
over mechanical TBMs in that it produces no muck
that must be disposed of by conveyors, trains, trucks, etc.
This greatly simplifies tunneling.
If nuclear subterrenes actually exist (and I do not know if they do)
their presence, and the tunnels they make,
could be very hard to detect,
for the simple reason that there would not be
the tell-tale MUCK PILES or tailings dumps
that are associated with the conventional tunneling activities.
The 1972 patent makes this clear. It states:
".. (D)ebris may be disposed of as melted rock
both as a lining for the hole and as a dispersal
in cracks produced in the surrounding rock.
The rock-melting drill is of a shape and
is propelled under sufficient pressure to produce
and extend cracks in solid rock radially around the bore
by means of hydrostatic pressure developed
in the molten rock ahead of the advancing rock drill penetrator.
All melt not used in glass-lining the bore is forced
into the cracks where it freezes and remains ... "
"... Such a (vitreous) lining eliminates, in most cases,
the expensive and cumbersome problem of debris elimination
and at the same time achieves the advantage
of a casing type of bore hole liner."
(US Patent No. 3,693,731, 26 Sep 1972)
There you have it: a tunneling machine that creates no muck,
and leaves a smooth, vitreous (glassy) tunnel lining behind.
Another patent three years later was for:
A tunneling machine for producing large tunnels
in soft rock or wet, clay, unconsolidated or bouldery earth
by simultaneously detaching the tunnel core
by thermal melting a boundary kerf into the tunnel face
and forming a supporting excavation wall liner
by deflecting the molten materials
against the excavation walls to provide,
when solidified, a continuous wall supporting liner,
and detaching the tunnel face circumscribed by the kerf
with powered mechanical earth detachment means
and in which the heat required for melting the kerf
and liner material is provided by a compact nuclear reactor.
This 1975 patent further specifies that the machine is intended
to excavate tunnels up to 12 meters in diameter or more.
This means tunnels of 40 ft. or more in diameter.
The kerf is the outside boundary of the tunnel wall that
a boring machine gouges out as it bores through the ground or rock.
So, in ordinary English, this machine will
melt a circular boundary into the tunnel face.
The melted rock will be forced to the outside
of the tunnel by the tunnel machine,
where it will form a hard, glassy tunnel lining
(see the appropriate detail in the patent itself, as shown in Illustration 41).
At the same time, mechanical tunnel boring equipment
will grind up the rock and soil detached by the melted kerf
and pass it to the rear of the machine
for disposal by conveyor, slurry pipeline, etc.
And yet a third patent was issued
to the United States Energy Research and Development Admin.
just 21 days later, on 27 May 1975
for a machine remarkably similar to the machine
patented on 6 May 1975. The abstract describes:
A tunneling machine for producing large tunnels in rock
by progressive detachment of the tunnel core
by thermal melting a boundary kerf into the tunnel face
and simultaneously forming an initial tunnel wall support
by deflecting the molten materials against the tunnel walls
to provide, when solidified, a continuous liner;
and fragmenting the tunnel core circumscribed by the kerf
by thermal stress fracturing and in which the heat required
for such operations is supplied by a compact nuclear reactor.
This machine would also be capable of making
a glass-lined tunnel of 40 ft. in diameter or more.
Perhaps some of my readers have heard the same rumors that
I have heard swirling in the UFO literature and on the UFO grapevine:
Stories of deep, secret, glass-walled tunnels
excavated by laser powered tunneling machines.
I do not know if these stories are true.
If they are, however, it may be that the glass-walled tunnels
are made by the nuclear subterrenes described in these patents.
The careful reader will note that all of these patents were obtained
by agencies of the United States government. Further,
all but one of the inventors are from Los Alamos, New Mexico.
Of course, Los Alamos National Lab is itself the subject
of considerable rumors about underground tunnels and chambers,
Little Greys or EBEs, and various other covert goings-on.
(It may also be that the some of the tunnels are made
by these machines, while other subterranean tunnel systems
were made by other civilizations, both ancient and modern. --SW)
A 1973 Los Alamos study entitled
"Systems and Cost Analysis for a Nuclear Subterrene
Tunneling Machine: A Preliminary Study",
concluded that nuclear subterrene tunneling machines (NSTMs)
would be very cost effective, compared to conventional TBMs.
"Tunneling costs for NSTMs are very close to those for TBMs,
if operating conditions for TBMs are favorable.
However, for variable formations and unfavorable conditions
such as soft, wet, bouldery ground or very hard rock,
the NSTMs are far more effective.
Estimates of cost and percentage use of NSTMs to satisfy
U.S. transportation tunnel demands indicate a potential cost savings
of 850 million dollars (1969 dollars) throughout 1990.
An estimated NSTM prototype demonstration cost of $100 million
over an eight-year period results in a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio of 8.5."
Was the 1973 feasibility study only idle speculation, and is the
astonishingly similar patent two years later only a wild coincidence?
As many a frustrated inventor will tell you,
the U.S. Patent Office only issues the paperwork
when it's satisfied that the thing in question actually works!
In 1975 the National Science Foundation commissioned
another cost analysis of the nuclear subterrene.
The A.A. Mathews Construction and Engineering Company
of Rockville, Maryland produced a comprehensive report with two,
separate, lengthy appendices, one 235 and the other 328 pages.
A.A. Mathews calculated costs for constructing
three different sized tunnels in the Southern California area in 1974.
The three tunnel diameters were:
a) 3.05 meters (10ft.);
b) 4.73 meters (15.5 ft.); and
c) 6.25 meters (20.5 ft.).
Comparing the cost of using NSTMs to the cost of mechanical TBMs,
A.A. Mathews determined:
"Savings of 12 percent for the 4.73 meter (15.5 ft.) tunnel
and 6 percent for the 6.25 meter (20.5 foot) tunnel were found
to be possible using the NSTM as compared to current methods.
A penalty of 30 percent was found for the
3.05 meter (10 foot) tunnel using the NSTM.
The cost advantage for the NSTM results from the combination of:
(a) a capital rather than labor intensive system,
(Reducing the number of personnel required is especially important
in black budget projects for security reasons. --SW) and
(b) formation of both initial support and final lining
in conjunction with the excavation process.
(Leaving a glass-like lining, which could be *air-tight*,
allowing the use of high-speed, superconducting mag-lev trains
operated in a virtual vacuum in a tunnel deep underground. --SW)
This report has a number of interesting features. It is noteworthy
in the first place that the government commissioned such a lengthy
and detailed analysis of the cost of operating a nuclear subterrenes.
Just as intriguing is the fact that the study found that the tunnels
in the 15 ft. to 20 ft. diameter range can be more economically
excavated by NSTMs than by conventional TBMs.
Finally, the southern California location that was chosen
for tunneling cost analysis is thought provoking.
This is precisely one of the regions of the West
where there is rumored to be a secret tunnel system.
Did the A.A. Mathews study represent part of the planning for an
actual covert tunneling project that was subsequently carried out,
when it was determined that it was more cost effective
to use NSTMs than mechanical TBMs?
Whether or not nuclear subterrene tunneling machines