AHC: Channel Tunnel Built Prior to WWI

It definitely sounds implausible, but this lengthy article from a 1917 issue of War Illustrated makes it seem otherwise. While the article goes into quite a bit of detail on the military and political ramifications of a Channel Tunnel during WWI, how exactly would one go about getting the thing constructed before the war began? Were there any investors and financiers willing to back such a project, or will it have to be a government endeavor? Even with the Entente Cordiale in place, I don't really see a lot of cooperation between the British and French governments.

Anyway, what are your thoughts?
 

mowque

Banned
Do we have the tech? The Chunnel was tricky to build, if I recall. Very deep and through some tough marl.
 
Do we have the tech? The Chunnel was tricky to build, if I recall. Very deep and through some tough marl.

The technology may have been there (just so) - after all, the step from the 14 km long tunnels through the Alps is only gradual. However, the costs of such a tunnel would have been even more staggering in relationship to the general economy.
 
They were going to build it in Victorian times, they even made quite a good beginning before politics and fear of it being used for invasion killed it.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
They were going to build it in Victorian times, they even made quite a good beginning before politics and fear of it being used for invasion killed it.

Speaking of fear of invasion--if WWII isn't butterflied away, won't they just blow up/collapse/destroy the tunnel after France falls?
 
Speaking of fear of invasion--if WWII isn't butterflied away, won't they just blow up/collapse/destroy the tunnel after France falls?

I'd imagine they'd just mine the French entrance and blow it, then they can rebuild it after the war. Of course, a tunnel makes a pretty good killing field, especially when you've got chemical weapons in ready use.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I presume that steam trains would be very difficult in terms of supply of usable air and perhaps diesel too.

Was the tech there to do an electric railway at that time
 
I presume that steam trains would be very difficult in terms of supply of usable air and perhaps diesel too.

Was the tech there to do an electric railway at that time

The Victorian idea was to have the engines at both ends and run a cable system

But IIRC that was also the plan in one of the first London underground railways but they ended up using electric, and that was in the 1880s or so

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I presume that steam trains would be very difficult in terms of supply of usable air and perhaps diesel too.

Was the tech there to do an electric railway at that time

Welll... half the Swiss rail network, not to mention a couple of other countries', was already electrified by 1910, so the answer is I guess YES.
 
I'll be damned...plausible, but damned expensive. :eek:

I figured this was ASB Steampunk territory.

Still talking major engineering for the time. This would take a ridiculous amount of time and money, but might be on par with the Panama Canal in scale. I'll assume that it'd end up electrified rather quickly for sheer practicality reasons...the cable system would be just too much of an uneccisary complication. Would the Varne air shaft be enough ventilation, though?

Needs a TL...paging Amerigo Vespusi! Paging Amerigo Vespusi! :cool:
 
I'll be damned...plausible, but damned expensive. :eek:

I figured this was ASB Steampunk territory.

Still talking major engineering for the time. This would take a ridiculous amount of time and money, but might be on par with the Panama Canal in scale. I'll assume that it'd end up electrified rather quickly for sheer practicality reasons...the cable system would be just too much of an uneccisary complication. Would the Varne air shaft be enough ventilation, though?

Needs a TL...paging Amerigo Vespusi! Paging Amerigo Vespusi! :cool:

The 1856 drawing also appears to indicate a couple of artificial air towers inbetween Varne and each coast. Presumably some form of piling would be used to create stable foundations for these towers which would then rise about 10-15m above sea level to be both visible to ships and out of the reach of waves.
 
I'd call this one technically possible but economically and politically impossible. We're talking about an engineering project on the scale of the Panama canal... but without an equivalent payoff. The political implications of tying England to France would also be quite large. The UK had not too long ago spent CENTURIES fighting the French on and off.

Also, while the tunnel could indeed be easily closed in wartime, doing so would throw away all the money invested in it. If you just cap one end, it can be uncapped and you're still vulnerable to a raid or surprise attack. If you destroy the whole thing you've just destroyed a major part of your GDP for several years; not something you want to plan on. Since a continental war was an expectation all through this period...
 
From what I heard the partly constructed Channel Tunnel from the plan of 1880-1883 collapsed at the entrance. This, along with political fears, let to its abandonment.
 
The political implications of tying England to France would also be quite large. The UK had not too long ago spent CENTURIES fighting the French on and off.
The only way I can see to get around that would be if the UK had somehow managed to maintain ownership of the Pale of Calais, that way it would be going from British territory to British territory. Of course you'd still have to overcome the financial costs and the scare of it being used as an invasion route.
 
It definitely sounds implausible, but this lengthy article from a 1917 issue of War Illustrated makes it seem otherwise. While the article goes into quite a bit of detail on the military and political ramifications of a Channel Tunnel during WWI, how exactly would one go about getting the thing constructed before the war began? Were there any investors and financiers willing to back such a project, or will it have to be a government endeavor? Even with the Entente Cordiale in place, I don't really see a lot of cooperation between the British and French governments.

Anyway, what are your thoughts?


Interesting link, but I don't think it goes anyway to really exploring the viability of a pre Great War tunnel. More, just some speculation as to it being a primary target of any German invasion and the conclusion that it would be a target Germany could have succeeded in reaching.

From a financial POV it would tie up so much resource that GB (if sole or primary funder source) might be somewhat less able to consider other adventures
 
Top