Supposing the Germans were not able to use the undefended Channel tunnel to invade Britain? Given British air and naval superiority would they have some other chance otherwise?
Supposing the Germans were not able to use the undefended Channel tunnel to invade Britain? Given British air and naval superiority would they have some other chance otherwise?
Which is good for a hypothetical war scenario, but in peace? Luckily the UK is not exactly an earthquake-ridden location.If Stanley Baldwin's government hadn't been obsessed with privatising public works & competitive tendering, that tunnel would never have been constructed by German engineering firms in the first place, and intentionally constructed too tough to 'blow'.
Indeed, if British builders had gotten the job then it would have collapsed with minimal effort required, if any at all, possibly all by itself.
Which is good for a hypothetical war scenario, but in peace? Luckily the UK is not exactly an earthquake-ridden location.
OOC: No. But geology is usually POD-proof and hardly ceases to exist as a science and as part of curricula ITTL.OOC: Ok, have I gotten how DBWIs work wrong again?
Well longest railway tunnel in Slovakia has 4697.15 m and was done in 4 years (1936-40), Swiss Lotschberg tunnel has 14.612 and was done in app 6 years (1907-1913).Some of the difficulties involved in pre-1940 undersea tunnel building:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severn_Tunnel
The Severn Tunnel is 3.7km and took 13 years, need another 10 times that for the Channel. The Queensway Tunnel was 3.24km between Liverpool and Birkenhead took 9 years from 1925-34, 50 years after the Severn Tunnel so progress is not much faster. If France and UK cooperated its still 50 years of digging.