The first section of this
page was written by Phil Schneider
Photo of United States Air Force tunnel boring machine at Little Skull
Mountain, Nevada, USA, December 1982.
There are many rumors of secret
military tunnels in the United States. If the rumors are true, machines such
as the one shown here are used to make the tunnels.
(Source: U.S. Department
This (below image) is a $13 million tunnel boring machine (TBM) used for tunneling at the
Nevada Test Site. (Remember that
Area 51 is part of the test site.) Many
other types of TBMs are used by many government agencies, including the
'nuclear powered TBM' [NTBM] that melts solid rock and leaves behind
Most tunneling activity is under military installations and all information
is highly restricted.
Former employees of said facilities have surfaced over
the years to talk of massive underground installations in places like,
the Northrop facility in Antelope Valley, California (rumored to have 42
the Lockheed installation near Edwards, California
The 'Black Budget' currently consumes $1.25 trillion per year.
At least this
amount is used in black programs, like those concerned with deep underground
military bases. Presently, there are 129 deep underground military bases in
the United States. They have been building these 129 bases day and night,
unceasingly, since the early 1940's. Some of them were built even earlier
These bases are basically large cities underground connected by
high-speed magneto-leviton trains that have speeds up to Mach 2. Several
books have been written about this activity.
The average depth of these bases is over a mile, and they again are
basically whole cities underground. They all are between 2.66 and 4.25 cubic
miles in size. They have laser-drilling machines that can drill a tunnel
seven miles long in one day. I was involved in building an addition to the
deep underground military
base at Dulce, which is probably the deepest base.
It goes down seven levels and over 2.5 miles deep.
I helped hollow out more
than 13 deep underground military bases in the United States.
images of tunnel boring equipment
From Dr Bill Deagle
Granada Forum Lecture
I took care of John Fialla, who was best friends with Phil Schneider.
many people know about
Well, they were using tunneling
machines back in the mid-90s that could tunnel through a rock face at seven
miles per day, that could cut through a rock face with high-energy impact
lasers that could blow the nano-sized particles of rock so that there was no
debris left, forming an obsidian-like core, and laying an inner core for
maglev trains that travel at Mach 2 to 2.8 underground
between these very very powerful and organized cities.
There's 132 under the United States, an average of 5.36 to 7.24 cubic miles
in size at an average of 1.5 to 4.5 miles underground, built, by and large,
most of them in areas away from geotectonic areas - but there's going to be
lots of new geotectonic faults established when you have force 11, 12, 13,
14 earthquakes hit the Earth.
Why are they rushing to do this? Because they know that
And where's this money coming from? It's not coming from our regular
Black Op budget. It's coming from the
illegal sale of drugs.
In the United
States there's at least, by conservative estimates, a quarter of a trillion
to a half a trillion of illegal drugs just sold in the United States that
goes directly into underground budgets, and 90-95% goes to the DUMBs
Underground Military Bases).
videos, click above image
Written by Richard Sauder, PhD
Adapted from his book
Underground Bases and Tunnels
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.
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° Fahrenheit (1,100° Celsius) 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
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."
(U.S. Patent No. 3,693,731 dated Sept. 26, 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, clayey,
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
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
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
Underground Bases and Tunnels). 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 Administration just 21 days later, on 27 May 1975 for a machine
remarkably similar to the machine patented on 6 May 1975.
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
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
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:
3.05 meters (10 ft.)
4.73 meters (15.5 ft.)
6.25 meters (20.5 ft.)
Comparing the cost of using NSTMs to the cost of mechanical TBMs,
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 capital rather than labor intensive system,
formation of both initial support and final lining in conjunction with
the excavation process.
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
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 have been used, or are
being used, for subterranean tunneling is a question I cannot presently