
The following was 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. 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 (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 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."
(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 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 Administration 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.
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.
It stated:
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 (10 ft.)
b) 4.73 meters (15.5 ft.)
c) 6.25 meters (20.5 ft.

There are several patents for these machines-which would be used for the tunnel making process needed for the train system.Heres the link to the
site:
For a side note it seems like I have stated many times and in this source aswell that after around 1974 this all "disappears",as in no more
reference to it,no more patents(that is extremly odd,usualy if something doesnt work someone else will try another design thus another patent,but
there hasnt been any.)Also all the people who worked on these patents seemed to have disappeared or suddenly lost intrest in this after 74'.I will
bring you all more info in a day or so.(I am busy w/ school and all)