Talk:M42 (sub-basement)

Reports of Nazi target
Many questionably-reliable, modern sources: -- ɱ (talk) 14:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/grand-central-terminal-turns-1-10313889/
 * https://www.travelandleisure.com/attractions/landmarks-monuments/grand-central-terminal?slide=f09850ab-9d30-4dbe-8df3-9eac4973a94f#f09850ab-9d30-4dbe-8df3-9eac4973a94f
 * https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/video-inside-grand-centrals-secret-sub-basement-which-nazis-nearly-destroyed
 * https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/grand-central-terminal-100-year-anniversary/index.html
 * https://www.nycurbanism.com/blog/2019/8/29/grand-centrals-clandestine-substation
 * https://www.timeout.com/newyork/blog/10-fascinating-secrets-of-nycs-grand-central-terminal-012017
 * https://viewing.nyc/peek-inside-the-secret-grand-central-terminal-sub-basement-that-nazis-nearly-destroyed-in-wwii/
 * https://www.6sqft.com/video-why-did-the-nazis-want-to-destroy-this-secret-power-substation-below-grand-central/
 * https://www.iflymagazine.com/en/magazines/new-york/onestory-grand-central
 * https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3276268/M42-Grand-Central-Terminal-targeted-Hitler-Nazis-WWII.html
 * https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-mysteries-beneath-new-york-citys-grand-central-ter-509564392
 * https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-xpm-2008-03-03-0803020167-story.html

Accuracy
I have to question one of the claims in this article, as it makes no sense. And as the reference is a book which I do not have, I wish others would check into it.

But the article claims that "during World War II, the facility was featured in a navy training film as the safest place in New York during a nuclear strike" Which makes no sense, as how many training films made during WWII covered the risk of nuclear war? This to me appears to be a spurious and anachronistic claim, and does not fit in why anything I am aware of during the era. Mushrom (talk) 05:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination
The most recent edit removed the information mentioned in ALT1. Jose Corregidor (talk) 01:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite rightly too, as it can't possibly be correct. The nuclear bomb was top secret until the last days of the war, so wouldn't have been in training movies. If the training film actually existed, I imagine it was a post-war film? can you please re-check the source and make corrections? Nick-D (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Your own classroom-learned knowledge of events won't cut it. A reliable source has information - do you have references to support that it could be false? I imagine the US nuclear program was secret, but from reading history of nuclear weapons, it seems clear that multiple nations were developing projects like this, and that scientists thought it directly possible even before the war, so a mention of a shelter from strike does not seem unreasonable. Then there's the thought, do you know that no US Navy officials of any rank were allowed to know about the possibility of a strike from a super-weapon? ɱ  (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I emailed Roberts, we'll see what comes of it! ɱ  (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where the weird complaint about "classroom-learned knowledge of events" comes from (what's this meant to be compared to?), but see Gerard DeGroot's book The Bomb, for instance, for discussions of the intense secrecy around the World War II nuclear bomb program. It was so secret it was hidden from US senators, and even Vice-President Truman only learned about it after being sworn in to replace FDR (pp. 54-55). There's no way it would have been mentioned in training films at this time, but it's entirely likely that this would have happened during the Cold War. Nick-D (talk) 06:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)