It's amazing how the big guns are divided on this.

EH (of course!) think the short bored tunnel would be fine (though that's a step up from their previous years of supporting the worst possible option, cut and cover).

CPRE are good guys it seems - "The government needs to dig deep to find what it takes to deliver a longer tunnel for this priceless world asset." (Such clarity! - and ancient sites isn't even their core concern, unlike EH).

And even the NT is more visionary than EH - "The public inquiry needs to consider whether the proposed tunnel is long enough to conserve and enhance the spirit of place, landscape and archaeological interest of Stonehenge."

That's it then, I'll support whatever solution EH doesn't. Probably a pretty accurate rule of thumb in lots of areas....