Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience

[Morley]

snip testimony fodder

Your inspirational prose brought a tear to my eye, Brother Gabriel. I believe you have just penned the script for the future blockbuster film, Witnesses II. I do wonder, however, if there shouldn't be some scene where Satan is tempting the elected.
.

[DrW]

Hey Gabriel,

Your script is a nice mash-up of "Airplane!" and "The High and the Mighty", with a bit of classic "Star Trek" thrown in. The line,

"I already DID that! But she's still burning!"

reminds me of a young pilot's description of the engines on his B-17, and conditions in general, during a WWII bombing run over Germany,

"Two turnin', two burnin', and flack so thick you could walk on it."

Rusty's story had one turnin' and one burnin'. All his story needs now is some flack (other than the kind it's already taken on this thread). Maybe next time he tells it he should punch it up a bit with some hostile ground fire. (Why not? It's only slightly more ridiculous than what he has claimed already.)

[DrW]

Dup

[Tom]

Now I'm writing my ideas on the fly and I'm the first to admit that I don't speak pilot talk, but I think that the pilot should at least have a good supporting role in Russell's movie. First, I would have Russell calmly watching the pilot toggle a bunch of switches, shake his steering wheel a couple times, then grab his radio mike, shouting to the control tower:

"Mission Control! Mission Control! This is N4728N! Our right engine"s blown! There's flaming fuel engulfing our right aileron. Mayday! Mayday! We're at the point of no return!"

....

At any rate, I could go on and on with this stuff.

Please do. You might consider adding an astonished/terrified Delta farmer and his family to the script. I picture them encountering Nelson immediately after the plane smashes into their barn and Nelson slowly emerges from the plane in a daze, mumbling, "Is this an airport hangar or a barn on a farmer's field not far from Delta?" You could inject some additional drama if the screaming lady across the aisle turned out to be Wendy Watson, and the film accesses her beatific thoughts immediately after the crash: "There's a calm, cool, collected, and righteous man who is wearing his garments [cue shot of his garment-top line showing through his thin dress shirt] and has been faithful to the covenants he made in the temple. I will marry him one day!" Nelson, realizing he's late for his commitment, pushes the pilot aside and flies the plane out of the barn, shouting, "I got a prayer to give at W. Rolfe Kerr's inauguration in one hour! Yee haw!" (The "Back to the Future" barn scene could easily be repurposed for this movie with small edits and some CGI.)

[Craig Paxton]

Yeah. It’s not like the pilot would have announced they were landing at an airport or anything.

Or that President Nelson ever got off the plane and looked around.

It's amazing how just adding the visuals to Russell's story makes it even more ridiculous. For example, the church, with its stock footage of the interior of (what looked like) a passenger jetliner, really dropped the ball in providing the gravitas needed for this miraculous, faith-promoting story. I am thinking that with CGI animation, and an interior set mockup of a Piper Navajo Twin engine aircraft, and a small crew of actors, the church should have stood by its man and provided a proper film that would do his story justice....



At any rate, I could go on and on with this stuff. But, I think that tonight I will end here. Brothers and Sisters, Adieu.

F***ing Brilliant. Que Daniel Peterson, this has the makings of an opportunity to redeem himself from his financial bomb "Witnesses" with a movie sure to tingle the bosom of Mormon's the world over. I imagine throngs of maskless/vaxxless faithful packing theaters throughout the intermountain west all in the hope of watching their hero , Russel M. Nelson being portrayed on the big screen. Surely even a nod from the Academy of Motion Pictures isn't too far of a stretch given he follow your script narrative closely. I imagine Nelson, portrayed by a stoic, garment wearing John Cleese, facing his imminent death without even the appearance of perspiration on his forehead but with an apostolic twinkle in his eye, glaring into the the camera for his close up with a smirk of confidence on his lips as the plane goes into its fiery death spiral. But does Cleese show even a semblance of fear, NO he makes a knowing, confident glance to the hem of his garment line showing clearly through his perspirationless white shirt and the slight rub of his hand across his garment line on his knee, Cleese imbrues all the confidence of knowing he was sealed in the temple and the knowledge that he has kept his covenants with the exception of his penchant for small embellishments of the truth every now and then.

It will send chills through the bosoms of its Mormon audience and money into the pockets of Peterson and his shills and perhaps even a golden statuette for his fireplace mantel.

[Moksha]

Here is a thread offering testimony as to the truthfulness of President Nelson's claims:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/73 ... New Testament-nelson/

Pretty sure Smac will conclude with firsthand accounts regarding President Nelson's role in valiantly defending the town of Grover's Mill, New Jersey on October 30, 1938.

[DrW]

Here is a thread offering testimony as to the truthfulness of President Nelson's claims:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/73 ... New Testament-nelson/

Yesterday, I had a look at the thread Moksha referenced over on the other site, which had expanded to 7 pages, and made a few notes for a possible comment. Fair Dinkum was being attacked for asking reasonable questions about the Russell M. Nelson story. Helix opined that both the Nelson and CAB versions could be true, suggesting that the following main points are compatible with both versions:

• They are in a small airplane.
• An engine makes a "bang" noise.
• Flames come out of the engine.
• The pilot handles it professionally, as they are trained to deal with a bad engine. The pilot stops one or both engines.
• The pilot starts a spinning steep descent to both aim for a nearby airport and put out the flames.
• A lady on the flight panics loudly.
• Nelson is initially alarmed, but is comforted because he has lived a life for which he's proud.
• The flames are extinguished. The pilot resumes a normal landing sequence.
• They land at the Delta Airport, which in the 1970s resembles a farmers field (or perhaps even had animals on fields very nearby).
• No external damage is seen on the airplane.

Helix is a bit confused here. No flames came out of the engine according to the CAB report. There was no NTSB notification of an engine fire. The CAB stated that the aircraft would have been capable of safely continuing to St. George or returning to SLC, which would not have been the case had there been an engine fire. And it gets worse.

Since the visit yesterday, the thread has expanded to 8 pages and now displays what one can best describe as logic run amok resulting in comedy gold.

Helix again:

There was no fire. There was no death dive. There was no emergency landing in a field. This is just one of his "stories" that seems to stray in a big way from reality.

Then how did Nelson know that stopping the affected propeller, shutting off the fuel, going into a descent while spinning, and landing quickly at an emergency airstrip is proper procedure for an engine fire?

Aside from the "How did Nelson know--" non sequitur, as described upthread here, spins are prohibited in a Piper Navajo Chieftain. Spinning that aircraft would not end well with two good engines let alone with one engine out and on fire.

Helix's post goes downhill from here with other misunderstandings about engine fires, rapid descents, and spins vs. spirals. Helix finds references that seem to support Nelson's story without understanding the language or context. The rapid spiral descent references are intended mainly for single engine aircraft, for example, and are to be used in an emergency when the pilot needs to get to the ground and land as quickly as possible on whatever surface is available. Another misunderstood reference is meant as instructions for aircraft ground controllers, not pilots.

No reasonable individual would have posted most of this nonsense had they bothered to even skim this thread, which as been referenced indirectly over there, but is apparently forbidden for faithful Mormons. The willful ignorance, faulty logic, blind faith and denial of reality on display by many posters over on that board is astounding.

[Moksha]

In exploring all areas of defense for this story, perhaps someone will suggest the plane was less than valiant in the pre-existence.

[IHAQ]

How long before Nelson saw the flames and death spiral with his spiritual eyes...or the suggestion that God wants to give members the opportunity to take the story on faith and not take away their agency so He's hidden the evidence? The mental contortions to try and salvage the idea that Nelson hasn't done a Dunn are staggering to behold.

[warbreaker]

Yesterday, I had a look at the thread Moksha referenced over on the other site, which had expanded to 7 pages, and made a few notes for a possible comment. Fair Dinkum was being attacked for asking reasonable questions about the Russell M. Nelson story. Helix opined that both the Nelson and CAB versions could be true, suggesting that the following main points are compatible with both versions:

Have enjoyed your posts on this thread. Any thoughts on this one:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/73 ... 1210044711

I am a pilot and flight instructor with 35 years experience. The Piper PA-31 Navajo is a small twin-engine airplane that carries 6 to 8 people including the pilot. The interior is about the size of a small mini-van. Everyone can see the pilot up front and both engines out the windows. The engines are piston engines, not jets.

One engine experienced a cylinder failure. On an air-cooled engine, the cylinders are individual assemblies attached to the crank case (very different from a car engine, where everything is buried inside the engine block). If one fails, it can be quite spectacular as the burning fuel/air mixture escapes and the now-unbalanced engine begins shaking violently.

Standard procedure:

1) Shut down the bad engine and feather the propeller (turn the blades into the wind to minimize drag). This causes the propeller to stop spinning. The fuel would also be shut off so as to not feed the fire.

2) Descend as quickly as possible to land, even if not at an airport. Better to land in a field than to burn up in the air. The emergency descent involves pulling the throttle on the good engine back to idle (it is NOT shut down), banking the airplane, and pushing the nose down to get as much airspeed as possible. This creates a spiraling descent. (Descending rapidly in a straight line "unloads" the wings, which could cause severe airframe damage if the wings were suddenly "loaded" by turbulence.) This rapid descent also has the benefit of possibly "blowing out" the fire (much like blowing out a candle).

3) Near the ground, roll out of the dive, level out, let the airplane slow down, and bring the power back up on the good engine to keep the airplane flying. If still burning, land wherever possible and evacuate. If the fire is out, proceed to the nearest airport or suitable landing site.

The passengers were never about to die, and there was no miracle recovery from the dive. The pilot knew the outcome from the start. Every multiengine pilot is trained to do this. It's published in countless manuals and training materials. I teach this to my multiengine students frequently. The "emergency descent" is a wild ride as the view out the front window looks like you're pointing straight towards the ground (really only about 30* nose down) and the airspeed shoots up into the "yellow arc" on the airspeed indicator (the "caution zone").