I grew up in the Delta area and drove by the airport frequently. The airport is not the equivalent of a farmer's field. In fact, a relative in Delta owned a plane and flew from the airport all the time (I believe this was in the 50s and 60s). I have pictures of him standing by his plane at the airport. I will see if I can find them. I also seem to recall that when the Intermountain Power Project was built they expanded the airport so the corporate jets could land there. However, this likely would have occurred just after Nelson's death spiral event.
Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:50 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
- Moksha
- God
- Posts: 6901
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
- Location: Koloburbia
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
The Intermountain Power Project, which supplies coal-driven electricity to Los Angeles, began in 1981 and went online in 1986.Fifth Columnist wrote: ↑Sat Aug 07, 2021 8:32 pmI also seem to recall that when the Intermountain Power Project was built they expanded the airport so the corporate jets could land there. However, this likely would have occurred just after Nelson's death spiral event.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:50 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
Here is a description of the Delta airport from it's own website (http://delta.utah.gov/home/public-facil ... al-airport):
I should also note that there are no farmer's fields by the airport. See here for an aerial image: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3853812 ... a=!3m1!1e3.General History
Construction of the Delta City Municipal Airport began during the spring of 1942. Following completion on September 24, 1944, the hangar and airfield were dedicated, with then-Utah Governor Herbert B. Maw and then-Delta Mayor Golden H. Black as the key principal speakers. Harold R. Morris offered the dedicatory prayer. The footprint of our airport covers approximately 1,200 acres and is situated 3.6 miles northeast of Delta on U.S. Highway 6 from its junction with Delta's Main Street (U.S. Highway 50/6). At a cost of $337,000.00, its construction was a national defense project of the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA). Construction of the main hangar commenced on September 27, 1943 at a cost $16,000.00. The airport has hangar space available (currently all spaces rented), as well as ample land available to lease for private hangar construction. Utah Valley University, located in Orem, Utah, is one of the top pilot training schools within the state. Their campus is located approximately one-hundred (100) miles north of Delta and they use the Delta Municipal Airport facilities for landing and taking-off training. Other universities in the area also utilize our airport for their aircraft training programs too. Our airport has long been considered as one of the best in rural Utah. It was used extensively during World War II as an emergency landing field. When the Ogden and Salt Lake City airports were closed in by fog or storm, aircraft returned to the Delta Municipal Airport, where we have more open weather than any larger airport in Utah. During World War II, our airport saved the lives of many servicemen. On one occasion, a Consolidated B-24 Liberator, a heavy American bomber aircraft, with a crew of twelve men aboard, was lost in a storm and contacted the Delta airport radio. They were over the mountains and about forty miles southeast of the airport, gasoline was nearly gone, and the crew was preparing to bail out. There were guided by radio and runway lights and safely landed the bomber at the Delta Municipal Airport. When they landed, they believed that they were at a an airfield in Arizona.
On September 25-26, 1949, thousands of people from all around came to "Airport Days," an aviation celebration. During 1949, the CAA built a new communications station to replace the previous unit that was destroyed by fire. The new station housed $20,000 worth of the latest communication equipment. In 1949, the State of Utah and the United States Federal Government spent $18,000 hard surfacing the area around the hangar and installing the sewer system. The airport has direct access to two state highways, U.S. Highway 6 and is centrally located in the state. The Delta City Municipal Airport Advisory Board was recently formed in order to provide input on airport issues and a recently updated automated fueling facility for the dispensation of 100 octane low-lead aviation gasoline as well as jet aviation turbine fuel. We also have a new airport maintenance building where a snow plow and snow blower are housed and stored on site solely for airport use. Approximately 1/2 mile south of our airport is the Sunset View Golf Course, a full 18-hole professional course for the enjoyment of many.
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:50 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
Right. My recollection is that they expanded it in the 1980 time frame, but I could be wrong. That would require corroboration. It doesn't matter all that much anyway since the general history of the airport makes it clear that it was far from a "farmer's field" at the time Nelson was diverted there.Moksha wrote: ↑Sat Aug 07, 2021 8:43 pmThe Intermountain Power Project, which supplies coal-driven electricity to Los Angeles, began in 1981 and went online in 1986.Fifth Columnist wrote: ↑Sat Aug 07, 2021 8:32 pmI also seem to recall that when the Intermountain Power Project was built they expanded the airport so the corporate jets could land there. However, this likely would have occurred just after Nelson's death spiral event.
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:12 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
Lem,
Additionally, never underestimate the fact that in America, bureaucratic organizations are in some ways formed to keep commercial entities in existence. The companies support the bureaucracies, and the bureaucracies support the companies.
But that is just my experience in working in Aerospace and Defense on government contracts.
In my experience working in Aerospace, yes. In my interactions with government agencies, and in writing reports concerning failures, the wording that is used is chosen VERY carefully and there is much hemming, hawing and hand-wringing that goes on.The in depth investigation by the FAA let the weasel words stand, and allowed them to be added to the CAB report?
Additionally, never underestimate the fact that in America, bureaucratic organizations are in some ways formed to keep commercial entities in existence. The companies support the bureaucracies, and the bureaucracies support the companies.
But that is just my experience in working in Aerospace and Defense on government contracts.
- Kishkumen
- God
- Posts: 7909
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
- Location: Cassius University
- Contact:
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
The pattern we see is one of Nelson lying to make himself look good. I don’t see enough evidence in the other direction to persuade me that this is not another case of the same kind of whopper.
- DrW
- Priest
- Posts: 296
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:25 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
azflyer,azflyer wrote: ↑Sun Aug 08, 2021 5:37 amLem,
In my experience working in Aerospace, yes. In my interactions with government agencies, and in writing reports concerning failures, the wording that is used is chosen VERY carefully and there is much hemming, hawing and hand-wringing that goes on.The in depth investigation by the FAA let the weasel words stand, and allowed them to be added to the CAB report?
Additionally, never underestimate the fact that in America, bureaucratic organizations are in some ways formed to keep commercial entities in existence. The companies support the bureaucracies, and the bureaucracies support the companies.
But that is just my experience in working in Aerospace and Defense on government contracts.
The issue regarding Lem's point is simply this: would it be a possible, legal, and safe to fly a Piper Navajo Chieftain PA 31 350 with sufficient fuel and three passengers on board, which aircraft had experienced an engine failure at 20,000 feet (your estimate) with no damage to the airframe, on a single engine from an approximate midway point between SLC and St. George, to either airport.
As shown upthread, this aircraft is reported capable of not only maintaining altitude on one engine, but of climbing at 250 ft. / minute on one engine (at sea level at maximum gross takeoff weight). Since there is no terrain anywhere near 20,000 feet (or even 10,000 feet) between SLC and St. George, the aircraft would need only be capable of maintaining an altitude of say 9,000 feet (in case pressurization was lost) on one engine during the flight to either destination*.
The manufacturer and the US Department of Transportation (in this case the FAA) agree that this aircraft has been demonstrated and certified capable of maintaining cruising altitude on a single engine. This determination has nothing to do with the amount of damage to the affected engine, so long as there was no damage to the airframe from the failure.
So the language in the report regarding the ability to continue flight to either station was not weasel words, but a statement of fact in accordance with regulations. The report did not state that continued flight was the safest or most prudent course of action, but that the aircraft was capable of continued flight. The most prudent course of action was the precautionary landing at Delta Municipal.
In working at a national laboratory on DOE and DOD contracts, including with aerospace and defense companies like Sikorsky Helicopter, Pratt & Whitney, General Dynamics and others, in the US and overseas, I agree that there can be some discussion and even debate among stakeholders about the wording of project work products. The objective of the exercise is not to deceive, but to be even-handed and fair to both the client (in my case the US or foreign governments) and the manufacturer / supplier, when describing the outcome of tests or product evaluations. Human lives and hundreds of millions or billions of dollars are often at stake.
___________________
* To be thorough, please note that Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards (ETOPS) rules would not be violated by such a flight because the aircraft would always be (substantially) less than 60 minutes flying time from the nearest airport.
"Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous." (David Hume)
"Errors in science are learning opportunities and are corrected when better data become available." (DrW)
"Errors in science are learning opportunities and are corrected when better data become available." (DrW)
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:12 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
Dr. W,
I am not disputing the capability of the airplane to continue in level flight and climb. That was one of the first questions I had. I know some light training twins are not capable of maintaining level flight on one engine. But the Navajo is not most light twins. As you pointed out is most certainly capable of cruise and climb on one engine, which is actually pretty impressive for a piston engine airplane. (remember I'm coming at this from a SEL perspective having flown 172's, 182's Archers and Warriors - and I fully acknowledge the different perspective I have)
I am not disputing the capability of the aircraft. I am questioning the prudence of the hypothetical decision to continue on to St. George. I think the company manual wisely directed the pilot to land as soon as practical (not sure of the exact wording).
The sense I'm getting here is that there are attempts on this board to minimize the severity of the situation because it de-legitimizes Nelson's story. I don't think that is the right approach, and perhaps my sense is wrong. While the plane most certainly made a safe landing, and the more and more I look into this, I'm sure the pilot's heart rate was elevated, but he knew what he was doing and confident he could get the plane on the ground safe. But we should not be analyzing this situation from the pilot's point of view, or from a review board's point of view. We need to be thinking about how a non-pilot passenger would feel in this moment... IN THE AIR...
My experience in general aviation has mostly been in taking friends up flying for the first time in a small airplane. I'd have to double check my logbook, but it's somewhere in the neighborhood of ~50 people (don't laugh, that's a big number to me) that I've taken up for their first flight in a small airplane. While that isn't necessarily a lot of people, it has always been a close personal experience. I have them help me pre-flight the airplane and we talk about everything on the plane, how it works, and the redundancy of the parts to keep us safe. I've been really surprised to learn that while some people are very excited, there are quite a few people that are pretty nervous. There are also a contingent of people that will not even consider flying with me because it's "one of those tiny planes". People that don't understand airplanes and systems, frequently, and understandably, have very irrational fears associated with flying.
In one instance I took my sister and her two sons up flying in the 172. I'd talked them about this ahead of time, and we performed a power off stall. I barely lost any altitude at all. At the first indication of buffeting, I reapplied full power and started working the flaps back in. When we got back on the ground, my sister told the whole family she thought she was "going to die" and that she was terrified. I have do doubt if would have performed some medium bank 30 degree turns, she would have called it a "death spiral". Her boys were in the back giggling the whole time because they thought it was fun. Now I know there is some sibling teasing going on here, but non-aviation people react very differently to the slightest sense that ANYTHING is going wrong in an airplane.
The challenge with this situation is not to precisely identify what happened with the airplane, but to understand how Nelson's brain was interpreting everything that was going on.
I am not disputing the capability of the airplane to continue in level flight and climb. That was one of the first questions I had. I know some light training twins are not capable of maintaining level flight on one engine. But the Navajo is not most light twins. As you pointed out is most certainly capable of cruise and climb on one engine, which is actually pretty impressive for a piston engine airplane. (remember I'm coming at this from a SEL perspective having flown 172's, 182's Archers and Warriors - and I fully acknowledge the different perspective I have)
I am not disputing the capability of the aircraft. I am questioning the prudence of the hypothetical decision to continue on to St. George. I think the company manual wisely directed the pilot to land as soon as practical (not sure of the exact wording).
The sense I'm getting here is that there are attempts on this board to minimize the severity of the situation because it de-legitimizes Nelson's story. I don't think that is the right approach, and perhaps my sense is wrong. While the plane most certainly made a safe landing, and the more and more I look into this, I'm sure the pilot's heart rate was elevated, but he knew what he was doing and confident he could get the plane on the ground safe. But we should not be analyzing this situation from the pilot's point of view, or from a review board's point of view. We need to be thinking about how a non-pilot passenger would feel in this moment... IN THE AIR...
My experience in general aviation has mostly been in taking friends up flying for the first time in a small airplane. I'd have to double check my logbook, but it's somewhere in the neighborhood of ~50 people (don't laugh, that's a big number to me) that I've taken up for their first flight in a small airplane. While that isn't necessarily a lot of people, it has always been a close personal experience. I have them help me pre-flight the airplane and we talk about everything on the plane, how it works, and the redundancy of the parts to keep us safe. I've been really surprised to learn that while some people are very excited, there are quite a few people that are pretty nervous. There are also a contingent of people that will not even consider flying with me because it's "one of those tiny planes". People that don't understand airplanes and systems, frequently, and understandably, have very irrational fears associated with flying.
In one instance I took my sister and her two sons up flying in the 172. I'd talked them about this ahead of time, and we performed a power off stall. I barely lost any altitude at all. At the first indication of buffeting, I reapplied full power and started working the flaps back in. When we got back on the ground, my sister told the whole family she thought she was "going to die" and that she was terrified. I have do doubt if would have performed some medium bank 30 degree turns, she would have called it a "death spiral". Her boys were in the back giggling the whole time because they thought it was fun. Now I know there is some sibling teasing going on here, but non-aviation people react very differently to the slightest sense that ANYTHING is going wrong in an airplane.
The challenge with this situation is not to precisely identify what happened with the airplane, but to understand how Nelson's brain was interpreting everything that was going on.
-
- God
- Posts: 6418
- Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
In a vacuum I suppose we could give Rusty the benefit of the doubt. But you have to consider the broader perspective of many other stories he told which also don't seem to be true.
There is a distinct pattern of Nelson fabricating miracle stories to make either himself or the church look good. Stories that when investigated turn out to be lies. The church is a business, and they are selling a product. Nelson's stories are like advertisements for that product, and we're just looking for some truth in advertising!
-
- Nursery
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:12 pm
Re: Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience
That is a fair point. Nelson became President of the church right around the time I started to distance myself from the church. I am not aware of any of the other stories you're referring to here. I don't have the same broader perspective you're referring to.In a vacuum I suppose we could give Rusty the benefit of the doubt. But you have to consider the broader perspective of many other stories he told which also don't seem to be true.