Myth 6 | Angels and Airplanes

Myth 6 | Angels and Airplanes

London England Temple (or any other temple) doesn’t have an Angel because . . .

First off, I would like to point out that the tradition of placing statues on every temple started around 1980, and the London Temple (as with most temples that suffer from this myth) was built and dedicated long before that point. So right off, any of the myths in this section are myths for just that reason: These temples did not get a statue because that’s just not what was done back then.

But let’s consider a few of these myths anyway.

. . . the reflection would have distracted pilots flying into [Gatwick] Airport.

Look at an Angel Moroni in the sunlight. You will notice that the whole angel does not shine at the same time. Pilots are more likely to get a glare from a solid flat reflective sheet like a window or a car windshield. The bigger the surface, the bigger the glare. The uneven surface of a Moroni statue is going to reflect and scatter small amounts of light every direction. The flatter the surface, the bigger the reflection. The part that will usually reflect the most light is the flattest portion of the statue: the front and back. A reflective surface reflects light in the opposite direction of the light source. So, if the sun is to the south, the reflection will be brightest to the North. The reflective surface will be between you and the sun, in one line.

As the front and back are mostly vertical and as the sun is above that vertical surface, it will typically reflect more light the opposite direction from the sun, down to the ground. Though there are times where the sun is low to the ground, early morning or late evening, when the sun can be behind you. In these instances, the statue will produce a vibrant reflection. But so will any other window, and the window will reflect an even greater amount of light, even if it is smaller, due to it being flat.

. . . there is a risk that a plane might hit the statue on approach.

Temples which had a Moroni added after dedication fall into 2 groups. Group one consists of the Boston and Sydney temples which were intended to have Angels but could not at first due to legislation or lawsuits. The second group were dedicated exactly as was intended, with no Angel on the spire.

In the second group, with the exception of Idaho Falls and Freiberg, the process of adding a Moroni required removing a portion of the spire to create a natural looking and compfortable spot for the statue to sit. This means that, after Moroni was placed, the temple was actually shorter than without the statue. (Idaho Falls and Freiberg actually made the spire taller.)

Another point to consider is that the London Temple is about five miles from the airport. A quick search on the internet suggests that a plane on approach will typically be about 1,500 feet up at that distance as it approaches (300 additional feet up for each mile.) The London temple is only 190 feet tall. Even a plane on shallow approach is not going to be that low

Another point to consider is that the London Temple is about five miles from the airport. A quick search on the internet suggests that a plane on approach will typically be about 1,500 feet up at that distance as it approaches (300 additional feet up for each mile.) The London temple is only 190 feet tall. Even a plane on shallow approach is not going to be that low that far out from the airport.

. . . the statue would interfere with the computerized landing systems.

The system they are referring to is called ILS. It uses directional radio antennas to project radio signals into the air along the safest approach routes. Put as simply as possible, to stay on course for landing, a pilot points an airplane to where the signals are strongest. Like the second answer to the previous question, in order to avoid problems with any structure on final approach, this radio signal is going to be so high up above the temple at five miles out that there is not much chance of the angel getting in the way of the signal.

---