B-29 in Lake Mead

[Pat Carry]

How much longer until the B-29 breaks the surface of Lake Mead?

[bdk]

I've already started preoiling the engines.

[p51]

That F13 is supposed to still be over a hundred feet underwater, but I don't know that for sure. That lake would have to be almost bone dry to the bottom for anyone to see it.

[menards]

That F13 is supposed to still be over a hundred feet underwater, but I don't know that for sure. That lake would have to be almost bone dry to the bottom for anyone to see it.

Actually its now in about ~65 feet of water and extremely close to shoreline. Its not far from Echo Bay in the Overton Arm.

[menards]

How much longer until the B-29 breaks the surface of Lake Mead?

So the lake will stop sending water downstream when level is at ~980 ft. I believe this is when the intake towers will be complete out of the water, and it is then physically impossible to move any water past the dam. Las Vegas sucks water from the 860' level. The lake also loses water through ground seepage and evaporation. The Bomber sits in a ravine at around the 970'-980' level, a short hike from Echo Bay in the overton arm. If current trends continue, the bomber will be on dry land next summer/fall. Maybe earlier if the north end of the overton arm gets ponded off by the underwater topography of the area.

[bdk]

So the lake will stop sending water downstream when level is at ~980 ft. I believe this is when the intake towers will be complete out of the water, and it is then physically impossible to move any water past the dam. Las Vegas sucks water from the 860' level. The lake also loses water through ground seepage and evaporation. The Bomber sits in a ravine at around the 970'-980' level, a short hike from Echo Bay in the overton arm. If current trends continue, the bomber will be on dry land next summer/fall. Maybe earlier if the north end of the overton arm gets ponded off by the underwater topography of the area.

We should set up a WIX gathering! I'd sure like to see it!!!!

[JohnB]

I've already started preoiling the engines.

So much for water quality!
I personally enjoy metallic taste afforded by a large structure of 24ST aluminum, fabric, rubber, ancient vacuum tubes, (much of it lubricated with grease), and who knows what else steeping for years in my water supply.
They say minerals are good for you.


Note to self: Next time in Vegas, don't drink the water...(As if anyone does).

[kalamazookid]

Keep watering those golf courses in the desert.

[bdk]

Keep watering those golf courses in the desert.

The golf course industry is too big to fail I suspect. A lot of politicians golf.

Maybe we'll see fire bombers diverted to water golf courses. Will Phos-Chek hurt the grass?

[dhfan]

Forget the grass, with luck it will hurt the politicians.

[Dan Jones]

Keep watering those golf courses in the desert.

The golf course industry is too big to fail I suspect. A lot of politicians golf.

Maybe we'll see fire bombers diverted to water golf courses. Will Phos-Chek hurt the grass?

The stuff we drop is kinda a liquid fertilizer.

It sure would be something to retrieve that B-29 if the water levels really do get that low. The Green-weanies might even pick up the tab - cleaning up the environment and all!

[Randy Haskin]

Keep watering those golf courses in the desert.

The golf course industry is too big to fail I suspect. A lot of politicians golf.

The ignorance on this subject is strong. Central California valley farming uses the vast majority of Lake Mead water.

Southern Nevada uses roughly 18% less water than we did 30 years ago and the population has more than doubled.

Yet again, just like in the last thread on this that we did last month, it still has *zero* to do with golf courses, swimming pools, or new construction in Vegas.

Aim your sarcastic fire at those "must-have" almonds and avocados.

Last edited by Randy Haskin on Fri Jul 29, 2022 8:00 am, edited 2 times in total.

[Randy Haskin]

That F13 is supposed to still be over a hundred feet underwater, but I don't know that for sure. That lake would have to be almost bone dry to the bottom for anyone to see it.

The last report was that the tip of the tail was about 75' under the surface.

You can follow the current water level here:

https://mead.uslakes.info/Level/

[p51]

The ignorance on this subject is strong.

This is the internet, Randy. Ignorance never kept anyone from drawing their own conclusions based on what they want, and to heck with the evidence to support it (just like anytime we have any blip in the weather, people insist it's 'proof' of global warming).
But I'd love to see data on water use over time out of Lake Mead. I would assume that with a larger population than when the dam was built in the region, the water use is greater than was intended for the dam. The first time I was there in person several years ago, one of the staff at the visitor center told me that the dam was putting out much more water than was originally intended when the dam was built.
I didn't think much about it at the time, but he did say something like this was eventually going to happen when they had any weather pattern that brought less snowpack and rainfall to the region feeding the river.
I've seen no hard data on this, but I'm willing to accept that your pie chart is accurate, and expanded farming in So Cal does sound plausible to me to explain at least some of the lowering of the water levels on the lake.

[Randy Haskin]

But I'd love to see data on water use over time out of Lake Mead.

There is a lot of data out there.

Start with searching on the "Colorado River Compact". It is right in a Wikipedia article...but there is certainly a lot more information from a wide variety of sources if you don't like Wikipedia. The data from the Compact lists the apportionments for all of the states in the upper and lower basins, both in the original compact in the 20s and the re-negotiation of it in the 40s.

Once you find that information, the actual usage of those apportionments in acre-feet over time are also easy to find online.

If you want to delve deeper there is plenty of data about the river volume assumptions that were used in the original agreements compared to the drought-levels that the last two decades have seen.

Just as importantly, folks don't seem to be aware of what the purpose of a reservoir is, and why the level of a reservoir might fluctuate over the years, especially during periods of extreme drought...and that such fluctuations are part of the assumptions built in to the construction, maintenance, and use of that reservoir.

Take a look at what the levels in reservoirs upstream of Mead (Lake Powell, especially) have been over recent years, and levels downstream (like Lake Havasu). They are all part of the equation, too.

Unfortunately, people don't seem to even want to perform a cursory level of inquisition, and instead want to go for low-hanging fruit and make assumptions based on what seems to make sense to them, apparently, by virtue of geography.

Last edited by Randy Haskin on Fri Jul 29, 2022 10:57 am, edited 2 times in total.