Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - DuncanDoenitz

Pages: < Back  1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  Next >
That very website shows it did fly over Greenland on 24 July, the date of my post.

So which version of the flight is correct? Is it the 7/24 version of the flight or is it the current version of the flight?

This really makes me question this website because it appears that the flight path changes after the plane lands. I wonder why that is?

You do understand that a Flight Number is not unique?  Most flights on popular routes take place several times a week, under the same Flight Number.  So you need to specify which date you are talking about for a particular Flight Number.  If you think the "flight path changes after the plane lands", then you are looking at the same Flight Number on a different day. 

The route will be different each day.  For the North Atlantic, flights are channelled into one of 4 North Atlantic Tracks, defined by the American and European Air Traffic Agencies.  Airlines submit their planned flights to the agency the day before, and the agencies select the routes based on where planes want to go, ideal Great Circle route, weather, and jet-stream activity.  The Tracks go with the jetstreams eastbound and avoid them westbound.  As the jetstreams are a natural pnenomonon, the routes vary day to day. 

Aircraft aren't obliged to follow the official tracks, but it makes economic sense to do so.  If you wanted, say, to fly a rigid Great Circle route eastbound then you can; your ground track will be a shorter distance, but you might be covering the ground around 25% slower than everyone else, so it will probably take longer and use more fuel.  Quite often, of course, the jetstreams do come close to a Great Circle, and then you get to see Greenland. 

Didn't see the need to comment at the time, but as iamcpc doesn't believe it, I can confirm watching all of edby's listed flights Friday on FR24, and currently watching those he's listed today. 

Also KL605 now, Amsterdam-San Francisco, over Greenland. 

I personally flew Belfast-Newark about 4 years ago, over Greenland.  Bright sunshine, got photos.  And the return flight?  Who knows.  Like most trans-Atlantic eastbound it was at night.  Been up all day, couple of vodkas and a skinny airline blanket; most people wouldn't notice if it routed over Antarctica. 

But thats another story. 

Also sorry about your job, Joe.  Times are tough. 


Do you go with your father, the world traveller who raised you.  Or someone on the Internet. 

Thats a tough one to call .......

Perhaps, when you are next looking at the aircraft tracking websites, ask yourself how likely it is that, without exception, all of those pilots are lying to their kids? 

Flat Earth Projects / Re: The Atlantic Split
« on: July 11, 2020, 08:28:06 AM »
Further to GreatAtuin; ETH507 Boeing 787 airborne now from Sao Paolo to Addis Ababa.  Estimating 9932km in 11 hrs 10 minutes = 894 kph, or 483 kts.  Wikipedia quotes a cruise speed of 488 kts for the Dreamliner. 

What I think is interesting; its going from only 20 deg south to 10 deg north, crossing the equator, so the Great Circle Route should appear almost a straight line, slight reflex curve, on FR24's (Mercator?) projection. 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: July 10, 2020, 11:52:19 AM »
As an aircraft engineer, I can tell you that no civil airliner comes off the production line with air-to-air refuelling (AAR) capability.  Some have been modified for use by the military (eg the VC-25 and E-4 Boeing 747s) but its hugely expensive and a technical challenge; the receptacle has to be on the top of the fuselage, and the fuel tanks are in the wings, so the plumbing has to be through the passenger compartment.  Safety regulation authorities would have a fit. 

On top of that is the economics.  You buy a ticket for a (say) 200-passenger flight, you are paying a 200th part of the costs of purchase, maintenance, fuel, crew and catering of your plane, plus a profit margin. 

Throw in AAR and your ticket price is the same PLUS 200th of the costs of purchase, maintenance, and crew of the refuelling plane PLUS the costs of the extra fuel you take on, PLUS the fuel to get the refueller to the rendezvous and back.  And another profit margin. 

Now Michael O'Leary is also having a fit. 

Has TFES nothing more recent to add to the Sea Distances topic?

Posts are made about how measured shipping times/distances and measured flight times/distances weaken many of the FE models almost every day. Did you not see the post I just made with like 20 responses to that statement?

Yup, read 'em, and a fine set of  responses they are, but Tom's response to your responses was just to trot out the "anomalies" line from the Wiki.  My point to Tom was that the Wiki focuses exclusively on quotes from the logs and journals of gentlemen in top hats.  Not that I've any objection to top hats and I've immense admiration and respect for the gentlemen concerned, but they are writing in the context of 18th and 19th Century knowledge, understanding and technology. 

Something from equally intrepid seafarers, post age-of-steam, would have at least as much relevance and should be in the Wiki. 

A recent Thread "Are Plane Tickets Real?"   ( ) absolutely did-to-death the fact that flights are regularly taking place (for example) between New Zealand and South America, by several airlines, on schedule, using a Great Circle route, and that the outward and return-flight times are entirely consistent with published aircraft performance, prevailing winds and RE distances.  These flights take place several times a week, without fuel stops or mysterious cancellations.  Week after week. 

Regarding sea travel, another recent Post referencing Southern Ocean Sailing Races ( ) contained experiences from experienced sailors of the current century, again supporting RE distances. 

Whilst the Wiki has some fascinating anecdotes and quotes, it seems to be lacking (a bit like the "Ice Wall" topic) anything since the 19th Century.  Has TFES nothing more recent to add to the Sea Distances topic?  Can TFES provide any real data on the prevalence of airliners actually having to make unscheduled fuel stops? 

Flat Earth Projects / Re: greenolive's Flat Earth model
« on: June 01, 2020, 08:44:39 PM »
He was doing the same thing with his ramblings as you are doing on here - everything you can to get this to go away.

As a dyed-in-the-wool Globey, there may be little that Tom and I would agree on (on this Forum anyway, I assume he's kind to animals) but I think greenolive's comment is a little harsh.  Far from "... getting this to go away..." Tom started a new thread to disseminate the hypothesis and encourage discussion.  The diagram which he later found and posted, retouched or not, has given me a far better idea of greenolive's concept than several pages of his eloquent, but rather wordy, dialogue. 

I do also have a question for greenolive; is the resemblance to the Brazilian flag just coincidental, or is the flag actually based on the same concept of Creation?  I ask this with regard to GoldCashew's comments about the flag referencing emperors, stars, etc.

Technology & Information / Re: T minus 5 minutes to launch
« on: May 31, 2020, 07:16:46 PM »
Because the camera is quite close to the nozzle its using a lens with a short focal length ("fisheye") to get a wide image.  This distorts the image, which is why some RE correspondants are saying don't read too much into the apparent curvature. 

In the first image the edge of the earth is close to the centre of the field-of-view, so there is less distortion.  In the second, as the spacecraft has moved, the edge of the earth has moved away from the centre of the field, so the distortion will be more pronounced. 

Technology & Information / Re: T minus 5 minutes to launch
« on: May 31, 2020, 05:37:58 PM »
In descending order of importance I'm a Yorkshireman, Earthling, British and European; you don't need to be American to appreciate that the result of the efforts by USA, NASA and Space-X, culminating in the events of the last 24 hours, is awesome. 

That said, like any meaningful endeavour, I'm sure that they would be the first to say it would not have been possible without the pioneering work and professional-bond of all space-fareing nations and organisations and, sometimes, the sacrifices of their crews. 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Around-the-World Sailing Races?
« on: May 22, 2020, 12:48:44 PM »
Ross and Cook were sailing around in wooden boats in the 18th and 19th Centuries respectively.  They didn't have access to skidoos, dog-sleds C-47s and De Havilland Twin Otters. 

You might wish to consider further works of research (and television?) in the 20th and 21st Centuries.  Could I suggest Pole to Pole (Michael Palin, BBC Books 1993) and the TV catalogue of Sir David Attenborough?   

Flat Earth Theory / Re: International Space Station
« on: May 16, 2020, 06:25:14 PM »
I think somerled may be correct.  Its a plane.  Its been travelling at over 7 km per second since 1998.  Need to get me some of that fuel. 

Or a balloon.  A really aerodynamic, pointy, balloon. 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 15, 2020, 07:06:07 PM »
"I" am doing engineering on jet engines in the real world and they don't need that level of accuracy, a claim made by you which is incorrect.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim that the building of modern jet engines requires less accurate measurements than what they were doing in the 1800's? I find a claim like that rather hard to believe and was unable to find any evidence to support or refute it online.

You won't find it on-line because its Commercial-in-Confidence Maintenance data from the manufacturer. 

But why would you think that all technical progress depends purely on the ability to measure increasingly long decimal fractions?  Since its the example you raised, do you know how the gap between turbine rotor blade tips and the enclosing stator is generally measured in service?  Laser? Photon particle accelerator? 

No.  We normally use feeler gauges, like Henry Ford used to set up the spark plugs on his Model T.  Do you know how we ensure that the flying control range of movement is correct on a business aircraft?  We use a protractor.  Or a ruler. 

You really need to consider whether the level of precision you're claiming, in any field of technology (in the real world) is going to be robust enough to survive erosion, temperature change, contamination, and simply surviving transit from where its made to where its employed. 

I don't doubt that there are some engineering technologies that are designed, manufactured and maintained to higher tolerances, but don't quote turbine engine blades as an example when you clearly have no knowledge of the subject or data sources yourself.  Perhaps you could provide an example, with sources, from your own field of technical expertise, not just something you read on the internet. 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 14, 2020, 06:21:02 PM »
Your're missing the point IAMCPC.  "WE" have the ability to split the atom and do brain surgery, but "I" do not,  and it doesn't matter, because "I" don't need to spit atoms or operate on brains. 

Similarly, I agree that "WE" can measure a zillionth of an inch, but "I" can't, and it doesn't matter, because "I" am doing engineering on jet engines in the real world and they don't need that level of accuracy, a claim made by you which is incorrect.   

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 14, 2020, 08:04:35 AM »
Quote from IAMCPC on 13 May 2020:

"Second off small distances do matter.
There is an entire branch of science called metrology dedicated to precise measurements measuring to the milliong/billionth of an inch actually is important and matters from things like nano technology, computer processors, or the precision engineering needed in a modern jet engine where, if one blade is long by .00000005 CM and another blade is short by .00000005 CM the entire engine would either not function or function much less efficiently". 

I don't know how to make a computer chip, but I am a Licensed Jet Engine Engineer.  In engine maintenance I've got no way of measuring a turbine blade to 5/millionth of a millimeter and, you know what, it doesn't matter.  The engine is going to work, and to an acceptable level of efficiency. If someone made a blade to that level of accuracy, it would be a few molecules smaller by the time he'd cleaned it and put it in a shipping package.  I'm looking for around 0.02mm (0.002cm). You're talking out of your jetpipe. 

On a similar note, I've got an apple in a fruit-bowl; one apple.  I add a second apple.  How many apples in the bowl?  Well, while I was picking the second apple, bacteria started reacting on the first apple and decay set in so, I've probably got 1.9999999995 apples. 

See my point?  Math is math.  Reality is reality.


From the FES Wiki "The Ice Wall"

"Along the edge of our local area exists a massive 150 foot Ice Wall. The 150 foot Ice Wall is on the coast of Antarctica. The Ice Wall is a massive wall of ice that surrounds Antarctica".

But you wrote that the Ice Wall IS Antarctica. 

So is the Ice Wall the edge of Antarctica, or does the whole of Antarctica comprise the wall?  Do you see my point?  I'm trying to establish if you accept that many people have (and continue to) travel and explore the continent of Antarctica by air, ground motor-vehicle, dog-sled, etc (for professional and recreational reasons) and have permanent bases there. 

Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: May 07, 2020, 02:55:20 PM »
BR, ICare, JSS, AllAround and friends; my brain is starting to hurt. 

Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: May 07, 2020, 11:35:04 AM »
Totallackey today at 10.38 AM;

"Now, knowing that gas released to the confines of a vacuum does 0 work, ...."

Lackey Mate, for once you've hit the nail on the head.  The whole point of Joule's experiment is that it was in a CONFINED vacuum, ie a closed system.  The gas accelerates into the vacuum chamber and then decellerates by an equal and opposite value, resulting in no overall change of energy or velocity.  In the limitless vacuum of space the rocket exhaust is released into an UNCONFINED space so does not subsequently come to rest.  It just keeps on going. 

You can't just keep repeating the soundbite "gas released into a vacuum does no work".  Its just a catchphrase. 

Garlic bread! 

Here's Johny! 

Nice to see you! 

Unless you understand the science and the context, its meaningless. 

Sorry, I don't want to muddle up the facts (again) and mislead anyone, so from the Wiki;

"The Earth is surrounded on all sides by an ice wall that holds the oceans back. This ice wall is what explorers have named Antarctica. Beyond the ice wall is a topic of great interest to the Flat Earth Society. To our knowledge, no one has been very far past the ice wall and returned to tell of their journey. What we do know is that it encircles the earth and serves to hold in our oceans and helps protect us from whatever lies beyond".

So the Ice Wall is the edge of Antarctica? Or not?  And few have lived to tell the tale? 

And no-one has any idea about Question #24, even though its "a topic of great interest"? 

Yo Pete, genuine apologies if I've appeared to show disrespect to you or Tom; that was not my intention.  I thought I had caught the essence of FE's concept of Antarctica/Ice-Wall/South Pole, but obviously not. 

However, I suggest that you're now diverting the topic (again) onto diplomacy and the semantics of debating per se, rather than provide an answer question #24 of Matt's original post.   

Man of straw indeed. 

Pages: < Back  1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  Next >