[Ratboy]

I often look out the window of the aircraft to match the stuff on the ground to where we are supposed to be.  Holding patterns to allow for fake times would be pretty hard to pull off.  People fueling the planes would have to remember when the flights are over land that people on the ground can see the plane and are hard to fake compared to flights over water where they can play games.  People screw up with real data let alone hoping they can pull off a conspiracy with millions of people in the know (the guy fueling the plane, the guy working the board, my friend in air traffic control, the search and rescue people, etc. etc.) eventually some pilot would forget and arrive six hours earlier than possible on a round earth. And they used to pull off this conspiracy back in the pre computer days when all this had to be tracked by hand in a real set of records and the conspiracy records.

[inquisitive]

Hmmm, that's odd. I geocache and use GPS to find the location of caches. It works amazingly well. Soooooo....yeah.

Do satellites exist? If yes, then the earth is round and the GPS system identifies the location of your geocache on the globe.

If satellites don't exist and the earth is flat, then radio stations broadcast a signal that makes the flat earth appear to be a globe while at the same time providing a coordinate that does work to locate your geocache on a flat earth.

A similar manipulation would have to be accomplished with flight times and distances. Even GPS distances can be faked to match the Globe overlay to the flat earth. One way or the other is false.

We know satellites exist and are used by millions for navigation, timing and communication.

[9111315]

Honest question for you and other FEers: what are your opinions/thoughts on flight tracking apps like Flight Aware?

That would depend on whether the flight date is computer compiled data or computer generated data. Their display is based on a Round Earth Model.

The real question about this thread should be the validity of direct observations or the practice of using intermediate data that only implies the geometry in question. A second or third generation of indirect observations is made when gate times are used to calculate aircraft speed and consistency between different origins and destinations.

[9111315]

Try and chart this flight on a Flat Earth model.

LAN Airlines 804
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA to SANTIAGO, CHILE
12h 12m total flight time
7,092 Miles.

Boeing 787-9 (twin-jet) (B789)



Yes, this data is from flightaware.com

[RightRoundBabyRightRound]

Try and chart this flight on a Flat Earth model.

LAN Airlines 804
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA to SANTIAGO, CHILE
12h 12m total flight time
7,092 Miles.

Boeing 787-9 (twin-jet) (B789)



Yes, this data is from flightaware.com

I agree that most on this site are less wary of direct observations, so I’ll share some of mine. I would appreciate it if any one has had any contradictory experiences.

 I’ve been on countless flights, both domestic and international, and I am somewhat of a nervous flyer so most changes in direction/speed don’t escape my notice.

From my experience, gate-to-gate times are usually around 30 minutes longer than wheels-up to wheels-down, so I figure they add on 15 Minutes of taxiing at each airport (although this is not always the case on very short flights). I always monitor the flight projections while on the flight itself, mostly so I don’t miss out on landmarks (big cities, coastlines, the Grand Canyon, etc.) and so I know how much more time I have to pass. I’ve never had a flight that lasted drastically longer or shorter than the projected flight time, and I’ve never noticed the plane to be in any location other than what the flight status map shows me, although this is understandably more difficult when flying over oceans.

In terms of monitoring flight aware, I have a few close friends that, whenever they fly, text me when they’re about to takeoff (not just leave the gate) and as soon as they land, and these times always match up with what flight aware tells me, on both domestic and international flights. From these experiences, I have grown to trust flight aware and the data it puts out.

Now in terms of charting the Melbourne to Santiago flight on a flat map, I drew a markup (on my phone so not perfect) on an existing flat earth projection. Red is the route over water that these flights presumably take, yellow is a possible quicker route on a flat model, and blue is the flight from California to Shanghai, which would be much shorter than either Australian flight on this projection, and I’m not sure how the length of this flight would be unnoticeabley lengthened to match the projected flight time on a round earth and the flight times from Chile to Australia. 

[9111315]

The map was scaled for a 7310-mile flight from Hong Kong to Las Angeles.

All other distances are measured as indicated and are wrong.

In addition, the flight paths are wrong. On MEL-SCL, the aircraft departs Melbourne and flies Southeasterly over the ocean.  The flight path does not fly over Texas. Upon arrival, the Boeing 787-9 approaches Santiago from the Southwest.



The farther south the flight path, the more error is introduced.

[RightRoundBabyRightRound]

The map was scaled for a 7310-mile flight from Hong Kong to Las Angeles.

All other distances are measured as indicated and are wrong.

In addition, the flight paths are wrong. On MEL-SCL, the aircraft departs Melbourne and flies Southeasterly over the ocean.  The flight path does not fly over Texas. Upon arrival, the Boeing 787-9 approaches Santiago from the Southwest.



The farther south the flight path, the more error is introduced.

Yes, exactly, similar flight times and distances do not make any sort of sense on any existing flat map.

[9111315]

um. . . the earth must be round.

[RightRoundBabyRightRound]

um. . . the earth must be round.

I agree

[9111315]

Your green route is good as it shows the even longer flight path that would have to be taken to fool the passengers with a departure over water, not land.

There was an incredible amount of data listed on FlightAware.com. They list the distances, so I don't see any reason to try and calculate it from gate time and flight speeds -- but expected taxing times are also listed.

I think that all my aircraft are different, and I'm sure that will be criticised. Does not matter anyway - I used the posted/flown distances.

I knew we would eventually get around to the truth.

[ScienceFirst]

They need to make the flight times look like the would on a round earth. They just list the scheduled arrival time that is needed to make the time look legitimate.

If more time is needed, they just post delayed flight at the arriving airport. The airlines are also more than happy to fly slower than normal cruise speed to save fuel.

The posted flight times will only work on a globe if the earth really was a globe or all the posted times were manipulated by NASA to make the earth seem like a globe.

If you are not in the cockpit, you can not trust the flight times.

could you not turn a on a timer on your phone as you get on? I have previously done this/ checked the actual hours multiple times on transatlantic flights between north america and europe and have never found a disparity!

[9111315]

They need to make the flight times look like the would on a round earth. They just list the scheduled arrival time that is needed to make the time look legitimate.

If more time is needed, they just post delayed flight at the arriving airport. The airlines are also more than happy to fly slower than normal cruise speed to save fuel.

The posted flight times will only work on a globe if the earth really was a globe or all the posted times were manipulated by NASA to make the earth seem like a globe.

If you are not in the cockpit, you can not trust the flight times.

could you not turn a on a timer on your phone as you get on? I have previously done this/ checked the actual hours multiple times on transatlantic flights between north america and europe and have never found a disparity!

Of course, you could. There are simply too many witnesses. The only way to make it work is to make it round.

[Tom Bishop]

That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

[9111315]

That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

It is the same one that the UN uses.

[Ratboy]

That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

This map took incredibly large number of hours to create.  Many people in every country know the shape of their country, their neighbouring countries, and when it is their turn to have the sun as high in the sky as it is going to be at noon.  People in every country phone people in every other country.  If they went outside and the sun was not at the top at noon, someone would spill the beans.  So countries know where they are in relation to every other country.  This map must represent the relationship to every other country.  And it is accurate in terms of relational longitude.  In order for the sun to provide daylight for 24 hours in the summer for penguins in Antarctica (and the workers at the stations there) and for the sun to be able to be above everyone at the right time, the lines of longitude must come to a point at the south pole as well as the north.  The distances between roads, railroad lines, telephone lines and anything else in Australia, South Africa and southern Brazil that run north and south get narrower the farther south one gets.  Not wider.  The southern hemisphere seasons and lengths of day are a mirror of the north.  The south does not get long nights and short days because the sun has a lot farther to travel around.

[TomInAustin]

That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

Pete, who most would consider the authority on FE here, acknowledged this map.

[Rounder]

That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

Pete, who most would consider the authority on FE here, acknowledged this map.

Plus, it’s the map featuted in the logo of the Society, that lends it some claim to being the map the Society believes in.