*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3427
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #60 on: February 26, 2020, 07:03:26 PM »
You can't compare a stagnant image with one scale to a moving interactive system with multiple scales. Of course they are different. They are different in every way.

I'm sorry, but you've lost me there.

You're argument is that because a line is X units long and because X units represents a different distance on Bing maps based on an interactive scale it is evidence that the earth is a sphere. Or that Bing maps is based on a sphere.

It has literally nothing to do with whether a tool has an 'interactive scale' or not. What robinofloxley has demonstrated several times now is that regardless of this 'interactive scale' business you're hung up on, the results returned from Bing are globe earth coordinates and distances. My answer: No, this does not prove that earth is a globe. Yes, it does prove that Bing Maps is based on the globe model.

Based on that logic the image below, because it has an interactive scale, is evidence that this hallway is a sphere or that the image below is based on a sphere


No.

I've been using bing maps, or maps which function very similarly to bing maps for the bettwer part of 15 years now and, with their interactive scale, they seem pretty accurate.

If you've been happy with Bing accuracy for 15 years then you've been happy with the globe based distances and coordinates that Bing has used for 15 years.

It seems strange to me that you're happy to trust Bing, which is a Microsoft owned product,

It's not that i'm happy to trust them. The general consensus here is that there is no map of the earth. That thought processes really does not sit well with me when i'm using a map of the earth almost every day. In thousands of years of technological progress we have not been able to make one freaking map??? Seriously?? To me this is something that is a big strike against these specific FE models. Here's a map, in which the earth is not specifically depicted as a sphere, (ad has the added bonus of being independently tested by millions and millions of users) why can't this be a map of the earth?

It is a map of the earth that is derived from the globe model. The problem seems to be that no one has been able to come up with a map of the earth derived from a Flat Earth model. Simple as that.

but when it comes to the Microsoft technical documentation on Bing stack has pointed out to you, you just reject it on the basis that anybody could have put what they liked in it. It's inconceivable that Microsoft would allow any unauthorized employee or worse an outsider to make changes to one of their pages, they simply wouldn't have the security permissions to be able to do that. The alternative is that an authorized employee wrote this and nobody at Microsoft has noticed or been made aware of this, or if they have, they simply don't care. How credible is that?

What do I need to do in order to move past this ad infinitum that is not a FE model that is a RE model because the website _____________ says it's a RE projection?  How can we possibly discuss a possible FE model when that just keeps getting regurgitated over and over and over.
The only thing that I can think of is to use the Bing API, build my own website, and in the documentation of the website say this is a projection of a non spherical earth. Would that satisfy you? Would you be able to look at that website and say, ok the website says it's not based on a globe projection?

Why you're still railing against Microsoft documentation stating their map system is based on the globe model is beyond me. It's the API that's returning the Globe coordinates/distances, not just the documentation that says it does. robinofloxley already showed that to you. So if you created your own site around the BING API and wrote anything you wanted to about it, that doesn't change how the map engine works. Your "documentation" would just simply be incorrect.

*

Offline flatearthwizard

  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • yo yo yo yo yo yo
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #61 on: February 26, 2020, 11:13:37 PM »
How come I can purchase a nonstop plane ticket from Sydney to Santiago in Chile? On the most common flat map, you'd have to cross or laterally pass EVERY single continent. Our jets A) wouldn't have enough fuel for that, B) can't travel fast enough to get there in 13 hours and 15 minutes, and C) We don't ever hear about people seeing land part of the way. I guess you could fly around the land, but that complicates the first two contingencies.
This has been addressed numerous times.

These airlines offer such flights for purchase.

The thing is, if you buy such a ticket, it is:

A) a NON-REFUNDABLE PURCHASE; and,
B) You end up typically moved to a different flight with a stop over (one that conveniently matches the Azimuthal Equidistant Map).

For those rare non-stop flights that do occur, it would not be surprising to find that aerial refueling is taking place, something of which the passengers would be totally unaware.

im sorry what. this makes no sense

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #62 on: February 26, 2020, 11:19:07 PM »
You can't compare a stagnant image with one scale to a moving interactive system with multiple scales. Of course they are different. They are different in every way.

I'm sorry, but you've lost me there.

You're argument is that because a line is X units long and because X units represents a different distance on Bing maps based on an interactive scale it is evidence that the earth is a sphere. Or that Bing maps is based on a sphere.


I'm not drawing a line on a map and measuring it myself, I'm simply taking multiple points on the map and then asking Bing to tell me the distances between those points. I neither know nor care how Bing is performing that calculation. However having collected all the distances, I find that the top and bottom of my shape, as defined by my 4 points, are the same length and the left and right side are the same length. If I assume the geometry is flat then the only possible shape that fits the bill is a parallelogram of some kind, however I also see that the diagonals are the same length too, which makes this a special form of parallelogram - a rectangle.

The only problem with this is that when I check the dimensions, I find that the two diagonals are 20% longer than they should be according to Pythagoras. The only possible conclusion I can draw is that my assumption is flawed and the geometry is not in fact flat.

I put the lines on the map to illustrate the point I was trying to make, but they really don't need to be there at all. What matters are the 4 points and the 6 distances Bing's built-in measuring tool gives me. Scaling zooming panning and an interactive scale aren't relevant. All that matters are the answers Bing gives me for the 6 distances involved.

I'm not stating as fact that the geometry is spherical, just that it cannot possibly be flat. I do however personally believe that it is spherical, simply because the results perfectly match a spherical geometry, but I'm just happy to leave it that it's certainly not flat.


Based on that logic the image below, because it has an interactive scale, is evidence that this hallway is a sphere or that the image below is based on a sphere



Well the underlying model if you will behind the image is certainly not flat, it's clearly a corridor with height and width and length. If this were a computer generated model with the ability to move around, something like a scene from a game, then you'd be able to move through it.

If this were an interactive image with its own measuring tool built-in and I could measure anything I liked, then I could perhaps work out the geometry of the model. If all the measurements I asked for were entirely consistent with a sphere or a pyramid or a doughnut, then I'd have to concede that's what it was. An interactive scale doesn't make it any particular geometry, you'd have to match the measurements up to confirm what it was.


What I've demonstrated to you is that you cannot lay these positions out on anything flat and make the distances work. What this means is that Bing's distance measurement tools cannot be using a flat geometry.

of course you can't The earth is not 2d. It's 3d.


Woah! The earth isn't flat, it's 3d? So Bing maps underlying model isn't flat either? OK, I'm wondering what this discussion was all about then.


When you say "stagnant image" are you just objecting to a screenshot from Bing?

A 2d drawing of triangles with three sides which are one unit long is not interactive. each side is one unit long. Putting that triangle on Bing maps is moot.

I've told you exactly how to do this, if you don't trust my stagnant image, fine, have a go yourself and tell us what distances Bing tells you.

I've been using bing maps, or maps which function very similarly to bing maps for the bettwer part of 15 years now and, with their interactive scale, they seem pretty accurate.


It seems strange to me that you're happy to trust Bing, which is a Microsoft owned product,

It's not that i'm happy to trust them. The general consensus here is that there is no map of the earth. That thought processes really does not sit well with me when i'm using a map of the earth almost every day. In thousands of years of technological progress we have not been able to make one freaking map??? Seriously?? To me this is something that is a big strike against these specific FE models. Here's a map, in which the earth is not specifically depicted as a sphere, (ad has the added bonus of being independently tested by millions and millions of users) why can't this be a map of the earth?

but when it comes to the Microsoft technical documentation on Bing stack has pointed out to you, you just reject it on the basis that anybody could have put what they liked in it. It's inconceivable that Microsoft would allow any unauthorized employee or worse an outsider to make changes to one of their pages, they simply wouldn't have the security permissions to be able to do that. The alternative is that an authorized employee wrote this and nobody at Microsoft has noticed or been made aware of this, or if they have, they simply don't care. How credible is that?

What do I need to do in order to move past this ad infinitum that is not a FE model that is a RE model because the website _____________ says it's a RE projection?  How can we possibly discuss a possible FE model when that just keeps getting regurgitated over and over and over.
The only thing that I can think of is to use the Bing API, build my own website, and in the documentation of the website say this is a projection of a non spherical earth. Would that satisfy you? Would you be able to look at that website and say, ok the website says it's not based on a globe projection?

Well the problem with that idea is that you do not represent Microsoft (presumably) and your Website will not be owned, authored and administrated by Microsoft, so your "documentation" carries no authority whatsoever because you are not the author of the Bing API (again presumably).

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #63 on: February 27, 2020, 08:01:34 AM »
Quote from: flatearthwizard
im sorry what. this makes no sense

I will break it down for you.

I indicated that any flat earth map has discrepancies that are revealed when measuring distances between two cities on the flat map model candidate and the distances we experience in real life, expecially the farther away from the equator a city is. For a few pages, we debated different aspects of how it could work (most arguments required a cabal to cover things up or something like that), and now we’re looking at different flat maps in particular the bing map, which is actually a globe map in disguise.

Does this make sense now
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 08:03:23 AM by ImAnEngineerToo »

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #64 on: February 27, 2020, 10:46:48 AM »
What I've demonstrated to you is that you cannot lay these positions out on anything flat and make the distances work. What this means is that Bing's distance measurement tools cannot be using a flat geometry.

of course you can't The earth is not 2d. It's 3d.

Can we back up a bit here, because I'm somewhat confused about your position on various matters. A few questions for you if you don't mind:
  • Do you believe Bing is based on a 2d flat plane eculidian geometry?
  • Do you accept that (euclidian geometry) if you construct a rectangle from 4 points and join each point to every other point via 6 lines, then the lengths of the diagonals can be calculated from the sides?
  • Do you accept that if the lengths of the diagonals don't match up with the calculated values, then the geometry cannot be flat?
  • Are you willing to accept the distances I've quoted which I read from a Bing map?
  • If not, are you willing to repeat this yourself and tell us your findings?

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #65 on: February 27, 2020, 04:17:20 PM »
Can we back up a bit here, because I'm somewhat confused about your position on various matters. A few questions for you if you don't mind:
  • Do you believe Bing is based on a 2d flat plane eculidian geometry?
  • Do you accept that (euclidian geometry) if you construct a rectangle from 4 points and join each point to every other point via 6 lines, then the lengths of the diagonals can be calculated from the sides?
  • Do you accept that if the lengths of the diagonals don't match up with the calculated values, then the geometry cannot be flat?
  • Are you willing to accept the distances I've quoted which I read from a Bing map?
1. This is a trick question. I don't believe the bing distances are based on a 2d flat plane or eculidian geometry. I believe it is based on measured distances in our 3d world.
2. yes but only in a flat 2d scenario. These shapes which apply to a 2d space don't apply to bing maps which is based on a 3d space.
3. This depends on your definition of flat.
4. sure.

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #66 on: February 27, 2020, 11:58:43 PM »
Can we back up a bit here, because I'm somewhat confused about your position on various matters. A few questions for you if you don't mind:
  • Do you believe Bing is based on a 2d flat plane eculidian geometry?
  • Do you accept that (euclidian geometry) if you construct a rectangle from 4 points and join each point to every other point via 6 lines, then the lengths of the diagonals can be calculated from the sides?
  • Do you accept that if the lengths of the diagonals don't match up with the calculated values, then the geometry cannot be flat?
  • Are you willing to accept the distances I've quoted which I read from a Bing map?
1. This is a trick question. I don't believe the bing distances are based on a 2d flat plane or eculidian geometry. I believe it is based on measured distances in our 3d world.
2. yes but only in a flat 2d scenario. These shapes which apply to a 2d space don't apply to bing maps which is based on a 3d space.
3. This depends on your definition of flat.
4. sure.

No trick questions, I was genuinely confused, thanks for the clarification.

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #67 on: February 28, 2020, 02:49:08 AM »
I believe it is based on measured distances in our 3d world.

This depends on your definition of flat.

The confusion on your position is perpetuated. My best guess on your position is that the world is round but not curved up to 360 degrees? You also think the bing map's interactive scale is completely accurate, meaning when you put two cities in, it will give you an accurate distance between them regardless of either cities' long/latitudinal position?

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #68 on: February 28, 2020, 11:26:41 AM »
I believe it is based on measured distances in our 3d world.

This depends on your definition of flat.

The confusion on your position is perpetuated. My best guess on your position is that the world is round but not curved up to 360 degrees? You also think the bing map's interactive scale is completely accurate, meaning when you put two cities in, it will give you an accurate distance between them regardless of either cities' long/latitudinal position?

It seems a bit ironic that we have to come up with a definition of flat on a flat earth site.

I'd say my kitchen table is flat. It's wooden, so on a microscopic scale is bumpy but on a large enough scale, it's flat. I'd look at the earth the same way, ignore the minor bumps, ie mountains, valleys, tides etc. +/- 10 miles or so is insignificant to the shape for most purposes.

If the earth is flat on a large scale like my kitchen table, then it fits my definition of flat.

Not a very precise definition I know.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #69 on: February 28, 2020, 06:31:02 PM »
The confusion on your position is perpetuated. My best guess on your position is that the world is round but not curved up to 360 degrees? You also think the bing map's interactive scale is completely accurate, meaning when you put two cities in, it will give you an accurate distance between them regardless of either cities' long/latitudinal position?

Do I believe 100% that the earth is not a sphere/oblate spheroid/spheroid? NO.
Do I believe 100% that the earth is a sphere/oblate spheroid/spheroid? NO.

Do i believe that there is evidence which supports the idea that the earth is  not a sphere/oblate spheroid/spheroid? YES.
Do I believe that there is evidence which debunks claims that observations/measurements mean the earth is a sphere/oblate spheroid/spheroid? YES
Do I believe that there are convincing logical arguments which explain why the earth can be flat and we can have the observations/measurements made? YES


I think there are far too many unanswered questions in the various FE models for me to be 100% convinced that the earth is not a sphere/oblate spheroid/spheroid.  There are way too many models with too little consistency within the community which significantly weakens the movement.



It seems a bit ironic that we have to come up with a definition of flat on a flat earth site.


Well I've driven through San Francisco. I would not consider that place flat at all. It has lots of hills and it's in a 3d space.
 

Yet if i look at a map of the area it is represented as a flat, 2d image.The only way to accurately depict the 3d non flat distances and locations of that city on a 2d flat image is to do so with an interactive scale.




I'd say my kitchen table is flat. It's wooden, so on a microscopic scale is bumpy but on a large enough scale, it's flat. I'd look at the earth the same way, ignore the minor bumps, ie mountains, valleys, tides etc. +/- 10 miles or so is insignificant to the shape for most purposes.


These interactive maps can zoom in to the scale of less than a mile so ignoring 10 mile "bumps" is not very logical




If the earth is flat on a large scale like my kitchen table, then it fits my definition of flat.

Not a very precise definition I know.

One of the more common FE models types is a flat circle with the north pole in the center.

Within those models there are many different things such as:

1. A dome.If earth has a dome I would not consider it flat at a global scale. A dome is not flat in my opinion. Another person may disagree
2. A great ice wall. If earth has a great ice wall holding the oceans in then the earth is more shaped like a bowl. A bowl is not flat in my opinion. Another person may disagree.
3. A curved firmament which is part of the earth. It's my understanding it's similar to the dome listed en example one. A thing with a curved firmament thing is not flat in my opinion. Another person may disagree.
4. An edge with something unknown beyond. To me if you don't know what something is then you also don't know what shape it is. I would not consider an unknown shape to be flat. Another person may disagree.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 06:44:53 PM by iamcpc »

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3427
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #70 on: February 28, 2020, 09:36:03 PM »

Well I've driven through San Francisco. I would not consider that place flat at all. It has lots of hills and it's in a 3d space.
 
Yet if i look at a map of the area it is represented as a flat, 2d image.The only way to accurately depict the 3d non flat distances and locations of that city on a 2d flat image is to do so with an interactive scale.

Or perhaps with a topo map, no interactive scale needed:


Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #71 on: February 28, 2020, 10:09:32 PM »
Or perhaps with a topo map, no interactive scale needed:


The scale, because it is not interactive, is much less accurate. It does not account for altitude at all.


The image below represents someone traveling between point A and point B which is, according to the scale one mile.

The top trip I would agree that the person traveling on a flat one mile stretch of road between point a and point B which are one mile apart based on the scale.

The bottom trip represents someone who is going up and down many hills across the journey. Their odometer would show something like 3 or four miles. The stagnant non interactive scale could be VASTLY improved by making it interactive and building an algorithm that factors in the 3d terrain



Advancements have been made in cartography in the past 50-60 years. The most advanced maps are ones that are interactive and thus require an interactive scale.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3427
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #72 on: February 28, 2020, 11:12:48 PM »
Or perhaps with a topo map, no interactive scale needed:


The scale, because it is not interactive, is much less accurate. It does not account for altitude at all.


Regardless of an interactive scale, the topo map provides the same accuracy the Bing map does. Using the topo map and its scale I measured 2 miles from 8th Ave between Noriega & Ortega basically East. The 2 mile scale stretched to around Dolores and 21st. As you probably know, between point A & B is Twin Peaks, the tallest hills in SF. I did the same measurement in Bing; interactively zoomed in and it measured 2 miles between those two same points as well.


Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #73 on: February 29, 2020, 03:18:43 PM »
Or perhaps with a topo map, no interactive scale needed:


The scale, because it is not interactive, is much less accurate. It does not account for altitude at all.


The image below represents someone traveling between point A and point B which is, according to the scale one mile.

The top trip I would agree that the person traveling on a flat one mile stretch of road between point a and point B which are one mile apart based on the scale.

The bottom trip represents someone who is going up and down many hills across the journey. Their odometer would show something like 3 or four miles. The stagnant non interactive scale could be VASTLY improved by making it interactive and building an algorithm that factors in the 3d terrain



Advancements have been made in cartography in the past 50-60 years. The most advanced maps are ones that are interactive and thus require an interactive scale.

I don't think Bing works in quite the way you think it does. Here are two locations for you, (-19.053843, -65.265419) and (-33.437220, -70.650020). According to Bing maps measuring tool these are 1688km apart. Google Earth comes up with a slightly different figure, 1681km, but let's not split hairs here. Google Earth does however allow you to see an elevation profile and calculates a longer distance based on the profile, in this case 1701km, so 20km extra is added.

Using a great circle route calculator (again  I used https://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong.html), the simple haversine formula based result which this gives (haversine is just an equation, it has no knowledge of terrain) is 1686km, only 2km different from Bing's figure.

The reason I picked these two locations is that you are basically travelling 1000 miles or so along the backbone of the Andes, so the elevation changes are extreme.

So comparing Bing's distance (1688km) and the haversine formula distance (1686km), leads me to believe that Bing is giving you an "as the crow flies" great circle distance measurement between the two points and it's simply not attempting to correct for elevation changes (unlike Google Earth when you specifically request an elevation profile).




Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #74 on: March 01, 2020, 11:02:01 PM »
The only thing that I can think of is to use the Bing API, build my own website, and in the documentation of the website say this is a projection of a non spherical earth. Would that satisfy you? Would you be able to look at that website and say, ok the website says it's not based on a globe projection?

The scale, because it is not interactive, is much less accurate. It does not account for altitude at all.

Your idea of using the Bing API got me thinking, so I took a look at it and discovered this rather interesting page https://www.bing.com/api/maps/sdk/mapcontrol/isdk/distancebetweentwolocations:



This is a developer's area where you can experiment with code for calculating distances in Bing. In this example, the code is using the API call Microsoft.SpatialMath.getDistanceTo(...) to determine the distance between two pushpins placed on a map. Under the hood, this is how you measure distances on a Bing map.

Since this is an interactive code example, it's easy enough to put the two pushpins in a different location and change the units to km, as I've done here:



I've used the same two locations I used earlier, and this is confirmed by the distance 1688km, identical to my earlier experiment with a Bing map, confirming that we're using the correct API call. Now let's take a look at the official Microsoft documentation for this API call https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/bingmaps/v8-web-control/modules/spatial-math-module/core-calculations

getDistanceTo - "Calculate the distance between two locations on the surface of the earth using the Haversine formula. If highAccuracy value is set to true, the slower but more accurate Vincenty formula is used instead."

So there it is, Bing maps uses the Haversine formula for distance calculations. This formula is based on an assumed spherical earth and does not take into account elevation changes.

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #75 on: March 19, 2020, 03:16:43 PM »
How come I can purchase a nonstop plane ticket from Sydney to Santiago in Chile? On the most common flat map, you'd have to cross or laterally pass EVERY single continent. Our jets A) wouldn't have enough fuel for that, B) can't travel fast enough to get there in 13 hours and 15 minutes, and C) We don't ever hear about people seeing land part of the way. I guess you could fly around the land, but that complicates the first two contingencies.

I tried to do this last year just to see if I could buy a ticket from those exact 2 locations, Santiago to Sydney.  I also just tried again.  A ticket 1 way are about 1500$.  Every one stops in the USA.  The one that didn’t was a non-stop flight for $2500.  So I tried to buy one. I went through the steps and at the end the ticket went up to $9500.  I clicked accept. Then it sent me back to a flight that had a stop in Los Angeles.  I didn’t come across a non-stop flight today when I searched, but I was short in time. I’m not saying they aren’t any non-stop flights, but if they do have them the airlines sure don’t want the average Joe on them.

On a FE map, Santiago to Sydney with a stop in Los Angeles is a straight line. It doesn’t make much sense on a RE to go all away from Santiago to Northern Hemisphere and back down to Sydney.  If I’m not mistaken all 3 have a latitude of 33 with Los Angeles in the northern hemisphere. So that’s 132 degrees out of the way.  66 up and 66 back down.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3179
    • View Profile
Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #76 on: March 19, 2020, 03:36:09 PM »
It doesn’t make much sense on a RE to go all away from Santiago to Northern Hemisphere and back down to Sydney.

It does if you have sufficient customers who want to go between Santiago and LA, and/or LA and Sydney
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #77 on: March 19, 2020, 04:02:48 PM »
This dude managed to book a direct flight from Sydney to Santiago fine



At one point he shows the flight route shown on the seat displays.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #78 on: March 20, 2020, 10:18:30 AM »
How come I can purchase a nonstop plane ticket from Sydney to Santiago in Chile? On the most common flat map, you'd have to cross or laterally pass EVERY single continent. Our jets A) wouldn't have enough fuel for that, B) can't travel fast enough to get there in 13 hours and 15 minutes, and C) We don't ever hear about people seeing land part of the way. I guess you could fly around the land, but that complicates the first two contingencies.

I tried to do this last year just to see if I could buy a ticket from those exact 2 locations, Santiago to Sydney.  I also just tried again.  A ticket 1 way are about 1500$.  Every one stops in the USA.  The one that didn’t was a non-stop flight for $2500.  So I tried to buy one. I went through the steps and at the end the ticket went up to $9500.  I clicked accept. Then it sent me back to a flight that had a stop in Los Angeles.  I didn’t come across a non-stop flight today when I searched, but I was short in time. I’m not saying they aren’t any non-stop flights, but if they do have them the airlines sure don’t want the average Joe on them.

On a FE map, Santiago to Sydney with a stop in Los Angeles is a straight line. It doesn’t make much sense on a RE to go all away from Santiago to Northern Hemisphere and back down to Sydney.  If I’m not mistaken all 3 have a latitude of 33 with Los Angeles in the northern hemisphere. So that’s 132 degrees out of the way.  66 up and 66 back down.

I went on quantas.com. Maybe you can try to buy one of these flights and let us know how you get on. I was actually pretty surprised, given the global COVID-19 pandemic, that I'd be offered anything at all..


Re: Are plane tickets real?
« Reply #79 on: March 21, 2020, 07:25:16 AM »
How come I can purchase a nonstop plane ticket from Sydney to Santiago in Chile? On the most common flat map, you'd have to cross or laterally pass EVERY single continent. Our jets A) wouldn't have enough fuel for that, B) can't travel fast enough to get there in 13 hours and 15 minutes, and C) We don't ever hear about people seeing land part of the way. I guess you could fly around the land, but that complicates the first two contingencies.

I tried to do this last year just to see if I could buy a ticket from those exact 2 locations, Santiago to Sydney.  I also just tried again.  A ticket 1 way are about 1500$.  Every one stops in the USA.  The one that didn’t was a non-stop flight for $2500.  So I tried to buy one. I went through the steps and at the end the ticket went up to $9500.  I clicked accept. Then it sent me back to a flight that had a stop in Los Angeles.  I didn’t come across a non-stop flight today when I searched, but I was short in time. I’m not saying they aren’t any non-stop flights, but if they do have them the airlines sure don’t want the average Joe on them.

On a FE map, Santiago to Sydney with a stop in Los Angeles is a straight line. It doesn’t make much sense on a RE to go all away from Santiago to Northern Hemisphere and back down to Sydney.  If I’m not mistaken all 3 have a latitude of 33 with Los Angeles in the northern hemisphere. So that’s 132 degrees out of the way.  66 up and 66 back down.

I went on quantas.com. Maybe you can try to buy one of these flights and let us know how you get on. I was actually pretty surprised, given the global COVID-19 pandemic, that I'd be offered anything at all..



Wow. You leave Sydney at 10am and 12 hours later you get to Santiago at 8:55am the same day you actually get  a extra hour when u land .
Going the other way you lose 29 hours.  I’ll do the math on that tomorrow and see if it all adds up.