Most common FE map:Useless for navigation.
Another model:Even more useless than the one above.
Most common FE map:
(https://s30.postimg.org/ved2x1r3l/Map.png)
Another model:
(https://s29.postimg.org/qwt95gswn/Altmap.png)
This website is for "IF" the earth was flat.
This website is for "IF" the earth was flat.
No, it isn't.
Most common FE map:Useless for navigation.
Another model:Even more useless than the one above.
Using any of your maps, let's see you plot a course that'll take you from Sydney to Santiago (or it's nearest port Valparaiso)
If it isn't, what is it ?You'd think someone with your "credentials" would be able to read the "About" section of the homepage, but here you go:
This is the home of the world-famous Flat Earth Society, a place for free thinkers and the intellectual exchange of ideas. This website hosts information and serves as an archive for Flat Earth Theory. It also offers an opportunity to discuss this with the Flat Earth community on our forums.
I'm not sure how to plot a course exactly. I suspect it could be done but the distances probably wouldn't match reality. I don't know what the explanation for that is. Also, in the bipolar map I suspect you would get a complicated set of points of longitude/latitude that don't match reality. If you plot the course on the Globe map I will use your example as a pattern and try it on one or both of the flat earth models.The simplest course is a Rhumb Line course. That is a course of a constant compass heading.
Thank you all for your responses. Please respond to me one more time.
I realize this is problem for both camps. But in the FE model, the pilot would need to constantly adjust the positioning of the plane so it's going slightly left or right so it looks like it's going straight but it's really going AROUND the circle. If you are a globe-earth person it seems to me the pilot would constantly need to adjust the plane DOWNWARDS slightly as a straight plane would fly further and further away from earth as it curves downward. Any comments?
Thank you all for your responses. Please respond to me one more time.The downwards "climb" would automatically happen with a plane that is in trim. For a plane to move farther away from the earth you would have to add energy via increasing power. Do a little study on a plane in trim and will see that a plane can stay the same distance from the center of the earth, ie consistant elevation, on a spherical body without input from the pilot. In really the pilot or auto-pilot is making lots of adjustments because of air turbulence. The deviation of 8" in a given mile would be unnoticeable. Some in the flat earth community is really fudging the math to make it seem like the downward trajectory is severe. From the planes perspective there is never more than 8" in a mile.
I realize this is problem for both camps. But in the FE model, the pilot would need to constantly adjust the positioning of the plane so it's going slightly left or right so it looks like it's going straight but it's really going AROUND the circle. If you are a globe-earth person it seems to me the pilot would constantly need to adjust the plane DOWNWARDS slightly as a straight plane would fly further and further away from earth as it curves downward. Any comments?