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 - Gonzo

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4  Next >
41
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Sydney to Santiago Flight path
« on: April 01, 2022, 05:50:58 AM »
Try to actually book a ticket OP. You'll see that they will always want to take you along a route that makes sense on a flat earth and no sense on a globe.

See my thread below for:
Perth (Australia) ---------> Buenos Aires (Argentina)

Auckland (New Zealand) ---------> Cape town (Africa)

forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=19211.0

You can currently book Auckland - Santiago direct with LATAM, as well as Sydney to Jo'burg as stack says.

42
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
« on: March 31, 2022, 01:36:04 PM »
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?
Yep.

It was a dot, traveling rather fast.

I'd recommend using some decent binoculars or even a telescope, it’s quite easy to make out the shape.

43
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: ISS Photo From The Ground
« on: March 31, 2022, 11:53:35 AM »
No need to call anyone an idiot, the photographer is a well known astrophotographer.

Action80, have you seen the ISS go overhead?

44
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Sydney to Santiago Flight path
« on: March 31, 2022, 08:45:25 AM »
To be fair I've never seen any flightpath that doesn't make sense on the globe, when one considers all the factors used in flight planning and route selection.

45
Flat Earth Theory / Re: ECHOSTAR (Private Satellite) Earth footage?
« on: March 30, 2022, 06:22:41 AM »
I'm not sure the fact someone has written and published a book is a particularly high bar for quality content.
Hey, at least you identified a fact today.

Progress in action, step by step.

Lovely to hear from you again, I’d really appreciate it if you could point out where I’ve not been using facts.

46
Flat Earth Theory / Re: ECHOSTAR (Private Satellite) Earth footage?
« on: March 29, 2022, 11:32:56 AM »
I'm not sure the fact someone has written and published a book is a particularly high bar for quality content.

47
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 26, 2022, 10:53:28 PM »


You posted a bunch of reasons why flights might be diverted, but zero reasons for why they would be diverted to a place that would make a straight line between the destinations on a Flat Earth Azimuthal map.

No Tom.

I posted a non-exhaustive list of factors considered when choosing where to divert.

That ‘book’ claims that because a flight diverted to airport A instead of airport B, when it clearly (in the author’ mind) should have gone to airport B, that this is evidence of flat earth. No. It’s merely evidence that the flight diverted to airport A.

So still no explanation for why it occurs. Convincing.

An explanation for why what occurs?

Have a look at a sample of, for example, the routes taken by flight HAL50 from KHNL-KJFK. One can see the route varies quite a bit, sometimes coasting in near LA, other days over San Francisco, and sometimes even near Seattle. This would be down to many factors of course, but mainly the upper winds and any airspace restrictions and the need to avoid the resultant delays (a major factor in the flight planning of international flights is the difference in airspace route charges between nations (not a factor here, of course). A longer flight burning more fuel might work out less costly overall if it avoids flying through an expensive FIR (Flight Information Region)).

The 'book' claims in Chapter 15 that the aircraft should have landed in LA as that would be closer, the author not realising a) that flight routes vary over time, especially oceanic routes, and b) that the Great Circle route from KHNL to KJFK actually passes almost straight over San Francisco itself, rather than over LA as he claims.

It's incredible that some here seem to hold this 'book' up as evidence of anything other than the author's lack of understanding and knowledge of aviation.

48
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 26, 2022, 06:17:33 PM »

Yeah, you see the data as part of your job.

And it doesn't include data from significant regions.

And, other than some internet jockey making a ridiculous claim, "government could not or would not interfere with that data!" there is no evidence that the government could or would not interfere.

I did look at that very nice PowerPoint slide show from ADS-B marketers.

Fancy, but likely false. Ground-based transponders are still operational (and still maintained for dependable operation) located all across the flat earth, performing the exact same functions.

Can you explain how you think ground-based transponders would interfere with or plot false tracks of aircraft over the ocean?
I never said transponders are interfering with or plotting false tracking for aircraft. I'm not even going to entertain your obvious troll.

I don't care what your name is, I don't care where you are from, and I don't believe a single word you typed here on this thread.

I'm done responding to you.

Sorry, you'll definitely have to expand on this one.


Ok, I must be mistaken then. In your view, what are these ground based transponders doing?

49
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 26, 2022, 04:17:50 PM »
In-flight diversions are a lot more complex than just diverting to the ‘nearest airport’, as some (including the author of that ‘book’) seem to think.

Most international airlines use a service based in Phoenix, AZ called MedLink MedAire. This is a 24/7 operation staffed by ER doctors which is the first port of call for aircraft in the air when there’s a sick passenger.
They will advise the airline on the best course of action.
Factors that need to be considered in choosing a diversion airport:
•   If it’s a medical diversion, is the patient stable? Is it every second counts?
•   Medical care facilities at the airport, and wider area
•   Runway length, runway strength, taxiway strength, anticipated aircraft landing weight
•   Weather now and forecast
•   Air traffic control provision
•   Airport fire fighting and rescue cover
•   Fuel and aircraft servicing provision (hydraulic fuel, lubricants, steps to reach the aircraft, baggage facilities, towing capability)
•   Does the airline have contracts in place with companies at the proposed diversion airport?
•   Engineer/mechanic provision
•   Flight crew duty hours
•   Relief crew position
•   Passenger services (immigration/customs)
•   Accommodation for crew and passengers
•   Distance from aircraft (to be comfortable for passengers, most airliners require about 10nm for every 3000ft of altitude. The descent rate could be increased somewhat if it was an emergency, but you’re still talking nearly 100nm from 35,000ft).
•   Passengers on board (do they need visas to land at proposed diversion? Will they be kept on board for hours while the situation is sorted out?).
•   Are there vulnerable passengers on board (i.e. people whom one country would be very keen to get their hands on? (for example the relatively recent incident over Belarus)) .
•   Political concerns (i.e. A US flight might go another 20-30nm to avoid diverting to Iran and making it to UAE).
These are factors I have just come up with, and no doubt there are many more to be considered.

To second guess why a crew made a decision to divert to a particular airport with no knowledge of most of these factors (as the 'book' does) is naive in the extreme.

Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!

You posted a bunch of reasons why flights might be diverted, but zero reasons for why they would be diverted to a place that would make a straight line between the destinations on a Flat Earth Azimuthal map.

No Tom.

I posted a non-exhaustive list of factors considered when choosing where to divert.

That ‘book’ claims that because a flight diverted to airport A instead of airport B, when it clearly (in the author’ mind) should have gone to airport B, that this is evidence of flat earth. No. It’s merely evidence that the flight diverted to airport A.

50
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 25, 2022, 10:31:19 PM »

Yeah, you see the data as part of your job.

And it doesn't include data from significant regions.

And, other than some internet jockey making a ridiculous claim, "government could not or would not interfere with that data!" there is no evidence that the government could or would not interfere.

I did look at that very nice PowerPoint slide show from ADS-B marketers.

Fancy, but likely false. Ground-based transponders are still operational (and still maintained for dependable operation) located all across the flat earth, performing the exact same functions.

Can you explain how you think ground-based transponders would interfere with or plot false tracks of aircraft over the ocean? Where's the evidence for them performing the same functions (same functions as what? Transponders in aircraft?

Oh no, I have access to global data, perhaps I wasn't clear. It's just not my direct job. I've been working with ADS-B for over ten years. I actually represent my country on European and global working groups on the subject. A group of us was discussing ADS-B accuracy in the SE Pacific only last week on an MS Teams call.

It's so tempting to sit in ignorance and say 'I don't know, therefore I can claim it's all made up/fake/government interference', isn't it?

As for 'some internet jockey', yeah not really. My name is Adam Spink, you can find me pretty easily on Twitter or Instagram. You know where I work. I've even written a few blog posts for my employer at NATS.aero/blog. I use the same forum username on the Professional Pilot Rumour Network (mainly sticking the the ATC Issues forum) where you'll find my posts, and the Flyer Magazine General Aviation forum, where my username is GonzoEGLL. Nice to meet you.

Quote
No significant changes to routes commonly used for hundreds of years have occurred

Sorry, you'll definitely have to expand on this one.

51
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 25, 2022, 03:41:23 PM »
Quite.

The fact that FR24 doesn't present ADS-B location data there doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It just means they've made a commercial decision not to pay for it.

I see the data as part of my job, certainly from flights over the N. Atlantic.

52
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 25, 2022, 12:05:24 PM »
Does it stem from this?

Quote
They do not even bother posting fake real time data of FR24 for these supposed AU to SA flights, so the claim gubment cannot fake any of it, or even all of it, at the exact same time, is just nonsense.

53
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 25, 2022, 11:42:41 AM »

In this case, there's no such data to begin with.


Can you explain what you mean here, please? What data are you saying doesn't exist?

54
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 24, 2022, 04:03:39 PM »
Buy your own equipment, or get it for free, and verify ADS-B for yourself. Anyone can do it. Simple.


55
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 24, 2022, 12:42:33 PM »
Correct.

It's literally part of my job to verify ADS-B data, and investigate mismatches between that and ATC radar-derived position data.

We rely on ADS-B data over the ocean to ensure aircraft maintain the required separation. There would be TCAS alerts going off all over the place if aircraft weren't where their ADS-B position claimed them to be on the scale you suggest.

And again, you can buy your own receiver and verify this yourself. Get a friend to do the same and you could even triangulate the broadcasts yourself to provide another level of verification. Can you explain how you think a government could interfere with this.

Action80, many airlines and engine manufacturers track their own aircraft/engines as they fly, often through technologies other than ADS-B. Do you think they have the correct position or is that being interfered with too? Do you think flight crews know their true position? I'm trying to understand what you're claiming here. What makes you think this interference going on? Genuine question.

56
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 21, 2022, 02:28:21 PM »
Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!
What do you mean to communicate here:

"Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data"

I apologise, I thought it was pretty clear.

ADS-B receivers are abvailable to purchase, or receive free of charge in association with one of the many flight tracker wensites out there.

If you are really paranoid, you can plug them into your computer to build your own flight tracker (with limited horizon of around 100-150 miles). you receive the aircraft's transmissions and that shows you on your computer the location of the aircraft. You don't even need an internet connection. What opportunity are you seeing for anyone to interfere with the data in this case?

A large part of my job is verifying ADS-B data for accuracy (we compare it to ATC radar data to safety assure its use to provide separation between aircraft). If there were major issues with ADS-B accuracy it wouldn't be used.

(edit to remove an errant apostrophe)

57
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 21, 2022, 01:06:30 PM »
There have been a few claims in this thread regarding flight tracking/ADS-B and in-flight diversions. Thought I’d collect some thoughts.

First, a short intro.

I’ve been an air traffic controller at London Heathrow for 23 years, In the last 14 years I’ve been working in our Operations department. As part of that I’ve worked on developing and introducing operational ATC ADS-B systems (including comparing accuracy to ATC radar data), analysed and worked with commercial flight trackers (one of my duties is to help respond to noise complaints and queries from local residents using FR24 etc)

A few notes on Flight trackers.

FR24 and other commercial trackers use various methods of determining position.

ADS-B – this is where the aircraft is effectively continually broadcasting a message, and part of that message is its own location.
    - Note that in some cases, particularly older aircraft, this ‘own location’ may not be derived from GNSS signals, and may even be determined by what we call DME/DME triangulation (DME – Distance Measuring Equipment – a ground-based radio beacon, often co-located with a VOR navigation aid).
    - You only need one antenna/receiver to pick up these signals and plot locations. You can buy these for less than $100 and FR24 and others will send you one for free if you then connect up and feed their network.
    - Some flight trackers have a commercial agreement with satellite-based ADS-B providers that feed ATC systems for over the ocean flying, away from ground-based ATC radar cover.

Some aircraft aren’t fitted with ADS-B, or can turn ADS-B broadcasts off. In this case, the aircraft’s transponder (sometimes called SSR – Secondary Surveillance Radar) will be used. This is the aircraft sending out signals in response to a pulse from a ground-based ATC radar. This response from the transponder does not include the aircraft’s position, but ATC radar will merge the information received with the Primary radar (energy being reflected back from the aircraft received at the same time as the transponder response) to provide location on ATC radar screens. Flight tracking apps (with one exception – I’ll come to later) don’t have access to this, so they use a multilateration system. Mode S transponder receivers again are pretty cheap to buy (or provided free as above), and FR24 et al use triangulation to provide position data on non-ADS-B aircraft.

The exception that I know if is an iPad-only app called ‘NATS Airspace Explorer’ which is a flight tracking app provided by NATS, the main ATC provider in the UK. It takes a feed from the actual ATC radar system (anywhere in UK airspace above about 1000ft apart from over mountains) rather than ADS-B. It’s what controllers are seeing on their screen in real time.

There are some aircraft that won’t show up on FR24 et al even if they are broadcasting ADS-B. Aircraft owners can apply to be on a list of suppressed aircraft, this is mainly done for commercial or security/govt. sensitivity reasons.

However, the website-based tracker ADSBExchange.com does not use any filtering. It’s a crowdsourced organization and those suppressed aircraft will show up if they are using ADS-B.

Accuracy of ADS-B.

As I said earlier, ADS-B information is now being used operationally in many countries, especially in the USA. I think now around 150 US airports use ADS-B info overlaid on their radar screens, and, as the ONLY source of position information over the world’s oceans out of ATC radar cover. Bearing in mind that you or I could buy an ADS-B receiver to feed flight trackers I’m not sure on what basis any government organisation could ‘interfere’ with that data

In-flight diversions

There was a comment earlier on the thread:
“Aeronautics credentials are not required to connect three points on a map.”

In-flight diversions are a lot more complex than just diverting to the ‘nearest airport’, as some (including the author of that ‘book’) seem to think.

Most international airlines use a service based in Phoenix, AZ called MedLink MedAire. This is a 24/7 operation staffed by ER doctors which is the first port of call for aircraft in the air when there’s a sick passenger.
They will advise the airline on the best course of action.
Factors that need to be considered in choosing a diversion airport:
•   If it’s a medical diversion, is the patient stable? Is it every second counts?
•   Medical care facilities at the airport, and wider area
•   Runway length, runway strength, taxiway strength, anticipated aircraft landing weight
•   Weather now and forecast
•   Air traffic control provision
•   Airport fire fighting and rescue cover
•   Fuel and aircraft servicing provision (hydraulic fuel, lubricants, steps to reach the aircraft, baggage facilities, towing capability)
•   Does the airline have contracts in place with companies at the proposed diversion airport?
•   Engineer/mechanic provision
•   Flight crew duty hours
•   Relief crew position
•   Passenger services (immigration/customs)
•   Accommodation for crew and passengers
•   Distance from aircraft (to be comfortable for passengers, most airliners require about 10nm for every 3000ft of altitude. The descent rate could be increased somewhat if it was an emergency, but you’re still talking nearly 100nm from 35,000ft).
•   Passengers on board (do they need visas to land at proposed diversion? Will they be kept on board for hours while the situation is sorted out?).
•   Are there vulnerable passengers on board (i.e. people whom one country would be very keen to get their hands on? (for example the relatively recent incident over Belarus)) .
•   Political concerns (i.e. A US flight might go another 20-30nm to avoid diverting to Iran and making it to UAE).
These are factors I have just come up with, and no doubt there are many more to be considered.

To second guess why a crew made a decision to divert to a particular airport with no knowledge of most of these factors (as the 'book' does) is naive in the extreme.

Happy to answer any questions on the above, if I can!

58
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 20, 2022, 08:54:33 AM »
That ‘book’ on ‘16 Emergency Landings’ is written by someone who has no working knowledge of flight planning, nor of handling in-flight emergencies and the practical, political and financial decisions made during them.

When I have time I’ll go through it and explain why things most likely happened as they did.

59
So let’s get something straight… you come and pick two routes you know don’t have direct flights, in order to make your argument work. But you know it doesn’t, so then you falsify the routes the non-direct flights take, in an attempt to shore up that argument?

Nice.

I’ll ask again, why not start from an actual flight route that’s followed by actual flights?

60
New question.. Why are there never any planes in the Southern Hemisphere on flight radar?



Let me guess.. Covid or Putin.

Many reasons.

As has been said, the vast majority of people are in the Northern hemisphere.
Also, there are more population centres further to the north (in the N hemisphere) than they are to the south (in the S hemisphere).

You just have to look at your screenshot of FR24…. Look at the location of the equator, then look at the amount of populated land mass above that dotted line and compare it to the populated land mass below the line.

But given all of that, the effect of Covid is significant. It’s impact on countries such as S Africa, New Zealand and Australia over the past few years, aviation is nowhere near what it was in 2019 when there were more direct flights between S hemisphere cities than there are now. Think about where the flights you think should be in the areas of your question marks would be flying to and from. S. America and Australia/NZ, Aus/NZ and S Africa, S. Africa and S America.

I work at London Heathrow airport, before Covid there were around 30 flights a day (so maybe 6000 passenger seats per day) to New York, because London and New York are incredibly important global cities with many business links and high travel demand.

I don’t think one can compare that city pair to Perth and Buenos Aires.

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4  Next >