Bruce Rauner

• 2
Flight Paths
« on: September 24, 2018, 05:16:54 PM »
Hi all, new member here and this is my first post. I have always loved aircraft and was interested in flight patterns from a very early age. On a flat earth model, A flight path from say New York to London makes sense, but the flight path from aircraft that travel from Chile to Australia don't. This distance seems astronomical on a flat earth map. So how is this possible?

Sorry if I haven't been abiding by the posting rules, as I said before, I'm new here.

- Bruce

Bruce Rauner

• 2
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2018, 04:49:47 PM »

junker

• Planar Moderator
• 8953
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2018, 05:32:06 PM »

Please refrain from bumping threads that shortly after posting them. If people want to reply, they will, and sometimes it may be longer than a day (if at all).

RonJ

• 872
• ACTA NON VERBA
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2018, 10:23:36 PM »
It doesn't have to be a flight path.  Any path of a longer length will bring out the curved nature of the path around a globe.  Before I retired, I worked on ships that made the transit between China and the US.  The shortest distance between the two ports is known as a great circle route.  The airlines fly those paths as well, again because they are the shortest distance.  I've made countless long trips over the earth's oceans both on airplanes and on ships.  When you are burning fuel, which costs a bunch of money, you must take the shortest routes possible.  Just try to plot out a long course on a flat earth map.  You will quickly see that your path course and distance won't match what is actually needed to make the transit between point A and point B. Navigators know down to a 'gnat's ass' just how far it is between two ports.  Additionally they plot our position, hourly, on the chart. The accumulated time and distance is also noted.  If something doesn't match then it's looked into.  On a route that's a regular run, it would be hard to fool anyone. Both the airlines and shipping companies use charts that were drawn using a representation of the global earth.  There is no getting around the fact that they 'just work'.  I've seen it for myself, first hand.  All my old 'shipping buddies' would tell you the same thing.
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

geologyboy

• 3
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2019, 08:47:10 PM »
Hi all, new member here and this is my first post. I have always loved aircraft and was interested in flight patterns from a very early age. On a flat earth model, A flight path from say New York to London makes sense, but the flight path from aircraft that travel from Chile to Australia don't. This distance seems astronomical on a flat earth map. So how is this possible?

Sorry if I haven't been abiding by the posting rules, as I said before, I'm new here.

- Bruce

The earth is not flat. It's a ball, and flying from Chile to Australia or Australia to South Africa involves very simply flying around that ball. You can track planes online easy enough.

iamcpc

• 729
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2019, 10:15:14 PM »
Hi all, new member here and this is my first post. I have always loved aircraft and was interested in flight patterns from a very early age. On a flat earth model, A flight path from say New York to London makes sense, but the flight path from aircraft that travel from Chile to Australia don't. This distance seems astronomical on a flat earth map. So how is this possible?

Sorry if I haven't been abiding by the posting rules, as I said before, I'm new here.

- Bruce

1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
4. Which flights don't exist? Sydney to Buenos Aires in particular, or no flights exist at all? Because if Argentina and Australia are actually close, why fake a flight at all?
5. Point 5 kind of contradicts point 4. You are saying there are flights, but they are assisted by jet streams. But jet streams go in one direction - shouldn't the flight in the opposite direction be twice as slow?

You are not the first to ask such questions and you are not the last. How can the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/cartography on the wiki map be possible when they don't match the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/modern cartography.

This has been discussed so many times. I was also VERY curious about it. I got all the responses from a flight time superthread. (Pick any one of your rebuttals from the list below) Here's a link:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.0

-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 180 degrees the earth is flat.
-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 179.99984 degrees the earth is slightly concave.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121615#msg121615

-Distances between two cities which are far apart is unknown
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121996#msg121996

-Flight GPS systems are inaccurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122030#msg122030
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122441#msg122441

-GPS systems are based on a round earth therefore will give measurements/distances which support a round earth.
-Aircraft are using instruments which assume round earth coordinates which will support a round earth.
-There is no flat earth map.
-The difference in flight time is based off of flight speed which has yet to be proven.
-The airplane speed and range is based off round systems therefore will give speeds and ranges which support a round earth
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122359#msg122359

-plane speed measurements are unreliable
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122364#msg122364

-there are no flat earth flight programs, systems, GPS etc because the flat earth aircraft navigation fund is nonexistent.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122369#msg122369

-Triangulation as a measurement of distance can be inaccurate because the "known" locations used for triangulation are based on a round earth system
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122410#msg122410

-there are almost an infinite number of continental configurations (If a flight disproves flat earth continental configuration 23985729387592873 you then need to test continental configuration 23985729387592874).
-Groundspeed measurement instruments use a round earth coordinate system therefore will give results which support a round earth
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122411#msg122411

-proof is needed that mile measurements on a highway are accurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122423#msg122423

-Google maps is based on a round earth coordinate system
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122433#msg122433

-any navigation system based on longitude and latitude is a round earth navigation system (which is most likely used in all navigation systems)
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122655#msg122655

-any map, navigation, or measurement system which uses Latitude and Longitude in any way is inaccurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122664#msg122664

-That's not the map of the earth (a variant of there is no map of the earth)
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122672#msg122672

J-Man

• 608
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2019, 02:02:50 AM »

Of course Mark Sargent gives and explanation of flight paths for the flat earth and the very accepted map.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 02:05:11 AM by J-Man »
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

stack

• 1325
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2019, 07:52:30 AM »

Of course Mark Sargent gives and explanation of flight paths for the flat earth and the very accepted map.

Unfortunately for Mark Sargent all he proves here is that he's terrible at searching for non-stop flights and the "very accepted map" he uses, ironically, is an AE globe projection. Meaning it is derived from a globe.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

AllAroundTheWorld

• 2769
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2019, 09:27:24 AM »
Of course Mark Sargent gives and explanation of flight paths for the flat earth and the very accepted map.

Northern Hemisphere:

Distance from London to Las Vegas
Distance is 5236 miles

Direct flight time: 10h 50 minutes
That gives us an average speed of 483.32mph

Santiago to Melbourne
Distance is 7022 miles

Direct flight time is: 14h 45minutes

That gives us an average speed of 476mph

Weird that Mark Sargent spent a whole evening not finding anything and I spent about 15 minutes and found this.
Distances taken from https://www.timeanddate.com , one of the sites Sargent suggests

If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 6673
• Flat Earth Believer
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2019, 02:22:07 AM »
Seargant does say that there are a few claimed direct nonstops in the video.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

stack

• 1325
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2019, 02:38:17 AM »
Seargant does say that there are a few claimed direct nonstops in the video.

He does, in a way, around the 6:00 mark. He states that you may find one. But then basically launches into the "GPS is a part of the conspiracy, maps are wrong, pilots are too afraid to bring it up, everyone is doing it wrong" thing, peppered with fuel/speed/distance nonsense. Like airlines and their crew don't calculate down to the gallon/mph/mile.  If they didn't there would be planes dropping out of the sky by the thousands.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 6673
• Flat Earth Believer
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2019, 02:52:01 AM »
Planes make unscheduled stops for fuel on supposed "nonstop" flight all of the time.

Annoyed by a fuel stop on your direct flight?

Nonstop Flights Stop for Fuel

Air travel: So-called nonstop flights now stop for fuel

The airliners basically do anything they want.

The travel industry only appears to consider stops with passenger exchanges as stops. If bus stopped for fuel on a 29 stop route, would the route be advertised to customers as 29 stops or 30 stops?
« Last Edit: January 12, 2019, 03:02:40 AM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

stack

• 1325
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2019, 03:16:11 AM »
Planes make unscheduled stops for fuel on supposed "nonstop" flight all of the time.

Annoyed by a fuel stop on your direct flight?

Nonstop Flights Stop for Fuel

Air travel: So-called nonstop flights now stop for fuel

The airliners basically do anything they want.

The travel industry only appears to consider stops with passenger exchanges as stops. If bus stopped for fuel on a 29 stop route, would the route be advertised to customers as 29 stops or 30 stops?

Sure, it’s called weather. From the articles you referenced:

"Dozens of Continental Airlines flights to the East Coast from Europe have been forced to make unexpected stops in Canada and elsewhere to take on fuel after running into unusually strong headwinds over the Atlantic Ocean.”

“Be aware that so-called nonstop flights now stop for fuel. Flights to the East Coast from Europe are being forced to make dozens of totally unexpected stops in Canada and elsewhere to take on fuel after running into unusually strong head winds over the Atlantic Ocean."

But tons of non-stop flights exist that are not diverted due to weather. I fail to see your point. Just have a look at historical flight data. It's not hard.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 6673
• Flat Earth Believer
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2019, 03:25:10 AM »
Planes make fuel stops when they want and call it what they want. You said that it was based on careful planning, yet we see numerous articles complaining of nonstop flights making fuel stops.

Can you provide a source on the flight data that doesn't come from NASA?

See the following video at 15:07:

« Last Edit: January 12, 2019, 03:28:13 AM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

stack

• 1325
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2019, 03:47:07 AM »
Planes make fuel stops when they want and call it what they want. You said that it was based on careful planning, yet we see numerous articles complaining of nonstop flights making fuel stops.

Sure, but your logic is that ALL non-stop flights make a fuel stop. But not all do. So, again, I don't see your point.

Can you provide a source on the flight data that doesn't come from NASA?

See the following video at 15:07:

Maybe, watched the vid, haven't looked into it. Give me a bit. In the mean time, can you provide a source that all worldwide flight data flows through NASA? But, to put a fine point on it, in the short run, your argument is that all flight travel data, worldwide, flows through NASA?

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

AllAroundTheWorld

• 2769
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2019, 07:38:00 AM »
Seargant does say that there are a few claimed direct nonstops in the video.
So what is the issue then?
After I wrote the above post I looked at the comments on Sargent’s video and it was full of people saying they’d personally flown the route I found and other similar ones.
Of course those comments were often followed by FE people calling them liars but that’s a lazy argument. You can “prove” anything if you ignore or call lies anything which shows you to be wrong.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

AllAroundTheWorld

• 2769
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #16 on: January 12, 2019, 08:45:12 AM »
Planes make unscheduled stops for fuel on supposed "nonstop" flight all of the time.

I think the key word there is "unscheduled". The first article says that one airline had to do it twice in January and another airline only did it once all year. So it's not something which happens often. It also explains why they sometimes have to do that.

The second article says that "dozens" of flights had to make stops - it doesn't say what percentage that is - but it also explains why and it's clear that this is the exception rather than the rule. You have to subscribe to read the whole thing.
The third article is not accessible from the UK for some legal reason.

I have never been on a non-stop flight which has stopped. Clearly it happens sometimes but the idea that they "do what they like" is ludicrous. The airline industry is highly competitive, any airline that "did what they liked" would quickly go out of business as people would use alternatives.

I'm not clear how you think any of this helps FE theory. Are you trying to cast doubt on the whole airline industry? Are they all "in on it" too?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

edby

• 1093
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #17 on: January 12, 2019, 09:52:42 AM »
I thought of starting an FE investigation on southern flight paths across the ocean, but they are kind of dull, because they fly across the ocean and nothing much to see. But FYI here are three of them now

As I write (09:40 UCT) I can see 3 aircraft over the South Pacific.

LAN800 Auckland Santiago
QF27     Sydney Santiago
ANZ30 Auckland Buenos Aires

None of these flights tend to make unscheduled stops, o/a of the whole flight (except ANZ30) is across the ocean. I calculate LAN800 should be flying at a speed of around 2,300km/h, based on the AE projection. According to the website (which may be lying) speed is actually around 900 km/h.

RonJ

• 872
• ACTA NON VERBA
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #18 on: January 12, 2019, 03:19:58 PM »
The idea that the airlines can 'do anything they want' is not completely true.  Yes, they can decide to offer a direct flight between any two airports they want, but are then faced with lots of federal/international regulations regarding that flight.  Additionally the airline has to believe that the seats in the plane would be filled, otherwise why offer a flight if will be a money looser?  Surprise, an airline is a company and has to receive more revenue from ticket sales than they pay in expenses, on the average, or they can't stay in business.  Any direct flight has to be flown by a plane that has sufficient range with ample reserve capacity at the end of the flight.  There are a lot of international regulations regarding the maximum distance a aircraft can be from an emergency field during the flight.  This distance depends a lot on the type of aircraft being flown (two engine or four).

In my personal experience, I would say that most non-stop long haul flights are conducted without stopping.  I've been on quite a few over the years and can only remember 1 where a stop was necessary.  It was a direct flight from Chicago to Hong Kong.  The weather had been bad the whole route and there was a potential weather problem in Hong Kong as well.  We landed at Beijing, China and took on some fuel and waited on the ramp for about 2 hours until the situation got better.  It was a good thing too, because we had to be in a holding pattern for about 30 minutes at Hong Kong because the previous delays had traffic backed up.

I have held a commercial pilot's license myself for a lot of years.  Any flight I planned always had to have enough fuel for the entire route as well as sufficient reserve for unexpected circumstances.  If your projected reserve is used up along the way due to weather or weather related diversions, then it's time to land somewhere and get more fuel and/or wait on the ground until things in the air become more favorable for you to continue.

What would be the potential consequences of not doing that?  You could die, along with all your passengers.  It's better be safe than sorry.  I didn't blame the pilot for a second on my Chicago to Hong Kong flight.  I wanted to arrive safely.
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

edby

• 1093
Re: Flight Paths
« Reply #19 on: January 13, 2019, 02:39:11 PM »
Looks as though LAN800 got in successfully and on time yesterday (12 Jan). It's now 3 hours into today's flight from Auckland. I will report back tomorrow.

[EDIT]
Looking also at LA804 Melbourne Santiago. On the flight track website the flight path looks weirdly curved. However the Google Earth shows it as straight. It’s almost as if the earth were a globe.

« Last Edit: January 13, 2019, 02:47:35 PM by edby »