*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2019, 02:23:24 AM »
A service ceiling isn't the same as the flight levels you fly. I just checked aircraft in Europe right now. Of 604 airline aircraft I can see, not one single one of them is at FL410 or above. https://www.flightradar24.com/51.54,-0.67/5

I wouldn't think short hops over Europe would climb that high either. But I dragged the map over the Atlantic and literally the first one I randomly clicked on was this:

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

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2019, 11:14:18 AM »
saying something is not allowed when it actually is allowed is incorrect.
It is not allowed. We have already agreed on that. Pay attention. The only contention here is whether we implied that it's legally not allowed - which I already acknowledged the possibility of (even if I strongly disagree with the idea that everyone would misread it in such a silly way), and said I'd fix it.

So, aside from reheating stale arguments that were already resolved, do you have anything remotely useful to say?

But hey what do I know I'm just one of those pesky roundheads!
Sadly, yes. You have a track record of jumping into discussions without having read them fully, introducing ridiculous technical objections which simply rely on you being emotional. You actively look for things to disagree with, and in the process you forget to sanity check what you're saying. Suddenly, there's an objection you've always had, but it just so happened that you didn't think to voice it until after it was discussed and a compromise was reached. Get out.

Ok, lets put some actual facts into this.
Thank you, Thork, that's exactly the kind of expertise I was looking for. I should have thought to ask you in the first place.

Would the following be a reasonable summary?
  • Hypothetical curvature only visually discernible from above 60,000ft (we could cite Lynch on that)
  • Commercial aircraft are built to cruise at much lower altitudes, usually topping off at 45,000ft
  • In practice, it would be very uncommon for ATC to assign anything higher than 41,000ft (I understand that even that is super uncommon, but you can see what kind of crowd we're dealing with here, and it doesn't weaken our claim anyway)

Any SERIOUS objections to the above will be considered. More bickering about whether or not your mum saying you're not allowed to play video games tonight is the same as being legally prohibited from playing video games will be treated as off-topic.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2019, 11:19:46 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2019, 06:18:37 AM »
Ok, lets put some actual facts into this.

So in 1982 they changed the rules on how close aircraft could be to each other. So instead of stacking them every 2000 feet, they could now stack them every 1000 feet. This was done for altitudes between FL290 and FL410. It was called RVSM. Reduced Vertical Separation Minima.
https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Reduced_Vertical_Separation_Minima_(RVSM)

This is important. There is no FL420. The next one from FL410 is FL430. Now we are back to 2000ft jumps, not 1000ft. Its a big stretch.


So
Muh Boeing 747-100 in 1969, its maximum ceiling was 45,100 feet
is a moot point. Air traffic control aren't going to give you a FL430.

Why not, like what the hell is with 41,000ft? Well it is mostly a kind of legacy hard ceiling myth legend type thing.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-7gvtZkKKP4C&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=highest+flight+level+you+have+ever+received?&source=bl&ots=U7vUMzBnMB&sig=ACfU3U1naog-MFxu9pJ4JFmr_yRP4FQNOw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj4yNXxxPzlAhWSRMAKHf_hAqQ4KBDoATAEegQIExAB#v=onepage&q=highest%20flight%20level%20you%20have%20ever%20received%3F&f=false

The same wisdom prevails today. The air traffic guy isn't going to even dream of giving you something over 41,000ft. Its not even going to cross his mind. Those altitudes are for the military and rich pricks flying private jets that high purely because they can and want to let everyone on the radio know they have lots of money. And he's going to give the jet FL390 and they'll ask for FL510 and he's going to roll his eyes and say fine.  ::)

And even if your airliner has a service ceiling of 45,000ft, you're not going to be given FL450. You aren't even going to be given FL410. You might get offered FL410 a handful of times in a 30 year career (usually only possible when you are re-positioning the aircraft and its pretty empty). You'll tell your mates you got offered it. You'll remember the flight. You'll sit gawping at the altimeter as it slowly clicks up and you'll probably make a little announcement for the passengers if you have any to let them know that they should probably buy a lottery ticket this week.

commercial aircraft can and do cruise at altitudes of up to 45,000ft
So this is bullshit.

A service ceiling isn't the same as the flight levels you fly. I just checked aircraft in Europe right now. Of 604 airline aircraft I can see, not one single one of them is at FL410 or above. https://www.flightradar24.com/51.54,-0.67/5

Altitudes are assigned based on direction (heading) of travel, even altitudes heading west (180-360), and odd altitudes heading east (360-180). Aircraft can and are assigned levels such as FL420 etc. Additionally, aircraft fly at FL410 quite often. I've been flying the 737-700 for just over a year now and have flown at FL410 more than a "handful" of times, especially flying Trans-Atlantic or Pacific. Unless there is a reason not to, you are given the altitude you request. The altitude you request is based on a number of factors including weight, fuel consumption, winds aloft, total distance, etc.

*

Offline Baby Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 2252
  • I am Baby Thork. Hear me roar!
    • View Profile
Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #23 on: November 25, 2019, 05:36:57 PM »
Aircraft can and are assigned levels such as FL420 etc.
I will bet you have never ever flown FL420. I'll also bet you don't even know anyone who has ever flown FL420.

Additionally, aircraft fly at FL410 quite often. I've been flying the 737-700 for just over a year now and have flown at FL410 more than a "handful" of times, especially flying Trans-Atlantic or Pacific. Unless there is a reason not to, you are given the altitude you request. The altitude you request is based on a number of factors including weight, fuel consumption, winds aloft, total distance, etc.
I think we can agree, FL410 is an exception rather than the rule. You'll fly FL330-FL390 far more often.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2019, 06:03:04 PM »
Aircraft can and are assigned levels such as FL420 etc.
I will bet you have never ever flown FL420. I'll also bet you don't even know anyone who has ever flown FL420.

Additionally, aircraft fly at FL410 quite often. I've been flying the 737-700 for just over a year now and have flown at FL410 more than a "handful" of times, especially flying Trans-Atlantic or Pacific. Unless there is a reason not to, you are given the altitude you request. The altitude you request is based on a number of factors including weight, fuel consumption, winds aloft, total distance, etc.
I think we can agree, FL410 is an exception rather than the rule. You'll fly FL330-FL390 far more often.

I have been a passenger on an aircraft at FL420 (Dubai to Dulles) but I have not piloted an aircraft above FL410, since that is the max service ceiling of the aircraft I currently fly, as we all as the highest max of any aircraft I've flown. Additionally, I know plenty of pilots who have flown FL420 and higher, especially in military aircraft (mostly EA/FA-18, EA-6B).

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2019, 01:29:00 PM »
Would the following be a reasonable summary?
  • Hypothetical curvature only visually discernible from above 60,000ft (we could cite Lynch on that)
  • Commercial aircraft are built to cruise at much lower altitudes, usually topping off at 45,000ft
  • In practice, it would be very uncommon for ATC to assign anything higher than 41,000ft (I understand that even that is super uncommon, but you can see what kind of crowd we're dealing with here, and it doesn't weaken our claim anyway)
In the absence of objections or further feedback, I decided to lean on a USA Today article as a reference point. The Q/A now reads as follows:

As a passenger on an aircraft, how is it I can see the curvature of the Earth?
Quite simply, you cannot.

If the Earth were round, one would need to observe it from an altitude of 60,000ft in ideal atmospheric conditions (assuming a field of view of at least 90°) to have a clear view of the supposed curvature. Commercial aircraft do not fly this high. Generally, cruising altitudes vary between 33,000ft and 42,000ft, with 36,000ft being a commonly-cited figure. In addition, the windows on commercial aircraft are small and heavily curved. Even if they flew high enough for a person to see curvature, it would still not be visible to passengers.

It is likely that those claiming to have personally visually discerned curvature from an aeroplane are experiencing a form of confirmation bias.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2019, 03:50:26 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #26 on: November 26, 2019, 03:51:24 PM »
Would the following be a reasonable summary?
  • Hypothetical curvature only visually discernible from above 60,000ft (we could cite Lynch on that)
  • Commercial aircraft are built to cruise at much lower altitudes, usually topping off at 45,000ft
  • In practice, it would be very uncommon for ATC to assign anything higher than 41,000ft (I understand that even that is super uncommon, but you can see what kind of crowd we're dealing with here, and it doesn't weaken our claim anyway)
In the absence of objections or further feedback, I decided to lean on a USA Today article as a reference point. The Q/A now reads as follows:

As a passenger on an aircraft, how is it I can see the curvature of the Earth?
Quite simply, you cannot.

If the Earth were round, one would need to observe it from an altitude of 60,000ft in ideal atmospheric conditions (assuming a field of view of at least 90°) to have a clear view of the supposed curvature. Commercial aircraft do not fly this high. Generally, cruising altitudes vary between 33,000ft and 42,000ft, with 36,000ft being a commonly-cited figure. In addition, the windows on commercial aircraft are small and heavily curved. Even if they flew high enough for a person to see curvature, it would still not be visible to passengers.

It is likely that those claiming to have personally visually discerned curvature from an aeroplane are experiencing a form of confirmation bias.


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

Re: Question regarding the FAQ & Answers on the Wiki page
« Reply #27 on: December 04, 2019, 04:48:17 PM »
Would the following be a reasonable summary?
  • Hypothetical curvature only visually discernible from above 60,000ft (we could cite Lynch on that)
  • Commercial aircraft are built to cruise at much lower altitudes, usually topping off at 45,000ft
  • In practice, it would be very uncommon for ATC to assign anything higher than 41,000ft (I understand that even that is super uncommon, but you can see what kind of crowd we're dealing with here, and it doesn't weaken our claim anyway)
In the absence of objections or further feedback, I decided to lean on a USA Today article as a reference point. The Q/A now reads as follows:

As a passenger on an aircraft, how is it I can see the curvature of the Earth?
Quite simply, you cannot.

If the Earth were round, one would need to observe it from an altitude of 60,000ft in ideal atmospheric conditions (assuming a field of view of at least 90°) to have a clear view of the supposed curvature. Commercial aircraft do not fly this high. Generally, cruising altitudes vary between 33,000ft and 42,000ft, with 36,000ft being a commonly-cited figure. In addition, the windows on commercial aircraft are small and heavily curved. Even if they flew high enough for a person to see curvature, it would still not be visible to passengers.

It is likely that those claiming to have personally visually discerned curvature from an aeroplane are experiencing a form of confirmation bias.
I just noticed you made this correction.

Well done.