[GreatATuin]

According to Wikipedia, Tahiti is the largest island of the Windward group of the Society Islands in French Polynesia, located in the central part of the Pacific Ocean. On the island, there is the only international airport in the region, Faa'a International Airport.

There are more, but let's focus on two flights :

Air Tahiti Nui flight TN 102: Auckland - Los Angeles via Tahiti (this route is the usual way to go from Tahiti to mainland France: as there are no direct flights to Paris, people fly to LAX and from there to CDG)

LATAM Airlines Group flight LA 836: Tahiti - Santiago via Easter Island (weekly flight, Easter Island is a popular destination for Tahitians or tourists visiting Polynesia - except of course when there is a lockdown in place)

Let's calculate the distances for each segment, and match with the typical scheduled time:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=AKL-PPT-LAX
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=PPT-IPC-SCL

AKL-PPT: 2,544 mi, 4:45h
PPT-LAX: 4,095 mi, 7:41h

PPT-IPC: 2,644 mi, 5:05h
IPC-SCL: 2,335 mi, 4:30h

Now, how would that work on a flat Earth?

On a bipolar model, it's simple, it doesn't work at all. You can't go from Auckland to Santiago via Papeete and Easter Island over the Pacific Ocean. At least one of these flights cannot exist.

On a "standard" monopole, such as the popular azimuthal equidistant projection, the segments could be possible but the distances don't match at all: Tahiti appears closer to Los Angeles than to Easter Island or Auckland, while the PPT-LAX flight actually takes approximately 50% longer, which is consistent with the calculated great circle distances. Moreover, if you sum Auckland-Papeete, Papeete-Easter Island, Easter Island-Santiago, it would take just over 14 hours. Compare the sum of distances on any flat Earth monopole map to the distance of a direct flight from Rome to Los Angeles that takes 13 hours. Even without stopovers, Auckland-Santiago is more than twice as long. These flights would need to be supersonic.

Conclusion, either the information on these flights is false (they don't exist at all, or their duration is seriously altered), either none of the proposed flat Earth maps is correct.

[spinningstars]

Fake, absolutely fake.

The data you provided is forged by the WHO and CIA.

[juner]

Fake, absolutely fake.

The data you provided is forged by the WHO and CIA.

Keep the shitposting in AR/CN. Warned.

[iamcpc]

Now, how would that work on a flat Earth?

The idea that known flight times, flight paths, and flight distances weaken the various different FE models is something that has been discussed dozens, if not hundreds of times. Here is a large array of responses:



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2046469#msg2046469

 "This flight has never been existed."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2044714#msg2044714
"Don't trust  aircraft companies such as Qantas and Latam by their claims about flight times. These are liars."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2045126#msg2045126
"If you find a video show full flight of a travel between Chile and Australia, then there will be a possiblity that path it exist."
-These flights only exist if you can produce a full video of the entire flight.



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2045413#msg2045413
-flying from Santiago, Chile to Sydney Australia in about 14 hours is impossible

-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

[Tom Bishop]

In addition to what iampc posted, I've posted some more information here on the topic: https://wiki.tfes.org/Distances_in_the_South

Sea travel claims have some questionable anomalies and international flights seem to heavily rely on high speed winds above the Earth to get around, and may not be an accurate scientific tool to determine the Earth's geography. Ie. If a flight had to re-route to a physically longer route on a particular day (they don't take the same day-by-day routes) or had to stop and refuel to get between two points you would tell me that it's just the winds, but if the plane made it in an expedient amount of time you would say that it's the RE. Basically biased subjectivity.

[DuncanDoenitz]

A recent Thread "Are Plane Tickets Real?"   ( https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15877.msg204861#msg204861 ) absolutely did-to-death the fact that flights are regularly taking place (for example) between New Zealand and South America, by several airlines, on schedule, using a Great Circle route, and that the outward and return-flight times are entirely consistent with published aircraft performance, prevailing winds and RE distances.  These flights take place several times a week, without fuel stops or mysterious cancellations.  Week after week. 

Regarding sea travel, another recent Post referencing Southern Ocean Sailing Races ( https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=16361.0 ) contained experiences from experienced sailors of the current century, again supporting RE distances. 

Whilst the Wiki has some fascinating anecdotes and quotes, it seems to be lacking (a bit like the "Ice Wall" topic) anything since the 19th Century.  Has TFES nothing more recent to add to the Sea Distances topic?  Can TFES provide any real data on the prevalence of airliners actually having to make unscheduled fuel stops? 

[iamcpc]

Has TFES nothing more recent to add to the Sea Distances topic?

Posts are made about how measured shipping times/distances and measured flight times/distances weaken many of the FE models almost every day. Did you not see the post I just made with like 20 responses to that statement?

Can TFES provide any real data on the prevalence of airliners actually having to make unscheduled fuel stops?

I'm sure it would not be hard to google airplane making unscheduled stops. Airplanes make unscheduled stops prolly every day because of medical emergencies, people getting into fights on the plane, hijackings, mechanical issues, fuel issues etc.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Has TFES nothing more recent to add to the Sea Distances topic?

Posts are made about how measured shipping times/distances and measured flight times/distances weaken many of the FE models almost every day. Did you not see the post I just made with like 20 responses to that statement?

Yup, read 'em, and a fine set of  responses they are, but Tom's response to your responses was just to trot out the "anomalies" line from the Wiki.  My point to Tom was that the Wiki focuses exclusively on quotes from the logs and journals of gentlemen in top hats.  Not that I've any objection to top hats and I've immense admiration and respect for the gentlemen concerned, but they are writing in the context of 18th and 19th Century knowledge, understanding and technology. 

Something from equally intrepid seafarers, post age-of-steam, would have at least as much relevance and should be in the Wiki. 

[iamcpc]

Yup, read 'em, and a fine set of  responses they are, but Tom's response to your responses was just to trot out the "anomalies" line from the Wiki.  My point to Tom was that the Wiki focuses exclusively on quotes from the logs and journals of gentlemen in top hats.  Not that I've any objection to top hats and I've immense admiration and respect for the gentlemen concerned, but they are writing in the context of 18th and 19th Century knowledge, understanding and technology. 

Something from equally intrepid seafarers, post age-of-steam, would have at least as much relevance and should be in the Wiki.

The thing that you have to understand is that the wiki primarily focuses on the FE round disk model with no dome and the north pole center.

To me the flight time/distance and the shipping time/distance data suggests that the model of the earth is something different than the flat disk north pole center model. I guess that is one response that I forgot to mention. A lot of effort is put into rebutting the observations and data and information which weaken this specific flat disk north pole center model instead of looking to see if another model could better or more easily explain these sets of observation/data/information.

[soakland]

On this topic, this has been documented by flat earthers that certain flights drop off the GPS system at certain longitude/latitudes. This is obviously deliberate and not by accident as it happens consistently and has been observed live on the web as so. If that is the case, and it is, it is no small feat to fake a flight. And I am sure that flight is not trackable from beginning to end either. They STILL cannot get around that international flights take the shortest route (which results in a nearly straight line on the flat earth map), and make no sense at all on a globe. That is because the earth is flat. TNOTE: these things don't take thousands of conspirators as some may claim. All it takes is a few at the top. As in any conspiracy fact.

[GreatATuin]

Would you mind being a little more specific? What flights, what latitude and longitude, documented by who, based on what evidence?

On every commercial flight I boarded, provided I had a window seat, I could get a GPS lock and position during the flights. Passengers on these flights can do it too.

[edby]

The thing that you have to understand is that the wiki primarily focuses on the FE round disk model with no dome and the north pole center.

Correct, because this is the only model that has a line of longitude as the shortest distance between two points, and observation suggests that a line of longitude is in fact the shortest distance between two points.

[Longtitube]

... this is the only model that has a line of longitude as the shortest distance between two points, and observation suggests that a line of longitude is in fact the shortest distance between two points.

That's only true if one point lies due north or south of the other, otherwise a line of longtitude won't pass through both points.

[edby]

... this is the only model that has a line of longitude as the shortest distance between two points, and observation suggests that a line of longitude is in fact the shortest distance between two points.

That's only true if one point lies due north or south of the other, otherwise a line of longtitude won't pass through both points.

True. I meant a line of longitude is the shortest distance between any two points on that line. I.e. take any two points a and b lying on any line of longitude. Then every point on the shortest line between a and b lies on that line of longitude.

[edby]

[..] They STILL cannot get around that international flights take the shortest route (which results in a nearly straight line on the flat earth map), and make no sense at all on a globe. [..]

Do you have evidence for this claim? The usual explanation is that aircraft take 'great circle' routes because they are the shortest, but a great circle route is not a straight line on the standard FE map.

[iamcpc]

They STILL cannot get around that international flights take the shortest route (which results in a nearly straight line on the flat earth map), and make no sense at all on a globe. That is because the earth is flat.

The earth can be flat and not shaped like a flat circle with a north pole center, no south pole, and a great ice wall.

The most glaring controversy  is flight paths and flight times.  I have flown nonstop from LA to London twice in my life. Both times I looked out the window. Both times I noticed that I didn't fly over Greenland. I have mapped the path that I believe that I took based on the flight information online and based on my own personal observations on two different FLAT earth models shown below:


This FLAT earth model represent the earth as a FLAT plane and is interactive with an adjustable scale. The red path represents the "straight line" path on the flat disk model. Not very straight here is it? Notice how the flat circle flight path curves way out of the way to go over greenland?
Please keep in mind that, based on my observations, I'm able to confirm that the red path is NOT the path that I took. Once we hit the ocean we didn't fly over the southern tip of Greenland. Once we hit the ocean we didn't fly over any land until we hit the British islands.




This model also represents the earth as a flat plane and is NOT interactive. Notice how, two different representations of the earth as a flat plane, have two totally different flight paths. One is overwhelmingly supported by flight paths and flight times and one is significantly weakened by flight paths and flight times.Notice how the red "straight line" path passes over Greenland. This is VERY easy to test. Fly from LA to London, once you hit the ocean, look out the window every few minutes to see if you see land. If you don't then you have shown the red line flight path to be incorrect.

If that is the case, and it is, it is no small feat to fake a flight.

I'm not talking about fake flights. I'm talking about flights in which an airplane full of people can all verify the flight information was decently accurate when they check it online. In addition all the friends/family of those passengers who dropped them off at the airport to board the plan can confirm the flight is real. PLUS all the friends/family who picked them up from the airport at their destination can verify that their flight was real.

When Grandma says i'm on flight 1704 from Ohio to Dallas which departs at 1:00 PM and arrives at gate 4 at 4:00 PM and I'm at gate 4 at 4:00 PM and I see grandma depart the plane saying I left from Ohio at 1:00 PM to me it's shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the flight was real.

[Longtitube]

The most glaring controversy  is flight paths and flight times.  I have flown nonstop from LA to London twice in my life. Both times I looked out the window. Both times I noticed that I didn't fly over Greenland. I have mapped the path that I believe that I took based on the flight information online and based on my own personal observations

Whoa there, tiger. Flight across busy airspace is heavily organised and the North Atlantic is no exception. All commercial flights are organised, corralled, controlled by air traffic control in distinct lanes whether they are flying east or west, to avoid mid-air collisions. Flights across the continental US are also heavily organised. An airliner is not free to pick the most direct route in any circumstances, even if that would save a ton of fuel, because midair collisions make even worse headlines than the price of a ticket and you're talking about some of the busiest airspace in the world.

If you want a long-distance flight that more resembles the "great circle" route, try London to Tokyo.

[iamcpc]

Whoa there, tiger. Flight across busy airspace is heavily organised and the North Atlantic is no exception. All commercial flights are organised, corralled, controlled by air traffic control in distinct lanes whether they are flying east or west, to avoid mid-air collisions. Flights across the continental US are also heavily organised.

I agree  but there is also a limited amount of fuel that an airplane can hold. Flights can easily avoid collision by going a mile or two out of the way or Increasting/decreasing altitude.

Do you know anyone who looked out the window and saw Greenland when flying from LA to London? I don't. I was on two separate flights with hundreds of people. I checked on 50 flights online and never saw one that flew over Greenland. My Mother also flew to London and verified she didn't fly over Greenland. I asked some of my coworkers who work in LA on my team if they have been to Europe. One said he flew to France and didn't fly over Greenland. I've found 10 people who have all confirmed my initial observations. In addition when checking dozens of flight tracking websites they have all confirmed the observations. The score is 100 points for non flat disk model flight path and 0 points flat disk model flight path.

An airliner is not free to pick the most direct route in any circumstances, even if that would save a ton of fuel, because midair collisions make even worse headlines than the price of a ticket and you're talking about some of the busiest airspace in the world.

Airplanes have a maximum flight distance and airlines are definitely profit driven so flights will always take the most direct route possible while avoiding collisions. If you look in the air above LA you will notice very clearly that the skies are not crowded even though it has a huge airport. They never have to fly hundreds or thousands of miles out of the way to avoid an airplane.

If you want a long-distance flight that more resembles the "great circle" route, try London to Tokyo.

I've never flown from London to Tokyo. It would be pretty easy to test. The flat disk model has the flight flying over Norway. Based on my observations matching flight maps I've seen online I'm betting that they don't.

I did call my Uncle who is a retired pilot just to ask and he said that the London Tokyo flights don't fly over Norway and that generally the flight tracker websites online are decently accurate. I have no reason to think he's lying.

I dated a girl in high school who's dad was a pilot and I messaged her to see if she would ask her dad for me. I'll update my post if/when she responds.

[Longtitube]

I’ve no reason to doubt your observations, it’s just not as clear-cut as you seem to think. Airspace is highly controlled, the penalties for ignoring the instructions of air traffic control are grievous and the LAX to London route as flown is not a simple FE vs RE case.

In case your uncle is interested, I meant the direct flight between Tokyo and London. It overflies Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia.

https://www.airportdistancecalculator.com/tokyo-japan-to-london-united-kingdom-flight-time.html

[edby]

Try flightradar which tracks planes as they fly.  https://www.flightradar24.com/DAL3323/250498fb

Click on any of the planes and it shows you the origin and destination airports, and a line showing the route. You see plenty flying over Greenland.

I can't find it now, but a year ago here I mapped the published average flight times between airports against the expected RE time and expected FE time in an X-Y chart. There was a strong correlation between the expected RE time and average published time. Correlation for FE was poor, particularly for the Southern part of the world, which had planes flying at multiples of speed of sound.

[EDIT] As I write, check out BAW6B, San Francisco-London, currently over the Hudson Bay and heading directly for Greenland. Using the ‘measure distance’ function on Google maps, the flight appears to be on the great circle route.

[EDIT 2] And now, London time 12:28 (BST) BAW6B has neatly crossed the tip of Greenland and most of the North Atlantic, just approaching the coast of Ireland.  Scheduled to arrive at Heathrow 14:05. I live underneath the flight path so I will be able to see it come in.

[EDIT 3] Sadly it landed 35 mins early so I missed it over lunch. I will check some other flights some other day. But in any case, the point of looking out of my window to see the actual plane is simply a Zetetic check to verify that the flight tracking software is not part of the overall conspiracy. If we all accept it can be relied upon, then visual checks not needed. (Of course, you could object that I am part of the conspiracy, which if true would lead you to doubt my assurances that I am not part of a conspiracy, but there is a limit to what we can verify for ourselves. Sometimes you have to accept things on trust).