[Tom Bishop]

Air speed indicators are accurate to a degree, and while they are not used for navigation, they will give a reading that can confirm the shape of the earth.
Here is an article that shows a pilot claiming that an error of 6knots is outside of safe levels. http://rec.aviation.ifr.narkive.com/ISynE1Rf/airspeed-indicator-accuracy-tolerance
An inaccuracy of 6knots on a Boeing 747 at cruse speed is an error of just over 1%.

So yes you can't draw an accurate map based on flight speeds and time alone, but I think some of them would notice if they always had to fly twice as fast in one hemisphere than another.

An error of 6 knots compared to the Groundspeed.

If the round earth was correct then using a Mercator map would leave many planes running short of fuel. For example, flying across Africa would take three times as much fuel than Europe even though Europe is bigger on the projection.
But if you do fly across both Europe and Africa using the same amount of fuel then, yeah, I guess that is a good map.

The point is that pilots would be able to navigate using a different projection of the earth. You seem to agree with my assertion.

Your comment about fuel is another topic, one which was already addressed.

[xenotolerance]

Planes navigating an 'actually flat Earth' by 'incorrect round Earth coordinates' would then appear to have significantly worse fuel efficiency and travel much slower in the Southern hemisphere.

Flying ~3650 miles from New York to Paris takes x amount of fuel... flying (what the pilots, Tom claims, erroneously think is) ~3750 miles from Rio de Janeiro to Cape Town takes 3x, 4x, 5x... some much greater amount of fuel. It would take the same proportion of time longer.

This is not the case. Ergo, the flat Earth model fails to correctly predict distances in the Southern hemisphere.

[inquisitive]

Air speed indicators are accurate to a degree, and while they are not used for navigation, they will give a reading that can confirm the shape of the earth.
Here is an article that shows a pilot claiming that an error of 6knots is outside of safe levels. http://rec.aviation.ifr.narkive.com/ISynE1Rf/airspeed-indicator-accuracy-tolerance
An inaccuracy of 6knots on a Boeing 747 at cruse speed is an error of just over 1%.

So yes you can't draw an accurate map based on flight speeds and time alone, but I think some of them would notice if they always had to fly twice as fast in one hemisphere than another.

An error of 6 knots compared to the Groundspeed.

If the round earth was correct then using a Mercator map would leave many planes running short of fuel. For example, flying across Africa would take three times as much fuel than Europe even though Europe is bigger on the projection.
But if you do fly across both Europe and Africa using the same amount of fuel then, yeah, I guess that is a good map.

The point is that pilots would be able to navigate using a different projection of the earth. You seem to agree with my assertion.

Your comment about fuel is another topic, one which was already addressed.

The 'projection' they use is a model of the round earth which is accurate.  Find out about WGS84.

The World Geodetic System defines a reference frame for the earth, for use in geodesy and navigation.

https://www.nga.mil/productsservices/geodesyandgeophysics/pages/worldgeodeticsystem.aspx

I'm surprised you are not contributing to this with your knowledge of the shape of the earth.

[xenotolerance]

This whole trainwreck is really just a repeat of this thread about flight times proving the Earth is not flat.

Suffice to say, they do.

Incidentally that thread is the source of:

The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

also,

I pulled FE map from this site and attached an example of why the FE map simply doesn't work.  Basically a flight to JNB to NBO is 4 hours and a flight from JNB to SYD is 12 hours (3x).  Yet the distance from JNB to SYD is at least 7x as long per the FE map.  The flight route to Sydney would actually be much longer as we know flights from South Africa to Sydney go over the ocean (not Asia).  Sorry about image quality (limited by Forum).

Yes - I think it's very clear that THIS flat earth map doesn't work.  But you're missing the importance of this thread.

Some FE'ers (notably Tom) have put up alternative maps...and when challenged about these new maps, Tom (and others) has frequently responded that these maps are all tentative and that the FE'ers admit that they don't know for sure how the REAL Flat Earth continents are laid out.

I presume that they hope that this will deflect all problems of the kind you just gave under a layer of uncertainty...."Well, we know THIS map isn't perfect - but we're not finished with drawing the perfect FE map."...they fondly imagine that this is a sneaky way to avoid answering these "flight distance" problems.

HOWEVER

I'm not letting them get away with that.

The significance of THIS thread is that it proves that no possible flat earth map can EVER reconcile all of the distances given to us by airlines for their route distances.

So not just the map on the Wiki - not just Tom's new map - this thread clearly demonstrates that there is NO POSSIBLE flat map that can get the distances between four widely-separated cities right.

It constitutes definite proof that Flat Earth theory is wrong...AND that it can't possibly be fixed by redrawing their maps because this proof doesn't rely on their maps...instead it says that you can't resolve these distances between cities no matter how you juggle them around.

Cool or what?!   :-)

[GiantTurtle]

If the round earth was correct then using a Mercator map would leave many planes running short of fuel. For example, flying across Africa would take three times as much fuel than Europe even though Europe is bigger on the projection.
But if you do fly across both Europe and Africa using the same amount of fuel then, yeah, I guess that is a good map.

The point is that pilots would be able to navigate using a different projection of the earth. You seem to agree with my assertion.

Your comment about fuel is another topic, one which was already addressed.

Actually I said they would require three times as much fuel and take three times as long for a trip that a projection would state is the same distance. So they Wouldn't be able to.
But IF they cross Africa with the same time and fuel use as Europe then that would mean a Mercator is much more accurate than a globe.