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 - Zaphod

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
61
Flat Earth General / Re: Calculating real size of Australia
« on: December 06, 2017, 04:52:11 AM »
In fact we do transmit position info in oceanic areas via satcom provided the FIR is datalink capable. We still do an HF radio SELCAL check but the days of manually transmitting position reports via HF radio are pretty much long gone.

I’ve just looked at the charts for that area and in all likelihood QF28 transits Auckland Oceanic (NZZO) and Isla De Pascua FIR (SCIZ), both of which are ads-c and CPDLC capable. (Obviously the exact routing depends on wind, en-route diversion airfields, and whether or not they’ll be “chemtrailling” Wellington and Easter Island on the way 😂).

Flight tracker websites make use of ads-b which is currently ground based so no surprise that there’s a gap in coverage.

62

I took lessons from Melkur and Hoppy 😂

63
Saw 2 sunsets in one day a coupe of weeks ago on a very northerly routing from Tokyo to London. Northern lights were incredible too!

Ah but you are a shill in the pay of NASA and the CIA, who sleeps regularly, I wish, with various members of the illuminati.....is that about right or I have got the wrong Zaphod, by the way how’s the two heads working for you? I heard certain members of the illuminati like that feature!

Bugger, rumbled. Arthur, Ford, Trillian - hit the improbability drive!

64
Saw 2 sunsets in one day a coupe of weeks ago on a very northerly routing from Tokyo to London. Northern lights were incredible too!

65
Flat Earth General / Re: Calculating real size of Australia
« on: December 05, 2017, 05:38:00 AM »
Also, make sure you’re using the trip time (take off to landing) and not the block time (brakes off for push back until brakes on at the arrival gate). Schedules are designed around the block time.

The difference between the 2 is obviously the time spent taxying and can be significant. Outbound taxi times in JFK for example can be 45 minutes or more at busy times.

Anyway, you now seem to think that Australia is narrower than that depicted on a globe, but totallacky, who says that the flat earth map is accurate, will say that it’s wider!

Having piloted 777s many times across Australia between SIN and SYD I’m going with the RE distance. Haven’t run out of fuel yet and fuel burn/distance/time stats look remarkably consistent regardless of latitude.

66
Flat Earth General / Re: Experiment Pitches
« on: November 25, 2017, 07:56:25 AM »
Why would people keep on questioning it?
That is the purpose of science. Test, observe, gather as much data as humanly possible. Don't assume your model is right, try to disprove it.

Well said that man.

So, in the spirit of data gathering, and as you have previously said that you were a commercial pilot on various Boeing aircraft with experience of flights in the Southern Hemisphere, how about some details of said flights? You know, airfields of departure, arrival, flight time, a/c type etc. Should all be there in your logbook. We could then make an educated guess at the distances flown, especially if you can remember what typical mach number or cost index was used used.

67
Flat Earth General / Re: Plane trip from Perth to Cape town
« on: November 22, 2017, 04:33:42 PM »
ETOPS rules in fact cover all extended operations regardless of number of engines or what your flying over (land or water). The key point is distance from a suitable diversion airfield. Different ETOPS certifications exist but the majority of modern twin jets will be working to ETOPS 180, so flights must be planned to always be within 3 hours of a suitable diversion airfield.

By definition ETOPS stands for extended range TWIN engine operational performance standards, so its not all aircraft operation that ETOPS applies to, only twin engine planes.

I'm could be wrong but I think the FAA changed the definition a few years ago, but yes the origin of the acronym and the policy was twin engined a/c ops.

68
Flat Earth General / Re: Plane trip from Perth to Cape town
« on: November 22, 2017, 09:59:50 AM »
ETOPS rules in fact cover all extended operations regardless of number of engines or what your flying over (land or water). The key point is distance from a suitable diversion airfield. Different ETOPS certifications exist but the majority of modern twin jets will be working to ETOPS 180, so flights must be planned to always be within 3 hours of a suitable diversion airfield.

69
Do I just not exist?

And still waiting for some details of your "flights" in the Southern Hemisphere. Go on "Captain", dig out than logbook of yours.

And Hoppy is a commercial pilot too? This should be fun.

70
Flat Earth General / Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« on: October 11, 2017, 04:02:11 PM »


And their velocity is FIXED.



So just to be sure, you think an object in orbit has a fixed velocity?

As stated earlier, you need to look up what velocity and acceleration actually mean.

71
Flat Earth General / Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« on: October 11, 2017, 02:14:59 PM »
PL

I'm sure you're just having fun trolling, but just in case you're not it might be an idea for you to look up what "acceleration" and "velocity" actually mean.

72
Flat Earth General / Re: conspiracy cover up?
« on: September 24, 2017, 02:43:32 AM »
Dutchy

I for one believe you to be one of the few honest and sincere FErs here and I appreciate your posts and can agree with much of what you say..... especially that you should question everything! Science absolutely does not know all the answers. Scientific theories can never be proved true, they can only ever be proved wrong - it is the essence of the scientific process. Richard Feynman summed it up well here in 1964

[youtube][/youtube]

At present the overwhelming evidence supports a heliocentric globe/space/a big bang/evolution/dinosaurs/an old earth/an older universe/apollo moon landings/ISS/etc etc etc. What you mustn't do though, and what Feynman is alluding to in the clip, is decide what the answer is then massage the "facts" to fit your world view.

Talking Apollo, have you ever actually spoken to an apollo era astronaut? The ones still alive are getting a bit long in the tooth but with a little effort you can still engage with them. I've been fortunate enough to meet and talk at length on different occasions with Fred Haise, Jim Lovell, and Tom Stafford. Have you ever visited the Kennedy Space Center in Florida or the Johnson Space Center near Houston? There you can speak with all sorts of folk who worked on the apollo and shuttle programs in all sorts of capacities. The last time I was at KSC we chatted to Bruce Melnick, engineer on STS49, about the complex capture and repair of Intellsat VI - I challenge you to speak to these people about their experiences and think that they're lying. 

ps. On the BBC now is an outstanding documentary about the Cassini probe to Saturn. If you have a UK vpn you can watch it here. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b095vp3p/horizon-2017-goodbye-cassini-hello-saturn

Are you seriously saying that this has been a 30 year multi-national conspiracy?

Yes question everything. That applies to all of us.

73
Irma is definitely part of it. All fake. Not real.

But if it is fake I wonder why we've just been informed that we're being evacuated from our hotel here in Punta Cana!

Bugger.

74
Flat Earth General / Re: Dinosaurs: Made In China
« on: September 01, 2017, 04:40:44 PM »
I'd wager the majority of scientists and academics don't understand science. Why ask a bird about ornithology?

Quite the stupidest thing I've read for a long time.

On the subject of dinosaurs I thoroughly recommend a visit here...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_National_Monument

.... where in the Quarry building near Vernal UT you can see hundreds of fossilised dinosaur skeletons still in the rock. I was there a couple of weeks ago. Awesome place. The real thing is so much more beautiful and awe inspiring than your made up bollocks. FFS wake up.


75
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 01, 2017, 05:15:00 AM »


When I witnessed the eclipse I observed a black disc passing in front of the sun.



Maybe, just maybe, the "black disc" was the moon? Whacky I know but.......

Where were you in '99 when you saw this?

76
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 31, 2017, 01:16:32 PM »


When I witnessed the eclipse in the UK in 1999 I did not see the Moon all day .



As it approaches alignment how much would you expect to see?

From what I remember of 1999 it was cloudy all day. Where were you?

This time around we saw a near perfect half-lit moon 7 days before from Death Valley. 11am, sun and moon visible. A few days later the moon had waned as it neared the sun but was just visible. A few days ago we see a near perfect waxing half from europe, 7 days or so after the eclipse. I really am struggling to see why you don't get this. You're either a very good troll, in which case hats off to you, or you're weapons-grade deluded dipshit. You don't have to agree with the heliocentric model to appreciate that it explains things perfectly.

77
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 31, 2017, 09:26:16 AM »

The Moon is nowhere near the Sun during the Solar Eclipse.


Bloody hell, RiF got something right! The moon is in fact nowhere near the sun - it's approx 93 million miles away from it.


The Moon doesn't eclipse the Sun during the solar eclipse.


Ah bugger, it was all going so well.

78
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 30, 2017, 03:23:53 PM »
Ok hung like a Bull then!

Oh and it's "aeroplane"or "aircraft" please, we'll not have that nasty American talk here.

I was hoping to have some fun on this thread but hey ho, Captain Fantasy has done a runner.

And yes, Yellowstone did stink and Wyoming was awesome!

Hope you're well.

Z

79
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 30, 2017, 01:17:53 PM »
TBH it's a shame TheMelkur has disappeared, because in my experience Boeing 777 Captains are highly intelligent, very good looking, and hung like baboons!  :-*

80
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 29, 2017, 05:38:54 AM »
Our "Captain" must have put his/her logbook somewhere very safe.  ;D

Still looking forward to a few more details of the polar flights.

81
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 21, 2017, 02:31:18 PM »
Well, I watched it from Casper WY with my kids and some friends.

Helluva trip from Europe but so worth it - awesome experience. Great to watch the moon getting closer over the past week or so, from a perfect "half" 7 days ago from Death Valley at an angle of roughly 90 degrees from the sun. You'd almost think it was orbiting the earth every 27 days or so. And yes we saw stars during totality, Mars off to the right according to others but I need to check.

RiF, I really don't give 2 hoots what you think is the cause of it.

Curry tonight, Yellowstone tomorrow! It's been a fab road trip.

82
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 17, 2017, 09:50:16 PM »
I first posted this in the wrong thread.

Speed, distance and time are related but when you are flying you don't measure distance, you measure the other two. Distance can be calculated from that, and you're confident with time, but speed isn't so easy to determine when you have to take into account wind speed. I was not at all convinced by the mechanisms I saw that attempted that.
With such poor technology combined with a fear of deviating from normal routes, it is hard not to suspect there is something odd happening.
Yes, flying a 787 is a rare experience. I don't see your point.

You only have to use one sqaure of the Peirce Quincunial map.
When you are flying over the middle of the ocean GPS is the only way you have to determine where you are. Those measurements are unfalsifiable and so unscientific, but if you ever have the opportunity I would advice you to look at how the numbers fluctuate, and even compare two GPS devices and note that even those fluctuations are never synchronised.
I didn't write the wiki.

Wind currents would be faster the further you are from the center because everything is, from stars to sunlight.

Can you give some details of your flight(s) near the South Pole? I'm sure I'm not the only one who's interested. Where did you take off from and where did you land? Who did you fly for?

83
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 17, 2017, 06:30:13 AM »


There are no such thing as planets.

There is no such thing as a solar system.

There is no such thing as the Globe.

These are are just different aspects of your Heliocentric fairytale.

The Moon rises in roughly the same place every night 

The Moon rise changes by 50 minutes every night.

This does not prove your imaginary globe.

This does not prove the Moon orbits your imaginary globe.


The firmament rotates around the Flat Earth .

The Sun and moon rotate around the Flat Earth.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

Which just goes to show what a complete waste of time it is debating with you. You've clearly decided already and refuse to listen to anyone or do the most basic observation.

84
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth and the Eclipse
« on: August 12, 2017, 08:03:59 AM »
Badxtoss

It's due to perspective I think. Either that or density. No wait, I remember now, it's the orbital sagnac..... probably.

Whatever it is I hope they've got it right as I'm picking up a minibus in Oakland CA later today and the mega road trip up to Casper WY begins this afternoon to watch it. Can't wait to see the moon whizzing around a huge arc of it's orbit in order for the shadow to go west to east. I mean that's what must happen surely? RiF and his mate Luke say so!

85
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 11, 2017, 04:26:47 PM »
You don't have to use Gleason's map, personally I prefer a slight variation on the Peirce Quincunial map.
Mostly I flew Boeings, 737, 747, 777, and a couple of 787. I don't particularly want to list every flight I ever served on. I stopped a little under 18 months ago.
We got a more detailed picture than the 'time to destination' that passengers get, and the rate at which the precise figures fluctuated and changed was enough to convince me that the GPS map could not be completely accurate.
Knowing the distances at that scale is not as important as you think, our speeds vary based on direction and time of day, and the speed and time are the most important factors.
Flights near the South Pole are what you'd expect, keeping the ice to one side of you and flying with that bearing in mind. It's what you'd do at the rim of a flat Earth, especially given the jet streams would be much faster that far out.
Absolutely no curvature is visible from a plane. It sounds like confirmation bias, I had a few copilots that talked about seeing that while we were looking at a completely flat horizon.

So what maps did your company use to build the flight plans, estimate eta, fuel burn, etc?

It would be cool if you could dig out your logbook for one of your flights near the South Pole. Just the aerodromes of departure and arrival plus your record of the flight time would give a rough idea of the distance actually flown.

Not sure how "precise figures" are supposed to fluctuate but you're the expert. When you say that knowing the distance is not important, but speed and time are, I'm wondering if my understanding of the relationship between the 3 quantities is somewhat lacking.

Can you share some of the "more detailed picture" of the info you were getting up the front and why it gave you concerns?

86
Flat Earth General / Re: Why Would NASA Lie About The Shape Of Earth?
« on: August 11, 2017, 10:10:44 AM »


Why would I waste my time researching something that looks as ridiculous as that.



I know you don't normally let facts and logic get in the way of a whacko opinion, but just in case you have a moment of lucidity there's an excellent documentary about the lunar lander here .......

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">


Ps, off to visit USS Hornet right now, (apollo recovery ship). I'll be sure to pass on your regards!


87
Flat Earth General / Re: Greetings
« on: August 10, 2017, 06:10:10 AM »
TheMelkur

Welcome aboard!

Good to have your view here, especially with your experience. What did you see near the "South Pole"? Also when did you stop flying and what types did you fly?




88
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 09, 2017, 07:07:52 PM »
Quote
Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

RIF, with respect this is plain wrong. The moon does not have to be overhead to cast a shadow. For a shadow to traverse a certain distance on the earth, the object casting the shadow only has to move the same actual distance, NOT the same number of degrees.

Try this way of thinking about it.....

Do you accept that the speed of a shadow on the ground cast by an aircraft at say 3000ft is essentially the same as the speed of the aircraft? Can you then see that the distance travelled by the shadow in a given timespan is the same as the distance travelled by the aircraft in the same timespan?

If the light source is a long way away, do you accept that this is true regardless of the altitude of the aircraft?

If the aircraft/object was at say 300,000km and the light source a LOT further away do you accept that the speed of the shadow across the ground would be the same as the speed of the object?

If the ground was then also moving with respect to the light source, and moving in the same direction as the object, can you see that the speed of the shadow across the ground is the difference between 2 speeds? So in our case the speed of the shadow is the speed of the moon minus the speed of the ground.

As the speed of the moon is faster than the speed of the ground, the shadow will still go west to east in this case. For the shadow to travel 3000 miles across the continent the moon also only has to travel 3000 miles.

I really can't make it any simpler than that.





89
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 07, 2017, 03:23:58 PM »
RIF

Quote
How is it possible for the Moon to take 27 days to Orbit the Earth and at the same time only take 90 minutes to cross the USA when the USA is 3000 miles wide.?

As HTLAY said above it is the shadow that crosses the USA not the moon. The moon only has to travel roughly the same linear distance as the width of the continent. It is only a very small fraction of its orbital circumference. The moon/sun don't have to be directly overhead to cast a shadow.

It's easier to understand initially if you imagine the earth is not rotating, and just have the moon orbiting the earth casting a shadow as it goes. I'm sure someone with more time could make an animation/drawing to illustrate. Once you add a rotating earth the speed of the shadow across the surface will be reduced accordingly.


90
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: August 06, 2017, 12:02:45 PM »
RIF

Quote

OK try this one.

https://explorable.com/chinese-astronomy

As it says a false prediction was punishable by death.

The Chinese where accurately predicting eclispes when westerners where still living in caves ; sharing their women and having sex with apes.

Like I said the Heliocentric's have retrofitted their mathematics to fit the ancient Chinese /Babylonian flat model.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

Interesting article. It doesn't say they were using a flat earth model though and states they were more interested in observation and record keeping rather than developing theories and models. The eclipses they were trying to predict were lunar rather than solar. As the earth is so much larger than the moon I guess this would not require so much accuracy.

Can you link to any working FE model for predicting eclipses? This surely must exist if heliocentrics have "retrofitted" their mathematics.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5