Just out of curiosity...

So I was looking at this flat earth map:



And, assuming this model was correct, I was wondering how one would fly from, for instance, Johannesburg SA to New York City, USA (these are just examples, you can sub in many different cities). The shortest and most practical route would be over the north pole, yet no flights ever pass over it. What they usually do is travel east from Johannesburg along with the curved lines and fly in what would appear to be a very large arc, passing over Guiana.


(yes, I know this is a globe earth model, but the route should be the same regardless of model)

So now I have 2 questions:

1. According to google maps, this travel would take around 22 hours. Now, on that flat earth model, using the same route, the trip would either have to take twice as long at normal speed or the plane would have to be travelling twice as fast. Do planes on that route get an extra speed boost or something? How are they able to make it in such short time? Additionally, are they equipped with and extra tank of gas, as a regular plane doesn't hold enough fuel for a trip of this length?

2. Why don't they just travel over the north pole? It would be much quicker, cheaper, and efficient.

P.S.

 with a plane traveling along that intensely curved route, wouldn't the passengers be consistently dumped on their sides for the vast majority of the ride, seeing as in order for a plane to turn it must bank?

What you've identified is in fact problematic with a flat Earth model and it's commonly discussed.

FE'ers will tell you that the map isn't actually a map -- it's an artistic conception, a depiction of what a flat Earth may look like.

RE'ers will tell you what you just said -- the map doesn't work as intended and yet FE'ers have no alternative. The projected flight path is totally silly on a flat Earth and yet FE'ers have no justifications. That, and all projected flight paths work exactly as one would expect them to on a globe model.

That should tell us something.

Reminder that FE Q&A is strictly for Flat Earth questions and Flat Earth answers.

If you can find a plane that takes the route non - stop, let us know. You could probably receive an answer.

If you can find a plane that takes the route non - stop, let us know. You could probably receive an answer.

There is, actually the example I posted is an actual plane route that does not make a stop, all the way from Johannesburg to NYC

is this an accurate map of Earth? I had no idea that Australia was so much farther across than the United States! it looks like double the width!!!

Quote from: WISHTOLAUGH on April 27, 2021, 08:17:18 AM

If you can find a plane that takes the route non - stop, let us know. You could probably receive an answer.

There is, actually the example I posted is an actual plane route that does not make a stop, all the way from Johannesburg to NYC

Sorry, you are correct.

I did find claims of non-stop.

But your time reference is way off.

1. According to google maps, this travel would take around 22 hours. Now, on that flat earth model, using the same route, the trip would either have to take twice as long at normal speed or the plane would have to be travelling twice as fast.

*Citation needed.

2. Why don't they just travel over the north pole? It would be much quicker, cheaper, and efficient.

Are you capable of identifying anywhere on any sort of map?

with a plane traveling along that intensely curved route, wouldn't the passengers be consistently dumped on their sides for the vast majority of the ride, seeing as in order for a plane to turn it must bank?

Flying does not work that way.

The flat Earth map is of course inaccurate. The true map of the flat Earth is unknown since it is difficult for us to check every part of the world. However, it is expected that the flat Earth Map has distances between cities similar to round Earth, and distortions occurs in rural areas and oceans. I would say that the South America is much closer to Africa and the Sahara desert is much smaller.

2. Why don't they just travel over the north pole? It would be much quicker, cheaper, and efficient.

Why? a straight line goes throu west africa, not the north pole

with a plane traveling along that intensely curved route, wouldn't the passengers be consistently dumped on their sides for the vast majority of the ride, seeing as in order for a plane to turn it must bank?

When a plane banks the passengers are pushed down into their seats do to centrifugal force. if a plane turned without banking i.e. tilting on its side then the passengers would be pushed sideways