Why The Earth Appears Curved at a High Altitude.

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 06:26:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 28, 2010, 06:20:26 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 04:13:27 PM

You are not paying attention, sigh. How does anything in your quote above lead you to J’s claim: “glass is part of most airplane window deployments.”?
Your quote says the opposite: “Jet airliner cabin windows are usually acrylic.”

It was such a short reply, did you really have to copypaste it and turn it into such a headache-inducing eyesore?

If you're not going to contribute to the debate, did you really have to post at all? What's next? Grammar? What octave you whine best at?

Ugh, you really messed the tenses up there.

Thanks for proving my point. It's so good to have a wingman like you!

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on June 28, 2010, 06:27:58 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 06:26:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 28, 2010, 06:20:26 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 04:13:27 PM

You are not paying attention, sigh. How does anything in your quote above lead you to J’s claim: “glass is part of most airplane window deployments.”?
Your quote says the opposite: “Jet airliner cabin windows are usually acrylic.”

It was such a short reply, did you really have to copypaste it and turn it into such a headache-inducing eyesore?

If you're not going to contribute to the debate, did you really have to post at all? What's next? Grammar? What octave you whine best at?

Ugh, you really messed the tenses up there.

Thanks for proving my point. It's so good to have a wingman like you!

Hmh. I guess you didn't get it. Oh well.

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Evidence or source? How is it that bending out creates the curvature illusion? Perhaps we can avoid your lack of research sooner this time?

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

He didn't say that, it's not true, and you can't prove that it is.

You lose.

Try harder next time.

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 04:13:27 PM

You are not paying attention, sigh. How does anything in your quote above lead you to J’s claim: “glass is part of most airplane window deployments.”?
Your quote says the opposite: “Jet airliner cabin windows are usually acrylic.”

It was such a short reply, did you really have to copypaste it and turn it into such a headache-inducing eyesore?

What, like what you do in your (over) 16000 posts?

How was his reply a "headache-inducing eyesore"? Is your level of reading comprehension really so low? Three sentences with two clearly marked qoutes and you have trouble reading it without getting your eyes all sore?

Then you most likely have a problem that can be resolved with one of the links below:

http://www.rif.org/
or
http://www.specsavers.co.uk/

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Wow, way to mis-interpret to try to prop up your weak position? Layered lexan and polycarbonate are far more rigid and stronger than glass is.  They dont bow with pressure. If they did, even a little, you would have the Comet window problem all over again. Flexing and bowing cause micro cracks which would degrade the integrity of the window surface.  Face it, you lost and your idea is ridiculous.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

You still don't get it do you? I'm amazed that you can keep up this amount of retardation.

Quote from: Johannes on June 28, 2010, 11:19:16 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Wow, way to mis-interpret to try to prop up your weak position? Layered lexan and polycarbonate are far more rigid and stronger than glass is.  They dont bow with pressure. If they did, even a little, you would have the Comet window problem all over again. Flexing and bowing cause micro cracks which would degrade the integrity of the window surface.  Face it, you lost and your idea is ridiculous.

Sorry, I meant laminated glass-polycarbonate windows. I am aware that airplanes do not use pure glass for windows, as I have never been aboard an airliner that has pure glass windows.... I need to do more research before I continue this debate.

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 29, 2010, 09:33:50 AM

Quote from: Johannes on June 28, 2010, 11:19:16 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Wow, way to mis-interpret to try to prop up your weak position? Layered lexan and polycarbonate are far more rigid and stronger than glass is.  They dont bow with pressure. If they did, even a little, you would have the Comet window problem all over again. Flexing and bowing cause micro cracks which would degrade the integrity of the window surface.  Face it, you lost and your idea is ridiculous.

Sorry, I meant laminated glass-polycarbonate windows. I am aware that airplanes do not use pure glass for windows, as I have never been aboard an airliner that has pure glass windows.... I need to do more research before I continue this debate.

You may also want to ponder the notion that since much flying is still done visually, optical distortion from windows is something that you generally want to avoid.

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 12:44:31 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 29, 2010, 09:33:50 AM

Quote from: Johannes on June 28, 2010, 11:19:16 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Wow, way to mis-interpret to try to prop up your weak position? Layered lexan and polycarbonate are far more rigid and stronger than glass is.  They dont bow with pressure. If they did, even a little, you would have the Comet window problem all over again. Flexing and bowing cause micro cracks which would degrade the integrity of the window surface.  Face it, you lost and your idea is ridiculous.

Sorry, I meant laminated glass-polycarbonate windows. I am aware that airplanes do not use pure glass for windows, as I have never been aboard an airliner that has pure glass windows.... I need to do more research before I continue this debate.

You may also want to ponder the notion that since much flying is still done visually, optical distortion from windows is something that you generally want to avoid.

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Quote from: markjo on June 29, 2010, 12:49:17 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 12:44:31 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 29, 2010, 09:33:50 AM

Quote from: Johannes on June 28, 2010, 11:19:16 PM

Quote from: EireEngineer on June 28, 2010, 09:01:20 PM

Not to point out the obvious to all you in the "too dense and opinionated to do research", but this thread has turned quite patheti-sad.  I did a quick check in the POH on my plane, and the windows are Lexan. Checked into a few airliners....Lexan and  polycarbonate, with reinforced housings seems to be the norm.  They sooooo do not use "glass" as the term is traditionally used.

Thank you EireEngineer for confirming what brother Pongo has been saying.

The windows are less rigid than glass, thus bend out, creating the curvature illusion.

Wow, way to mis-interpret to try to prop up your weak position? Layered lexan and polycarbonate are far more rigid and stronger than glass is.  They dont bow with pressure. If they did, even a little, you would have the Comet window problem all over again. Flexing and bowing cause micro cracks which would degrade the integrity of the window surface.  Face it, you lost and your idea is ridiculous.

Sorry, I meant laminated glass-polycarbonate windows. I am aware that airplanes do not use pure glass for windows, as I have never been aboard an airliner that has pure glass windows.... I need to do more research before I continue this debate.

You may also want to ponder the notion that since much flying is still done visually, optical distortion from windows is something that you generally want to avoid.

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Soon the conspiracy will have so many people involved it will need its own conspiracy to fund it.

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

They can see properly. They are already using genetically modified birds to pull their planes, so they would obviously use genetically enhanced humans to pilot them. These "humans" would have no issue seeing through the distortion.


Another Flat Earth Victory!!!

Quote from: Crustinator on June 29, 2010, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

They can see properly. They are already using genetically modified birds to pull their planes, so they would obviously use genetically enhanced humans to pilot them. These "humans" would have no issue seeing through the distortion.


Another Flat Earth troll Victory!!!

Fix'd

These "humans" would have no issue seeing through the distortion.

They probably have their eye's lenses removed, and a glass. plastic mix inserted instead. Effectively the planes windows become the eyes lens, focusing light onto the retina.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on June 29, 2010, 02:08:54 PM

These "humans" would have no issue seeing through the distortion.

They probably have their eye's lenses removed, and a glass. plastic mix inserted instead. Effectively the planes windows become the eyes lens, focusing light onto the retina.

Good call. This would would be the reason why none of the pilots have ever seen the birds before. They can only see when they are flying the plane, they are blind while they are not. It would also explain why the companies do not allow the pilots fly during rainstorms as the water could change the magnification in spots and impair their ability to fly.

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

Actually, today autopilot is (allegedly) so good that it is often safer to have the computer do the flying. Of course, this makes it much easier for the conspiracy to control things.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on June 29, 2010, 02:08:54 PM

Quote from: Crustinator on June 29, 2010, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

They can see properly. They are already using genetically modified birds to pull their planes, so they would obviously use genetically enhanced humans to pilot them. These "humans" would have no issue seeing through the distortion.


Another Flat Earth troll Victory!!!

Fix'd

Does that imply that I am trolling AND correct in my claim? If so, I accept.

Good call. This would would be the reason why none of the pilots have ever seen the birds before.

It would make them easier to control too. This is why when I stayed at an expensive hotel I saw an Italian pilot getting escorted back to his room by a woman in a short tight skirt and revealing top. She was probably his minder from the Conspuracy.

What about fighter-jets?

What about fighter-jets?

They have different prostitutes for the air force.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 28, 2010, 06:20:26 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on June 28, 2010, 04:13:27 PM

You are not paying attention, sigh. How does anything in your quote above lead you to J?s claim: ?glass is part of most airplane window deployments.??
Your quote says the opposite: ?Jet airliner cabin windows are usually acrylic.?

It was such a short reply, did you really have to copypaste it and turn it into such a headache-inducing eyesore?

What, like what you do in your (over) 16000 posts?

I never copypaste.  I consider it rude to do so because it looks like shit, like that post I quoted.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on June 29, 2010, 02:21:50 PM

Good call. This would would be the reason why none of the pilots have ever seen the birds before.

It would make them easier to control too. This is why when I stayed at an expensive hotel I saw an Italian pilot getting escorted back to his room by a woman in a short tight skirt and revealing top. She was probably his minder from the Conspuracy.

Quote from: Raver on June 29, 2010, 02:32:12 PM

What about fighter-jets?

They have different prostitutes for the air force.

Maybe that woman was a jet fighter pilot?

Maybe that woman was a jet fighter?

She was fighting something in that room.

Quote from: Crustinator on June 29, 2010, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

Actually, today autopilot is (allegedly) so good that it is often safer to have the computer do the flying. Of course, this makes it much easier for the conspiracy to control things.

And what about the 50 or so years of commercial aviation before that?  Didn't pilots need to see the runway to land in the 1970s?

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 02:24:37 PM

Quote from: Crustinator on June 29, 2010, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

Actually, today autopilot is (allegedly) so good that it is often safer to have the computer do the flying. Of course, this makes it much easier for the conspiracy to control things.

And what about the 50 or so years of commercial aviation before that?  Didn't pilots need to see the runway to land in the 1970s?

See my post about genetic modification.

Quote from: Crustinator on June 29, 2010, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: Johannes on June 29, 2010, 01:28:17 PM

Pilots are members of the conspiracy, so it doesn't matter if the cockpit window isn't distorted.

Conspiracy or not, they still need to be able to see properly.

Actually, today autopilot is (allegedly) so good that it is often safer to have the computer do the flying. Of course, this makes it much easier for the conspiracy to control things.

You certainly have the laymans opinion of the Autopilot.  Autopilots really do make flying far safer. When you fly, there are dozens of things that divide the pilots attention, and the autopilot removes several of them. Namely, holding a course and altitude. However, dont delude yourself into thinking that the pilot is not ultimately in control of the aircraft.  It wasnt the autopilots fault that that SW airplane overshot Minneapolis after all.

I was on a plane yesterday, and I made sure to look at the windows. I wanted to post this while on the plane but you get no service up there. 

They seemed to have some of distortion at the edges and minimal at the middle.