Flight times between Australia and South America

  • 70 Replies
  • 36450 Views
*

chtwrone

  • 443
  • Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again
Flight times between Australia and South America
« on: October 30, 2015, 12:21:33 AM »
There seems to be a lot of ignorant debate concerning HUGE flight times between Australia and South America.

But really there is nothing unusual about these flight at all.

I have seen quite a bit of rubbish concerning direct flights routing via North America?

WTF would these direct flights need to route this way?

The 3 pictures below illustrate exactly how these flights route, and it's usually either via overhead New Zealand or south of, depending on the direction of the upper winds, and best routing to avoid any headwinds.

As an air traffic controller in Christchurch, New Zealand, I have a direct knowledge of the routing that these flights take, and to provide actual backup to these routings, I have taken 2 screenshots from the Flightradar24 website that monitors and displays controlled flights around the world. The screenshots are that of a direct Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia flight, QANTAS 28, which took place around a week ago.

As the most direct route is overhead Christchurch, I have personally witnessed this flight on many occasions, travelling in either direction, dependant on departure point and destination.

The route is a curved line, due to the display of the 3D flight path onto a 2D world map.

The 3rd picture is from Google Earth, and illustrates how this 2D curved route, would actually appear as a straight line on the 3D globe.









Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2015, 08:31:31 AM »
When presented with reality, no replies?
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2015, 02:44:46 AM »
I know this thread is a few weeks old, but the subject is directly related to my question, so I don't mean to hijack this thread, but since you're an air traffic controller (OP), maybe you can shed some light on what I'm missing here.

The flight path you just outlined above would not work on the flat earth map, obviously, without taking a huge detour. At least not with the current flat earth models. In fact, I believe that flight path is strong evidence (if not a proof) of a globe earth.

What I'm currently struggling to find an answer to is why it appears that there are no flights that go directly over Antarctica, despite the fact that in some cases a flight directly over Antarctica would be the shortest possible flight. If the flights do exist, I can't find any.

The most-obvious path for this example I think would be Western Australia to southeast South America. The largest international airports, if I'm not mistaken, in each of those continents are Perth, Australia (PER) and Buenos Aires, Argentina (EZE). If we search for a direct flight from PER to EZE, it would look like this, going directly over the center of Antarctica. This flight below, I believe is only theoretical since I could not find any actual flights like this. This flight, if it exists, would be about 7800 miles (6800 nautical miles) and last about 15.25 hours.



On a globe, it would be more-or-less like this.



The problem is, it seems no flights ever go over Antarctica this way. I tried searching for any flights that go from anywhere in Western Australia to anywhere in South America. All flights either go to South Africa first, or to Eastern Australia first before flying to South America. Some flights from Eastern Australia to South America do fly over Antarctica, but only the edges, which of course would still be possible on a flat earth map.

This doesn't prove that the earth if flat, obviously. But to me it just raises suspicion. Actually, if one could confirm that there are flights that take this route over the South Pole, it would prove that the earth is a globe, right? But I think the actual, defined polar routes (as in the image below, from Wiki) agree with the my search that no flights ever go over the center of Antarctica.


 
The flight path's shown above are possible on a flat earth map, although it would require you to essentially fly around the outer edge of the earth, which would not be the fastest route.

This problem does not exist on the North Pole, however. There are plenty of flights that regularly go right over the Arctic center and in fact. The flight from Los Angeles (LAX) to Dubai (DXB) takes this flight of 8300 miles (7200 nautical miles) and lasts over 16 hours.



And there are plenty of other "polar routes" that go right over the pole.



So the question is: Why? Why do no flights go over the center of Antarctica? It's suspicious that going over the North Pole is common, but going over the South Pole seems non-existent, and it seems unlikely that there would be no demand to fly directly from WA to South America. And if there are flights that do, why is the flat earth debate even a thing?

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2015, 03:55:58 AM »
The FAA's Guidance for Polar Operations (March 5, 2001) outlines a number of special requirements for polar flight, which includes two cold-weather suits, special communication capability, designation of diversion airports (especially difficult down there) and firm recovery plans for stranded passengers (even more difficult), fuel freeze strategy (not easy either) and monitoring requirements.

North polar routes are generally shorter and closer to civilization while the Antarctic Treaty adds further preservation and safety concerns.

And that's why there are no scheduled flights across the Antarctic.

By the way, a one week trip from Chile to the South Pole and back costs only 47.200 $ (there are still spots for the one starting December 13th) ... or you can pay 128.000 $ for a 40 day ski expedition to the south pole (but you might need to hurry, it starts in about a week).

http://www.icetrek.com/south-pole-and-antarctica.html#dates-prices

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2017, 02:52:52 PM »
I know this thread is a few weeks old, but the subject is directly related to my question, so I don't mean to hijack this thread, but since you're an air traffic controller (OP), maybe you can shed some light on what I'm missing here.

The flight path you just outlined above would not work on the flat earth map, obviously, without taking a huge detour. At least not with the current flat earth models. In fact, I believe that flight path is strong evidence (if not a proof) of a globe earth.

What I'm currently struggling to find an answer to is why it appears that there are no flights that go directly over Antarctica, despite the fact that in some cases a flight directly over Antarctica would be the shortest possible flight. If the flights do exist, I can't find any.

The most-obvious path for this example I think would be Western Australia to southeast South America. The largest international airports, if I'm not mistaken, in each of those continents are Perth, Australia (PER) and Buenos Aires, Argentina (EZE). If we search for a direct flight from PER to EZE, it would look like this, going directly over the center of Antarctica. This flight below, I believe is only theoretical since I could not find any actual flights like this. This flight, if it exists, would be about 7800 miles (6800 nautical miles) and last about 15.25 hours.



On a globe, it would be more-or-less like this.



The problem is, it seems no flights ever go over Antarctica this way. I tried searching for any flights that go from anywhere in Western Australia to anywhere in South America. All flights either go to South Africa first, or to Eastern Australia first before flying to South America. Some flights from Eastern Australia to South America do fly over Antarctica, but only the edges, which of course would still be possible on a flat earth map.

This doesn't prove that the earth if flat, obviously. But to me it just raises suspicion. Actually, if one could confirm that there are flights that take this route over the South Pole, it would prove that the earth is a globe, right? But I think the actual, defined polar routes (as in the image below, from Wiki) agree with the my search that no flights ever go over the center of Antarctica.


 
The flight path's shown above are possible on a flat earth map, although it would require you to essentially fly around the outer edge of the earth, which would not be the fastest route.

This problem does not exist on the North Pole, however. There are plenty of flights that regularly go right over the Arctic center and in fact. The flight from Los Angeles (LAX) to Dubai (DXB) takes this flight of 8300 miles (7200 nautical miles) and lasts over 16 hours.



And there are plenty of other "polar routes" that go right over the pole.



So the question is: Why? Why do no flights go over the center of Antarctica? It's suspicious that going over the North Pole is common, but going over the South Pole seems non-existent, and it seems unlikely that there would be no demand to fly directly from WA to South America. And if there are flights that do, why is the flat earth debate even a thing?

I glad I found this thread. I've been aboard this train now for maybe a year and haven't committed just as I'm generally slow to commit to much, sorry ladies, but I've been compelled to say the least but as I do every so often when time permits I actually look into something rather just have fun viewing /reading and believing and I looked into the flight thing and came to the end logical point of this thread except that no one's pointing out the most obvious, to me at least, factor of the flight durations. Why aren't we looking to that for the heaviest evidence?

According to our (pre FE) assumptions it should take 15 hrs across a globe to traverse these locations and guess what claim a Google search produced? I found a flight stated to take 15 hrs for this flight. Isn't that the most compelling evidence for a globe? Or was this a misprint or lie? Or is the theory vague on geography? Could the current FE map be way off to explain the possibility of these flights? Cuz according to the FE map I usually see it should take around 40 hours to cross this distance by plane.

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2017, 03:01:11 PM »
Wow look at all the flat earth tumbleweed blowing around.
This was one of the mainstays of fe argument Southern Hemisphere flight times along with how few flights there was in comparison to the northern hemisphere.
The truth was FE youtubers made things up regarding the flight times....again it’s public information just go look. The other almost laughable one regarding flight frequency was population differentials. Fe believers either forgot or did not know that only around 10-12% of the world’s population live in the Southern Hemisphere hence only 10% of flights.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2017, 03:15:57 PM »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The most-obvious path for this example I think would be Western Australia to southeast South America. The largest international airports, if I'm not mistaken, in each of those continents are Perth, Australia (PER) and Buenos Aires, Argentina (EZE). If we search for a direct flight from PER to EZE, it would look like this, going directly over the center of Antarctica. This flight below, I believe is only theoretical since I could not find any actual flights like this. This flight, if it exists, would be about 7800 miles (6800 nautical miles) and last about 15.25 hours.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y474/JargonXJ/Flat%20Earth%20Theory/f2fe2e8b-879d-4edc-bb93-5c71cf7a192e_zpsyycbuqzw.png[/img]
On a globe, it would be more-or-less like this.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y474/JargonXJ/Flat%20Earth%20Theory/04276275-668c-46c1-8c14-5f7a39ac730c_zpshpvhnuv8.png[/img]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
it would prove that the earth is a globe, right? But I think the actual, defined polar routes (as in the image below, from Wiki) agree with the my search that no flights ever go over the center of Antarctica.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y474/JargonXJ/Flat%20Earth%20Theory/91c04e3e-1315-47f2-9d15-7dcce2e84309_zps1hd3hssn.png[/img]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
This problem does not exist on the North Pole, however. There are plenty of flights that regularly go right over the Arctic center and in fact. The flight from Los Angeles (LAX) to Dubai (DXB) takes this flight of 8300 miles (7200 nautical miles) and lasts over 16 hours.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y474/JargonXJ/Flat%20Earth%20Theory/5bd1cebc-110c-49b7-b854-d2bca1048023_zpsvszcurij.png[/img]
And there are plenty of other "polar routes" that go right over the pole.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y474/JargonXJ/Flat%20Earth%20Theory/4b83861f-e83d-40d9-b8ee-f9e3e417eaec_zpsfmnriubv.png[/img]
So the question is: Why? Why do no flights go over the center of Antarctica? It's suspicious that going over the North Pole is common, but going over the South Pole seems non-existent, and it seems unlikely that there would be no demand to fly directly from WA to South America. And if there are flights that do, why is the flat earth debate even a thing?
You've been caught by the "Photobucket Ransom Demand" as I and many others have.
You'll need to get tour photos onto another host and modify your original posts, but it won't help posts that quoted yours.

I have hundreds of photos on Photobucket (they are still safe there) and I still haven't  fixed all the old posts months later.
I'm using "dropbox", but there are many, possibly better, hosts.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #7 on: November 20, 2017, 05:31:19 PM »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
So the question is: Why? Why do no flights go over the center of Antarctica? It's suspicious that going over the North Pole is common, but going over the South Pole seems non-existent, and it seems unlikely that there would be no demand to fly directly from WA to South America. And if there are flights that do, why is the flat earth debate even a thing?
One major reason the "no flights go over the center of Antarctica" is that there are simply not enough commercial reasons for any.
A Perth to Santiago flight would fly over the South Pole, but there is just not enough demand so the flight is Sydney to/from Santiago and there are also safety issues.

There used to be a Perth to Johannesburg flight, but with longer range aircraft the Sydney to/from Johannesburg flight has replaced it - simply for commercial reasons.

There are safety-related reasons for avoiding much of Antarctica, especially since the Mount Erebus disaster.
Remember that much of Antarctica is at quite a high altitude while the North Pole region is completely flat.

Read thess excerpts from, Metabunk.org, Flat Earth Theory Debunked by Short Flights (QF27 & QF28) From Australia to South America

     
Quote from: TWCobra
Quote from: M Settle
And with a normal aircraft that flies at 39,000 ft there shouldn't be any concerns whatsoever for high passes that are un-mapped. And with an aircraft that flies long distances on a normal tank of fuel, 7800ish miles shouldn't even be a challenge.
all airliners are required to carry sufficient fuel to cope with a depressurisation or an engine failure at any point along the intended route, under instrument flight rules. The chart we use for SYD-SCL has about 75% of the continent as a no fly zone for this reason.
Quote from: TWCobra
Quote from: Mick West
But all you'd need to cross that no-fly zone is more fuel, right?
No, because we are IFR we'd need accurate terrain data.

Normally in a 747 we would descend to 14000 feet during a depressurisation event, then eventually to 10,000 feet once the oxygen supplied to the passengers runs out. That vertical profile gives us better fuel range.

If there is known terrain higher than those figures along the route, such as crossing the Andes or Himalayas, escape procedures are devised to limit the time at those higher altitude.

That does require more fuel, however, we have to be able to assure proper terrain clearance to do that because, unlike Admiral Byrd, IFR means you could be in cloud the whole way to destination.

If we can't guarantee statutory terrain clearance, then we simply aren't permitted to fly over that terrain.

The charter flights that do sightseeing over Antarctica also have the IFR restriction. This was imposed after the Air New Zealand Mt Erebus disaster in 1979.
So they only fly in the parts of the continent where terrain data is accurately known.

And this post details one particular Santiago to Sydney flight, Flights in the Southern Hemisphere « Reply #52 on: October 04, 2017, 07:42:48 AM »

I hope all this helps.

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #8 on: November 20, 2017, 11:05:23 PM »
What I'm currently struggling to find an answer to is why it appears that there are no flights that go directly over Antarctica, despite the fact that in some cases a flight directly over Antarctica would be the shortest possible flight. If the flights do exist, I can't find any.
The most-obvious path for this example I think would be Western Australia to southeast South America. The largest international airports, if I'm not mistaken, in each of those continents are Perth, Australia (PER) and Buenos Aires, Argentina (EZE). If we search for a direct flight from PER to EZE, it would look like this, going directly over the center of Antarctica. This flight below, I believe is only theoretical since I could not find any actual flights like this. This flight, if it exists, would be about 7800 miles (6800 nautical miles) and last about 15.25 hours.
I know the thread is old, but I felt like answering anyway.
While I'm not sure of the physical size of the airport, Perth is not the airport with the most traffic.
The major international Airport in Australia is Sydney. Thus lots of flights go from there.

Rab covered other reasons to avoid Antartica.
But one extra one I will say is the weather.
The weather at the north pole is quite mild compared to Antarctica.

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2017, 09:01:09 AM »
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.

An equal amount of sun year in an and year out would result in climates that are more similar to each other, yet that is not the reality of the Flat Earth on which we live.

The reality is the outermost reaches of the Flat Earth on which we live receive little to NO Sun at all and it is cold as fuck and will always remain cold as fuck.

I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.

Go pound sand.

Anybody can draw lines on a map and claim the lines were generated by some other software.

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2017, 12:09:54 PM »
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.
The fact that the structure of the 2 are so dramatically different is the number one reason to call bullshit on that argument.

The north pole is a large body of water with ice in it.

The south pole is a continent covered in ice.
This includes large mountains.

The 2 are vastly different.
As such, you would not expect the 2 to have the same weather.

The reality is the outermost reaches of the Flat Earth on which we live receive little to NO Sun at all and it is cold as fuck and will always remain cold as fuck.
No, the reality is that the 2 poles receive similar amounts of light.

I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.
Then show a problem with it. Until you do, you are just calling BS.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.
Then go track it yourself.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2017, 02:01:38 PM »
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.

An equal amount of sun year in an and year out would result in climates that are more similar to each other, yet that is not the reality of the Flat Earth on which we live.
Rubbish! The reason for the huge difference is simple that the North Pole region is all ocean and Antarctica is elevated land.
Look at the climate of Siberia and compare that with say Iceland.

Quote from: totallackey
The reality is the outermost reaches of the Flat Earth on which we live receive little to NO Sun at all and it is cold as fuck and will always remain cold as fuck.

I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.
You haven't the slightest idea of what your are talking about because most aircraft tracking is not by radar, but by ADS-B and similar services.
Hence aircraft can only be tracked when in range of an ADS-B receiver and their are not many across the southern Pacific, Indian or Altantic oceans.
Go and improve you education, airservices, Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast.
Some time in 2018, satellite based ABS-B will be deployed using new Iridium satellites being deployed.
See, Aireon, SPACE-BASED ADS-B MAKING GLOBAL AIR TRAFFIC SURVEILLANCE A POWERFUL REALITY.

Yes, using satellites, those thingos that orbit above the Globe.

Quote from: totallackey
Go pound sand.
While you bury your head in the sand, because you simply don't have the nouse to face reality!

Quote from: totallackey
Anybody can draw lines on a map and claim the lines were generated by some other software.
TWCobra is a Captain on the QANTAS QF27,QF28 flights Sydney to/from Santiago. See what he has to say!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TWCobra, Senior Member, Metabunk might have a very good idea, Mr TotallyLacking (in credibility), because he is the pilot on this Flight QF28.

Quote from: TWCobra
A Flight over the Antarctic Sea Ice From Chile to Australia (QF28)

QF28, Route on Mercator's Projection
[Nov 18 2016] For anyone interested, in a couple of hours I'll be heading out of Santiago heading for Sydney on the QF28. The flight plan has us spending quite a bit of time at 71'30" South and the cloud forecast at the moment shows not a lot of cloud! Lucky I brought 2 GoPros with me!

Fingers crossed for a good time-lapse video of the ice pack!

The pic above shows the route. I've been meaning to post something explaining great circle routes and why they are faster. This map will help once I compare it to the Google Earth representation of the track.

In the meantime we will be taking off around 1700 GMT and landing about 14 hours later. Only around 5% of the flight will be visible on FR24 as there is just nobody to pick up our ADSB signals.

Main Flight plan has just arrived with 13:25 as the flight time which should have us in Sydney on schedule at 0645 UTC. Here is what the flight looks like in the Nav software.


QF28, Route on Polar Projection
[UPDATE: Nov 19, 2016]
Just got in. We had 30 minutes with an awesome view of the ice.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Read the rest in: A Flight over the Antarctic Sea Ice From Chile to Australia (QF28)

You might also  :P enjoy reading :P Flat Earth Theory Debunked by Short Flights (QF27 & QF28) From Australia to South America.
Try that on your Pizza Planet map!

Get up to date, Mr Genius!

And I'd believe TWCobra before TotallyCrabby any day!

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2017, 04:33:24 PM »
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.
What is the reason for not flying directly over the south pole other than temperature/weather conditions?
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2017, 07:05:31 PM »
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.
I did not say that! Totally Crabby said that. I'll assume it was a simp,e mistake.

Quote from: AltSpace
What is the reason for not flying directly over the south pole other than temperature/weather conditions?
Here are a few:
Under IFR rules commercial must not fly over regions without adequately mapped terrain.
In the event of a depressurisation the plane must descend asap to 14,000 ft then to 10,000 ft when the passenger's oxygen runs out.
There are sections with low enough elevation for this to be no problem, nevertheless flying at 10,000 ft uses much more fuel.
Flying anywhere over the Antarctic requires a certain minimum number of polar environment suits.
Aircraft must always carry enough reserve fuel to reach designated emergency diversion airports at all points along the route.
Then at high altitude the air temperature can freeze the usual Jet A fuel (kerosene) and the more expensive Jet A-1 or Jet B  (kerosene+naphtha) might be needed.

These restraints apply to commercial passenger flights everywhere, it's just that all affect Antarctic flights.
Of course there are sight seeing flights and tourist flight's directly the South Pole. About 25% of Antarctica is quite unrestricted
The North Pole has many more diversion airports and far less extreme weather conditions.

In any case there is no reason for the Sydney to/from Santiago to fly over the South Pole. Here is the Great Circle route:

PS I hope this turns out OK. I had cataract surgery (itself a piece-of-cake) a couple of hours ago and
      I can't even get my glasses on properly over my uncovered eye. Well, that's my excuse for any typos.

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2017, 07:57:04 PM »
That was my bad, messed up on quoting you.
And the fact the weather at the North Pole is so dramatically different from that of the supposed South Pole is the number one reason to call bullshit on the globe thing.
I did not say that! Totally Crabby said that. I'll assume it was a simp,e mistake.

Quote from: AltSpace
What is the reason for not flying directly over the south pole other than temperature/weather conditions?
Here are a few:
Under IFR rules commercial must not fly over regions without adequately mapped terrain.
In the event of a depressurisation the plane must descend asap to 14,000 ft then to 10,000 ft when the passenger's oxygen runs out.
There are sections with low enough elevation for this to be no problem, nevertheless flying at 10,000 ft uses much more fuel.
Flying anywhere over the Antarctic requires a certain minimum number of polar environment suits.
Aircraft must always carry enough reserve fuel to reach designated emergency diversion airports at all points along the route.
Then at high altitude the air temperature can freeze the usual Jet A fuel (kerosene) and the more expensive Jet A-1 or Jet B  (kerosene+naphtha) might be needed.

These restraints apply to commercial passenger flights everywhere, it's just that all affect Antarctic flights.
Of course there are sight seeing flights and tourist flight's directly the South Pole. About 25% of Antarctica is quite unrestricted
The North Pole has many more diversion airports and far less extreme weather conditions.

In any case there is no reason for the Sydney to/from Santiago to fly over the South Pole. Here is the Great Circle route:

PS I hope this turns out OK. I had cataract surgery (itself a piece-of-cake) a couple of hours ago and
      I can't even get my glasses on properly over my uncovered eye. Well, that's my excuse for any typos.
So, basically, they can't fly over the Antarctic because it is much too cold for the most efficient altitudes for the planes?
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2017, 08:28:36 PM »
So, basically, they can't fly over the Antarctic because it is much too cold for the most efficient altitudes for the planes?
Commercial passenger planes are not permitted fly in 75% of Antarctica because of the numerous IFR rules I gave above.
In addition:
Commercial passenger planes do not fly across Antarctica because there is no commercial reason to do so.
At the present time there is no commercially viable route that even touches on Antarctica, apart from sight seeing flights.

A shortest route for a Perth to Santiago flight would overfly the South Pole, but Perth is a much smaller city than Sydney (or Melbourne) so at present the flight is not viable.
 

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2017, 11:21:56 PM »
What is the reason for not flying directly over the south pole other than temperature/weather conditions?
That has already been addressed.
There are no routes that people want to fly (that is that have any serious demand and would be economically viable) which go over the south pole.

Why should they go over the south pole?

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2017, 11:28:46 PM »
That has already been addressed.
Well, Rabinoz explained it well enough I guess.
Quote from: JackBlack
There are no routes that people want to fly (that is that have any serious demand and would be economically viable) which go over the south pole.
You mean with the different fuel and equipment that goes along with it?
Quote from: JackBlack
Why should they go over the south pole?
If all else were equal, then why not with the shortest route? They've done it with the Sydney-Santiago, it could get quite straight with a flight route.
But if the fuel could freeze, I wouldn't go over the south pole of course.
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #18 on: November 21, 2017, 11:48:46 PM »
Quote from: JackBlack
There are no routes that people want to fly (that is that have any serious demand and would be economically viable) which go over the south pole.
You mean with the different fuel and equipment that goes along with it?
No, I just mean commercially viable routes.
The only routes you would want to fly are those which will receive significant traffic.
Sydney is a major international airport, in part due to it being in the most populous city in Australia. As such, it makes the most sense for international flights to come from here.
Meanwhile Perth is basically nothing.

If all else were equal, then why not with the shortest route?
Not all else is equal.
The shortest routes which are economically viable don't go over the south pole.
So even ignoring the weather, there is no reason to go there.

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #19 on: November 21, 2017, 11:58:43 PM »
No, I just mean commercially viable routes.
The only routes you would want to fly are those which will receive significant traffic.
Sydney is a major international airport, in part due to it being in the most populous city in Australia. As such, it makes the most sense for international flights to come from here.
Meanwhile Perth is basically nothing.
Why? Even if it is a once in 20 years flight, why not fly the shortest route over the south pole?
It seems you are saying that even without the differing conditions, the shortest route is not economically viable, but what I got out of it is that it is not economically viable because of the weather conditions/temperatures over the Antarctic.
Quote
The shortest routes which are economically viable don't go over the south pole.
So even ignoring the weather, there is no reason to go there.
If it was a flight from Perth to Santiago, why would the fact that it is smaller than Sydney make it a less viable path?
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2017, 12:48:35 AM »
If all else were equal, then why not with the shortest route? They've done it with the Sydney-Santiago, it could get quite straight with a flight route.
No, the shortest Sydney-Santiago route does not overfly the South Pole.
In any case there is no reason for the Sydney to/from Santiago to fly over the South Pole. Here is the Great Circle route:
The line labelled "Sydney to Santiago 11,400 km", touching 60°S  is the great circle route on the Globe - the geodesic.
The Santiago to Sydney flight with Captain TWCobra flew a lot further south, down below 70°S, to avoid headwinds.
So they flew a longer course, but achieved a better ground speed. They overflew a lot of ice, but did not touch Antarctica.

A Perth to Santiago route would fly over the pole., but as far as I know it has not been flown commercially - there's no reason to.
And there just aren't the required diversion airports, so the route would not be suitable even it was otherwise allowed by IFR.
I believe one (at least) RAF C-130 Hercules was flown from Perth to the Falklands during that war, but I've no confirmation, so it does not mean much.

Quote from: AltSpace
But if the fuel could freeze, I wouldn't go over the south pole of course.
If planes must fly in that region they use low temperature fuel, which is more expensive and hazardous - easier ignition from static arcs etc.
I noticed that you asked
If it was a flight from Perth to Santiago, why would the fact that it is smaller than Sydney make it a less viable path?
There are fewer passengers from Perth and it is further than from Sydney, so naturally QANTAS made the decision to fly from Sydney.
The smaller number of passengers fly Perth-Sydney-Santiago. No great problem.

Of course were they fly from Perth they would have to divert around part of Antarctica anyway.

But all this is very hypothetical because none of us are involved in making these commercial decisions.

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2017, 01:21:25 AM »
No, the shortest Sydney-Santiago route does not overfly the South Pole.
In any case there is no reason for the Sydney to/from Santiago to fly over the South Pole. Here is the Great Circle route:
The line labelled "Sydney to Santiago 11,400 km", touching 60°S  is the great circle route on the Globe - the geodesic.
The Santiago to Sydney flight with Captain TWCobra flew a lot further south, down below 70°S, to avoid headwinds.
So they flew a longer course, but achieved a better ground speed. They overflew a lot of ice, but did not touch Antarctica.

I know, I was saying it was the shortest route, and they took it, so it clearly was viable, even if it is rarely taken.
Quote
A Perth to Santiago route would fly over the pole., but as far as I know it has not been flown commercially - there's no reason to.
Why not? Never enough in that area to make a flight? If they did, then what is wrong with the shortest route?
Quote
If planes must fly in that region they use low temperature fuel, which is more expensive and hazardous - easier ignition from static arcs etc.
Is it really that much more spendy?
Quote
There are fewer passengers from Perth and it is further than from Sydney, so naturally QANTAS made the decision to fly from Sydney.
The smaller number of passengers fly Perth-Sydney-Santiago. No great problem.
So since few passengers from Perth go to Santiago by flight, they stop by Sydney every-time? Is that why it isn't viable?
Quote
Of course were they fly from Perth they would have to divert around part of Antarctica anyway.
And my question is, ignoring temp. and weather conditions, why is the shorter path less viable?
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2017, 01:46:59 AM »
There seems to be a lot of ignorant debate concerning HUGE flight times between Australia and South America.

But really there is nothing unusual about these flight at all.

I have seen quite a bit of rubbish concerning direct flights routing via North America?

WTF would these direct flights need to route this way?

The 3 pictures below illustrate exactly how these flights route, and it's usually either via overhead New Zealand or south of, depending on the direction of the upper winds, and best routing to avoid any headwinds.

As an air traffic controller in Christchurch, New Zealand, I have a direct knowledge of the routing that these flights take, and to provide actual backup to these routings, I have taken 2 screenshots from the Flightradar24 website that monitors and displays controlled flights around the world. The screenshots are that of a direct Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia flight, QANTAS 28, which took place around a week ago.

As the most direct route is overhead Christchurch, I have personally witnessed this flight on many occasions, travelling in either direction, dependant on departure point and destination.

The route is a curved line, due to the display of the 3D flight path onto a 2D world map.

The 3rd picture is from Google Earth, and illustrates how this 2D curved route, would actually appear as a straight line on the 3D globe.








They have mastered teleportation and are hiding it from us, they teleport the planes to their destination with some bit inbetween

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2017, 02:02:18 AM »
Why? Even if it is a once in 20 years flight, why not fly the shortest route over the south pole?
A once in 20 year flight would make no sense at all.
No one is going to wait 20 years just to have a flight.

The same flights happen almost every day.
No one is going to want to make sure they get that specific flight. They are far more likely to book an earlier or later flight on a day of their choosing which will go another way.

You seem to just want one to go over the south pole.

It seems you are saying that even without the differing conditions, the shortest route is not economically viable
It can be interpreted that way.
If you have a few people in Perth that want to go to South America, it is more economically viable to have them catch a plane to Sydney, along with loads of other people going to Sydney, and have them get on a place in Sydney to go to South America.
That is far more economically viable than having loads of people in Sydney be forced to fly to Perth just to catch a plane to go to South America over the south pole.

I am saying that even without these other considerations there is not likely to be many (if any) flights that go over the south pole.

There simply isn't enough demand for these flights.


If it was a flight from Perth to Santiago, why would the fact that it is smaller than Sydney make it a less viable path?
Why would people go to Perth just to catch a flight to Santiago?
The majority of people flying from Australia to Santiago would be happier to go via Sydney. It will likely be a much shorter flight for them.
Sydney to Santiago is shorter than Perth to Santiago.
Additionally, these people are likely to be coming from Australia or NZ. This makes Perth quite far out of the way.

As such, there is more demand for the flight from Sydney than there is from Perth. That makes Perth less economically viable.

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2017, 02:05:09 AM »
So since few passengers from Perth go to Santiago by flight, they stop by Sydney every-time? Is that why it isn't viable?
Pretty much.
The few people from Perth going to Sydney makes more sense than the larger number going from Sydney to Perth, and Sydney is a better choice for those from Brisbane, NZ, Melbourne, Canberra and Adelaide.
So Sydney is the smarter choice.

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2017, 02:21:22 AM »
I see.
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2018, 06:08:25 PM »
I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.

Go pound sand.

Anybody can draw lines on a map and claim the lines were generated by some other software.
However, the flight schedules are published. If the flights don't exist, where are the complaints about never being able to book on them? If they exist, but take much longer than scheduled, then where are the complaints about the excessive and persistent delays? The most likely answer is that the flights exist, and take about as long as advertised, and that's a problem for the flat earth theory.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22983
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2018, 01:00:14 PM »
I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.

Go pound sand.

Anybody can draw lines on a map and claim the lines were generated by some other software.
However, the flight schedules are published. If the flights don't exist, where are the complaints about never being able to book on them? If they exist, but take much longer than scheduled, then where are the complaints about the excessive and persistent delays? The most likely answer is that the flights exist, and take about as long as advertised, and that's a problem for the flat earth theory.

Nope.

The problem is;

There is more than 100.000.000 flat earth believer and about 500.000 of them are living in Australia. About 10 times more flat earth believers in Brasil. But neither in Brasil, nor in Australia a flat earth believer flown to the other continent.

All the claims made as "we flight Santiago from Sydney" all are rounders. So all of them are suspicious. This is main problem.

Rounders always say "hey man, go, run to Santiago, cmoooonn". But none of us have done it. Because it is not exist.

Think, if you are deceiving people and gathering more than 20 billion $'s for per year, so you may set many dishonest people say lie like "comoooonn we gone to Santiago, hey comooon we did it". They have  not gone to Santiago from Sydney, nor the opposite route. They are nothing but a bunch of dishonest people!

If you say you are travelling the moon every day and returning every night, do we have to believe your lie? Or do we have to believe a lie that depends on a route written on a paper? No, we have not.

Prove it. Absent. I watched many full time videos between other routes but never, never and never a flight between Santiago and Sydney. There is nothing like this. This is completely a hoax. Who says to done it, he is the most one of the liar and dishonest one of the world.


this workplace is on strike

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22983
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2018, 01:16:57 PM »
Nowadays the interest to the flat earth theory is increased again. About all over the world, especially Australia.

And I wondered which city in Chile most interest to the FE?

In this image:



Img taken from this link and this view today is reliable.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=CL&q=flat%20earth,nasa

Did you see? The most interest to "Flat Earth" in Chile is in the Santiago. This city that globists constany claim they are travelling between Australia! And whats happen? This claim, I mean rounders say "we travel between Santiago and Sydney" incrases the interest in Santiago to the FE theory. Because they know this travel is impossible, absent so there must be a problem!


this workplace is on strike

Re: Flight times between Australia and South America
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2018, 01:56:37 PM »
I call bull shit on the whole flightradar tracking thing presented in the OP.

There is not one independently documented instance of flightradar tracking a supposed non-stop Australia to South America (or South Africa) for the entire length of the claimed flight.

Go pound sand.

Anybody can draw lines on a map and claim the lines were generated by some other software.
However, the flight schedules are published. If the flights don't exist, where are the complaints about never being able to book on them? If they exist, but take much longer than scheduled, then where are the complaints about the excessive and persistent delays? The most likely answer is that the flights exist, and take about as long as advertised, and that's a problem for the flat earth theory.

Nope.

The problem is;

There is more than 100.000.000 flat earth believer and about 500.000 of them are living in Australia. About 10 times more flat earth believers in Brasil. But neither in Brasil, nor in Australia a flat earth believer flown to the other continent.

All the claims made as "we flight Santiago from Sydney" all are rounders. So all of them are suspicious. This is main problem.

Rounders always say "hey man, go, run to Santiago, cmoooonn". But none of us have done it. Because it is not exist.

Think, if you are deceiving people and gathering more than 20 billion $'s for per year, so you may set many dishonest people say lie like "comoooonn we gone to Santiago, hey comooon we did it". They have  not gone to Santiago from Sydney, nor the opposite route. They are nothing but a bunch of dishonest people!

If you say you are travelling the moon every day and returning every night, do we have to believe your lie? Or do we have to believe a lie that depends on a route written on a paper? No, we have not.

Prove it. Absent. I watched many full time videos between other routes but never, never and never a flight between Santiago and Sydney. There is nothing like this. This is completely a hoax. Who says to done it, he is the most one of the liar and dishonest one of the world.
Source for your numbers of travellers, believers etc. please.