Flight times between Australia and South America

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!

Santiago is by far the most inhabited city in Chile, as well as the capital of the country. So of course it is the "most interested in FE theory", as far as the number of interested people go. I'd wager it is also the most interested in pineapples and tap dancing. That doesn't prove anything (except your dishonesty).

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome 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!

Santiago is by far the most inhabited city in Chile, as well as the capital of the country. So of course it is the "most interested in FE theory", as far as the number of interested people go. I'd wager it is also the most interested in pineapples and tap dancing. That doesn't prove anything (except your dishonesty).

Pineapple gets 50/day.

Nope.

The problem is;

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

It's easy to claim that all contradicting evidence is lies (although defamation proceedings might arise). But it doesn't address the point I raised.

Just now I went onto the Qantas booking page, and went through a booking from Sydney to Santiago for the coming Wenesday. Looks like the plane (assuming it exists) is nearly full. I stopped only when I reached the payment page, because I don't actually want to go to Santiago. Anyone, including a flat-earth believer, can try this. So, the question is, what would happen if I tried to pay, as I would likely do if I actually wanted to travel. There are various possible outcomes. Firstly, my payment would be rejected. Secondly, it would be accepted, but between now and Wednesday, I'd be informed that the flight was cancelled. Thirdly, I might board the plane, which leaves Sydney, only to be diverted for some alleged technical reason. Fourthly, it might actually fly to Santiago, but take 28 hours longer than the claimed flight time.

Any of those scenarios, particularly if repeated over and over, would surely cause complaint. Where are those complaints? If the world's massive conspiracy is censoring them, why does it allow this forum to exist? Why allow flat-earther believers any ability to publicise their views? Indeed, why create the appearance of the existence of non-existent flights? Why offer direct services from Sydney to Santiago that don't exist, or don't perform as advertised, given that that's only going to cause trouble?

By far the most likely scenario is that the flights do exist, and take the advertised twelve and half hours to make the trip. That would explain the lack of complaints. Of course, that's a problem for the flat-earth theory.

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.

Rubbish! Anyone living in Australia knows that Australia does not:You talk nonsense Mr Brotherhood of the Dome.

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

More rubbish!
I don't care if Mr Brotherhood of the Dome thinks they are suspicious, they still fly at least six flights a week in each direction!

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?

It means the number of passengers would be lower. That's a problem for a route that's not suitable for twin-engined aircraft under the current rules, because the four engined aircraft in commerical service capable of flying that distance are all large, with the smallest being the a340-300, carrying 277 passengers.

Quote from: AltSpace on November 21, 2017, 11:58:43 PM

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?

It means the number of passengers would be lower. That's a problem for a route that's not suitable for twin-engined aircraft under the current rules, because the four engined aircraft in commerical service capable of flying that distance are all large, with the smallest being the a340-300, carrying 277 passengers.

I don't know of any passenger flights from Perth to South America. For a start there would be great difficulty meeting safety requirements in case of diversion due to engine failure or decompression.

I have seen that there was an RAF Lockheed C-130 Hercules flight from Perth, Australia, to Stanley, Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas).

But,  I can find no recent verification. The report might have been in Royal Air Force .

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome on February 10, 2018, 01:00:14 PM

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.

Rubbish! Anyone living in Australia knows that Australia does not:

look like this:

or like this:

You talk nonsense Mr Brotherhood of the Dome.

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome

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

More rubbish!
I don't care if Mr Brotherhood of the Dome thinks they are suspicious, they still fly at least six flights a week in each direction!

No they don't! No matter how you claim it, they do not! If they do that, so nobody in Santiago awaken of it! Whole Santiago thinks the earth is flat! Because they don't know you yet!

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome 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!

Santiago is by far the most inhabited city in Chile, as well as the capital of the country. So of course it is the "most interested in FE theory", as far as the number of interested people go. I'd wager it is also the most interested in pineapples and tap dancing. That doesn't prove anything (except your dishonesty).

The interest ratio related with ratio of people interest, not the number of people. For example, if there is two cities and one of them is 10 millions and the other is 10.000; but interest is same; trends give you as "50-50" result, not 100 to zero.

So you are proved your dishonesty. I'm the most honored one here.

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome on February 10, 2018, 01:00:14 PM

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 09, 2018, 06:08:25 PM

Quote from: totallackey on November 21, 2017, 09:01:09 AM

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.

You can find out the number of believers in a topic I periodically update. You may see the last value as 40m something there. But it is a statistics and different than reality. In fact, people in every country researches flat earth with type as "flat earth" and their own language. I ascertained that people in countries don't talk English are searching "flat earth their own language" more and more than flat earth searches. But NASA is always nasa. Because it is a corporate name and never changes.

So the number of flat earth believers is: 40m + (40mx1,...) This 1,... is a number bigger than 1. So I get it as a number more than 80m. So that, 100m number of believers seems fair enough.

100.000.000 compared to 7.000.000 world ; so per 1 flat earth believer for per 70 world people.
x compared 24m australian. 24m/70= 340.000 believers. But in google trends and other places show us the interest in Australia is more than whole world. So that 500.000 number seemed fair enough.

I remember The population of Brasil is more than Australia 10 times but now I see it 8,6 times. I take it as 10 times and said it.

I calculated these numbers while posting in a few seconds and did not feel the need to show all calculations but I did not consider somebody ask them. If I did consider somebody ask it, I could make more carefuly calculation. 

Quote from: Ising on February 10, 2018, 02:08:30 PM

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome 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!

Santiago is by far the most inhabited city in Chile, as well as the capital of the country. So of course it is the "most interested in FE theory", as far as the number of interested people go. I'd wager it is also the most interested in pineapples and tap dancing. That doesn't prove anything (except your dishonesty).

The interest ratio related with ratio of people interest, not the number of people. For example, if there is two cities and one of them is 10 millions and the other is 10.000; but interest is same; trends give you as "50-50" result, not 100 to zero.

So you are proved your dishonesty. I'm the most honored one here.

Your link provides raw numbers of people, not rates. Also, you do realise that people might google "flat earth" just to make fun of you people, don't you ?

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.

1) I call bullshit on your claim you are a flight controller for anything other than a flight of fancy.

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

3) Take your FLIGHT AWARE and shove it up your keister. Tracking flights SOUTH of the the Equator is nigh impossible and anyone can draw a fucking red line on a fucking map.

Quote from: chtwrone 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.

1) I call bullshit on your claim you are a flight controller for anything other than a flight of fancy.

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

3) Take your FLIGHT AWARE and shove it up your keister. Tracking flights SOUTH of the the Equator is nigh impossible and anyone can draw a fucking red line on a fucking map.

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Or you can continue to be close minded and believe everything you see on YouTube.

Your choice.

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

What does "non-refundable" have to do with taking the flight? 

Mike

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

Only non-refundable when booking through third party sites for the cheapest seats.  I just checked Qantas.com and they have refundable options there. 

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 03:30:58 PM

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

What does "non-refundable" have to do with taking the flight? 

Mike

Non-refundable has a lot to do with it if one was doing a study on whether or not these flights actually exist.

I do plan on on saving enough money to take a trip down under in the future and it would include a week in Australia and a week in Chile.

That takes money (about 6 weeks salary for the airfare alone) and I cannot afford to waste it booking the flight and then losing the money just because...

Quote from: MicroBeta on February 11, 2018, 03:41:29 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 03:30:58 PM

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

What does "non-refundable" have to do with taking the flight? 

Mike

Non-refundable has a lot to do with it if one was doing a study on whether or not these flights actually exist.

I do plan on on saving enough money to take a trip down under in the future and it would include a week in Australia and a week in Chile.

That takes money (about 6 weeks salary for the airfare alone) and I cannot afford to waste it booking the flight and then losing the money just because...

Like frenat said, you can book through Qantas it's fully refundable if you cancel before departure.  I just looked it up.  There's a direct flight from Sydney to Santiago next Saturday. 

Mike

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

It seems an act of complete desperation to argue that airlines are advertising and offering flights that either don't exist, or take multiples of the advertised time, with multiple stops. Where are all the complaints from severely annoyed passengers, or would-be passengers? Why would the airlines do something that's only going to cause them trouble? In the case where the flight takes longer, and multiple stops, why would the airlines offer something that would inevitably lose them money? If the Earth really were flat, such that the direct flights were impossible, why wouldn't the airlines simply claim that the direct routes were uneconomic, and not offer them?

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 11:10:00 AM

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

It seems an act of complete desperation to argue that airlines are advertising and offering flights that either don't exist, or take multiples of the advertised time, with multiple stops. Where are all the complaints from severely annoyed passengers, or would-be passengers? Why would the airlines do something that's only going to cause them trouble? In the case where the flight takes longer, and multiple stops, why would the airlines offer something that would inevitably lose them money? If the Earth really were flat, such that the direct flights were impossible, why wouldn't the airlines simply claim that the direct routes were uneconomic, and not offer them?

I am a passenger and I want to go from Australia to Chile.

I book one of the direct flights.

I arrive at the airport that very day and when I arrive, a customer service agent states to me:

"Sir, we are very sorry but the direct flight has been cancelled because of rules prohibiting pilot operating hours; however, we have made these alternate arrangements for you."

If I complain a lot (probably not) the agent offers a voucher for 50 bucks off my next flight...

Not too big a deal...

Who is going to argue against caps on pilot operating hours?

Nobody.

Airlines make more money off multiple stops.

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 11, 2018, 05:22:22 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 11:10:00 AM

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

It seems an act of complete desperation to argue that airlines are advertising and offering flights that either don't exist, or take multiples of the advertised time, with multiple stops. Where are all the complaints from severely annoyed passengers, or would-be passengers? Why would the airlines do something that's only going to cause them trouble? In the case where the flight takes longer, and multiple stops, why would the airlines offer something that would inevitably lose them money? If the Earth really were flat, such that the direct flights were impossible, why wouldn't the airlines simply claim that the direct routes were uneconomic, and not offer them?

I am a passenger and I want to go from Australia to Chile.

I book one of the direct flights.

I arrive at the airport that very day and when I arrive, a customer service agent states to me:

"Sir, we are very sorry but the direct flight has been cancelled because of rules prohibiting pilot operating hours; however, we are have made these alternate arrangements for you."

If I complain a lot (probably not) the agent offers a voucher for 50 bucks off my next flight...

Not too big a deal...

Who is going to argue against caps on pilot operating hours?

Nobody.

Airlines make more money off multiple stops.

While it may be possible, do you have anything to support your supposition?

Mike

ftp://

I am a passenger and I want to go from Australia to Chile.

I book one of the direct flights.

I arrive at the airport that very day and when I arrive, a customer service agent states to me:

"Sir, we are very sorry but the direct flight has been cancelled because of rules prohibiting pilot operating hours; however, we are have made these alternate arrangements for you."

If I complain a lot (probably not) the agent offers a voucher for 50 bucks off my next flight...

Not too big a deal...

Who is going to argue against caps on pilot operating hours?

Nobody.

Airlines make more money off multiple stops.

Many passengers would be aware that there are plenty of non-stop flights that exceed twelve and half hours (I've been on such flights myself, multiple times, Sydney to Los Angeles, Singapore to London), and that the pilot hours issue is managed by having additional pilots on board so that no pilot has to work the entire flight. So they'd find this excuse less than plausible. They'd also point out that in any case, the airline would have know about the problem in advance, but still offered the non-stop flight. There's no way that an airline could get away with doing this over and over again.

As for making more money off multiple stops, this would only work if the airline tried to get the passenger to pay the extra. If the airline engaged in such a practice on a regular basis, it would certainly be subject to sanctions from consumer protection agencies, because bait and switch is not allowed.

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

The fact that it can be refunded perhaps.

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 11, 2018, 05:22:22 PM

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 11:10:00 AM

2) A person can try to book a direct flight from Australia to South America all they want. Those flights do not take place on a daily basis (I see Petey on here stating they offer six flights a week...I bet none of those actually go fulfilled).If you do book the flight, be prepared to not only lose the cost of the deposit, but also be prepared to be placed on a two or three stop flight due to any myriad of airline related foul ups.

It seems an act of complete desperation to argue that airlines are advertising and offering flights that either don't exist, or take multiples of the advertised time, with multiple stops. Where are all the complaints from severely annoyed passengers, or would-be passengers? Why would the airlines do something that's only going to cause them trouble? In the case where the flight takes longer, and multiple stops, why would the airlines offer something that would inevitably lose them money? If the Earth really were flat, such that the direct flights were impossible, why wouldn't the airlines simply claim that the direct routes were uneconomic, and not offer them?

I am a passenger and I want to go from Australia to Chile.

I book one of the direct flights.

I arrive at the airport that very day and when I arrive, a customer service agent states to me:

"Sir, we are very sorry but the direct flight has been cancelled because of rules prohibiting pilot operating hours; however, we are have made these alternate arrangements for you."

If I complain a lot (probably not) the agent offers a voucher for 50 bucks off my next flight...

Not too big a deal...

Who is going to argue against caps on pilot operating hours?

Nobody.

Airlines make more money off multiple stops.

While it may be possible, do you have anything to support your supposition?

Mike

Yes, the reality of caps on pilot operating hours.

Quote from: totallackey on February 11, 2018, 03:30:58 PM

Quote from: DavidOrJohn on February 11, 2018, 03:28:32 PM

You can verify it yourself by booking the flight and indeed taking the flight.

Which part of "non-refundable," eluded your pea-brain?

The fact that it can be refunded perhaps.

It seems Qantas (I have not verified this for a fact) is offering refunds on these supposed flights.

I will investigate further.

I know other websites offer no refunds or transfer options when ordering.

Many passengers would be aware that there are plenty of non-stop flights that exceed twelve and half hours (I've been on such flights myself, multiple times, Sydney to Los Angeles, Singapore to London), and that the pilot hours issue is managed by having additional pilots on board so that no pilot has to work the entire flight.

Easier written than done.

So they'd find this excuse less than plausible. They'd also point out that in any case, the airline would have know about the problem in advance, but still offered the non-stop flight. There's no way that an airline could get away with doing this over and over again.

Once I get more data in as far as how many of these flights actually take off and do not get re-routed, we shall see.

As for making more money off multiple stops, this would only work if the airline tried to get the passenger to pay the extra. If the airline engaged in such a practice on a regular basis, it would certainly be subject to sanctions from consumer protection agencies, because bait and switch is not allowed.

Ah, Jesus...

The extra money is not charged to the individual passenger.

The extra money comes from having a plane closer to full capacity.

I am a passenger and I want to go from Australia to Chile.

I book one of the direct flights.

I arrive at the airport that very day and....."

If I complain a lot (probably not)...

Not too big a deal...

Who is going to argue against caps on pilot operating hours?

Nobody.

Lots of people. People with deadlines. People with connecting flights. People that just want to pass on their frustrations on the next person.

Ever heard any of such people say they were treated such on the Sydney-Santiago or Sydney-Jo'burg routes?

Even if Aussies are so damn nice they don't complain (which I seriously doubt thanks to Rabinoz), what of the South Africans or even South Americans with all that passionate Latin blood?

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 11, 2018, 06:44:06 PM

Many passengers would be aware that there are plenty of non-stop flights that exceed twelve and half hours (I've been on such flights myself, multiple times, Sydney to Los Angeles, Singapore to London), and that the pilot hours issue is managed by having additional pilots on board so that no pilot has to work the entire flight.

Easier written than done.

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 11, 2018, 06:44:06 PM

So they'd find this excuse less than plausible. They'd also point out that in any case, the airline would have know about the problem in advance, but still offered the non-stop flight. There's no way that an airline could get away with doing this over and over again.

Once I get more data in as far as how many of these flights actually take off and do not get re-routed, we shall see.

Quote from: SylviaElse on February 11, 2018, 06:44:06 PM

As for making more money off multiple stops, this would only work if the airline tried to get the passenger to pay the extra. If the airline engaged in such a practice on a regular basis, it would certainly be subject to sanctions from consumer protection agencies, because bait and switch is not allowed.

Ah, Jesus...

The extra money is not charged to the individual passenger.

The extra money comes from having a plane closer to full capacity.

I agree completely! Now, I’ve never been south of the equator, but I think that these flights don’t exist and that fact can be well hidden. number of times I’ve been delayed at an airport is ridiculous! Sometimes I go to a hotel and back the next day and didn’t know even what airport or country I was in. Maybe I also have no concept of time when I fall asleep on a flight. Jet lag is the result of such drugging and passing out!

Lots of people. People with deadlines. People with connecting flights. People that just want to pass on their frustrations on the next person.

Ever heard any of such people say they were treated such on the Sydney-Santiago or Sydney-Jo'burg routes?

Even if Aussies are so damn nice they don't complain (which I seriously doubt thanks to Rabinoz), what of the South Africans or even South Americans with all that passionate Latin blood?

Whatever Copernicus...

Lots of people my ass...

80/20 rule...

80 percent of the world's people live their life looking simply to get to the next fucking day and would not utter a word...
Then we have 20 percent...made up of:

Thinking people who exercise sensibility and would not make too much of a fuss, especially in an airport, boarding on an intercontinental flight, mostly for business purposes.

RE-tards like you, who spend their lives somewhat aimlessly, finding themselves frequenting flat earth websites as part of their daily chores who have never been to an airport, let alone going to fly on a plane...

Other RE-tards too stupid to not control themselves and who think the entire world is just like them...

WTF is wrong with you?

Most people would not argue the issue of a cap on pilot operating hours and I guarantee if you tried to make a big scene out of it at an airport, you would certainly not like the result...

Eighty and twenty percent, you say?

I raise you one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-Percent_Nation

They hold the true knowledge! Keep your pitiful twenty, you weed.

Quote from: SpaceCadet on February 12, 2018, 05:58:22 AM

Lots of people. People with deadlines. People with connecting flights. People that just want to pass on their frustrations on the next person.

Ever heard any of such people say they were treated such on the Sydney-Santiago or Sydney-Jo'burg routes?

Even if Aussies are so damn nice they don't complain (which I seriously doubt thanks to Rabinoz), what of the South Africans or even South Americans with all that passionate Latin blood?

Whatever Copernicus...

Lots of people my ass...

80/20 rule...

80 percent of the world's people live their life looking simply to get to the next fucking day and would not utter a word...
Then we have 20 percent...made up of:

Thinking people who exercise sensibility and would not make too much of a fuss, especially in an airport, boarding on an intercontinental flight, mostly for business purposes.

RE-tards like you, who spend their lives somewhat aimlessly, finding themselves frequenting flat earth websites as part of their daily chores who have never been to an airport, let alone going to fly on a plane...

Other RE-tards too stupid to not control themselves and who think the entire world is just like them...

WTF is wrong with you?

Most people would not argue the issue of a cap on pilot operating hours and I guarantee if you tried to make a big scene out of it at an airport, you would certainly not like the result...

Take the flight yourself. Prove yourself wrong.