Free discussings about new map

I want to get your offers about some points:



We see on this drawing these cities/places as marked:

"About Johannesburg (right sided), About Australia (upper circle)".

As we see that, all suspicious points marked as about true. There is only one handicap here: Sydney to LA route. It seems about 3.000kms on the map, perhaps we may do it 4-5k but there is flights between them at least 12:00 hours.

In my oinion, aircrafts use this path instead of a line:



This route is about 10.000 kms and corrects the wole map



Can it be?

Your offers are important for me, except whose are in ignore list.

Hey, dome, sup?

I recently flew on Air New Zealand flight 28 from Auckland, NZ to Houston, Texas, USA. This flight crossed the southern part of the Baja Peninsula and northern Mexico, slightly north of the great circle passing through these airports. This flight must have gone right through the middle of your "no radar" zone.

Elapsed time between wheels up and wheels down, using my wristwatch's "chrono" (stopwatch) mode, was 13h15m57s, about 8 minutes less than the predicted flight time announced at the beginning of the flight.

The outbound flight (NZ 29) a few weeks earlier was about 90 minutes longer, and we were aloft for almost exactly the announced time at the beginning of that flight according to my watch. The portion of that flight over North America was dark and mostly cloudy, so land features could not be identified once we left the Houston area.

Google earth reports the great-circle distance between the airports as 11934 km, giving the effective average ground speed as about 820 km/h for the outbound flight and 900 km/h for the return, but the actual ground speeds must be at least a little higher since the actual flight paths must be longer than the great circle path. This seems consistent with the stated cruising speed of the Boeing 787 used on this route, 567 mi/h (912 km/h), considering winds aloft, reduced speed at take-off and landing, and true distances flown.

Any questions?

I recently flew on Air New Zealand flight 28 from Auckland, NZ to Houston, Texas, USA. This flight crossed the southern part of the Baja Peninsula and northern Mexico, slightly north of the great circle passing through these airports. This flight must have gone right through the middle of your "no radar" zone.

Elapsed time between wheels up and wheels down, using my wristwatch's "chrono" (stopwatch) mode, was 13h15m57s, about 8 minutes less than the predicted flight time announced at the beginning of the flight.

The outbound flight (NZ 29) a few weeks earlier was about 90 minutes longer, and we were aloft for almost exactly the announced time at the beginning of that flight according to my watch. The portion of that flight over North America was dark and mostly cloudy, so land features could not be identified once we left the Houston area.

Google earth reports the great-circle distance between the airports as 11934 km, giving the effective average ground speed as about 820 km/h for the outbound flight and 900 km/h for the return, but the actual ground speeds must be at least a little higher since the actual flight paths must be longer than the great circle path. This seems consistent with the stated cruising speed of the Boeing 787 used on this route, 567 mi/h (912 km/h), considering winds aloft, reduced speed at take-off and landing, and true distances flown.

Any questions?

Of course, there is no radar zone. I'm trying to understand why pilot are going wrong path.

Now I'm thinking that pilots are first trying to arrive to the middle of path. According to them, the middle of path is a place near to mexico.

The path is equal to:



Thanks for your comment.

Any otherone has an idea?

Very interesting and useful work. There's a flat earth group on facebook I was in contact with a year ago attempting to do the same thing. Would you like me to introduce you? I haven't seen how far they've gotten, but there might be some room to work between each others findings.

Very interesting and useful work. There's a flat earth group on facebook I was in contact with a year ago attempting to do the same thing. Would you like me to introduce you? I haven't seen how far they've gotten, but there might be some room to work between each others findings.

I am a member of the flat earth society. I'm feeling myself in my home in here. So you can freely introduce me or use my works as society's workings or your own workings.

Shortly, you have a represent right the society,so including my workings. Although I'm the most working person, this is a common working, at least, theorically.

Quote from: Alpha2Omega on January 20, 2018, 09:51:15 AM

I recently flew on Air New Zealand flight 28 from Auckland, NZ to Houston, Texas, USA. This flight crossed the southern part of the Baja Peninsula and northern Mexico, slightly north of the great circle passing through these airports. This flight must have gone right through the middle of your "no radar" zone.

Elapsed time between wheels up and wheels down, using my wristwatch's "chrono" (stopwatch) mode, was 13h15m57s, about 8 minutes less than the predicted flight time announced at the beginning of the flight.

The outbound flight (NZ 29) a few weeks earlier was about 90 minutes longer, and we were aloft for almost exactly the announced time at the beginning of that flight according to my watch. The portion of that flight over North America was dark and mostly cloudy, so land features could not be identified once we left the Houston area.

Google earth reports the great-circle distance between the airports as 11934 km, giving the effective average ground speed as about 820 km/h for the outbound flight and 900 km/h for the return, but the actual ground speeds must be at least a little higher since the actual flight paths must be longer than the great circle path. This seems consistent with the stated cruising speed of the Boeing 787 used on this route, 567 mi/h (912 km/h), considering winds aloft, reduced speed at take-off and landing, and true distances flown.

Any questions?

Of course, there is no radar zone. I'm trying to understand why pilot are going wrong path.

Now I'm thinking that pilots are first trying to arrive to the middle of path. According to them, the middle of path is a place near to mexico.

The path is equal to:

Actually, no. I arrived in Houston, Texas, not Los Angeles, California. Houston is east of San Antonio and a little east of due south of Dallas. The flight passed between Monterrey, NL, Mexico and San Antonio.

Something like the green arrow in the image below doesn't require unnecessary looping around to thread the way between those cities:



I think the city between Mexico City and Dallas on your drawing is Monterrey, but the label is too small to read; I'm not sure what the others that are too small to read are. Note that this image was made from the first version you posted, before amending and re-posting it to include text.

Why do you think they're going the wrong path? Why would pilots avoid the middle of the Pacific Ocean? In this case, great-circle distance and published cruising speed for that airliner fit flight time and identifiable landmarks quite well.

Thanks for your comment.

You're welcome!

Thank you Intikam. You have no idea how much joy it brings me that you feel at home here. I'm glad we can use your works, I of course, will attribute them.

Perhaps its almost time to reintroduce the Earth Not A Globe Review.

In my oinion, aircrafts use this path instead of a line:



This route is about 10.000 kms and corrects the wole map



Can it be?

Your offers are important for me, except whose are in ignore list.

No, it can't be.
That route would put the craft on several radars which would easily be detected. It would also result in the passengers knowing they are not travelling the way the airlines claim.

Of course, there is no radar zone. I'm trying to understand why pilot are going wrong path.

Perhaps you should try it without first assuming Earth is flat.
If you do, you will realise that these flights all work fine on a globe Earth.

One has to wonder about that area, given the accounts we've seen concerning it.

One has to wonder about that area, given the accounts we've seen concerning it.

Not regarding flights which complete in a time far too short to be possible on your FE model.
Also, considering you are claiming a massive conspiracy regarding the shape of Earth from well developed countries, shouldn't the problematic ones be those in the north, like the US, and the various countries of Europe that are allegedly hiding the shape of Earth?

Anthropologically, the area has great interest. At least to me. I find it odder that one can sail from that area to the South Americans in a canoe equivalent, then put up statues towards Easter Island with such accuracy. Perhaps the truth we have been told is but a nightmare man is yet to awaken from.

I digress, and don't want this to become an Easter Island thread. Please address this concern in a new thread, if you will by politeness.

I digress, and don't want this to become an Easter Island thread. Please address this concern in a new thread, if you will by politeness.

“I’ve raised a complete non sequitor, please don’t notice it or talk about it”

Why not just stay on topic?

Of course, there is no radar zone. I'm trying to understand why pilot are going wrong path.

Aircraft tracked by FlightAware, FlightRadar24, etc on long intercontinental flights are not tracked by radar, but by ADS-B!
Whether you like it or not, or whether you believe it or not makes no difference to reality!
Here is the current FlightAware ADS-B coverage:
Read this again and again and again!
Just as in the Southern Hemisphere.

Take a look at this New York to London flight over one of the busiest routes in the world, about half the flight is not tracked.

Then Do you want any more examples to prove how little we can rely on anything you say, there's plenty more where they came from!
And again!
NOT ALL flights are visable above ALL oceans in Northern Hemisphere. Just as in the Southern Hemisphere.

I don't care if you refuse to believe it or not - that is a fact - get used to it! Make a fool of yourself if you like, it's no concern of mine.

By the way, I live in Australia, I know where Australia is and I know how big Australia is - you don't!

Quote from: John Davis on January 20, 2018, 01:10:05 PM

I digress, and don't want this to become an Easter Island thread. Please address this concern in a new thread, if you will by politeness.

“I’ve raised a complete non sequitor, please don’t notice it or talk about it”

Why not just stay on topic?

I feel the point was relevant to the discussion, but the globularist mind has severe attention issues that I have to be on constant guard against. This is likely due to him gobbling up whatever is on the tele at the time.


Edit: See Above.

Any comment about this post from a few days ago, "brotherhood of the dome"?

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome on January 20, 2018, 10:10:11 AM

Now I'm thinking that pilots are first trying to arrive to the middle of path. According to them, the middle of path is a place near to mexico.

The path is equal to:

Actually, no. I arrived in Houston, Texas, not Los Angeles, California. Houston is east of San Antonio and a little east of due south of Dallas. The flight passed between Monterrey, NL, Mexico and San Antonio.

Something like the green arrow in the image below doesn't require unnecessary looping around to thread the way between those cities:

That conversation started off so well!