# flight times

• 108 Replies
• 16857 Views
?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #30 on: January 14, 2007, 02:44:31 PM »
The 24000 miles diameter is quoted in the FAQ.  Did you just edit your reply?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #31 on: January 14, 2007, 02:47:54 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
Ok.  Start from the ice wall nearest Chile.  Using ratios (ie not absolute distances) can you make an estimation as to the distance between the ice wall and Chile.  Note I have not asked for an accurate distance, just a rough estimate, eg 1/10, as in "the distance from the ice wall to Chile is about 1/10 of the whole distance across".

Yes, I would say 1/10 is a rough approximation.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #32 on: January 14, 2007, 02:50:10 PM »
OK.  And can you make a similar estimation as to the distance between NZ and the far ice wall.  Again, I'd go for 1/10.  Agreed?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #33 on: January 14, 2007, 02:50:28 PM »
Agreed.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #34 on: January 14, 2007, 02:52:31 PM »
Ok.  It's worth saying at this point that none of this need be related to RE distances in any way, we are just looking at FE.

So if the distance from near ice wall to Chile is 1/10 total distance, and distance from NZ to far ice wall is also 1/10, then the remaining distance is 4/5.  Agreed?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #35 on: January 14, 2007, 02:54:21 PM »
Agreed.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #36 on: January 14, 2007, 02:55:51 PM »
Ok.  So we've established that on FE, a straight line between Chile and NZ is about 4/5 of the total diameter, and 4/5 of 24900 is 19920 miles.  Agreed?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #37 on: January 14, 2007, 03:00:24 PM »
Above, on the first post of this page, you estimated the diameter as 24,000 miles. You are changing your numbers around.

?

#### Banjooie

• 44
##### flight times
« Reply #38 on: January 14, 2007, 03:01:09 PM »
Well, okay, can we agree that 4/5s of 24000 is, um, whatever someone not too lazy to pull a calculator out and test it is?

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #39 on: January 14, 2007, 03:01:37 PM »
My apologies - I have since rechecked the FAQ and the exact number there is 24900.  But do you agree with my previous statement?

#### cmdshft

• The Elder Ones
• 13149
• swiggity swooty
##### flight times
« Reply #40 on: January 14, 2007, 03:03:09 PM »
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Above, on the first post of this page, you estimated the diameter as 24,000 miles. You are changing your numbers around.

Pot calling the kettle black...

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #41 on: January 14, 2007, 03:03:17 PM »
Quote
My apologies - I have since rechecked the FAQ and the exact number there is 24900. But do you agree with my previous statement?

You are forgiven.

Yes, I can agree on a rough estimated distance of 19,920 miles.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #42 on: January 14, 2007, 03:08:33 PM »
So just to be clear, from everything we've agreed on in these last few posts:  on FE, the straight-line distance between Chile and NZ is, give or take, approximately 19000 miles.  Agreed?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #43 on: January 14, 2007, 03:12:08 PM »
Agreed, that might be a rough estimate.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #44 on: January 14, 2007, 03:18:15 PM »
Well, this sort of brings me back to my original question: on FE, to travel the shortest possible distance between Chile and NZ in 11.5hrs requires an average speed of about 1650 mph.  How is this possible in a 747 with average cruising speed 600mph?

And yes I realise these figures are slightly different this time round - the original was based on my estimation of 18000 miles, these are based on your estimation of 19000.

Also, please note we have STILL not made any reference to round earth.

To reiterate: on FE, how can you travel 19000 miles in 11.5hrs?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #45 on: January 14, 2007, 03:54:11 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
Well, this sort of brings me back to my original question: on FE, to travel the shortest possible distance between Chile and NZ in 11.5hrs requires an average speed of about 1650 mph.  How is this possible in a 747 with average cruising speed 600mph?

And yes I realise these figures are slightly different this time round - the original was based on my estimation of 18000 miles, these are based on your estimation of 19000.

Also, please note we have STILL not made any reference to round earth.

To reiterate: on FE, how can you travel 19000 miles in 11.5hrs?

Planes don't travel a direct route between Chile to New Zealand. In reality they make a lot of little hops to major destinations picking up and dropping off passengers.

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #46 on: January 14, 2007, 03:57:34 PM »
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote from: "brit"
Well, this sort of brings me back to my original question: on FE, to travel the shortest possible distance between Chile and NZ in 11.5hrs requires an average speed of about 1650 mph.  How is this possible in a 747 with average cruising speed 600mph?

And yes I realise these figures are slightly different this time round - the original was based on my estimation of 18000 miles, these are based on your estimation of 19000.

Also, please note we have STILL not made any reference to round earth.

To reiterate: on FE, how can you travel 19000 miles in 11.5hrs?

Planes don't travel a direct route between Chile to New Zealand. In reality they make a lot of little hops around the world picking up and dropping off passengers.

Actually there is a single flight from Auckland to Santiago.  It took me a damn long time to find one with no other stops, but I found it.  I think it was on www.LAN.com, if you want to find it again.

#### cmdshft

• The Elder Ones
• 13149
• swiggity swooty
##### flight times
« Reply #47 on: January 14, 2007, 03:57:55 PM »
Enough techincalities. He's asking if a 747 did not make any stops, then how would it possible?

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #48 on: January 14, 2007, 04:01:06 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
So just to be clear, from everything we've agreed on in these last few posts:  on FE, the straight-line distance between Chile and NZ is, give or take, approximately 19000 miles.  Agreed?

that is not even close; you are waaay too high.  It's more like 4500 Km.  I did the exact calculation myself from Auckland to Santiago using their specific latitudes and longitudes.

Here is my post:  http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7663&sid=7ebcdc3b67913e75c7206f358a51cde7

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #49 on: January 14, 2007, 04:02:27 PM »
There is a daily DIRECT Qantas service that takes 11 hours 20 minutes.

Again Tom, I ask you to answer my question.  How can a 747 achive 1650mph?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #50 on: January 14, 2007, 04:03:14 PM »
edit: retracted

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #51 on: January 14, 2007, 04:04:13 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
There is a daily DIRECT Qantas service that takes 11 hours 20 minutes.

Again Tom, I ask you to answer my question.  How can a 747 achive 1650mph?

You're going to have to read my post, Brit.  I did the exact same calculation except with no estimates.  you are way off, my friend.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #52 on: January 14, 2007, 04:04:25 PM »
eviltoothpaste your calculations are based on a diameter of 12800km, whereas it clearly states on the FAQ that the diameter is 24900 miles.  Are you suggesting the FAQ is wrong?

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #53 on: January 14, 2007, 04:08:18 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
eviltoothpaste your calculations are based on a diameter of 12800km, whereas it clearly states on the FAQ that the diameter is 24900 miles.  Are you suggesting the FAQ is wrong?

In his post he estimates the diameter of the equator at 12,800km.

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #54 on: January 14, 2007, 04:09:47 PM »
Quote from: "brit"
eviltoothpaste your calculations are based on a diameter of 12800km, whereas it clearly states on the FAQ that the diameter is 24900 miles.  Are you suggesting the FAQ is wrong?

interesting.  That's a really big difference.  What did I do?

ahhh, I looked it up on the "government controlled" internet.  big mistake, my apologies.

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #55 on: January 14, 2007, 04:11:44 PM »
My mistake Tom, but you have previously agreed that the 19000 figure was fairly accurate.

eviltoothpaste, if you can calculate FE distances between any 2 earth points to absolute accuracy (and your post implies that you claim you can) then surely you can present me with an accurate top-down map of FE?

?

#### brit

• 23
##### flight times
« Reply #56 on: January 14, 2007, 04:13:59 PM »
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not there, but could you tell me which non-government-controlled source you obtained the latitudes and logitudes from?

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #57 on: January 14, 2007, 04:14:42 PM »
I wonder where they got that number for the diameter?  They must have meant Km.

#### EvilToothpaste

• 2461
• The Reverse Engineer
##### flight times
« Reply #58 on: January 14, 2007, 04:19:47 PM »
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/RicardoMartinez.shtml

That's where I got my source for my calculations.  I think the FAQ meant to say Km instead of miles, because the generally accepted diameter of the equator fits pretty damn close in that case.

We're going to have to take this up with the big-wigs of FET.

?

#### Tom Bishop

##### flight times
« Reply #59 on: January 14, 2007, 04:23:15 PM »
edit: retracted