How Aeroplane Follow Earth Curvature

Quote from: JackBlack on July 09, 2019, 02:43:55 PM

But it isn't.
There is constant adjustment.
This adjustment corrects for many things, including the curvature of Earth.

What is the mechanism for constant adjustment?

Looking. Like when you walk.

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 06:35:13 AM

One degree of the curvature is 60 nautical miles long.
It is 111.12 kilometers.

Yes it is 1 degree change of orientation every 60 miles. But during 60 miles there is drop off earth surface up to 100 m if the plane not change its initial orientation.

But the plane does very slowly "change its initial orientation" by flying at a constant "pressure altitude".
A Boeing 777-300ER might cruise at a shade under 500 knots so it takes 7.2 minutes to cover that 60 nautical miles and the earth curves only 1° in 60 nautical miles.

That 100 m over 7.2 minutes is only 46 feet/minute which does not show on the altimeter anyway because it reads local altitude.

Or to look at it another way each minute the plane only "dips" by 0.14° which would be completely lost in other slight corrections even if it needed to be made.

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer. Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth. But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

For the plane, altitude not determined by pressure outside.

Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

What are you basing this statement on?

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 02:40:51 PM

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer.

And for a plane the altitude is determined by an isobaric layer.

There is one big difference though: The density of the sea changes very little width depth but the density of the atmosphere decreases bu roughly 13% each extra 1000m.

Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth.

In a submarine, the "lift" is mainly provided by buoyancy and the planes are only used to change the attitude.

But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

That is simply not correct! The procedure to climb is to increase engine power, climb to the desired altitude, then reduce engine power to achieve the required air-speed.
Climbing just 100 meters means the outside air density is reduced around 1.4% reducing the lift by that much.
Extra lift requires extra speed so if the speed remains constant the plane descends again, maintaining approximately the same altitude as read on the altimeter.

Ask a pilot who flies a Global Express XRS Corporate jet:

Do aircraft change attitude to follow the curvature of the Earth? Wolfie6020
He is a member here but has made only two posts, both on this topic:
Flat Earth General / Re: Pilots « on: September 29, 2018, 08:29:50 PM » and Flat Earth Debate / Re: "How does a plane follow the curvature of the Earth's atmosphere?" « on: September 19, 2016, 01:07:38 AM »

Why not maintenable. Even if the plane have a constant thrust (RPM), it is can manuevering to the higher altitude and stay at that altitude with the same machine power.

Because typically planes do not have enough thrust to overcome their weight.
Instead they use lift.
Lift is dependent upon the air pressure. If you have a much lower air pressure then the lift will be much less.
Also, the thrust is also dependent upon air pressure.
And if they kept flying in a straight line, they would have a higher angle of attack, and thus less lift.

What is the mechanism for constant adjustment?

For manual control they use the yoke.
For autopilot it is the autopilot.

Again, they don't just try to remain straight relative to their starting point.
They try to maintain the desired attitude and altitude and so on.
If either the pilot or the autopilot notices they are flying to high, they adjust to correct. If they are flying too low, they adjust to correct. If their pitch is wrong, they adjust to correct.

Quote from: rabinoz on July 09, 2019, 05:44:55 AM

Quote from: wise on July 09, 2019, 05:34:39 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on July 09, 2019, 05:31:20 AM

The earth's curvature is so slight that it is just another disturbance among the many.

It's curvature as slight so much so that we can agree its being flat.

No, we cannot agree with that at all! The curvature of the earth is slight simply because the earth is so huge but certainly not flat.

A flat earth must have edges that cannot be crossed but the real earth has no edges that cannot be crossed.

so you've seen the antarctic beyond the walls of the antarctica, haven't you? So why didn't you get to the magnetic south pole? looks somewhere on ground. So it must be accessible, right? 2 scientists fly the magnetic south pole, a compass and a camera are all you need. What is wrong with scientists can not arrive the south magnetic pole in technology of 2019?

Who says they can't go to the magnetic South pole?  It is known where it is. It moves around just like the magnetic North pole does but both have known locations.  Airport runways sometimes need to be renumbered because their magnetic heading has changed over time. This is because the magnetic poles have moved.

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 06:35:13 AM

One degree of the curvature is 60 nautical miles long.
It is 111.12 kilometers.

Quote

The typical cruising airspeed for a long-distance commercial passenger aircraft is approximately 475–500 knots (880–926 km/h; 547–575 mph).

It means nearly 7.5 minutes per one degree (8 degrees per hour).
Minute hand on your wall clock goes 45 times faster (360 degrees per hour).

Now, sit and watch your clock's minute hand to familiarize with the values.
How easily can you notice the 45 times faster tilt?

Even If the plane staying in initial orientation but the Earth curvature still make elevation increased 31 m every 20 km. Even the plane not rotating enough, there is significant change in plane altitude during the flight if the plane doesn't change its orientation. In submarine they using gyrocompass to make it travel at a straight path. But how about aeroplane? They never mention about that.

As a plane flies, if the direction to down changes then the plane trimmed for level flight will automatically and continuously change with it. Any decent pilot will trim an aircraft (or use autopilot to do the same thing) to keep a steady altitude. This will keep its orientation so it flies at the same altitude.

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 02:40:51 PM

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer. Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth. But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

For the plane, altitude not determined by pressure outside.

Bolded is wrong. If you just tilt the wings you'll lose lift as you'll be at a steeper angle of attack. You need to increase power as well.

Quote from: rabinoz on July 09, 2019, 05:44:55 AM

No, we cannot agree with that at all! The curvature of the earth is slight simply because the earth is so huge but certainly not flat.

A flat earth must have edges that cannot be crossed but the real earth has no edges that cannot be crossed.

so you've seen the antarctic beyond the walls of the antarctica, haven't you? So why didn't you get to the magnetic south pole? looks somewhere on ground. So it must be accessible, right? 2 scientists fly the magnetic south pole, a compass and a camera are all you need. What is wrong with scientists can not arrive the south magnetic pole in technology of 2019?

The Magnetic South Pole is under the ocean and not even south of the Antarctic Circle. There is no problem getting there!

South geomagnetic pole and South Magnetic Pole.
At present the South Magnetic Pole is located at 64.1°S 135.9°E and nowhere near where any Flat Earth edge might be.
That is South of Port Lincoln in South Australia but the Geographic South Pole is at exactly 90°S.

But there have been many circumnavigations of the earth through both the South Pole and the North Pole.
Here is one:

TAG Global claims record for polar circumnavigation by Charles Alcock - December 31, 2008, 6:20 AM
Ojjeh shared the six legs with four fellow pilots: Diego Ulrich and John Holter (with TAG Aviation Europe) and Mike Mueller and Emil St Hilaire (with Canada-based flight crew agency ACASS). Ojjeh was in the left seat of the Global Express for the first and last legs, while the four other pilots each took a turn in the left seat.

The cockpit crew were supported by in-flight coordinator Jeff Weber (president of TAG Aviation Services, Inc.), flight engineer Fabrice Milliet (from TAG Aviation Europe), reserve pilot Diego Vargas (TAG Aviation Europe) and FAI official observer Malek Adjadj.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TAG TransPolar 08 Record Flight Attempt
• Departs TAG Aviation’s Farnborough Airport in the UK at 10.05.54 UTC on November 21
• First technical stop at Whitehorse, Canada
• Second technical stop at Majuro, Marshall Islands
• Third technical stop at Christchurch, New Zealand
• Fourth technical stop at Punta Arenas, Chile
• Fifth technical stop at Sal, Cape Verde Islands

And this shows the route of that record attempt:

2008.   TAG.   UK over north pole to Canada to Marshall Islands to NZ over south pole to Chile to Cape Verde Islands and back to the UK

And there are plenty more.

What is wrong with scientists can not arrive the south magnetic pole in technology of 2019?

Of course "scientists can" "arrive at the south magnetic pole"! Don't be ridiculous!
But make your own thread because this has nothing to do with "How Aeroplane Follow Earth Curvature".

Quote from: fjr66 on July 09, 2019, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 02:40:51 PM

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer. Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth. But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

For the plane, altitude not determined by pressure outside.

Bolded is wrong. If you just tilt the wings you'll lose lift as you'll be at a steeper angle of attack. You need to increase power as well.

I see many videos about supersonic plane that fly just several meters above the ground. So speed not always proportional with altitude.

Quote from: frenat on July 09, 2019, 09:15:49 PM

Quote from: fjr66 on July 09, 2019, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 02:40:51 PM

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer. Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth. But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

For the plane, altitude not determined by pressure outside.

Bolded is wrong. If you just tilt the wings you'll lose lift as you'll be at a steeper angle of attack. You need to increase power as well.

I see many videos about supersonic plane that fly just several meters above the ground. So speed not always proportional with altitude.

What is the point you're trying to make?

Quote from: turtles on July 09, 2019, 03:03:56 PM

Also, if the plane was to go in an actual straight line it would be climbing into thinner air. This is not maintainable. It would lose power and naturally find it's level.

Why not maintenable. Even if the plane have a constant thrust (RPM), it is can manuevering to the higher altitude and stay at that altitude with the same machine power.

At higher altitude the air is thinner so the engine has to work harder. You don't get something (altitude) for nothing.

But anyway, you just agreed with me, saying "stay at that altitude". If you stay at altitude you'll follow the curve of the earth.

At higher altitude the air is thinner so the engine has to work harder. You don't get something (altitude) for nothing.

Then  why supersonic aircraft not climbing to higher altitude eventhough they carry excessive thrust. And many jet fighter can flying at several meters above the ground to prevent radar detection whereas it carry maximum speeds they can achieve like when it flying at higher altitude. 

<baseless claims>

According to your baseless claim, the compass in Geomagnetic pole has to show geographic north and it has to show geographic west in Syowa station as south. Can you provide a video show it, or is it just your own solid belief, or will you say there is magnetic declination? Your claiming a Magnetic declination seems logical to me. 

I see many videos about supersonic plane that fly just several meters above the ground. So speed not always proportional with altitude.

They have a fundamentally different design.
The angle of attack also matters.

Quote from: turtles on July 10, 2019, 01:38:01 AM

At higher altitude the air is thinner so the engine has to work harder. You don't get something (altitude) for nothing.

Then  why supersonic aircraft not climbing to higher altitude eventhough they carry excessive thrust. And many jet fighter can flying at several meters above the ground to prevent radar detection whereas it carry maximum speeds they can achieve like when it flying at higher altitude.

"Supersonic aircraft" are using their very large "thrust" to overcome the very high drag resulting from those speeds.
But even those aircraft can fly much faster at higher altitudes where the drag is less.

Within limits a pilot can fly at any chosen altitude but planes flying in controlled air-space are required to fly at designated altitudes (they call then "flight levels"), though a pilot can request a change.

Quote from: frenat on July 09, 2019, 09:15:49 PM

Quote from: fjr66 on July 09, 2019, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: Macarios on July 09, 2019, 02:40:51 PM

Under ideal conditions isobaric atmospheric layers would keep the constant altitude above the sea level.

There is the difference between submarine, air balloon and the plane. For submarine, elevation or depth determined by isobaric layer. Even if the submarine climbing (tilted its wing) to the shallow area, its weight equalize with the pressure outside so it is go back to initial depth. But for aeroplane there is no isobaric layer. There is no need to increase machine power (rpm) to make it go higher and higher. All determined by wing orientation in the space.  Climbing just 100 meters doesn't require extra machine power, we just need to tilted the wings.

For the plane, altitude not determined by pressure outside.

Bolded is wrong. If you just tilt the wings you'll lose lift as you'll be at a steeper angle of attack. You need to increase power as well.

I see many videos about supersonic plane that fly just several meters above the ground. So speed not always proportional with altitude.

and you're missing the point. If those jets change their angle of attack they WILL lose speed.  But again, they are trimmed to fly at that altitude so the airplane will continuously adjust. You're trying to make it more complicated than it is.

Quote from: wise on July 09, 2019, 05:49:53 AM

What is wrong with scientists can not arrive the south magnetic pole in technology of 2019?

Of course "scientists can" "arrive at the south magnetic pole"! Don't be ridiculous!

No they can't. Prove they have arrived for once. You can't. You can't, they can't nobody can't, because you can't arrive anything absent.

Quote from: rabinoz on July 09, 2019, 10:01:12 PM

Of course "scientists can" "arrive at the south magnetic pole"! Don't be ridiculous!

No they can't. Prove they have arrived for once. You can't. You can't, they can't nobody can't, because you can't arrive anything absent.

Give me ONE good reason why anybody cannot simply sail a boat to or fly a plane over the Magnetic South Pole! I even gave you a map of exactly where it is!

Quote from: turtles on July 10, 2019, 01:38:01 AM

At higher altitude the air is thinner so the engine has to work harder. You don't get something (altitude) for nothing.

Then  why supersonic aircraft not climbing to higher altitude eventhough they carry excessive thrust. And many jet fighter can flying at several meters above the ground to prevent radar detection whereas it carry maximum speeds they can achieve like when it flying at higher altitude.

Because they choose to fly at those altitudes. They have altimeters and autopilots and as I said before there are other factors which affect a planes attitude by many degrees of magnitude greater than the change of the angle of the ground.

Quote from: wise on July 10, 2019, 05:47:27 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on July 09, 2019, 10:01:12 PM

Of course "scientists can" "arrive at the south magnetic pole"! Don't be ridiculous!

No they can't. Prove they have arrived for once. You can't. You can't, they can't nobody can't, because you can't arrive anything absent.

Give me ONE good reason why anybody cannot simply sail a boat to or fly a plane over the Magnetic South Pole! I even gave you a map of exactly where it is!

because the magnetic south pole is absent. You are lying and can not prove its being any place.

Fun fact: 'South Magnetic Pole' is sort of a misnomer as is the 'North Magnetic Pole'. They are called these because the 'north' end of the magnet points toward the 'North Magnetic Pole' and the 'south' end of the magnet points toward the 'South Magnetic pole. See the problem? Opposites attract and likes repel. So technically, the South Magnetic Pole is the Earth's North Magnetic pole and vice-versa.