What we could ask here is: what are you trying to define as "direction"?
That might be useful if in any of the posts I've made concerning this proposed flight I've talked about or referenced other members using the word "direction."
My first response regarding the flight was to EvolvedMantisShrimp:
How do you propose we find out?
Do it. Fly a plane due South over the South Pole and keep going on that heading and record the results.
As confirmed in another topic, doing that requires turning around.
To which sokarul disagreed, and to which I replied:
If you "fly a plane due South over the South Pole" the instant you are at the South Pole you are flying North.
If you then "keep going on that heading" (i.e., due South) you must turn around so that instead of going north you are going south.
EvolvedMantisShrimp continued the line of questioning and I responded:
How do you propose we find out?
Do it. Fly a plane due South over the South Pole and keep going on that heading and record the results.
As confirmed in another topic, doing that requires turning around.
What happens if you don't? If you head to the South Pole on a bearing South and continue on the same heading after passing the South Pole, what happens?
See above. If you "head to the South Pole on a bearing South" (your words, not mine) and "continue on the same heading [ed. I.e., a bearing South] after passing the South Pole" (your words, not mine), then your path takes you south over the Pole, and the instant you have passed the Pole you must turn around to continue on the same heading south.
Seems a reasonably clear explanation.
But EvolvedMantisShrimp was deficient in comrpehending and after a few back and forths couldn't remember or be bothered to read my posts and asked me to repost my answer. Which I did.
Sokarul then went off on a non sequitur tangent about cardinal directions versus magnetic directions. This is the only time at which I used the word "direction" and it was always specifically in reference to "cardinal direction" (north, east, south, west), and never in reference to the direction of flying a plane.
In fact, in that same post in which I school sokarul about what a cardinal direction is, I quote the Wikipedia entry about "Cardinal directions' which adeptly distinguishes between what a change in compass bearing is, and what a change in direction is (requiring steering).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now:
Where was Sokarul's wrong in his post?
Confusing the meanings of "bearing" and "heading" and "cardinal direction" with "direction."
And completely making up his own definition of "cardinal direction."
I'm asking because the OP was indeed worded differently, namely like this:
If you get on a plane and you pick one direction, lets say South from the tip of South Africa, and fly in that direction without changing course, where do you end up when you get to the edge of your flat earth and then continue to fly in the same direction?
Yes, the OP is worded like that. But I never replied to the OP in any of my posts addressing a flight over the South Pole. My initial response regarding the proposed flight was to EvolvedMantisShrimp's proposal to:
How do you propose we find out?
Do it. Fly a plane due South over the South Pole and keep going on that heading and record the results.
If you read carefully, you will see that I make a distinction between posts that talk about going over the South Pole and continuing on the same heading or bearing (which changes the instant you are over the South Pole), and those that talk about going over the South Pole and continuing along the same great circle (which do not then require a direction change left or right).
Let's see how many members read carefully.